THE INDUSTRIAL TRIBUNALS

CASE REF:    889/12

CLAIMANT:	Hugh O’Donnell

RESPONDENT:	Creggan Neighbourhood Partnership

DECISION

The decision of the tribunal is that the claimant is entitled to six weeks  x  £430.00 redundancy payment amounting to £2,580.00.  However, the claimant’s claims in respect of notice pay, holiday pay, and outstanding wages are dismissed.

Constitution of Tribunal:

Chairman  (Sitting alone):	Mr S A Crothers

Appearances:

The claimant was present and represented himself.

The respondent was represented by his Vice Chairman, Conal McFeeley.

THE CLAIM

1.	The claimant claimed redundancy pay, notice pay, 12½ days holiday pay, and two week’s outstanding wages.  It was common case that the claimant was made redundant by the respondent and that he was legally entitled to a redundancy payment.  However, the respondent disputed the remainder of the claimant’s claims, and contended that the claimant was aware that the respondent would not be in a position to make a redundancy payment.

THE ISSUES

2.	The issues before the tribunal were as follows:-

	(i)	Is the claimant entitled to a redundancy payment?

	(ii)	Is the claimant entitled to a notice payment?

	(iii)	Is the claimant entitled to 12½ days outstanding holiday pay?

	(iv)	Is the claimant entitled to two week’s outstanding wages?

3.	The tribunal heard evidence from the claimant and from Conal McFeeley on behalf of the respondent.  It also considered any relevant documentation during the hearing.

FINDINGS OF FACT

4.	Having considered the evidence insofar as same related to the issues before it, the tribunal made the following findings of fact on the balance of probabilities:-

	(i)	The claimant, whose date of birth is 25 January 1954, was employed by the respondent under a series of fixed-term contracts from 23 July 2007 until the effective date of termination of his employment on 31 March 2012.  His gross weekly wage was agreed at £486.76 and his net weekly wage was agreed at £365.80.

	(ii)	The respondent depended on Government funding for its continued employment of the claimant.  His fixed-term contract was in effect extended from 1 April 2011 until 31 March 2012.  Nonetheless, there are notice requirements specified in the contractual documentation.  The tribunal is satisfied that the claimant received more notice of termination of his employment than is required by his contract during a meeting with the respondent held on 12 January 2012.  In an effort to avoid having to make a redundancy payment for which no funding was available, and to avoid any severance payment, (which the respondent also could not afford), the claimant was treated flexibly and was offered time off on full pay to pursue other interests up until 31 March 2012.

	(iii)	There was insufficient evidence before the tribunal to satisfy it that the claimant was authorised by the respondent to carry over 18½ days leave from 2010-2011, particularly in light of the specific contractual provision that a maximum of five days annual holiday could be carried over from one holiday year to the next.

	(iv)	The claimant had raised the matter of being entitled to two week’s wages after termination of his contract on the basis that, from mid-August 2007, he was paid from mid-month to mid-month.  However, having raised the issue on 12 January 2012, the respondent checked the position and confirmed, as far as the respondent was concerned, that no such payments were due to the claimant.  Mr McFeeley also asserted strongly in his evidence that all payments properly due to the claimant had been made after being properly vouched.  There was therefore insufficient evidence before the tribunal to satisfy it that the claimant was entitled to any further payment of wages.

	(v)	The tribunal is satisfied that the claimant was made redundant with notice.

THE LAW

5.	The tribunal considered the relevant provisions of the Employment Rights (Northern Ireland) Order 1996 together with the relevant provisions of the Industrial Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction Order (Northern Ireland) 1994 in relation to breach of contract.

CONCLUSIONS

6.	Having considered the evidence and the facts as found the tribunal concludes as follows:-

	(i)	The claimant is entitled to a redundancy payment calculated as follows:-

		-	On the termination of his employment he had four years completed service and was aged 58.  His pay is capped at £430.00 gross per week.  The appropriate multiplier for calculating his redundancy payment is:-

						£430.00  x  6  =  £2,580.00

	(ii)	The tribunal dismisses the remainder of the claimant’s claims.

7.	This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (NI) 1990.

Chairman:

Date and place of hearing:  31 July 2012, Belfast.

Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: