In this case, the Respondent appealed the decision of the Adjudication Officer to the Labour Court after the Adjudication Officer ruled in favour of the Complainant. The Complainant, Ms Conn, was employed by Cosy Tots and Company, ‘the Respondent’, as a Cook, in their creche in Nutgrove, Rathfarnham, Dublin 14. In June 2019, the Respondent advised the Complainant that they were closing the premises that she worked in. In August 2019, the Respondent wrote to the Complainant to offer her a position in one of their other creches, located in Barrow St., Dublin 2. The Complainant did not consider this alternative to be suitable for her due to increased commuting time and the impact this would have on her ability to also care for her granddaughter. The Complainant sought to be made redundant however the Respondent believed that in offering an alternative position with the same terms and conditions, they had met their obligations to the Complainant under the Act.

The Respondent took over the relevant business in 2014 under a transfer of undertakings. According to the records available to the Respondent, the Complainant worked for the company since the 3rd of September 2001. The Respondent maintained that a reasonable offer of alternative employment was made to the Complainant at the meetings which took place on the 3rd of July 2019 and on the 10th of July 2019 and then in writing in August 2019. The alternative offer was a position as a Cook in the Respondent’s Barrow St. premises and there was to be no material change in the Complainant’s terms and conditions. The Respondent maintained that the Complainant refused even to consider the position on offer. She based her claim for redundancy on the argument that the offer of alternative work was not a reasonable alternative as she was not comfortable with driving a slightly extra distance and that she has responsibility for collecting her Grandchild from school.

The Court was of the view that, in the circumstances of the city, the issue is less about the physical distance between the two locations, Nutgrove and Barrow St, than about the length of time it would take to cover that distance. It is this factor that made the Court take the view that it was reasonable for the Complainant to decide that the offer made was not one that constituted suitable alternative employment. Therefore, it follows that the Complainant was made redundant and was entitled to a payment under the Redundancy Payments Act.  The Court concluded that the calculation of payment due must be based on this start date (3rd of September 2001) with an end date of the 2nd of August 2019 and based on a salary of €360 per week.
https://www.workplacerelations.ie/en/cases/2021/february/rpd219.html