Covid-19 news with a HR Twist
June 2015
Worker dismissed at probationary period meeting awarded €10k
On 17th September 2013 a former employee of a coach hire company referred his case under Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 to the Labour Court and agreed to be bound by the Recommendations of the Court.
The case revolved around the alleged Unfair Dismissal of the claimant at his probationary meeting. An employee with less than 12 months’ service cannot avail of the protections offered by the Unfair Dismissals Acts, however, as this particular employee did, employees with less than 12 months’ service can refer a claim under the Industrial Relations Act as the amount of service is irrelevant in these instances. The employee claimed that he was made aware that he was being dismissed at the meeting but stated that no issues about his performance were raised at that time. The employee described how he was denied his right to appeal the decision as his employer either claimed to be “unavailable” or simply “failed to respond” to any correspondence relating to an appeal process. A Labour Court hearing was scheduled for, and took place on, January 10th 2014. The employer, who was notified of the hearing, did not attend and did not appoint any representation to attend on his/her behalf. Given his opportunity to speak, the worker claimed that throughout the course of his probation, he was never told of any issues with his performance. He went on to describe how he was not afforded his right to query why he was dismissed and was not given any opportunity to appeal the decision made by his employers to terminate his employment at that time. As there was no representation on the part of the employer the employee’s claims went uncontested. With the evidence presented to it, the Court decided that the process used in deciding to dismiss the claimant fell short of the standards of fairness that a reasonable employer should exhibit. The Court, satisfied with the evidence of the claimant, ruled that he be compensated in the amount of €10,000. This figure was in full and final settlement of all claims arising from this dismissal. The determination in this case should encourage all employers to ensure that they follow Labour Court approved procedures with extreme care when dismissing an employee - even when doing so during a probationary period. Employers should note from this case that all employees, including those who are dismissed during probation, are entitled to be afforded details of the reasons why they are being let go and should also be offered the right to appeal the decision to terminate. As should be the case all employees, even employees on probation, are entitled to natural justice.How to avoid an unfair dismissal claim when making someone redundant
Redundancy is a minefield if you take chances. You must remember that employees now know their rights better than ever before. They have lived through a time when friends, family and work colleagues have been laid off - there is also a lot of information readily available for them online. Employees have picked up a great deal of information about their rights. We say to Employers "your employees know their rights - do you?" Some businesses are now facing into a second phase of redundancies. In that instance, you can be guaranteed that staff know their entitlements even better than they did for the first phase. If you don't follow process, or if you make a false move, it could cost you - you could quite easily end up in the Labour Courts with an Unfair Dismissal case on your hands. Unfair Dismissal cases are very common these days and they are very difficult for employers to win as the onus is on the employer to prove that he or she made the correct choices when letting someone go. Proving that a redundancy, for instance, was necessary is essential - making the position, not the person, redundant is crucial - an employer cannot make an employee redundant and then hire a new staff member to carry out the same tasks the following week. Commissioners will scrutinize every detail and decision and will want to see that the employer has dotted every "I" and crossed every "T". Employers have a 50/50 chance of leaving Labour Court hearings with a large figure to pay out - it is important to remember that a huge number of cases are also settled prior to court proceedings so the odds are heavily stacked against the employer coming away from the Court with no fine on their hands. Without a doubt redundancies can be required to keep a business viable. Employers need to ensure that they make their decisions based on what's best for the business - not because they want to get rid of Danny the storeman who you feel hasn't done a tap for years. Before making people redundant, look at the business overall and see what areas are suffering a downturn, what areas are picking up, and how best you should react to changed circumstances. A Selection Matrix will help to clarify your thoughts and take the personalities out of the decision - and also ensure that no-one can accuse you of using redundancy simply to remove people you don't like from your company. As a business owner or manager, you are entitled to make decisions that make business sense. So establish the logic of any decision before you make it.
