LinkedInInstagramFacebookXYouTubeEmailFrench Website
Call us on: +353 1 2911850

Monthly Archives: June 2015

Employee unfairly dismissed for improper internet use awarded €7,000.

Why is having an internet use/social media policy so important? On 17th December 2013, the Employment Appeals Tribunal in Mullingar heard a claim that an employee had been unfairly dismissed by her employer, a wholesale electrical company that employed approximately 36 employees. Unfair Dismissal, CompensationThe individual was employed as a Marketing Assistant from 1 November 2010. With the permission of the employer, the employee worked a three day week for the first year as she was completing a graphic design course simultaneously. The employer was happy for the employee to begin working a 5 day week on 1st November 2011.     The Managing Director claimed that both he and the Office Manager had warned the claimant on a number of occasions about her non-work related internet use. According to the Managing Director, these alleged warnings were of a verbal nature. The Managing Director gave evidence to the Tribunal that, on 16 January 2012, he observed the claimant on a social media site and called her to his office before proceeding to dismiss her from her employment with the Company. The Managing Director believed that the actions of the claimant amounted to a waste of the Company’s time and resources and her actions constituted gross misconduct. It became apparent that the Company did not have a formal internet use/social media policy in place while the claimant was employed. It also came to light that the employee did not receive a contract of employment nor did she receive a copy of the Company’s disciplinary procedures. Unfair Dismissal, Internet Use Policy The claimant stated that she completed all tasks that were assigned to her. She was not using the internet in a secretive way (she gave evidence that her computer monitor was in full view of the office) and she did not believe that she was doing anything wrong when she was online. The claimant testified that she was not given a job description detailing the tasks that were assigned to her. The former employee explained that, if she was aware of the company’s policy around internet use/social media then she would have abided by it. The claimant stated that she regularly asked for more assignments to complete during her work hours but was not provided with enough to occupy all of her working time. The employee explained that she was told in December to “wind down” for the Christmas period when she looked for more work from the Managing Director’s son. The claimant admitted to spending time browsing the internet when she had finished with her work assignments but clarified that she spent the majority of her time on the internet carrying out work related activities. The claimant gave evidence that she never received any warnings prior to her dismissal. The Employment Appeals Tribunal considered all of the evidence that was submitted by the claimant and the respondent and concluded that the dismissal of the employee was unfair as, according to the Tribunal, there appears not to have been any valid grounds for the termination. In addition to this the Tribunal found that the dismissal was lacking any procedural fairness because no investigation or disciplinary process took place. Contracts of Employment The Tribunal also made note of the fact that the claimant was never provided with a any of the following documents throughout the course of her employment:

  • A contract of employment,
  • Payslips,
  • An internet use/social media policy
  • A copy of the Company’s disciplinary procedures
The claimant received pay for one week’s notice. The Tribunal found that there was no gross misconduct on the part of the claimant and, consequently, the Tribunal found that the employee was Unfairly Dismissed and awarded her €7,000.00 in compensation under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977 to 2007. GUIDE TO CONTRACTS OF EMPLOYMENT
By |2017-01-02T10:59:59+00:00June 17th, 2015|Compensation|0 Comments
Read More

No Adoptive or Maternity Leave Ireland for "Commissioning Mothers"

 

european Court of Justice, Surrogacy, Maternity LeaveIn September 2013 the legal opinion of the European Court of Justice was that an Irish teacher (Ms. Z), whose child was born through surrogacy, did not have an automatic right to either paid Adoptive Leave or Maternity Leave from her employment.

On 18th March 2014 a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling, that referred to the mother who did not give birth to the child as the “commissioning mother”, upheld this opinion. The ruling stressed that it is the birth mother who should benefit from Maternity Leave even where she does not keep the baby after giving birth and even in cases where the mother who takes on the responsibility of the child after birth is the biological mother. The reason for this is to improve the health and safety of pregnant workers and and those who have recently given birth.

Ms. Z and her husband are the baby’s full genetic parents. When Ms. Z’s application for paid Adoptive Leave was denied she brought a complaint to the Equality Tribunal. The woman, who has no uterus as a result of a rare medical condition, claimed that she was discriminated against on the grounds of sex, family status and disability.

The woman was told by her employer that she could take unpaid Parental Leave instead of the requested Adoptive Leave; however, as the child was genetically hers and her name was on the American birth certificate, Ms. Z felt that she was being treated unfairly.

The surrogacy scenario can be a challenging one for all concerned and blurred lines surrounding what mothers are entitled to in the workplace just adds to the complexity of the situation.

The Equality Tribunal referred the case to the ECJ and the Court ruled yesterday that mothers like Ms. Z do not have any automatic right to Adoptive Leave or Maternity Leave.

Maternity Leave

In September 2013, the legal opinion of the Advocate General stated that Ms. Z’s differential treatment was not based on sex, family status or disability, as claimed, but instead on the “refusal of national authorities to equate her situation with that of either a woman who has given birth or an adoptive mother”.

The Court ruled that Ms. Z did not fall within the scope of the Pregnant Worker’s Directive as the Directive in question presupposes that the worker has been pregnant or has given birth to a child. The claim of discrimination on the grounds of sex failed as fathers in this situation are also denied leave. The claim of discrimination on the grounds of disability also failed as, the judgement stated that, while “a woman’s inability to bear her own child may be a source of great suffering” it does not amount to ‘disability’. The concept of ‘disability’ within the EU Employment Equality Framework Directive “presupposes that the limitation, from which the person suffers, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder that person’s full and effective participation in professional life on an equal basis with other workers”.

The recent revelation, that Irish women who have babies through surrogacy arrangements are not afforded the same rights as mothers who have adopted or given birth to their babies, has highlighted the uncertainties/complexities surrounding the issue of surrogacy in both Irish and EU law.

Surrogacy is becoming a more frequent option for women; however, legislation in Ireland has not kept up with this change.

The ECJ stated that member states are “free to apply more favourable rules for commissioning mothers” and paid leave for mothers, who have children through surrogacy arrangements, is being legislated for in The United Kingdom.

Maternity LeaveOn 30th January 2014, Justice Minister Alan Shatter published the General Scheme of Children and Family Relationships Bill for consultation. According to Minister Shatter, the draft bill ‘seeks to provide legal clarity on the parentage of children born through assisted human reproduction and surrogacy’.   Annual Leave Guidelines

By |2021-01-07T18:11:32+00:00June 17th, 2015|Policies & Procedures|0 Comments
Read More

When should you use a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA)?

A non-disclosure agreement (NDA), often referred to as a confidentiality or a secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between two or more parties outlining knowledge and/or information that the parties wish to share with one another but wish not to have accessed by third parties.

By signing the document the parties agree not to disclose information that it contains. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of sensitive material such as details of trade secrets – it prevents the dissemination of company or project-specific information that, if leaked, could be damaging for one or both of the parties involved. It usually prevents the signing party from benefiting commercially from the information.

NDAs are commonly signed when two companies are considering doing business with each other and need to exchange information to benefit the partnership. A mutual NDA restricts both parties in their use of the materials provided; alternatively, an NDA can also exclusively restrict the use of material by one of the individuals or groups involved.

Employers often request that an employee signs an NDA or a similar form of contract when he or she commences employment, or a new assignment, in order to maintain confidentiality.

NDA

An NDA incorporates various basics – the details of the parties who must adhere to the agreement and the information to be kept confidential (often including items such as unpublished patent applications, financial information, customer lists, discoveries and business strategies). When drafting an NDA it is important to include the disclosure period in the contract.

Those writing the NDA should note that if the recipient had prior knowledge, obtained legally, of the matters contained within the NDA - or if the contents are publically available - the signatory cannot be held liable for dispersing the material. Similarly, if the materials are subject to a subpoena or a court order, this would override the contract.

The NDA should have a clause that forces the signing party to return or destroy the confidential information where the project or assignment is abandoned or when they no longer need access to the information.

Breach of the NDA is a serious offense – when this occurs the information owner can apply to court to have an injunction put in place to stop future breaches – Often it is too late at this stage as the damage has already been done. A second option here is to sue the party at fault for damages suffered by the breach. The consequences of breaching the NDA should be set out in the NDA and should include loss of profit as well as loss of reputation and costs and expenses caused by the breach. It is important to remember that Court proceedings can be a long and arduous process.

NDA

It can be extremely difficult to prove that an NDA has been breached but if a breach is proven, this can provide the basis for a claim. Given that it is not always possible to prove that an NDA has been breached some people do not rate them – however, at the very least the NDA holds some value in that it clearly sets out in writing what is expected of the parties to avoid any ambiguity and NDAs also serve as a reminder of the confidential nature of the information and act as a deterrent. GUIDE TO CONTRACTS OF EMPLOYMENT

By |2021-02-23T17:52:41+00:00June 17th, 2015|Documentation, Policies & Procedures|0 Comments
Read More

The Applicable Minimum Notice Periods for Employees in Ireland

The Minimum Notice Acts 1973 to 2005 ensure that every employee who has been in the continuous employment of his or her employer for at least 13 weeks is entitled to a minimum notice period before you, as the employer, may dismiss that employee.   The statutory period varies depending on the length of service (outlined below). It is essential to note that if you do not require the employee to work out their notice you, as the employer, are obliged to pay the employee for the applicable period.

    • If the employment lasted between 13 weeks and 2 years the Acts provide that you should pay the employee one week's notice before termination of employment
    • If the length of service is between 2 and 5 years then the notice period must be 2 weeks
    • For 5 to 10 years then the appropriate notice is 4 weeks
    • From 10 to 15 years then 6 weeks’ notice must be given
    • For more than 15 years the employee is entitled to a notice period of 8 weeks.
You can agree payment in lieu of notice with the employee if this is a more suitable arrangement for both parties involved. Minimum Notice If it is the employee that has made the decision to terminate the employment contract and he or she has carried out 13 weeks of continuous employment with the company then he or she is obliged to serve you, as the employer, with notice 1 week prior to the departure date (unless the contract of employment provides for a longer notice period). It is important to bear in mind that the Acts do not apply to:
    • Members of the Permanent Defence Forces (except temporary staff in the Army Nursing Service
    • Members of An Garda Síochán
    • Seamen signing on under the Merchant Shipping Ac
    • The immediate family of the employer (provided they live with the employer and work in the same private house or farm
    • Established civil servants
Employees are said to have continuous service if they have not been dismissed or have not voluntarily left their job during the period in question. This continuity is not normally affected by things like lay-offs or by a dismissal followed by immediate re-employment. Nor is it affected by the transfer or trade of a business from one person to another. However, it is important to distinguish between categories of employees for the purposes of these Acts as an employee who has claimed for and received a redundancy payment as a result of lay-off, for instance, is considered to have left his or her employment on a voluntary basis. If an employee was absent from work because he or she was taking part in a strike relating to the business in which the employee is employed this period is not included in their “continuous service” record. Minimum Notice Periods   It is very important to note that the Acts do not affect your right or that of the employee to terminate a contract of employment without notice due to the gross misconduct of the other party. A Workplace Relations Customer Services department has been set up at the offices of the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation. This resulted from the amalgamation of the information services previously provided by the National Employment Rights Authority’s Contact Centre and the general enquiries areas of the Equality Tribunal, the Rights Commissioner Service and the Employment Appeals Tribunal. This section has responsibility for:
    • information provision in relation to employment, equality and Industrial Relations rights and obligations
    • the receipt and registration of all complaints referred to the five Workplace Relations Bodies, and
    • dealing with enquiries concerning all complaints.

From 3rd January 2012 all complaints to the Workplace Relations Bodies have been channelled through Workplace Relations Customer Services, where they are registered, acknowledged and referred to the relevant adjudication body. Mimimum Notice Guide

By |2017-01-02T10:59:54+00:00June 17th, 2015|Notice|0 Comments
Read More

Employer Responsibilities when it comes to Contracts of Employment

Employers are legally obliged to provide workers with a written statement of the employment agreement between the two parties (the contract) within two months of the employee commencing employment.

Have you heard of NERA?

The National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) delivers unprejudiced information on employment rights legislation to employers and employees in Ireland. NERA is charged with monitoring the employment rights of employees within the country. NERA inspectors perform various checks around the country and investigate suspected breaches of employment rights – it is important to bear in mind that a significant number of these inspection are unannounced. If NERA finds that an employer is not complying with employment rights legislation inspectors will seek reparation from the employer on behalf of the employee. In certain circumstances prosecutions against the employer may result.

NERA has the power to chase awards made by the Labour Court, the Rights Commissioner or the Employment Appeals Tribunal.

In order to pass a NERA inspection; employers must have provided their employees with clarity on the terms and conditions of their employment. The contract should explain the relationship between the employer and employee and should not leave any room for misinterpretation or confusion.

A contract outlines the requirements of the position and conditions the person must work against. In the event of poor performance the employer can refer to the contract and all conditions contained therein, and manage the employee against such conditions.

Having a contract in place will offer protection to the company in the event of a dispute or issue arising. This document will safeguard the company in the event of employee litigation or labour court hearings.

Contracts

 

Items that must be included in the written terms of employment are:

•Full name of employer

•Full name of employee

•The address of the employer

•The place of work (if there is no permanent place of work, a statement specifying that the employee is required or permitted to work at various places)

•Appointment/job role – The title or description of the job or the nature of the work for which the employee is employed

•The date of commencement of the contract

•If the contract is temporary, the expected duration of employment

•If the contract is for a fixed-term, the date on which the contract expires; if the contract is for a fixed purpose, then the details of the occurrence of that specific purpose

•The rate of pay, the method of calculation and the frequency of payment (this clause should also include provisions on any permissible deductions in accordance with the Payment of Wages Act, 1991

•The period of notice required from each party to terminate the contract

•The terms and conditions applicable to sick pay, if any

•The terms and conditions applicable to pension schemes, if any

•The terms and conditions relating to paid leave if any

•The terms or conditions relating to hours of work, including overtime

•Reference should be made to any collective agreement affecting the terms of the contract, whether or not the employer is a party to the agreement, including information about the institutions or organisations which drew up any Collective Agreement which affects the terms of the contract to which the employer is not a party.

