ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00064780

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	Rimpledeep Kaur	Waybalmo Limited

Representatives

Complaint(s):

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-00079040-001	31/12/2025

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 16/06/2026

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and 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 was an employee of the Respondent emergency accommodation provider.

While she was on sick leave she was informed that the business was no longer going to provide emergency accommodation and her role was gone. She has submitted a complaint under the redundancy payments act.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant attended the hearing and provided documents evidencing her employment history with the Respondent and of the communication she received on the 10th of December giving her notice.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent did not attend the hearing. On review of the WRC file I can see that the Respondent’s owner was in contact with the WRC and as such I am satisfied that they were aware of the hearing.

Findings and Conclusions:

The Complainant’s employment began on the 18th of March 2023. Her payslips refer to the Respondent as her employer.

On the 10th of December 2025 the Complainant was given notice. Her evidence was that this followed a phone call in which it was explained that the employer was going to cease providing emergency accommodation services. At that point she was entitled to two weeks’ notice and as such her employment ended on the 24th of December 2025.

The Complainant was paid €349 per week.

Section 7 of the act provides that an employee who has been employed at a minimum of one hundred and four weeks is entitled to a redundancy payment if they are dismissed because their employer has ceased to carry on the business for the purposes of which the employee was employed for.

On the facts available to me the Complainant’s service and dismissal fit these criteria and as such she is entitled to a redundancy lump sum.

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 the complaint well founded and I direct the Respondent to pay the Complainant a redundancy payment calculated on the basis of the following findings:

The Complainant’s employment commenced on the 23rd of March 2023.

The Complainant’s employment ended on the 24th of December 2025.

The Complainant was paid €349 per week.

Dated: 09-07-2026

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: David James Murphy

Key Words: