Irish Employment Legislation Updates and Guidance Archives - Page 3 of 9

Employee dismissed for nonconsensual use of premises awarded €25k

A recent Labour Court recommendation where a former employee was awarded €25,000 in compensation for Unfair Dismissal illustrates why employers should make sure to attend any hearings that involve them.   The case in question concerns a former employee's claim that he was Unfairly Dismissed after he used the Company premises without the permission of his employer. In accordance with section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969, this particular worker referred his case to the Labour Court in June of 2013. He agreed to be bound by the Recommendation of the Labour Court. A Labour Court hearing took place in February of this year; however, the Company declined to attend the hearing and did not appoint any representation. This meant that the evidence submitted was solely that of the Claimant. The Court found it 'regrettable' that the employer declined to attend the hearing in any form and found it disappointing that the Company did not avail of its opportunity to present the version of events leading to this dispute from their perspective. The former employee accepted that he had used the Company's premises without prior consent. However, he did not accept that his behaviour constituted gross misconduct and, consequently, he contested the gravity of the punishment. The employee argued that his dismissal was disproportionate to his actions and maintained that the dismissal was unfair. Unfair Dismissal Based on the uncontested submissions of the employee (the Claimant) the Court was satisfied that the penalty of dismissal was inconsistent with the actions of the employee and the Court determined that a warning would have been more appropriate in the circumstances. According to the Court, the dismissal was both procedurally and substantially unfair and so the Court recommended that the Company pay compensation in the amount of €25,000 to their former employee in respect of his Unfair Dismissal. This figure was to be in full and final settlement.  

The difference between Constructive and Unfair Dismissal:

Constructive Dismissal is the term used when an employee terminates his or her employment based on the conduct of the employer. Unfair Dismissal is slightly different in that unfair dismissal cases arise when the employee feels as though he or she has been dismissed by the employer on unfair grounds. Unlike in an unfair dismissals case where dismissal is deemed to be unfair unless proven otherwise and justified by the employer - in constructive dismissal instances the onus is on the employee to prove that their resignation was based on poor employer conduct. Employees claim constructive dismissal/unfair dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1977-2007. If it is found that the employee has been unfairly dismissed he or she could either be awarded compensation for the loss of earnings suffered by the dismissal or could be placed back in their original role – However, this is not common practice due to the expected tension or strained relationship between employer/employee and due to the amount of time that is likely to have passed between the termination of the employment contract and the resolution of the case. Typically, an employee needs to have accrued 52 weeks’ continuous service with the employer. However, it is crucial for the employer to bear in mind that 52 weeks’ continuous service is not always an essential element. Employees dismissed for trade union membership or because they are pregnant/exercise their right to parental leave, for instance, do not have to have accrued 12 months’ continuous service prior to claiming unfair/constructive dismissal under the Acts.   If the employer acts unreasonably towards the employee or breaches the contract of employment (or demonstrates that they no longer intend to adhere to the terms and conditions outlined therein) then the employer is at risk of a claim under the Acts. It is important for employers to be aware of everything that occurs in their workplace as even other employees’ behaviour that goes unchecked by the employer could contribute to a constructive dismissal case. It is also very important for employers to attend Labour Court hearings if they are scheduled so they can give evidence in support of their decision. Also, the Court can look less favourably upon employers who fail to attend and can award higher levels of compensation to the employee.  

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:01+00:00June 17th, 2015|Compensation|0 Comments

With the Christmas Period upon us we thought you might find some information on Public Holidays and the relevant employer obligations/ responsibilities around pay useful.

There are nine Public Holidays in Ireland each year - they are:

•New Year's Day (1 January)

•St. Patrick's Day (17 March)

•Easter Monday (Changes every year)

•The first Monday in May, June & August

•The last Monday in October

•Christmas Day (25 December)

•St. Stephen's Day (26 December)

Here is a breakdown of the statutory outline of Public Holiday Entitlements under Irish Employment Legislation: Did you know that employees scheduled to work on a Public Holiday are entitled to an additional day's pay for the day?

For instance, let's take “Employee A” as an example – “Employee A” works on the day the Public Holiday falls - let's say “Employee A” is a retail store employee and is required to work on St. Stephen's day as it is the first day of the store's seasonal sale. *On a normal working day “Employee A” earns €100. This means that “Employee A” is entitled to receive the usual €100 for the hours worked on the Public Holiday as well as an additional €100 - So “Employee A” receives €200 for working on the Public Holiday. If there is any ambiguity in ascertaining what an additional day's pay should equal the employer should look at the last day worked prior to the Public Holiday. “Employee B” represents an employee who is normally scheduled to work on a day that a Public Holiday falls but is not required to work on that day (for example - an administrative assistant in a bank who typically works 09:00-17:00 Monday – Friday, who is not required to work on Easter Monday). “Employee B” should receive their normal day's pay for that day as well as not being required to work on the Public Holiday. On a normal working day “Employee B” receives €100. When a Public Holiday falls “Employee B” will not be required to work on this day as the business is closed. “Employee B” will still receive their normal day’s pay. Bank Holidays at Christmas

The one that can cause the most confusion is the case of “Employee C” – Employees who are not normally scheduled to work on the Public Holiday will receive one-fifth of their normal weekly pay for the day. “Employee C”, for instance, works Wednesday – Friday and receives €100 per day in remuneration. If a Public Holiday falls on a Tuesday, even though “Employee C” never works that day he or she still has the right to benefit from the Public Holiday in some way. “Employee C” is still entitled to be paid a certain amount as a benefit for the Public Holiday (one-fifth of their normal weekly pay). If this employee earns €300 per three day week (Wednesday-Friday) they are entitled to earn an additional €60 during a week where a Public Holiday falls on a Monday or Tuesday. The above rules will apply for all Public Holidays.

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:14+00:00June 17th, 2015|Christmas|0 Comments

Equality Officer Awards €40,000 in Gender Discrimination Case

Equality Officer Awards €40,000 to Anne Delaney in response to complaint made against the Irish Prison Service. Anne Delaney took a case against the Irish Prison Service because she was discriminated against by her employer on the grounds of gender in relation to promotion, training and conditions of employment. In 2011, Ms. Delaney referred a complaint against her employer under the Employment Equality Acts 1998 to 2008 to the Equality Tribunal. She alleged that the Irish Prison Service discriminated against her on grounds of gender when she applied for numerous posts over several years. Junior or less suitable/less experienced male candidates were appointed to the roles ahead of Ms. Delaney on all occasions.    

After reviewing all of the submitted evidence, the Equality Officer was satisfied that the complainant, Ms. Delaney, had established a link between the incidents that she complained about. The Equality Officer considered the incidents as separate manifestations of the same disposition to discriminate. The Equality Officer criticised the lack of transparency stating that she was unsure of the fairness of the selection procedures that were followed. There were no marking schemes available for review and no records to help her to assess what grounds the hiring decisions were based on. It also became apparent that the same senior personnel were involved in the selection process for all posts.

The Equality Officer’s investigation of the complaint concluded that the Irish Prison Service discriminated against Ms. Delaney on gender grounds when she applied for a gym instructor course in 2001, when she applied for an Operational Support Group post in 2009, when she was asked to step down from the post of Acting ACO in August 2010 and again in September 2010 when she applied for an allowance carrying post in the Detail Office.

As a result of her findings the Equality Officer tasked with making the decision on the case ordered that Ms. Delaney be appointed to the position of Acting ACO, and placed on the permanent roster for that position. The Equality Officer backdated this appointment to the 5th of August 2010 and ensured that all consequential employment rights and entitlements, including remuneration and recognition of service, were upheld.

The Equality Officer found that Ms. Delaney had been subjected to discrimination on the grounds of her gender on numerous occasions during her career with the Irish Prison Service. The Equality Officer considered a compensatory award of €40,000 to be just and equitable in response to the distress suffered by Ms. Delaney as a result of the discrimination that she suffered. The Equality Officer felt as though €40,000 was a proportionate, effective and dissuasive sum to award. That component of the award was not in the form of remuneration and, consequently, was not subject to the PAYE/PRSI Code.

The Equality Officer found that the Irish Prison Service’s selection process for the allowance carrying post in the Detail Office (a post applied for by Ms. Delaney in September 2010) was deficient and non-compliant with Equality Legislation. The Equality Officer ordered that the Irish Prison Service ensure that a fair selection process be adopted in all future selections. She also ordered that the selection panel must be trained in the process and that it must set down the criteria in writing before embarking on the selection process. The Equality Officer also ordered that a marking scheme must be adopted and that the weighting should be given under each element. She also directed that notes must be retained for future reference.

