British
and Irish Legal Information Institute
Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Industrial Tribunals Northern Ireland Decisions >> McKillion & Ors v Northland Early Years Centre Ltd & Ors [2004] NIIT 5238_03 (13 October 2004)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/nie/cases/NIIT/2004/5238_03.html
Cite as: [2004] NIIT 5238_03, [2004] NIIT 5238_3
[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
- The third and fourth named respondents be dismissed from the proceedings.
- The hearing of the claims of Rachel Marianne O'Kane and Tracey McMahon be adjourned.
- The applicants, Marion McKillion, Tracey McFarlane, Julie Kerr, Patrice Martine McGuckin, Cathy McGuinness and Sinead O'Neill were all dismissed by reason of redundancy, without notice, with some wages outstanding and, except in the case of Sinead O'Neill, with holiday pay outstanding.
- The first named respondent do pay the following sums to the applicants named in paragraph three above namely:
- There was no dispute as to the facts. The first named respondent was a company which had been formed for the purpose of carrying on an existing business. The company carried on the business for some three and a half years. However, it was losing money. The owners attempted to sell the business as a going concern but were unable to do so. When it appeared that there was insufficient money to pay the full wages for the month of July 2003 it was decided to cease trading on 11 July 2003. Letters were written to all staff advising them of this. No formal notice of this decision was given and no payment was made for any period worked during the course of July. The individual members of staff were given written details of the amount of wages and holiday pay due to them.
- The tribunal found that a redundancy situation existed, that the applicants were dismissed by reason of redundancy and that they were, accordingly, if they had satisfied the qualifying period, entitled to the appropriate redundancy payment. The tribunal found that the sums assessed by the first named respondent as being due by way of wages and holiday pay were due to the various applicants. The tribunal also found that no notice of dismissal had been given to the applicants and that they were consequently entitled to notice under their contracts of employment or under the terms of the Employment Rights Order and that payment therefore should be made.
- This applicant commenced work with the first named respondent's predecessors in July 1994. She was dismissed on 11 July 2003 and would have been entitled, under the terms of the Employment Rights Order, to one week's notice for each year of employment. The tribunal found that Ms McKillion had nine years service during eight of which years she was above the age of forty one and during one of which she was below the age of forty one. Accordingly, Ms McKillion is entitled to a redundancy payment calculated on the basis of thirteen weeks at a weekly rate of £67.20 making a sum of £873.60. Ms McKillion is also entitled to outstanding wages amounting to £51.32 and holiday pay of £89.25. She is entitled, under the terms of the Employment Rights Order to a total of nine weeks notice and is accordingly entitled to nine weeks net pay which the tribunal calculates to amount to £503.87.
- Ms McFarlane commenced work with the first named respondent on 20 September 1999. Accordingly she had three years completed service. She had not completed any complete year of service while she was above the age of twenty two. Accordingly, she is entitled to a redundancy payment calculated on the basis of one half week's pay for each of the three years of service at £157.50 per week amounting to £236.25. She was entitled to outstanding wages of £150.33 and outstanding holiday pay of £214.20. She was, in addition, entitled, by contract, to one month's net wages in lieu of notice amounting to £588.00.
- Julie Kerr commenced work with the first named respondent on 2 October 2000 and accordingly had two years service as at the date of termination during one of which she was above the age of twenty two and during the other of which she was below the age of twenty two. Accordingly, she is entitled to one and a half weeks pay at £189.00 per week making a total of £283.50. In addition Ms Kerr is entitled to outstanding pay of £156.36 and outstanding holiday of £91.35. In addition, Ms Kerr is entitled to one month's net pay in lieu of notice amounting to £588.00.
- Ms McGuckin commenced work with the first named respondent on 26 May 2003. Accordingly, she did not qualify for any redundancy payment. As at the date of termination she was entitled to the sum of £246.76 by way of outstanding wages and £67.50 by way of outstanding holiday pay. In addition she was entitled to one week's net pay in lieu of notice, as provided for by the Employment Rights Order which the tribunal assesses at £124.20.
- Ms McGuinness commenced work with the first named respondent on 17 July 1995. As her employment ceased in July 2003 she had, allowing for the period of notice to which she would have been entitled, eight complete years of service with the first named respondent, during the whole of which she was not below the age of twenty two. Accordingly, she is entitled to a redundancy payment calculated at the rate of eight weeks pay at £126.00 per week making £1,008.00. In addition, she is entitled to the sum of £93.40 by way of outstanding wages and £203.70 for outstanding holiday pay from which must be deducted the sum of £213.04 already paid. The balance due in respect of holiday pay and outstanding wages amounts to £84.06. In addition, Ms McGuinness is entitled, by virtue of the Employment Rights Order to seven weeks pay in lieu of notice which the tribunal calculates as £700.00.
- Ms O'Neill, according to her Originating Application which the tribunal accepted as evidence, commenced work with the first named respondent on 13 January 2003. Accordingly, she did not qualify for any redundancy payment. There was the sum of £223.11 due by way of outstanding wages with nothing outstanding by way of holiday pay. Ms O'Neill, having been employed by the first named respondent for a period in excess of one month, was entitled to one week's notice. As no such notice was given she is entitled to one week's net pay in lieu which the tribunal assesses at £135.64.
- The recoupment provisions do not apply.
- This is a relevant decision for the purposes of the Industrial Tribunals (Interest) Order (Northern Ireland) 1996.
CASE REF: 5238/03 & Others
APPLICANTS: Marion McKillion & Others
(See attached List)
RESPONDENTS: 1. Northland Early Years Centre Limited
2. Department for Employment & Learning
3. Joyce Kullas
4. Fred Kullas
The unanimous decision of the tribunal is that:-
Marion McKillion – redundancy payment, outstanding wages, outstanding holiday pay, notice pay - TOTAL £1,518.04
Tracey McFarlane - redundancy payment, outstanding wages, outstanding holiday pay, notice pay - TOTAL £1,188.78
Julie Kerr - redundancy payment, outstanding wages, outstanding
holiday pay, notice pay - TOTAL £1,119.21
Patrice Martine McGuckin - outstanding wages, outstanding holiday pay, notice pay - TOTAL £ 438.46
Cathy McGuinness - redundancy payment, outstanding wages, outstanding
holiday pay, notice pay - TOTAL £1,792.06
Sinead O'Neill - outstanding wages, notice pay - TOTAL £ 358.75
Appearances:
The sixth and seventh named applicants were represented by Mr N. McGuinness, Solicitor of Logan & Corry Solicitors.
All other applicants were unrepresented.
The first named respondent was represented by Mrs Kullas.
The second named respondent was represented by Ms Suzanne Lennox and Mr P Curran of
Redundancy Payments Branch
Summary Reasons
Marion McKillion
Tracey McFarlane
Julie Kerr
Patrice Martine McGuckin
Cathy McGuinness
Sinead O'Neill
Recoupment
Chairman:
Date and place of hearing: 13 October 2004, Belfast.
Date decision recorded in register and issued to parties: