Case Number: ADJ-00013265. Workplace Relations Commission

• Docket Number: ADJ-00013265
• Hearing Date: 05 September 2018
• Date: 01 October 2018
• Court: Workplace Relations Commission
• Parties: An Employee v A Printing Company

ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION

Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00013265

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-00017471-001	16/02/2018
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Act, 1967	CA-00017818-001	08/03/2018
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 6 of the Payment of Wages Act, 1991	CA-00017818-003	08/03/2018

Date of Adjudication Hearing: 05/09/2018

Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Ray Flaherty

Procedure:

In accordance with Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and Section 39 of the Redundancy Payments Acts 1967 - 2014 andfollowing the referral of the complaints to me by the Director General, I inquired into the complaints and gave the parties an opportunity to be heard by me and to present to me any evidence relevant to the complaints.

Background:

The Complainant commenced employment with the Respondent as a Lithographic Printer on 15 September 2007. His employment ended on 17 November 2017 when he was informed by the Respondent that he was being let go.

Summary of Complainant’s Case:

Background: The Complainant stated that he was unaware of any problems with the Respondent's business until November 2017. The Complainant stated that, approximately two weeks prior to being advised by the Respondent that the business was in difficulty and that he was being let go, he noted that two of the main printing machines were removed from the premises. According to the Complainant's evidence, on 17 November 2017 he was called into the office by the owner of the company and told that things were going badly and that they could not afford to pay all the employees and that some people were being let go. The Complainant stated that he was one of the people to be let go. In further evidence, the Complainant stated that he had no prior notice of the impending situation. According to Complainant when he asked about redundancy, he was informed by the Respondent that the company's accounts were frozen and they were not in a position to pay redundancy. According to the Complainant's evidence, a search of the Companies Registration Office shows that the Respondent is still registered. It was further stated that letters were sent to the Respondent, by registered post, on 27 March 2018, seeking redundancy, payment in lieu of notice, wages due and annual leave remuneration. The Complainant stated that a letter, dated 29 March 2018, was sent to the Data Protection Officer of the Respondent, requesting a copy of any/all information kept on computer or in manual form in relation to the Complainant's employment, in line with the Data Protection Acts (1988 – 2003). The Complainant stated that he received no reply to any of the above correspondence. Substantive case: The Complainant made three separate complaints - two under the Redundancy Payment Act 1967, (CA-00017471-001 and CA-00017818-001) and one under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 relating to payment of outstanding wages and annual leave (CA-00017818-003) respectively. With regard to the redundancy claim, the Complainant is seeking payment of redundancy based on 10.18 years’ service, which calculates amounts to €7,710.96 With regard to outstanding wages, the Complainant states that the Respondent did not pay him his last week's wages, which amounted to €361.07. In addition, the Complainant states that he is owed €216.64 in relation to outstanding annual leave.

Summary of Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent did not attend the hearing and did not provide any written responses to the complaint.

Findings and Conclusions:

The Complainant submitted two claims under the Redundancy Payment Act. However, on investigation it is clear that both claims refer to the same situation and that the claim under reference CA-00017818-001 was actually a refiling of the original claim under reference CA-00017471-001. Given that the Complainant's other complaints, those under the Payment of Wages Act, were submitted under complaint reference CA-00017818-003, his claim for redundancy is considered under reference CA-00017818-001 and, consequently, no decision is issuing in relation to claim reference CA-00017471-001. CA-00017818-001 – Redundancy Payments Act, 1967: Section 7 (2) of the Redundancy Payment Act, 1967, states as follow: “For the purposes of subsection (1), an employee who is dismissed shall be taken to be dismissed by reason of redundancy if the dismissal is attributable wholly or mainly to – ...