An Employee Working Abroad is also entitled to details of the following:

•The period of employment outside the State

•The currency in which they will be paid

•Any other benefits-in-kind or cash that will be provided

•The terms and conditions applicable on the employee's return home

 Contracts

Here are examples of some further terms and conditions of employment that are not required by law but are highly recommended:

•Probationary Period and Probation Policy

•Hours of work / additional hours / overtime / shift liability / weekend liability / night work liability / public holiday liability

•Performance related bonuses

•Absence Management

•Medical examination

•Holidays, public holidays, all other forms of leave

•Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures

•Confidentiality

•Company Property

•Phone and Mobile Phone Usage

•Right to Inspect / Search

•Drugs & Alcohol Policy / Right to Test for Intoxicants

•Retirement

•Company Rules and Regulations

•Bullying and Harassment / Respect and Dignity at Work

•Internet, Email & Social Media Usage

•Use of Company Vehicles

•Suspension without pay

•Break and rest periods / exemption provision for employer for recording breaks

•Return of company property

GUIDE TO CONTRACTS OF EMPLOYMENT
By |2021-02-23T17:52:29+00:00June 17th, 2015|Contracts of Employment, HR Guide|0 Comments
Read More

Employers must maintain terms & conditions of Employees on Maternity Leave

Equality Tribunal awards €80k to employee subjected to discriminatory treatment. The former employee (the complainant) in this case commenced employment with her employer (the respondent) in 2003 – She was appointed Financial Controller in 2007 and her employment ended in February 2011. She referred a complaint under the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2008 to the Equality Tribunal on 12 July, 2011.

The respondent, who had gone into liquidation by the time the Hearing took place in December, 2013 did not attend the Hearing.  The liquidator, who received adequate notice of the Hearing, chose not to attend either. The Hearing proceeded in their absence and the complainant built a case against her former employer in front of Equality Officer, Vivian Jackson.

According to the complainant’s uncontested evidence, she informed her employer that she was expecting her third child in November 2009. She alleged that her employer’s attitude towards, and treatment of, her worsened from this point. She had had a miscarriage in the summer of 2009 and, according to the complainant (Ms. M), her employer (Mr. W) responded to her November pregnancy news with the comment “Jesus Lisa, you don’t hang around”. The complainant gave evidence that a few weeks after this comment her employer again referenced her pregnancy but this time it was in front of clients and his comment shocked her. The complainant gave evidence that Mr. W implied to the clients that he was not happy that she was pregnant and stated that ‘she was meant to stop after two’. Maternity Leave The complainant described an incident in January 2010 where she was involved in a car accident. She claimed that a doctor certified her as unfit for work for a week in order to ensure that she and her unborn baby were unharmed. Even though she did not have access to a vehicle for the period, the respondent told her that she was required to attend work the following Monday. Ms. M complied with her employer’s request because she was fearful of losing her job. In February 2010, Ms. M requested a meeting in order to discuss cover during her maternity leave - this was due to begin at the end of April 2010. Mr. W agreed to hire an employee during the period that Ms. M was due to be on her protected leave. The complainant was under the impression that the new hire would begin work on a fixed term contract, however, during the course of the interview the successful applicant, Ms. S, asked about the duration of the contract and, to the complainant’s surprise, Mr. W said that he was ‘not sure that Lisa will be coming back to work’. The complainant said that she had never implied that she would not return to work and, in fact, not returning was ‘undesirable from a personal and professional point of view and impossible from a financial perspective’. Maternity Leave The complainant gave evidence that the respondent ‘froze her out’ – he undermined her with clients and changed arrangements regularly. He also began removing tasks from the complainant. Ms. M believes that this occurred because her employer no longer felt that, with three children, she would be committed to the company. The complainant demonstrated times where she had shown considerable commitment to the company in the past and said that the employer had no reason to believe that her commitment would diminish. The complainant sought a meeting with Mr. W prior to her leaving for her maternity leave – she wanted to discuss her remuneration and benefits during the leave. In the past, the employee had been allowed to keep her company phone and car during the leave and the employer also topped up her state maternity benefit so she continued to receive her normal monthly net income throughout her maternity leave. This time it was different – Mr. W only offered the complainant a top-up payment of €150 per month – far less than what was offered during previous leave periods. Ms. M accepted this. To her surprise, Ms. M was obliged to return her company car and phone for the duration of her leave on this occasion. Ms. M was due to complete her maternity leave at the end of January 2011 and in December 2010 she contacted her employer to give notice of her intention to return to work. She did not receive a response to this e-mail and so she e-mailed Ms. S, who had been hired to cover the period of maternity leave. Ms. S confirmed that Mr. W had received the complainant’s e-mail. Ms. S sent another e-mail on 6th January 2011 requesting that Ms. M attend a meeting with Mr. W on 14th January. At this meeting, Ms M was notified that her role of Financial Controller no longer existed in its previous format within the new company structure. Ms M was informed that the role was redundant and that another position was available to her as an alternative. The new position was a more junior role that not only incorporated additional hours but also a 40% reduction in pay. Ms M was not satisfied with this – she found it to be an unacceptable alternative to the Financial Controller role and demonstrated that her original role was not in fact redundant as MS. S continued to perform Ms. M’s original duties and was listed as the company’s Financial Controller on the company website. The complainant researched her position in light of the new role that her employer offered her as an alternative and realised that she was not obliged to accept the offer. The respondent offered Ms. M her original terms and conditions (including rate of pay and hours), however, the role that she was being asked to perform going forward was a clear demotion and a serious reduction in responsibility. She requested to return to her role as Financial Controller. Again it was expressed by the respondent that this role was redundant and he offered her 14 days to decide whether or not to take the new role of ‘Credit Control Manager’. Ms. M said that she was only happy to return to her original role and stated why the new offer was unacceptable in light of the fact that her original role clearly still existed. Mr. W wrote to Ms. M a number of days later rejecting her arguments and adding that, as she had not reported for duty, he considered her to have resigned. Dismissed Vivian Jackson, Equality Officer, found that Ms. M had been subjected to a range of unlawful treatments. Her employer made it impossible for her to proceed wither pre maternity leave role and essentially dismissed her. The Equality Officer ordered that the respondent pay the complainant €80,000.00 in compensation for the discrimination inflicted on her.  
By |2017-01-02T10:59:55+00:00June 17th, 2015|Discrimination|0 Comments
Read More

