John Lonergan v Liam Slevin [Employment Appeals Tribunal]

JurisdictionIreland
CourtEmployment Appeal Tribunal (Ireland)
Judgment Date09 Jul 2010
Judgment citation (vLex)[2010] 7 JIEC 0901

EMPLOYMENT APPEALS TRIBUNAL

Representation:

Appellant(s) : Mr. James J. Hally, Solicitor, "Eldon", Main Street, Tramore, Co. Waterford

Respondent(s) : Nolan Farrell & Goff, Solicitors, Newtown, Waterford

Abstract:

Employment law - Redundancy - Notice - Fair procedures - Whether employee entitled to redundancy - Whether employee had resigned - Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 to 2007 - Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 To 2005.

APPEAL(S) OF:

CASE NO.

John Lonergan, 19 Bayview, Tramore, Co. Waterford - appellant

RP2395/2009 MN1976/2009

against

Liam Slevin, Forest Hill, Ballykinsella, Tramore,

Co. Waterford - respondent

under

MINIMUM NOTICE AND TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT ACTS, 1973 TO 2005

REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS ACTS, 1967 TO 2007

I certify that the Tribunal

(Division of Tribunal)

Chairman:

Mr N. Russell

Members:

Mr J. Hennessy

Ms S. Kelly

heard this appeal at Waterford on 9th July 2010

Facts The appellant had been employed by the respondent as a general operative. It was the appellant's contention that he had been let go due to shortness of work. When he asked his employer for a redundancy payment he was told that even though he was not entitled one, he would pay him one. However he never received any payment and he had not resigned from his job. The respondent gave evidence that he employed the appellant as a general worker. There was a shortness of work and a letter was provided to the appellant in order for him to sign on at the Social Welfare office. The appellant had continued working for the respondent intermittently thereafter. The appellant had subsequently contacted him and told him that he was resigning as the dust was affecting his eyes. The appellant had requested a redundancy payment but was told that he was not entitled to a redundancy payment as work was available for him.

Held by the Tribunal in finding in dismissing the appeal. Conflicting evidence had been given by the appellant and the respondent on a number of issues. The Tribunal accepted that the respondent had contacted the appellant to ascertain why he had not turned up for work only to be told by the appellant that he could no longer carry out his duties for health reasons. The Tribunal found that the appellant had resigned voluntarily from his position with his employer and was not entitled to a Redundancy Payment.

Reporter: R.F.

1

The decision of the Tribunal was as follows:-

2

Appellant's Case

3

The appellant gave direct evidence that he was employed as a general operative on a full-time basis by the respondent since May 1998. On 6 April 2009 he reported for work and was told by his employer that there was no work for him. He sought a letter from his employer in order for him to sign on at his local Social Welfare office. His employer provided him with the letter which stated that he started work in May 1998 and finished on 3 April 2009 due to shortness of work at...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT