ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00057470
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Iryna Andriiets | Bosi Limited |
Representatives | Self-Represented | No Appearance |
Complaint:
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-00069480-001 | 21/02/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 09/09/2025
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 – 2014,following 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 Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent on 17th January 2024. The Complainant was a part-time employee, in receipt of an average weekly wage of €250. The Complainant’s employment ended on 15th December 2024, on the grounds of redundancy.
On 21st February 2025, the Complainant referred the present complaint to the Commission. Herein, she alleged that the Respondent failed to discharge her statutory redundancy payment. The Respondent did not provide a responding submission in respect of this allegation, and did not attend the hearing as scheduled.
At the outset of the hearing, the Adjudicator raised a preliminary issue as to jurisdiction. As this matter may be determinative of the entire set of proceedings, it will be discussed in advance of the substantive issue. |
Summary of the Complainant’s Case:
At the outset of the hearing, the Complainant accepted that she had less than one year’s accrued service with the Respondent. Nonetheless, she submitted that she was clearly dismissed on the grounds of redundancy. |
Summary of the Respondent’s Case:
As set out above, there was no appearance by or on behalf of the Respondent. |
Findings and Conclusions:
Regarding the present case, the Complainant accepted that she had less than one year’s accrued service with the Respondent. In this regard, Section 7(1) of the Act provides that, “An employee, if he is dismissed by his employer by reason of redundancy or is laid off or kept on short-time for the minimum period, shall, subject to this Act, be entitled to the payment of moneys which shall be known (and are in this Act referred to) as redundancy payment provided— (a) he has been employed for the requisite period…” Subsection 5 of that provision goes on to define “requisite period” as, “…a period of 104 weeks continuous employment…of the employee by the employer who dismissed him, laid him off or kept him on short-time, but excluding any period of employment with that employer before the employee had attained the age of 16 years.” While it is clear that the dismissal of the Complainant aros by reason of redundancy, it is also apparent that the Complainant has not attained the requisite period of service required for a statutory redundancy payment. Having regard to the foregoing, I find that the complaint is not well founded, and the appeal fails. |
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.
I find that the complaint is not well founded, and the appeal fails. |
Dated: 5th February 2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dolan
Key Words:
Redundancy, Service, 2 years |