Searching Employee Belongings Appropriately
Many employers have experienced theft by an employee in the workplace and, consequently, need to put certain measures in place in order to protect the profits of the company. It is the policy of some companies to search employees’ personal belongings when they are leaving the work premises. Employers can also reserve the right to search employee lockers and vehicles if this is agreed with the employee in advance. If the employer wishes to have the option to carry out personal searches then it is crucial that all details surrounding these searches are clearly communicated to the employees in the contract of employment. Employees sign this contract and by doing so agree to the policies and procedures contained therein. If an employer reserves the right to search an employee’s belongings then he or she must do so in a dignified manner – giving the employee appropriate levels of privacy. There are several significant procedures to observe when performing a personal search. The individual carrying out the search should be in a management position and, in the interest of clarity; the employees should be made aware in advance who it will be. The location of the search is also something that should be considered very carefully – it is important to maintain consistency and to carry out searches in an area that offers privacy to the employee involved. Employees should be notified of the location of the search and, ideally, it should be out of the view of customers and other employees. The shop floor is not appropriate search setting – the canteen is not suitable either. Ideally the area should be covered by CCTV in order to prevent a “he said she said” situation from arising. If this is not possible then a witness should be present so that this scenario is avoided. Either way discretion is of cardinal importance. As is procedure with airline security screening a male should search a male and a female should search a female, although, as the searches should not involve body contact this is less of a priority. It is essential that the employee is asked to open his or her bag, for instance, and that the person performing the search doesn’t breach privacy by putting their hands into the employee’s bag or on the employee’s person. Employees should be asked politely to remove any suspicious items from their bag for further inspection – the item/items should be placed on a clear surface in order to ensure that there is no confusion over what was actually in the bag. The searching employee (management/security where possible) should never assume that an item has not been paid for. If the item in question was from the store then the employee should be asked to produce a receipt for same. Further action can be taken if the employee cannot furnish proof of purchase. When an employee purchases an item in the store during the working day it is good practice for companies to put in place a policy where the bag is sealed and the receipt is attached to the bag. This removes any ambiguity. Some companies will carry out spot checks on employee belongings rather than checking them on a daily basis – it is vital to be fair and to ensure that the same employees are not targeted all the time. Not following appropriate procedures can lead to employees being awarded large sums of money.
Average Award in Unfair Dismissal Cases on the Rise
According to the Employment Appeals Tribunal Annual Report 2011 the number of cases annually referred to the Tribunal increased three fold during the Irish economic recession (to a high of 9,458 cases in 2009). The average number of annual referrals before the recession had plateaued at approximately 3,500. Statistics for Unfair Dismissals cases: The average compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Unfair Dismissal cases has risen dramatically in recent years. For the year ended 31st December 2009 the average compensation in Unfair Dismissals cases was €11,476. In 2010 it was €16,064.05 and in 2011 it was €18,047.85. This is a trend that employers really need to pay attention to as large sums of money like this can seriously damage a company. It is crucial to stay up-to-date with employment legislation and to follow appropriate procedures when dealing with employee matters.
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. It 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.).
Dignity at Work – Workplace Racism at an Alarming Level
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! 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, 1998 to 2007. 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. 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 Beware: Under current Irish employment legislation (The Employment Equality Acts 1998-2011) companies are accountable when it comes to bullying and harassment in the workplace or workplace disputes. 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. 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. 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. 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. Last week the Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) brought our attention to a shocking statistic – The ICI revealed that the number of racist incidents reported in Ireland over the last 12 months had jumped to a staggering figure – They dealt with 120 individual racism cases in the past year. 52 of these instances were reported in June/July of 2013 alone marking a huge increase when compared to the same period in 2012 when just 3 incidents were reported. The racism reported related to alleged discrimination, written harassment, verbal harassment and physical violence. The most commonly reported setting for racism was the workplace – where a massive 20% of reported incidents occurred. Employers need to be vigilant and need to make more of an effort to consciously crack down on this type of activity.