Why Companies are choosing to Outsource their HR

The number of cases annually referred to the Employment Appeals Tribunal increased three fold during the Irish economic recession and the average compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Unfair Dismissal cases rose from €11,476.00 to €18,047.85 between 2009 and 2011.

During this time of economic hardship Employers must pay even closer attention than ever before to their expenditure. Many organisations are forced to downsize and - in this era of increased Employee Litigation - making sure you follow appropriate procedures in redundancy or disciplinary scenarios, for example, is growing in importance.OutsourcingIt is at times like these that Companies need to concentrate on their Human Resource functions even more. Some elements of HR, however, can be both complicated and time consuming – an enormous burden on Employers. In recent years the focus has moved towards legal compliance (which can be a minefield with all of the pieces of Employment Legislation currently in operation) and administrative processes that can slow down the productivity of the firm. For SMEs in particular, it makes a lot of business sense to outsource HR tasks as firms specialising in the field can improve efficiency dramatically. Outsourcing allows Companies to offload work that isn’t part of their core business. It also saves money. At a Company that doesn’t have the funds to hire specialists outsourcing can allow it to gain access to a vendor’s services when required as well as the expertise and wealth of experience that they have accumulated – all at an affordable price. While SMEs don’t have the same number of Employees as larger corporations and multinationals they still require the same HR elements on a smaller scale. For instance, they still need to recruit staff, they still need to abide by the vast array of Employment Laws and still require Employment Documentation (Contracts of Employment etc.). Contact The HR Company Although some Companies do it, most SMEs cannot justify spending a large portion of their annual budget setting up a HR department comprehensive enough to incorporate the abundance of skills required to achieve a smooth-functioning, compliant working environment. Consequently, more and more Companies are choosing to outsource operations like HR and are directing vital, scarce, finances and resources towards other core/revenue-generating areas of the business. On the other hand, some Employers end up trying to balance HR duties in addition to their other responsibilities which can leave opportunities for threats and vulnerabilities to creep in. As time goes by many Employers are realising that assigning a large percentage of their time to one area is not just inconvenient but impractical, too. Juggling all elements of a business without assistance can be extremely difficult and for this reason many Employers are opting for the cost-effective third party route which involves the use of an external HR Company. This gives them enhanced peace of mind and confidence that they are working within the confines of all Employment Legislation. Outsourcing Companies can deal with HR successfully and as a priority so that Employers do not have to concern themselves with the associated time constraints and conflicts. Companies can eliminate exposures they did not even know existed quickly and in a cost-effective manner by availing of the services of a HR Company. Outsourcing HR HR Companies deal with all features of Human Resources comprehensively. They have a base of specialist Employees who are trained and experienced in all areas of Employment Law – meaning they are fully equipped to deal with any Employee Relations issues that arise in the workplace. Engaging the services of HR professionals gives Employers access to a bank of relevant knowledge and experience. HR Companies are well prepared to support or advise SMEs without costing an arm and a leg. They keep up-to-date with all changes in Irish Employment Legislation and are able to offer better support and guidance than the client can attain in-house. Navigating Government regulations can be a draining activity for Employers - it can be a time consuming and complicated process, however, it is what HR advisors are trained to do. HR firms can do a lot more than you might think – not alone do they have a top-class portfolio of skills, knowledge and experience concentrated in this specific area. They can offer a range of services and support at an extremely affordable price. Some HR Companies provide comprehensive services for as little as €100 per month – Hiring a HR Employee, even on a part-time basis, would cost far in excess of this. Similarly, many Employers currently engage the services of Solicitors to prepare Contracts of Employment and other Employment Documentation – this can also be an extremely costly process. Outsourcing HR HR Companies prepare Employment Documentation for their clients and on top of that they are there to advise on all individual Employee-related issues – discrimination claims, rest or annual leave entitlements, disciplinary and redundancy procedures, dismissals, grievances and much more. Lots of Companies operate outside of office hours and so some HR Companies even provide 24/7 advice lines for their clients meaning a client will never have an anxious wait for an answer. HR firms also provide support to existing HR departments within Companies - the level of service and associated costs are completely dependent on the needs of the individual Company. HR firms are growing in popularity. In the past outsourcing was often a difficult process because of the issues distance can sometimes create. Thanks to the advances in technology, however, dedicated HR experts are only a couple of clicks or a phone call away – so Human Resource emergencies can be dealt with on the spot.

