Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 7 Oct 1992

Vol. 423 No. 1

Written Answers. - Redundancy Payments.

Patrick McCartan

Question:

446 Mr. McCartan asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the basis upon which statutory redundancy lump sum payments were made to persons (details supplied); whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that the company involved (details supplied) was not would up or liquidated under the Company's Acts Legislation; whether this is a necessary pre-requisite to a payment under the Social Insurance Fund; and whether the claims of two outstanding employees will now be discharged under the same fund, if claims are submitted.

Seán Ryan

Question:

450 Mr. Ryan asked the Minister for Labour if he will make a statement on the circumstances whereby two former employees (details supplied) of a company (details supplied) in Dublin 13 who were successful in their claim to the Employment Appeals Tribunal have been unable to secure payment of their awards whilst at the same time, two other employees (details supplied) of the same company, which is insolvent, have been paid under the Department's Social Insurance Fund; and if he will have this dispute resolved as a matter of urgency.

I propose to take Questions Nos. 446 and 450 together.

The Redundancy Payments Acts, 1967 to 1991, provide that, where an employer fails to pay a statutory redundancy lump sum to an eligible employee, the Minister for Labour is empowered to pay the appropriate entitlement from the Social Insurance Fund; it is not necessary that the employer should be insolvent. My Department has paid lump sums to the two persons stated to have been paid in the Deputies' questions in accordance with the provisions of the Redundancy Payments Acts as their employer failed to make the payments.

I am aware that the Company concerned has not been wound up or liquidated under the Companies Acts but, as I have indicated, this is not a necessary pre-requisite for entitlement by an employee to payment of a redundancy lump sum from the Social Insurance Fund under the Redundancy Payments Acts.
As regards the other two named persons in the Deputies' questions, the question of payment of their Employment Appeals Tribunal awards would not come within the scope of the Redundancy Payments Acts, as the awards arise from findings of unfair dismissal. In certain cases, unfair dismissal awards could be payable from the Social Insurance Fund, under the Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Act, 1984, but the relevant conditions under that Act require that the employer concerned must be insolvent within the definition in section 1 (3) (c) of the Act. As it appears that the employer in this case does not come within the definition in section 1 (3) (c), the unfair dismissal awards to the two employees cannot be paid under the 1984 Act. If, however, the company is put into liquidation or receivership, the awards may be payable under the 1984 Act provided the other qualifying conditions are satisfied in individual cases.
Top
Share