Labour Court Ends Zero-Hours Contracts For HSE Home Helps
The Labour Court has issued a recommendation giving improved terms and conditions to Home Help workers employed by the Health Service Executive (HSE). The recommendation, which is binding under the terms of the Haddington Road Agreement, was issued on 18th September, 2013, and will affect the employment terms and conditions of approximately 10,000 workers. It is important to note that this agreement only applies to Home Helps who are employed by the HSE. Individuals employed by private companies or not-for-profit providers are not covered by this Labour Court recommendation. Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) has been campaigning since 2009 in a bid to secure adequate contracts and security of earnings for its members. The Union has welcomed the Labour Court decision which brings an end to the extensive system of zero-hour contracts. Paul Bell, SIPTU Health Division Organiser, stated that the agreement put the terms and conditions of Home Helps on a “firm and binding platform for the first time since the community service was established thirty years ago”. A Zero-hours contract is a type of employment where an employee must be available for work but does not have specified or guaranteed hours or a formal roster. This can cause challenging circumstances for employees where the hours of work as well as earnings are unpredictable. This Labour Court agreement provides for the issuing of annualised contracts guaranteeing a minimum of seven to 10 hours of work per week for each Home Help. Caroline Jenkinson, Labour Court Deputy Chairman, explained that “the number of hours to be allocated to each person will be based on 80 per cent of their actual hours worked in the six-month reference period between October 1st, 2011, and March 31st, 2012, with a minimum guarantee of seven hours”. In addition to welcoming the removal of the zero-hours system Mr. Bell of SIPTU applauded a HSE effort to reorganise and manage the Home Help hours on a county by county basis. Those who choose not to work under the annualised hour scheme may be entitled to receive compensation of between €2,000 and €3,000 under an exit deal.
Drugs and Alcohol Free Workplace
So far as is reasonably possible, employers are legally obliged to ensure the safety and welfare at work of all employees. Likewise, employees have a responsibility to themselves and to their colleagues. The use of alcohol and/or unauthorised drugs may disturb the safe and efficient running of a business. It can hinder the health and safety of employees within the organisation as well as the customers and other stakeholders.
There can be multiple negative effects of alcohol and drug use. Below illustrates just some of the adverse outcomes that can come as a result of drug and/or alcohol use:-
The use of drugs or alcohol by an employee can lead to performance/productivity issues. It can make concentration very difficult for the person in question. Work related tasks can take more time and the number of mistakes can often increase, potentially costing the Company, individual concerned and other employees dearly.
-
Another common consequence of alcohol or drug use is the loss of faculties. This may lead to an inability to properly assess danger which can, in turn, bring about higher accident levels when driving to or from work, or being more prone to having an accident or causing an accident when at work.
-
Absence from work is another likely outcome when using alcohol or drugs in an excessive or irresponsible manner. Other related lapses such as lateness and disproportionate levels of sickness, etc. are also common.
Maternity, Adoptive and other forms of leave from Employment
Paid leave of absence for mothers, whose babies are born through surrogacy arrangements, falls outside the scope of the law.