DEC-E2013-155

DECISION NO: DEC-E/2013/155

Anne Delaney Vs Irish Prison Service

FILE NO: EE/2011/292

DATE OF ISSUE: 19th of November, 2013

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:14+00:00June 17th, 2015|Compensation|0 Comments

Pension Obligations of Irish Employers

No matter how big or how small your company may be – or whether your employees are part-time, seasonal or fixed-term - every Irish employer is obliged to enter into a contract with a PRSA provider and to provide access to at least one standard PRSA for all ‘excluded employees’.

What are ‘excluded employees’? Employees are considered to be ‘excluded employees’ if:

their employer does not offer a pension scheme, or
they are included in a pension scheme for death-in-service benefits only, or

they are not eligible to join the company’s pension scheme or will not become eligible to join the pension scheme within six months from the date they began working there, or
they are included in a pension scheme that does not permit the payment of additional voluntary contributions (AVCs).

  Even if there is only one ‘excluded employee’, an employer must:

enter into a contract with a PRSA provider (there is no charge for doing this)
provide employees with access to a Standard PRSA
allow reasonable paid leave of absence, subject to work requirements, so that excluded employees can set up a Standard PRSA
make deductions from payroll if required
advise employees in writing (normally on their payslip) at least once a month of their total contribution, including employer’s contribution, if any.

What an Employer is NOT responsible for:

You’re not obliged to give any advice to employees in relation to PRSAs, but you must allow your PRSA provider or intermediary reasonable access to your employees to brief them on PRSAs.

You don’t have to contribute to PRSAs on behalf of your employees, but if you decide to do so, your contributions must be paid to the PRSA provider within 21 days of the end of the month in which the employer contributions are due. And please note that you cannot make any deductions from this payment.

You are not responsible for the investment performance of PRSAs

What are the consequences of non-compliance? Be aware that there are significant penalties for failing to discharge your obligations. The Pensions Board will issue on-the-spot fines and prosecute any employers found in breach of theobligations, so it pays to get it right. As an Employer you may be subject to an on-the-spot fine if: (a) You fail to respond to a request by The Pensions Board to furnish information about their provision of access to a Standard PRSA for ‘excluded employees’ and (b) You do not provide at least a monthly statement to employees showing contributions deducted and employer contributions paid in the previous month. The bottom line is that this is not an issue that you can afford to get wrong. To find out more about your obligations, there’s a very helpful booklet on the Pension Board’s website.

IFG have many years of experience of providing Pension Scheme Design & Risk Advisory services to Irish companies. They would be delighted to answer any and all of your pension queries if you would like to find out more www.ifg.ie .

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:13+00:00June 17th, 2015|Policies & Procedures|0 Comments

Employers reducing salaries without consent

If a salary reduction is imposed without consultation or employee agreement, an employee now only has three (rather than four) potential legal opportunities to seek redress from his or her employer. If an employee’s wages are cut his or her first option is to claim Constructive Dismissal under the Unfair Dismissals Acts 1997-2007. Constructive Dismissal is the term used when an employee terminates his or her employment based on the conduct of the employer. In this instance, the employee must be able to prove that their position became unsustainable as a direct result of the involuntary reduction in pay. Secondly, where an employee’s salary is reduced, he or she has the opportunity to bring a trade dispute under the Industrial Relations Acts. The Industrial Relations Acts deal with disputes between employers and workers that are connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms and conditions of or affecting the employment, of any person. Thirdly, if an employer cuts an employee’s pay, the employee could claim that their contract has been breached. Defending this could prove very costly for the employer. Furthermore, an injunction may be granted to prevent the contract breach/reinstate the original salary. Salary Reduction In the past employees whose wages were cut without prior consent had a fourth option. They had the opportunity to take a case (and were likely to succeed) under the Payment of Wages Act 1991. Claims in relation to a reduction in wages, however, may no longer be successful if taken under this Act as a result of a recent Employment Appeals Tribunal determination. The specific EAT case referenced here is an appeal of a Right’s Commissioner decision in the case of Santry Sports Clinic v 5 employees. The employees in the aforementioned case were claiming for an 8% reduction in their pay that was imposed between February and March 2010. Santry Sports Clinic stated that the reduction was essential. According to the employer, all employees received letters detailing the 8% reduction in advance and, while only 30% of employees agreed to the reduction via return letters, no one officially objected or stated that they would not accept the pay cut and so it was implemented as planned. The Employment Appeals Tribunal considered all evidence and representations made at the hearing as well as all other submissions made. The Tribunal noted the High Court decision in the case of Michael McKenzie and others and Ireland and the Attorney General and the Minister for Defence Rec. No. 2009. 5651JR. In paragraph 5.8 of this decision the Judge stated that “the Payment of Wages Act has no application to reductions as distinct from ‘deductions’.” The Tribunal followed the High Court decision on a point of law and, therefore, the appeal was successful and the decision of the Rights Commissioner was entirely overturned in the case of Santry Sports Clinic v 5 employees. Reducing employee's pay This case brought to light the fact that the Payment of Wages Act 1991 refers to “deductions” as opposed to “reductions” and, as a consequence, employees whose wages are reduced without prior consent are now unlikely to succeed if they opt to take a case against their employer under the Payment of Wages Act 1991. This is particularly significant for claims that are currently being processed by the Employment Appeals Tribunal. Employers need to remember that, although this option has essentially been closed off for employees as a result of the above-mentioned High Court decision and the EAT case, they still have several avenues open to them if they wish to take a claim where a reduction of wages has been imposed by the employer without prior consent.

