Fergus O'Dowd (Louth, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 139: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she will respond to correspondence (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [40413/09]

Mary Coughlan (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Redundancy claims from the company in question were received by my Department earlier this year and were paid out of the Social Insurance Fund (SIF) in September 2009. The employer claimed inability to pay the statutory redundancy entitlements of the employees on the basis that the company was insolvent.

In the case of employer default, where either the employer genuinely has insufficient assets or simply refuses to pay entitlements, the statutory redundancy lump sum entitlement is paid in full to the employee(s) from the Social Insurance Fund. In such cases, the Department seeks to recover the monies paid (which have preferential creditor status in a winding-up situation) from the employer, as these constitute debts due to the SIF. This applies equally in circumstances such as liquidations, receiverships, examinerships or bankruptcy cases.

In the current case, the Department has recently sought to recover from the employer 40% of the monies owing to the SIF. The basis for seeking the recovery of 40% of the statutory redundancy entitlements paid is that the employer would anyway have been entitled to a 60% rebate had he paid the redundancy entitlements directly to the employees.

In general, Employment Law provides recourse for employees to pursue companies who have not respected certain entitlements due to them. Under the Payment of Wages legislation for instance, an employee is entitled to take a case before the Rights Commissioner Service to establish a right and entitlement to a claim for unpaid wages and, if necessary, to have this enforced through the Courts.

In relation to the question of whether the named company has any contracts with the Office of Public Works, responsibility for that Office lies with my colleague the Minister for Finance and I have no direct responsibility for that Office.

Contracts by agencies within the remit of my Department are a day to day matter for those agencies and I have no direct function in relation to such contracts.

I have passed the Deputy's question in relation to the "phoenix syndrome" to the Director of Corporate Enforcement for his attention and direct reply.