In September 2013 The European Court of Justice found 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. 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 European Court of Justice which found that the woman did not have any automatic right to Adoptive Leave. The legal opinion of the Advocate General stated that her 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 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. Rights to Maternity and Adoptive Leave defined: If an employee becomes pregnant while employed in Ireland she is entitled to take Maternity Leave. This entitlement extends to all female employees regardless of their length of service and the number of hours worked per week etc. Since March 1st 2007, employees have a statutory right to 26 weeks’ Maternity Leave. A further 16 weeks’ Additional Maternity Leave is available to them should they wish to take advantage of it. Employees are not obliged to avail of the entire period of leave open to them; however, they must take a minimum of two weeks prior to the birth and at least 4 weeks after giving birth. If the baby is born prematurely then Maternity Leave starts on the day the baby is born. Employees are obliged to notify their employer of their wish to take Maternity Leave as soon as is reasonably practicable (not later than 4 weeks prior to the desired commencement date). Employees must produce a medical certificate confirming the expected birth date. Employers must give paid time-off for doctor/midwife recommended medical appointments for all pregnancies and employees are also entitled to attend one set of antenatal classes during one pregnancy. The employer should be given written notice 2 weeks in advance of such appointments. Expectant fathers are also entitled to be paid by their employer while attending one set of antenatal classes. While some do, it is important to remember that employers are not obliged to pay employees while they are on Maternity Leave. Employees who have contributed enough PRSI can apply for Maternity Benefit from the Department of Social Protection. Employers, who do continue to pay employee salaries during Maternity Leave, often require the employee to forward to them any Maternity Benefit Payment from the Department of Social Protection. Most employees do not have any right to remuneration from their employer during Additional Maternity Leave and there is no state benefit payable during this time, however, employees are still entitled to avail of this extra 16 weeks away from the workplace immediately after the conclusion of their regular Maternity Leave. It is important to note that Employees must apply to their employer in writing 4 weeks prior to the conclusion of their Maternity Leave if they wish to avail of this Additional Maternity Leave. Employees are protected against discrimination or loss of employment through redundancy or dismissal on grounds relating to pregnancy and Maternity Leave. Employees must give notice of their intention to return from Maternity Leave at least 4 weeks prior to doing so. Employees must return on the same terms and conditions as when they left (unless this in not reasonably practicable). There is an obligation on the employer to carry out a specific risk assessment for employees who are pregnant, and for those who are breastfeeding or who have just given birth, in order to assess whether there are any workplace hazards for these employees. Should this risk assessment determine that hazards (that cannot be eliminated) exist the employee will be moved to alternative work or, if this is not feasible, the employee will be granted health and safety leave. The employee is entitled to payment from the employer in respect of the first 21 days of such health and safety leave and can apply for social welfare benefit for any period thereafter. Adoptive Leave: When an employee is adopting a child she is entitled to a minimum of 24 consecutive weeks’ ordinary Adoptive Leave starting on the day of placement of the child. Only the adoptive mother is entitled to avail of Adoptive Leave from employment, except in the case where a male is the sole adopter. There is no statutory obligation on employers to provide pay to employees while they are on Adoptive Leave – some companies, however, do offer this benefit to employees. Individuals may be entitled to Adoptive Benefit from the Department of Social Protection. Employees are also entitled to take 16 weeks' additional unpaid Adoptive Leave immediately following the period of standard Adoptive Leave. As is the case with Additional Maternity Leave, Employees must apply for the Additional Adoptive Leave in writing 4 weeks prior to the end of ordinary Adoptive Leave. In special circumstances, for instance cases involving foreign adoption, Additional Adoptive Leave may be taken at a time not directly following the regular Adoptive Leave period. An employee’s entitlement to Annual Leave and Public Holidays will continue to accrue as normal during Maternity Leave and Adoptive Leave. It is essential for employers to remember that, similar to other forms of protective leave, employees are entitled to return to the role they held immediately before commencing Adoptive Leave, subject to the employee having notified the employer of the intention to return to work, not later than four weeks before the date of expected return.Arm Your Company with the Best Human Resources Support
Since 2001 The HR Company, B2E Ltd. has been successfully providing a cost-effective HR and advice support service(s) for small to medium sized businesses (SMEs) across Ireland. The HR Company also assists several large corporations and multinationals with their HR operations. With so many pieces of employment legislation in place in Ireland it is a challenge for companies to ensure that they are fully compliant on all counts. The HR Company is an Irish-owned company headed up by Philip Carney, former head of HR for Microsoft’s European Operations Centre, and Angela O’Grady, former Staffing and Recruiting Manager. A team of 20 HR specialists provide peace of mind for Employers by guiding them on all aspects of Irish Employment Law. The HR Company provides a very affordable 24/7 protection service to those who wish to offload the burdens and risk associated with HR activities. Whether it relates to disciplinary procedures, annual leave, redundancy or anything in between; a dedicated account manager is at the end of a phone to guide Employers and help insulate companies whenever a query about best practices in HR arises. Not only does The HR Company provide bespoke employment documentation to ensure companies pass a National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) inspection, tailored disciplinary letters and any other relevant material are prepared by dedicated account managers to ease the load on the Employer. The HR Companyacts as the eyes and ears of the Employer on all HR related issues – protecting companies by keeping them informed on any relevant legislation updates. In this era of increased employee litigation employees know their rights – companies should shield themselves against the risk of a costly dispute by arming themselves with the best on-call support.
