ADJ-00038166 - Workplace Relations Commission John Walsh v Roadbridge Ltd

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Court: Workplace Relations Commission
• Judgment Date: 30 August 2023

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00038166

Parties:

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	John Walsh	Roadbridge Ltd

	Complainant	Respondent
Parties	John Walsh	Roadbridge Ltd (in Receivership)

Representatives John Walsh No show

Complaint(s):

Act	Complaint Reference No.	Date of Receipt
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994	CA-00049641-001	08/04/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003)	CA-00049641-002	08/04/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003)	CA-00049641-003	08/04/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003)	CA-00049641-004	08/04/2022
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Regulation 10 of the European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003 (S.I. No. 131 of 2003)	CA-00049641-005	08/04/2022

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 04/05/2023

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Brian Dalton

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 9 of the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Acts, 1984 - 2012, following the referral of the complaint(s)to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaint(s) and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaint(s).

Background:

The Complainant worked for the Roadbridge Group and had worked in Ireland and more recently for the Company in the UK. At the time of his posting to the UK he was provided with a written assurance that in the event of being made redundant he would be treated as if he had continued his service with Group in Ireland. Unfortunately, the Group experienced very significant trading difficulties and is now in receivership. The Complainant was made redundant in the UK and received statutory benefit based on his UK entitlements. This has left a shortfall as his previous service with the Group in Ireland has not been included in the calculation of his benefits. The Complainant a lay litigant has ticked boxes that he believed captured the essence of what he believed his grievance to be. They are misconceived as the complaint is about a shortfall in redundancy benefit and do not relate to a Transfer of Undertakings or the failure to be provided with the Terms of Employment. At the hearing held in May information was provided to the tribunal concerning the fact that on facts similar to this case the Complainant had brought a claim before another Adjudication Officer. This was confirmed by the Complainant that he had lodged a redundancy complaint based on the same facts brought under the Redundancy Act and to be represented by SIPTU. That case was heard and a determination in turn was issued. This means that the complaints before me are res judicata as essentially what the Complainant is looking for, he already has had determined by another Adjudicator; although, the heads of claim are different, they relate to the same facts. The narrative in the Complaint form is about a claim for statutory redundancy or for a claim underpinned by a contract term providing a guarantee that statutory redundancy would be paid irrespective of the employee’s geographical location.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant worked for the Roadbridge Group and had worked in Ireland and more recently for the Company in the UK. At the time of his posting to the UK he was provided with a written assurance that in the event of being made redundant he would be treated as if he had continued his service with Group in Ireland. Unfortunately, the Group experienced very significant trading difficulties and is now in receivership. The Complainant was made redundant in the UK and received statutory benefit based on his UK entitlements. This has left a shortfall as his previous service with the Group in Ireland has not been included in the calculation of his benefits.

...