ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00057233
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Niamh Kerin | Mc Cuisine Ltd Emma's Place |
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Niamh Kerin | McCusine Ltd Emma’s Place |
Representatives | Niamh Kerin | Emma Gallagher Director |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967 | CA-00069534-001 | 25/02/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 23/10/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014following the referral of the complaint to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint.
Background:
The Company is insolvent and has ceased trading. |
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The Company has ceased trading and has failed to pay statutory redundancy. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The Respondent attended at the hearing and stated that business was insolvent and had not funds available to pay the statutory redundancy. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Complainant has submitted a payslip showing cumulative earnings of €8872.15 for 42 insurable weeks dated 10th of November 2023. The employment ended on the 5th of March 2023. The employment commenced on the 9th of September 2016. The weekly gross wage at the date of termination on the form states the pay to be €259.90 The average weekly hours varied. The Act defines normal remuneration as follows: Normal Weekly Remuneration 13. For the purposes of this Schedule, in the case of an employee who is paid wholly by an hourly time rate or by a fixed wage or salary, and in the case of any other employee whose remuneration does not vary in relation to the amount of work done by him, his normal weekly remuneration shall be taken to be his earnings (including any regular bonus or allowance which does not vary in relation to the amount of work done and any payment in kind]) for his normal weekly working hours as at the date on which he was declared redundant, together with, in the case of an employee who is normally expected to work overtime, his average weekly overtime earnings as determined in accordance with paragraph 14. 14. For the purpose of paragraph 13 the average weekly overtime earnings shall be determined by ascertaining the total amount of overtime earnings of the employee concerned in the period of 26 weeks which ended 13 weeks before the date on which the employee was declared redundant and dividing that amount by 26. 15. For the purpose of paragraph 14 any week during which the employee concerned did not work shall be disregarded and the most recent week before the 26-week period mentioned in paragraph 14 shall be taken into account instead of the week during which the employee did not work. The normal weekly hours based on the payslips submitted. The hourly rate was €11.30. €8872.15 divided by 11.30= 785.14 hours divided by 42 insurable weeks=18.69 hours x €11.30=€211.24 as the normal weekly remuneration Section 7(2) of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967, states: (2) For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if for one or more reasons not related to the employee concerned the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to— (a) the fact that his employer has ceased, or intends to cease, to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed by him, or has ceased or intends to cease, to carry on that business in the place where the employee was so employed, or (b) the fact that the requirements of that business for employees to carry out work of a particular kind in the place where he was so employed have ceased or diminished or are expected to cease or diminish, Having heard the evidence and the fact that the respondent employer agreed that the complainant had been dismissed as the business has ceased trading and/or intends to cease trading and to carry on business in the place where the employee was employed and that her work has ceased, I am satisfied that the complainant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2014 based on the following facts established at the hearing; based on evidence given under oath and documentary evidence presented at the hearing and subsequently, including payslips:
The award is made subject to the complainant having been in insurable employment under the Social Welfare Acts during the relevant period. |
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.
The Complaint is well founded, and the appeal succeeds. Having heard the evidence and the fact that the Respondent employer agreed that the complainant had been dismissed as the business has ceased trading and/or intends to cease trading and to carry on business in the place where the employee was employed and that her work has ceased, I am satisfied that the complainant was dismissed by reason of redundancy and is entitled to a redundancy payment pursuant to the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967-2014 based on the following facts established at the hearing; based on evidence given under oath and documentary evidence presented at the hearing and subsequently, including payslips I determine a that statutory redundancy payment is owing based on the following facts:
|
Dated: 11th of November 2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton
Key Words:
Statutory Redundancy |