Probationary Periods in the Irish Workplace
Employment references for prospective employees can be great indicators of employee skills or characteristics and they should always be thoroughly vetted. However, for various reasons, they may not always give a true and present reflection of the candidate or they may reflect what the employee’s capabilities were at a different time and this may not necessarily match their current skills. References can also depict suitability for a role that is dissimilar to the one being filled. For this reason it is advisable for employers to engage new members based on multiple evaluations to protect themselves and to ensure not to waste any time or resources on someone who is not adequately equipped for the role. An applicant’s cover letter and curriculum vitae, as well as the resulting interview(s), can tell an employer a lot about the potential new employee - it is not uncommon, however, to ask shortlisted candidates to perform competency-based assessments or aptitude tests so that the employer can acquire a full picture of the candidate’s abilities and determine whether or not he or she is the right fit for the vacancy. It is customary for employers to hire new members on a probationary period of 6 months or a term not dissimilar to this. This probationary period does not prejudice the Company’s right to dismiss in accordance with the notice provisions contained in the employee’s individual statement of main terms of employment, or without notice for reasons of gross misconduct, should this be necessary. This period should be used by the employer to fully assess the employee’s work performance and establish suitability. If the work performance is not up to the required standard or the employee is considered to be unsuitable the employer should either take swift remedial action or terminate the employment, without recourse to the disciplinary procedure. At the end of the probationary period the employee should again be reassessed. If he or she has not reached the required standard the employer should, at their discretion, either extend the probationary period in order that remedial action can be taken or terminate the contract of employment. The probationary period should not in any case exceed eleven months in total. The employee should receive notice of the Company’s intention to extend the probationary period before or at the end of the initial 6 month probationary period. A clause should allow that any continuous period of absence of four weeks or more would suspend the probationary period until the employee’s return to work. To avoid any risk of discrimination, policies (like the probationary period outlined above) should be fair and consistent and should apply to all new employees throughout the Company. In disciplinary proceedings, when dealing with employees on probationary periods, progressive steps can be skipped but it is a common misconception that fair procedures and natural justice need not be adhered to during the probationary period. The Unfair Dismissals Acts 1997-2007 will not apply to the dismissal of an employee during a period at the beginning of employment when he/she is on probation or undergoing training provided that: •the contract of employment is in writing •the duration of probation or training is one year or less (including annual leave) and is specified in the contract It is important to bear in mind that this exclusion from the Acts will not apply if the dismissal results from trade union membership or activity, pregnancy related matters, or entitlements under the maternity protection, parental leave, adoptive leave and carer's leave legislation.
Grievances in the Workplace
It is essential for companies to have a Grievance Policy in place so that employees know the correct procedure to follow when addressing problems or concerns regarding work, Management or another staff member. The policy should also ensure that employees can formally raise a grievance regarding any decisions or actions taken by their employer. Employees should be encouraged to make Management formally aware of situations where they feel that a policy or procedure is not being followed or applied correctly to all employees.
It is understandable and acceptable that when people work together misunderstandings, concerns or problems can arise. Companies should implement a culture of openness as well as a willingness to listen and co-operate. The hope here is that issues/misunderstandings can be resolved informally in an efficient and an effective manner. However, where such issues remain unresolved they can become grievances. Employees should be encouraged to seek resolution of an issue by utilising the Company’s Grievance Procedure.