Reasons influencing decision to co-source:

Improve cost-effectiveness

Reduce administrative costs

Redirect HR focus toward strategy/planning

Allow company to focus on core business

Provide seamless delivery of services

Capitalise on technological advantages/expertise

Improve customer service

Have insufficient staff

Decrease response time to clients

Increase flexibility in handling special needs

Increase level of accuracy

Control legal risk/improve compliance

Tangible Cost Savings:

Reduce employee turnover

Control absenteeism

Efficient use of HR systems & applications

Reduce administration costs

Flexible cost base

Training expense

Hiring costs

By |2021-01-11T17:33:31+00:00June 17th, 2015|HR for Small Business|0 Comments
Read More

Breaks and Rest Periods in the Irish Workplace

Under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 every single employee in Ireland has a legal entitlement to breaks during their working day (or night) and is entitled to have clearly defined rest periods between their working days/nights. Under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 a rest period is defined as any time that is not ‘working time’. In general, an employee is entitled to a 15 minute break after the completion of 4.5 hours of work. If the employee is working a shift of 6 hours then he or she is entitled to a 30 minute break (the first break of 15 minutes can be included in this 30 minute break allocation). The employer is not obliged to pay employees for these break periods and they are not included when counting the total amount of time that the employee has worked. The regulations vary slightly for different categories of employees - for instance, shop employees who work more than 6 hours at a time are entitled to a break of one consecutive hour between the hours of 11:30 and 14:30 if they are scheduled to be in the workplace during that time. Employees are entitled to 11 consecutive hours of rest in a 24 hour period – on top of this, an employee should receive 24 consecutive rest hours in every 7 day period and this 24 hour allocation should follow an 11 hour rest period. Where an employer does not give his or her employee a full 24 hour consecutive rest period throughout the course of one week he or she must give two of these 24 hour rest periods in the following week.  This rest period, unless otherwise stated, should include a Sunday. Not all employees are governed by the break and rest period rules described above. Members of An Garda Síochána, The Defence Forces and employees who manage their own working hours are exempt.  Family employees on farms or in private homes are also excluded from the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 directives. The working terms and conditions for people under the age of 18 differ from those listed here. They are regulated by the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996. Breaks and Rest Periods In exceptional circumstances or emergencies an employer is exempt from providing the above mentioned rest periods but only where he or she provides equivalent compensatory rest. Where the rest period is postponed the employer must allow the employee to take the compensatory rest within a reasonable period of time. Employees working in transport activities or certain categories of civil protection services are exempt from the statutory break regulations specified above (the equivalent compensatory rest rules do not apply for these employees). Employers should be aware that employees have 6 months to make a complaint regarding breaks and rest periods in the workplace (in extreme circumstances this period can be extended to 12 months).