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:12+00:00June 17th, 2015|Policies & Procedures|0 Comments

Force Majeure Leave in the Irish Workplace

There are several types of leave that an employee may be entitled to. Some forms of leave are statutory entitlements and some other forms are not. Maternity Leave, for instance, must be given to employees when they are pregnant. Some forms of leave are paid and others are not. This can depend on statutory obligations and on the terms and conditions set out in the Contract of Employment. Annual Leave is a statutory entitlement and it must be paid by the employer. Sick Leave, however, is not always paid by the employer (this depends on individual company policies). Force Majeure Leave is less commonly discussed. The purpose of Force Majeure Leave is to provide limited, paid leave to enable an employee to deal with family emergencies resulting from injury or illness of a close family member. Force Majeure Leave applies where the immediate presence of the employee is urgent and indispensable (essential). A close family member is defined as one of the following:

A child or adopted child of the employee
The husband/wife/partner (same or opposite sex) of the employee
A parent/grandparent of the employee
A brother/sister of the employee
A person to whom the employee has a duty of care (where he or she is acting in loco parentis)
A person in a relationship of domestic dependency with the employee
Persons of any other class (if any) as may be prescribed

By its nature, an employee will not usually be able to give notice of the need to take Force Majeure Leave. The employee should, however, inform the employer (in writing) of reasons for taking the leave as soon as is reasonable practicable. The employee should provide details regarding the need for the leave and should confirm who the leave was taken in respect of. Employers are obliged to keep a record of Force Majeure Leave taken by employees. Employees will be entitled to: - up to 3 days paid Force Majeure Leave in any consecutive 12 month period; or - up to 5 days in a 36 consecutive month period. Absence for part of a day is usually counted as a full day of Force Majeure Leave. Employees are entitled to receive pay for this type of leave. Employers can grant employees more than the number of days outlined above; however, they are not obliged to do so. Employees are protected against Unfair Dismissal for taking Force Majeure Leave or for proposing to take it. Death is not covered under Force Majeure Leave – Leave taken when a death occurs falls under Compassionate Leave and this tends to depend on employee contracts as well as custom and practice within the workplace.

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:09+00:00June 17th, 2015|Policies & Procedures|0 Comments