Sample Grievance Procedure
1) Staff should approach their Manager in the first instance to arrange a meeting to discuss, and attempt to resolve, the problem/concern. (See point 4 below for procedure when the grievance involves the Manager). The employee should be asked to document their grievance in writing. This is very important. 2) The employee should be allowed to have a colleague (of their choice) accompany them at the meeting for support purposes. 3) The issue should be discussed in detail and a reasonable timeframe for resolution should be worked out (1 working week is a reasonable timeframe in most instances). 4) If the employee is not satisfied with the outcomeafter the relevant time has elapsed, he or she should appeal to the General Manager. If the initial grievance relates to an employee’s direct Manager then he or she should skip directly to this stage. 5) The problem/grievance should be discussed in detail once again with the General Manager and a reasonable timeframe for resolution should again be given (typically 1 working week is sufficient; this timeframe may vary depending on the severity of the issue/type of complaint). 6) If the employee is dissatisfied with the outcome of the final stage of the procedure then further recourse should be made available and the employee should be made aware that he or she can request a meeting with a Company Director. 7) The issue should be discussed for a third time and a reasonable timeframe for resolution given (again, depending on the severity of the issue, 5 working days should be sufficient). 8) The decision, following the exhaustion of the entire process outlines above, should be final and no further Company appeal need be entertained. 9) If the employee is still unhappy with the outcome he or she should then choose to seek recourse through external bodies.Click the below image to download your Guide to issuing Contracts of Employment
Illness Benefit “Wait Period” Extended from 3 to 6 days – Budget 2014
Sick pay from employers is not a statutory entitlement. It is up to the employer to decide whether or not to pay employees while they are out of work sick (once all employees are treated equally). Employers are obliged to provide details of their sick pay policy in employment contracts. During times of incapacity or illness the employee can apply to the Department of Social Protection for Illness Benefit (once the employee has paid enough in PRSI contributions he or she should be entitled to Illness Benefit). If it is Company policy to continue to pay employees while they are ill or incapacitated, the employer often requires that the employee signs over any State Illness Benefit received to the Company. A Budget 2014 announcement confirmed today (15th October, 2013) that the number of “waiting days” for Illness Benefit will be increased from 3 days to 6 days from 1st January 2014. What this means is that an employee will not be entitled to receive Illness Benefit for the first 6 days of any period of incapacity for work. This is more than one full working-week. This has the potential to significantly affect a large number of people - employees and employers alike. The extension, which is said to save the state €22million, will negatively impact employees who work for companies that do not pay for sick leave – doubling the number of days that must elapse before they are entitled to receive any income. The decision will also have an impact on companies who continue to pay employees during periods of illness or incapacity but recover some of the costs of doing so by forcing employees to sign over any State Illness Benefit received as, from January of next year, the employer will not now receive any refund for the first 6 days of absence.
More cuts in Maternity Benefit – Budget 2014
The Budget 2014 announcement that Maternity Benefit is to be capped at €230 per week has significant implications for numerous employees and employers alike. The current upper rate of €262 per week is an entitlement enjoyed by the vast majority of women in Ireland claiming Maternity Benefit. The reduction by €32 per week, which will be effective for new Maternity Benefit claims from January 2014, may discourage women from having children. Alternatively, it may force mothers to avail of shorter periods of Maternity Leave than they would like because they simply cannot afford to remain out of the workplace for the full 6 month period. The reduction of €32 per week over 6 months will see many new mothers lose out on €832 in Maternity Benefit. Some employers pay the difference between the Department of Social Protection Maternity Benefit figure and the employee’s regular salary (a "top-up" amount) as a gesture to employees so that they do not suffer major financial implications while on Maternity Leave. The Budget 2014 decision to reduce the amount paid by the State means that employers who cover the difference between Maternity Benefit and an employee's regular salary will now have to find an additional €832 per employee over the 6 month period in order to maintain the same level of maternity pay for employees while they are availing of maternity leave. Click the image below to download your guide to Public holiday Entitlements