A woman owed more than $15,000 in redundancy payments has called for action after two years without receiving a penny.

An Employment Tribunal found in 2020 that The Athletic Club had made Cassandra Simmons redundant in November 2019 when it moved her to an off-site gym.

While the decision was upheld by the Supreme Court last September, Ms Simmons said she has yet to receive any of the $15,400 the courts found she was owed.

She said: “People get these judgments, but where is it in the system that people are held accountable?

“I can go to court and win every case, but if there’s nothing in place to chase these people after you win, it’s a pointless court system.

“There’s no justice in the system if I have to keep running back and forth for something that was already judged.”

The Supreme Court heard that Ms Simmons was hired by The Athletic Club in 2010 and worked at the company’s Washington Street gym until it closed in November 2019.

The employer reassigned her to an off-site gym, where she remained until March 2020, when she stopped work because of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Ms Simmons filed a complaint with the Employment Tribunal shortly after she was moved to the other gym on the basis that the move was against her 2010 contract.

The tribunal heard the complaint and last July they ruled that under the 2010 contract Ms Simmons had been made redundant when the transfer happened and was owed $14,400 in redundancy payments.

But the court heard no payments were made because the company, based on the 2010 contract, determined that it had overpaid Ms Simmons for years and was actually owed money.

Last September, Puisne Judge Larry Mussenden found that the transfer was legal based on a 2015 contract signed by Ms Simmons which had not been presented to the tribunal.

However, Mr Justice Mussenden said that she was still owed 20 weeks of redundancy under that contract from when she lost her job in August 2020, which amounted to $15,400.

Ms Simmons said that when she attempted to receive her payments, she was informed that the company had gone into liquidation and she would have to go to the liquidators.

While a notice for the liquidation was published, the lawyer listed as the liquidator said in February they had not been nominated or appointed to the role.

Ms Simmons said she has since been told that the company would go into liquidation, although she questioned what had happened with the company’s assets over the past two years.

Ms Simmons said last month the court ordered payment of the $15,400, along with interest and legal fees, but she said she had yet to receive any funds.

“This is costing me time, costing me money, causing me stress,” she said. “Why is our government system allowing companies to get away with things like this?

“We have a window of time, so if you know the system, you can work the system. They know the system, but I didn’t know the system until I got a lawyer, and that costs.

“I worked for this company for ten years. I was the last person standing. I feel disrespected as a human being, as a mother, as a parent who worked for a company that ignored the orders from the court.

“I can say I won an order but what difference does that make if there is no one to penalise these people. There are no bailiffs chasing them. If I was fined in court, I would pay it or be in jail. That’s it.”