Remove Threats Download HR e-Book
By |2017-01-02T10:59:53+00:00June 17th, 2015|Breaks|0 Comments
Read More

Bullying prevalent in Irish workplaces according to recent survey

  The results of a recent Europe-wide survey, which were reported on in TheJournal.ie’s article Irish workplaces among worst in Europe for bullying, highlighted worrying levels of bullying within companies in Ireland. According to the survey, Ireland is the 7th worst country in Europe when it comes to workplace bullying with a significant 6% of employees claiming to experience it.    

Tom O’Driscoll, SIPTU’s Head of Legal Affairs, explained that “It can be physical abuse but it’s usually abusive name-calling, putting undue pressure on people, singling people out, commenting on their performance…” etc.

Bullying in the workplace is any recurring inappropriate conduct that undermines a person’s right to dignity at work. Bullying can be carried out by one person or by several people - it is aimed at an individual or a group where the objective is to make them feel inferior or victimised. Bullying can come in the form of a verbal or physical assault and can also take place over the internet – this is known as cyber bullying and can be performed via many methods - Mobile phones, social networking sites, emails and texts are all common vehicles for cyber bullying. Cyber bullying is becoming more and more prevalent in society. Keep in mind that harassment based on civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, race, nationality or ethnic origin, disability or membership of the Traveller community is considered discrimination. Harassment in the workplace is prohibited under the terms of the Employment Equality Acts. The Act of harassment - whether direct or indirect, intentional or unintentional - is unacceptable and should not be tolerated by any company.   Any allegations should be dealt with seriously, promptly and confidentially with a thorough and immediate investigation. Any acts of harassment should be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal.  Any victimisation of an employee for reporting an incident, or assisting with an investigation of alleged harassment and/or bullying is a breach of Equality Legislation and should also be subject to disciplinary action. Dignity at work Bullying or harassment isn’t always obvious – in fact it can come in many shapes and forms – some examples are: •Social exclusion or isolation                                                                                                                                              •Damaging someone’s reputation through gossip or rumour                                                                                                •Any form of intimidation                                                                                                                                                  •Aggressive or obscene language or behaviour                                                                                                             •Repeated requests for unreasonable tasks to be carried out Employers - Did you know that you can be held accountable for bullying or harassment in the workplace? ……..Not being aware of it does not get you off the hook! Under current Irish Employment Legislation (The Employment Equality Acts 1998-2011) companies are accountable when it comes to bullying and harassment in the workplace. It is vital for employers to be mindful of the legislation as companies are answerable for the actions of employees, suppliers and customers even in cases where the company is not aware that bullying or harassment is taking place. To defend itself; a company must illustrate how it did everything reasonably practicable to prevent bullying and/or harassment from taking place in the workplace. The company must also show that when an instance of bullying or harassment occurred the company took immediate, fair and decisive action. Dignity at work There is a huge risk of exposure if companies do not adhere to the strict Regulations. Those found in violation of the Act may be liable for fines and in severe circumstances imprisonment on summary conviction. Companies can also end up paying out large sums in compensation. Sample award – In June 2013, a fast food company in Blackpool, Cork was forced to pay €15,000 after two employees were subjected to sexual harassment by another employee.  An Equality Tribunal ruling found that a lesbian couple, who both worked for the restaurant in Cork, were forced to endure obscene remarks and queries about their relationship and sexuality from another employee at the branch. The Tribunal found that management at the restaurant failed in their duty to take the appropriate steps to protect the women. They failed in their responsibilities to their employees and consequently were instructed to pay €15,000 to the couple.   Compensation Under Irish Employment Legislation it is the duty of the employer to provide a workplace that is safe for lesbian women and gay men to be open about their sexuality.   This is something that all employers need to pay close attention to.  Bullying creates a very hostile work environment and can negatively affect employee performance – It can lead to disengagement and low levels of morale. It can also cause a company to lose key members of staff. Bullying can affect both the safety and the health of employees – this violates the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005. It is abundantly clear that it is in the best interest of all stakeholders to prevent bullying or harassment of any form in the workplace. Employers need to be vigilant and need to make more of an effort to consciously crack down on this type of activity. In order to avoid bullying and harassment an employer should include harassment-related policies and procedures in the Employee Handbook – A Dignity at Work Policy should be communicated clearly to employees. This will clarify what is expected of employees and what the protocol/repercussions are if bullying/harassment does occur. The Europe-wide survey found that females between the ages of 30 and 49 are most likely to be bullied at work. Males between the ages of 15 and 29 are the second most likely group to experience bullying.  Women in the same age group are most likely to experience sexual harassment. Bullying in the workplace In December 2013 the Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) brought our attention to a shocking statistic when it revealed that the number of racist incidents reported in Ireland in the first 11 months of 2013 had jumped 85% on the same period in 2012. The racism reported related to alleged discrimination, written harassment, verbal harassment and physical violence. A massive 20% of the reported incidents of racism occurred in the workplace. Racist Incidents                    The area of workplace bullying clearly requires immediate attention in Ireland.    
By |2017-01-02T11:00:06+00:00June 17th, 2015|Bullying at work|0 Comments
Read More