How to Conduct an Effective Employee Communication Survey

Surveying employees is an effective first step in fixing communication barriers in an organisation. Even if there are no obvious problems, communication surveys can help get an organisation to the next level of performance. Benefits in conducting an employee communication survey and acting on the results include: • improved employee satisfaction • lower turnover • reduced absenteeism • less political infighting • greater levels of manager-worker trust • reduced defect rates • higher customer satisfaction A well-run communication survey can give you these benefits. However, a poorly conducted communication survey can have the opposite effect. Surveys badly planned, rolled-out and followed-up can actually increase employee cynicism and resistance to change. They can also increase employee turnover and absenteeism. This can negatively impact customer satisfaction and your bottom line. Employee Communication Survey Tips So, what do you need to consider before rolling out your survey? Here are some tips. Question types Include in your survey questions that require limited tick-the-box responses, such as Yes/No and Strongly Agree/Agree/Disagree/Strongly Disagree. Including these questions will allow you to perform quantitative analyses that you can use to compare results between different demographics and to use as a benchmark for future surveys. However, equally as important is the provision of free form space which affords employees the opportunity to elaborate on the feedback they have given elsewhere on the form and to discuss in detail anything that has not been covered in the other areas of the survey. A good idea is to run Focus Groups with a random sample of respondents after the survey forms have been collected and analysed. These discussion groups are invaluable in performing a sanity check on your results so far and in teasing out issues that have surfaced in the written survey. Anonymity Guarantee absolute anonymity for the people completing the survey and make this clear in the survey instructions. Some employees will either not complete the survey or give sanitised answers if they believe that their identity will be disclosed with their answers and comments. Employee Survey   Sample size Should you survey the whole organisation/department or a select group? Preferably, survey all employees as this gives everyone a sense of being listened to. If the organisation/department is excessively large or budget is tight, draw a random sample from each of the demographic groups that you will be reporting on. If your selection is not random, the communication survey results will not be representative and you will lose credibility with your employees. If a demographic group comprises 50 people or less, you will need to survey 100 percent of the people within that group. Mode of delivery If the people completing the survey are small in number and at a single location, then hardcopy distribution will not be a problem. As the number of respondents increases and the locations become more dispersed, more consideration will need to be given to electronic distribution. Think about putting the survey on a local intranet or internet web server. To make filling out the employee survey form easy for people, have it so that the form can be completed online. If this is not possible, either send the form by email or put it on an accessible server from which people can download it. If your survey respondents are not comfortable with technology, then be wary of online options and provide plenty of employee support if you decide to go down that road.   Inducements and Reminders Survey participation rates do not tend to be particularly high, typically ten percent or less. You can dramatically improve on this completion rate by conducting some simple follow-up. As you get closer to the communication survey cut-off date (of course, you will have publicised that date with your survey), send out an e-mail reminder or arrange for someone to call the respondents personally. Consider advertising a raffle for all survey participants - this will increase the participation rate (especially if it is a good prize). describe the image Distribute results Once the employee feedback results are in and analysed, distribute your findings first to your managers and then to employees. Withholding results from employees will only breed cynicism and distrust and will make getting a satisfactory response rate from your next survey all that more difficult. Break down your results into meaningful groups, such as by department or by location/site. The reporting groupings need to be small enough that people can identify with the group enough for a meaningful action plan to be developed. Be prepared for some kickback from defensive managers. Frank employee feedback is both confronting and jarring, especially for those managers not used to it. Use your best facilitation skills to deliver the key messages, or use a professional facilitator to perform this sensitive task. Follow-up and Rewards A survey conducted with no plan for action is not only a waste of resources but will leave employees asking why they bothered to give feedback to managers on how they felt. Work with each manager to construct an action plan that they agree with. Remember, it is the manager that will be implementing the communication plan, not you. Get back with each manager three or six months later to review how they are progressing with their communication plan and report the results to the organisation. As you see communication practices improve across the organisation, make sure that managers get rewarded.

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:09+00:00June 17th, 2015|Employee Communication|0 Comments

What employers need to know about work permit Ireland
Gallery
What employers need to know about work permit Ireland

Employer Responsibilities

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.     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:     • 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. An interesting point to note is that work permits will not be considered for certain occupations. Since April 10^th 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 The HR Company Administrator|2021-01-07T17:59:43+00:00June 17th, 2015|Employer Responsibilities|0 Comments

HSE costs to total €400k on conclusion of Constructive Dismissal case

Constructive Dismissal is the term used when an Employee terminates his or her employment based on the conduct of the Employer.Unlike in an Unfair Dismissals case where the dismissal is deemed to be unfair unless proven otherwise and justified by the Employer - in Constructive Dismissal instances the onus is on the Employee to prove that their resignation was based on poor Employer conduct.

Constructive Dismissal

If it is found that the Employee has been Unfairly or Constructively Dismissed then he or she could either be awarded compensation for the loss of earnings suffered as a result of the termination of employment or could be placed back in their original role. Reinstatement is not common practice (particularly in Constructive Dismissal cases) due to the expected tension/ strained relationship between the Employer and the former Employee and due to the amount of time that is likely to have lapsed between the termination of the employment and the resolution of the case. Often the Employee has entered in to a new employment contract elsewhere.

