ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00057321
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Sarah Keleghan | Global Logic Software and Technology Ireland Limited (formally known as Sidero) |
Representatives |
| Alison McComiskey IBEC West |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 | CA-00068700-001 | 19/01/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/05/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Procedure:
The Complainant has brought a series of complaints against the Employer with whom she was engaged from the 6th of July 2023 to the 31st of March 2023. These complaints issued by way of workplace relations complaint forms which were received by the WRC on the 8th and 9th of February 2025.
Pursuant to Section 39 of the Redundancy Payment Act of 1967 (as amended) it is directed that the manner of hearing prescribed in Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015 shall apply to any question, dispute, complaint or appeal referred to the Director General under the Redundancy Payments Acts of 1967 – 2014.
I have accordingly been directed by the Director General of the Adjudication services, to hear the within complaint and I can confirm that I have fulfilled my obligation to make all relevant inquiries into the complaint. I have additionally and where appropriate heard the oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses and have taken account of the evidence tendered in the course of the hearing.
Under the Redundancy Payments Acts, an eligible employee who is found to be redundant is entitled to a statutory redundancy payment for every year of service (per Section 7 of the Redundancy Payment Act of 1967). The Acts provide for a payment of two weeks gross pay for each year of service. A further bonus week is added to this. An eligible employee is one with 104 weeks of continuous employment with an employer and whose position has ceased to exist. The calculation of Gross weekly pay is subject to a ceiling of €600.00. Gross pay is the current normal weekly pay including average regular overtime and benefits-in-kind and before tax and PRSI deductions. A Redundancy payment is generally tax free.
A complainant must be able to show a minimum two years (104 weeks) of service in the employment. The Complainant herein qualifies.
The Employee must have made a claim for a redundancy payment by notice and in writing before the expiration of 52 weeks form the date of the cessation of the employment per section 24 of the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 (as amended). The time limit may be extended to 104 weeks where the employee can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Adjudication Officer that the failure to bring the claim in the earlier time period was due to reasonable cause (24(2A)).
Background:
This hearing was to be conducted remotely as provided for in the Civil Law and Criminal Law (miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2020 and SI 359/2020 which said instrument designates the Workplace Relations Commission as a body empowered to hold remote hearings pursuant to Section 31 of the Principal Act. The said remote hearing was set up and hosted by an appointed member of the WRC administrative staff. I am satisfied that no party would have been prejudiced by having this hearing conducted remotely. I am also satisfied that I was in a position to fully exercise my function and I made all relevant inquiries in the usual way. The Complainant did not attend. I am satisfied that the Complainant was notified of the date, time and venue for this hearing by a letter sent from the WRC - dated the 17th April 2025 - and emailed to the email address provided by the Complainant on the workplace relations complaint form. The Complainant had specifically agreed to communication by electronic means when filling out his complaint form. From the Complaint form provided, I have discerned that the Complainant seeks to establish that she was entitled to a payment of Statutory Redundancy.
|
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Complainant had presented a significant amount of paperwork in advance of this hearing. All of this documentation was presented in support of the Complainant’s spectrum of complaints. None of the documentation was ultimately opened in a hearing and the Respondent’s attitude to same remains unknown. On the evening before the hearing at circa 3pm the following email was notified to the Adjudication service: Dear Workplace Relations Commissions Team, I decline and refuse your offer of a Webex Hearing - you can update the series of names involved. There must be something of grave concern that an in person hearing is not possible. Enough technicalities have failed within the WRC, however, duly noted for future reference, and in the correct hands. Mr ****** only yesterday requested a new postponement form, 2 days prior to a webex hearing date. Thank you for all of the legal documents, which are also stored, and will be stored elsewhere. Dates, times and cross reference of names involved, available for future inspection, and in the correct hands. Yours sincerely, Sarah This was deemed not to be a withdrawal of the Complainant’s complaints, and the matter remained in the list for hearing as scheduled. The Complainant did not attend. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent was represented by the business representative group known as IBEC. The Respondent provided me with a written submissions dated the 9th of May 2025. The Respondent had two key employees attend the hearing to give evidence on behalf of the Employer. Had evidence been presented I have no doubt it would have been robustly challenged by the Respondent. The Respondent has asserted that it has always treated the Complainant with dignity and respect and within the parameters of any and all employment legislations identified by the Complainant herein. In any event the Respondent has indicated that in circumstances where the Complainant has allowed a considerable length of time to lapse since the end of the employment relationship then the complaint is out of time with no clear prospect for an extension of time. This would have been a preliminary issue. The Respondent rejects that there is an entitlement to a redundancy payment. |
Findings and Conclusions:
|
Decision:
Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2012 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under that Act.
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 CA-00068700-001 – Complaint herein not well founded and fails.
|
Dated: 14th July 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Penelope McGrath
Key Words:
|