What employers need to know about work permit Ireland

  Employers, as you may be aware, the National Employment Right’s Authority (NERA) conducts thousands of inspections (many of which are unannounced) annually. It is within NERA’s remit to investigate your compliance with Irish Immigration and Employment Permit legislation. NERA     Did you know that employers could be seriously penalised for employing individuals who do not have valid employment permits? •             The Employment Permits Acts 2003 to 2006 make it a criminal offence for a foreign national to work without an employment permit. Employers are committing an offence themselves if they employ a foreign national without a valid work permit. •             The Acts place an onus on the employer to carry out checks in order to be satisfied that a prospective employee does not require an employment permit, and, if he or she does, that they have obtained one. •             NERA inspectors are authorised to exercise powers under the Employment Permit Acts. If, during an inspection, NERA finds evidence showing that an employee does not have a valid employment permit, both the employer and employee are advised of the need to correct the situation. They are also informed of the consequences of failing to do so. •             An employer failing to rectify matters could be prosecuted. NERA commenced initiating proceedings under S.2 of the 2003 Act in 2012. •             An Garda Síochána are also an enforcement authority under Employment Permits legislation with prosecution powers. Who needs an Employment Permit? According to the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, a non-EEA national (except in the cases listed below) requires an employment permit to take up employment in Ireland. The EEA comprises the Member States of the European Union together with Iceland, Norway and Liechtenstein. Employment permit (or work permit) holders are only allowed to work for the employer and in the occupation named on the permit. If the holder of an employment permit ceases to work for the employer named on the permit during the permit’s period of validity, the original permit (along with the certified copy) must be returned immediately to the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Innovation. Citizens of non-EEA countries who do not require Employment Permits include:describe the image     •             Non-EEA nationals in the State on a Work Authorisation/Working Visa   •             Van der Elst Case The European Court of Justice delivered a judgement on the Van der Elst Case (Freedom to Provide Services) on 9 August, 1994. The Court ruled that in the case of non-EEA workers legally employed in one Member State who are temporarily sent on a contract to another Member State, the employer does not need to apply for employment permits in respect of the non-nationals for the period of contract.   •             Non-EEA nationals who have been granted permission to remain in the State on one of the following grounds:   •             Permission to remain as spouse or a dependent of an Irish/EEA national;   •             Permission to remain as the parent of an Irish citizen;   •             Temporary leave to remain in the State on humanitarian grounds, having been in the Asylum process. •             Explicit permission from the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform to remain resident and employed in the State •             Appropriate business permission to operate a business in the State •             A non-EEA national who is a registered student Swiss Nationals: In accordance with the terms of the European Communities and Swiss Confederation Act, 2001, which came into operation on 1 June, 2002, this enables the free movement of worker between Switzerland and Ireland, without the need for Employment Permits. It is imperative that every labour market opportunity is afforded to Irish and other EEA nationals in the first instance. This is also in accordance with EU obligations and recognises that Ireland's labour market is part of a much greater EEA labour market which affords a considerable supply of skilled workers. Work Permits An interesting point to note is that work permits will not be considered for certain occupations. Since April 10th 2013 occupations listed as ineligible for work permits are as follows: •             Hotel, tourism and catering staff except chefs •             Work riders – horseracing •             Clerical and administrative staff •             Drivers (including HGV drivers) •             Nursery/crèche workers, child minders/nannies •             General operatives and labourers •             Operator and production staff •             Domestic workers including carers in the home and child-minders* •             Retail sales staff, sales representatives and supervisory or specialist sales staff** •             The following craft workers and apprentice/trainee craft workers: bookbinders, bricklayers, cabinet makers, carpenters/joiners, carton makers, fitters - construction plant, electricians, instrumentation craftspeople, fitters, tilers - floor/wall, mechanics - heavy vehicles, instrumentation craftspersons, metal fabricators, mechanics - motor, originators, painters and decorators, plumbers, printers, engineers - refrigeration, sheet metal workers, tool makers, vehicle body repairers, machinists - wood, plasterers and welders * In exceptional circumstances an employment permit may be granted for a carer who is a medical professional caring for a person with a severe medical condition or for a carer who has a long caring relationship with a person with special needs where there are no alternative care options ** Specialist language support and technical or sales support with fluency in a non-EEA language in respect of those companies that have formal support from the State’s enterprise development agencies earning at least €27,000 a year may apply for a work permit.

By |2021-01-07T17:59:43+00:00June 17th, 2015|Employer Responsibilities|0 Comments
Read More
Go to Top