ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00060247
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Parties | Audrey Hendrick | Clonsilla Blinds Limited |
Representatives | Represented Herself | Ruaidhri Giblin BL |
Complaint:
Act | Complaint Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 12 of the Minimum Notice & Terms of Employment Act, 1973 | CA-00073339-001 | 11/07/2025 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 26/01/2026
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Procedure:
In accordance with section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, this complaint was assigned to me by the Director General. I conducted a hearing on January 26th 2026, at which I made enquiries and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard and to present evidence relevant to the complaint. This complaint is linked to a separate complaint under the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, ADJ-00060219 and both complaints were heard together.
The complainant, Ms Audrey Hendrick, consulted a legal firm, Maguire McClafferty LLP and she submitted letters from this firm in advance of the hearing; however, she represented herself with the support of her daughter, Mia Hendrick. Clonsilla Blinds Limited was represented by Mr Ruaidhri Giblin BL. Mr Giblin was instructed by Paul Kelly Solicitors, although Mr Kelly did not attend the hearing. The business owner, Ms Helen McGrath attended with her book-keeper, Ms Louise Morris and a friend, Mr Kevin Grimes. Ms McGrath gave evidence in response to Ms Hendrick’s claim.
While the parties are named in this Decision, from here on, I will refer to Ms Hendrick as “the complainant” and to Clonsilla Blinds Limited as “the respondent.”
Background:
In March 2012, the complainant started working as a sales assistant in the respondent’s blinds shop in Cannon Row in Navan. She worked four and a half days a week; however, when she returned from maternity leave in January 2013, she reduced her hours to three days a week. In 2016, she moved to a new unit in Navan, in Beechmount Home Park. In 2024, her hourly rate of pay was €14.00. Payslips that the complainant sent to the WRC after the hearing show that, in most weeks, she worked for 21 hours, earning €294.00 gross per week. The shop where the complainant worked in Navan was closed in December 2024, due to what the owner described in correspondence to the complainant in July 2024, as “the gruesome downturn in the business.” The complainant was out sick when the shop closed, and, in February 2025, when she was certified as fit to return to work, she was offered the option of transferring to the respondent’s second shop in Stadium Business Park, Ballycoolin, Dublin 15. She decided that, because of the distance she would have to travel to work, 40 km, compared to 5.5 km, the offer to move her job to a new location was unreasonable. Under complaint reference number ADJ-00060219, I have concluded that the complainant’s job was redundant when the shop in Navan was closed in December 2024. In this complaint under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973, the complainant claims that she got no notice of the closure of the shop in Navan, and that she is entitled to be paid in lieu of notice. |
Findings and Conclusions:
The Relevant Law Section 4 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973 (“the Act”) sets out the entitlement of employees to notice of the termination of their employment. The length of notice is determined by the length of service of the employee. The complainant commenced in her role in March 2012 and, by December 2024, she had completed 12 years and nine months of service. In accordance with s.4(2)(d) of the Act, as she had more than 10 years and less than 15 years of service, she would have been entitled to six weeks’ notice. Findings From the evidence presented by the complainant at the hearing of this complaint, I am satisfied that she was issued with notice in writing on July 24th 2024, of her employer’s intention to close the shop in Navan. At the hearing, she said that she received this letter in the post on August 6th 2024. On July 27th 2024, the owner wrote to the complainant to inform her that the transfer would take place between August 18th and 23rd 2024. While the owner planned to close the Navan shop, it was her intention that the complainant would transfer to her other shop in Stadium Business Park in Ballycoolin, Dublin 15. I am satisfied therefore, that, in August 2024, the complainant was notified of the owner’s intention to close the shop where she worked; however, she wasn’t notified of the termination of her employment. The complainant refused her employer’s offer to transfer to Ballycoolin and the shop in Navan remained open. The complainant said that she was absent due to illness from August 30th 2024. The evidence of both parties is that the shop in Navan was closed finally in December 2024, although neither side was able to confirm the exact date. If the complainant had been at work, she would have been entitled to six weeks’ notice of the termination of her employment. Because she was out sick, she wasn’t able to work her notice, and she was therefore not in a position to waive her right to notice. I must conclude therefore, that the complainant cannot succeed in her claim for pay in lieu of notice. |
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
For the reasons I have set out above, I decide that this complaint is not well founded. |
Dated: 19th of March 2026.
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Catherine Byrne
Key Words:
Notice of redundancy, pay in lieu of notice, absence due to illness |