It is important for Employers to be aware of everything that occurs in their workplace as even other Employees’ behaviour that goes unchecked by the Employer could contribute to a Constructive Dismissal case. Constructive Dismissal scenarios can be extremely costly to employers as was proven in a recent Health Service Executive (HSE) case. The claimant in this case was the Head of Ambulance Services for the HSE. The claimant, who lives in Derry, inappropriately used a HSE fuel card for private purposes and, while this would likely have seen him disciplined had he remained in employment, the claimant discovered that he had been found guilty at an early stage and, fearing dismissal/a Garda inquiry, he resigned from his position in 2010. Constructive Dismissal, Employment Appeals Tribunal

Constructive Dismissal, Employment Appeals Tribunal

The claimant’s employer (the HSE) found that he was guilty without first giving him the opportunity to defend himself which meant that the process was seriously defective. The HSE exposed itself with this fundamental flaw in its process and, after his resignation in March 2010; the former Head of Ambulance Services claimed that he had been Constructively Dismissed. The Employment Appeals Tribunal found that the claimant, who resigned from his approximately €100,000 per year role out of anxiety after learning that he was found guilty of the fuel card offence, had in fact been Constructively Dismissed. However, the Tribunal did not award any financial compensation because of the nature of the employee’s actions prior to his departure. The claimant appealed the decision not to compensate and, in December 2013, the Circuit Civil Court awarded €250,000 (minus €50,000 for the misuse of the HSE fuel card) because of the catastrophic affect that the Constructive Dismissal had on the claimant’s career. On the 22^nd January 2014, the Health Service Executive was dealt a further blow when the Circuit Civil Court ordered it to pay the legal costs. The HSE is liable for an estimated €200,000 in legal costs that built up during the course of the Court and Employment Appeals Tribunal Hearings. Constructive Dismissal

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:04+00:00June 17th, 2015|Compensation|0 Comments

Data Protection Breaches in Ireland Dangerously High

The Data Protection Acts 1988 and 2003 provide rules that apply to the collection, use, disclosure and transfer abroad of information about individuals. The Acts cover the principals that companies must follow when processing personal data about employees as well as information about clients/residents.

The Acts also give individuals certain rights in relation to personal data that is held about them. If you as a company collect, host or process data about people on any type of computer or structured filing system, then you are considered a data controller under the Acts. Every company holding information about individuals should have a data protection policy in place and should ensure that all IT administrators and employees with access to personal/confidential information are fully trained on the rights and responsibilities associated with that access. Billy Hawkes, the Data Protection Commissioner, ensures that companies that keep personal data are in compliance with the Acts. The Commissioner has a range of enforcement powers to help guarantee that the provisions of the Acts are observed. The Commissioner can serve legal notices compelling data controllers to provide information needed to assist with his enquiries. He can also compel data controllers to implement provisions of the Acts in a particular prescribed manner. He may investigate complaints made by members of the public and can authorise officers to enter sites with the aim of inspecting the type of personal information kept as well as how it is processed and the security measures that the data controller has in place. Companies are required to co-operate fully with such data protection officers. Data Protection Policies

Data controllers who are found guilty of offences under the Acts can be fined up to €100,000 on conviction and may be ordered to delete all or part of their database. The Data Protection Commissioner publishes a report annually naming, in certain cases, data controllers who were investigated by his office. Civil sanctions may result where a person suffers any damage as a consequence of failures on the part of a data controller to meet his/her obligations. In November 2013 it was discovered that the personal information of more than 1,500,000 people was compromised by a major security breach at a Co. Clare based company. In an RTE Morning Ireland interview at the time, Mr. Hawkes admitted that “cyber-criminals have become extremely sophisticated and it can be quite difficult to actually identify that your system has been perpetrated.” This was one of the worst data breaches in Irish history. The Society for Chartered IT Professionals in Ireland, known as the Irish Computer Society (ICS), carried out a recent survey on data protection in Ireland and the results, which were published in January 2014, were astonishing. 256 Irish based companies were surveyed and a record number of data breaches were reported to have occurred in 2013. Findings revealed that one in two of the surveyed companies experienced a data breach during the last 12 months. In fact, more than 20% of the companies contacted by the ICS reported multiple breaches. These statistics mark a significant increase on last year’s figures when 43% of companies examined reported a breach. According to the results, one third of employees are not fully aware of data protection issues and many receive insufficient data protection training or, alarmingly, no relevant training whatsoever. