The Complainant was employed as an Office Manager with the Respondent from February 1997 until May 2019. The Complainant was responsible for recruitment, payroll and delegating work to staff. The Complainant also generated more fee income than other sales staff. In 2017, a Credit Controller within the Respondent company was appointed general manager.

The General Manager insisted that the Complainant commenced work at 9am, although she had always started work at 9.30am, and this was agreed with the Directors. This was due to a medical condition. She was told that if she did not conform her salary would be docked or she would be issued with an official warning. The GM then downgraded the Complainant’s management role and responsibilities, which was possibly aimed to force her to resign from her position. She raised her concerns with the Director but he was not interested, she said.

In January 2019, the Complainant’s sick-pay was drastically cut while on sick-leave, which was not allowed under the terms of her contract of employment. In February 2019, while on sick-leave and without any consultation, the Complainant was informed she was being made redundant by a telephone call. The General Manager informed the Complainant that there was a serious financial situation as there were months of continued losses. The financial details were not forthcoming and three new staff had been recruited for the company. The Complainant believed that the consultation process was a sham as the consultation process only commenced after she was informed of her redundancy.

The Respondent affirmed the Complainant was terminated solely on grounds of redundancy and therefore argued  that this did not constitute an unfair dismissal. The Respondent stated that the company began a restructuring process in an attempt to reduce costs and put it into profitability. The General Manager thought it would be necessary to remove two members of staff to obtain savings in wages and discussed this with the Director.

The Adjudication Officer outlined that the onus lies on the Respondent to show the dismissal resulted wholly or mainly from redundancy. The Respondent CEO offered evidence in relation to financial concerns regarding the company in the period leading up to the Complainant’s redundancy in 2019. However, the filed accounts of the company showed a small profit increasing annually since 2016 amounting to over 100,000 euro in 2018. Satisfactory financial statements had not been provided by the Respondent in order to substantiate the concerns of the CEO regarding the company’s alleged deteriorating financial position.

The Respondent had also taken on three new employees in the previous year, two of whom were made redundant at the same time as the Complainant. Therefore, the Adjudication Officer found that the Complainant was unfairly dismissed on substantive and procedural grounds. As the Complainant was earning €46,000.00 annually, it was ordered that the Complainant be awarded €69,000.00 in compensation.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2021/january/adj-00025155.html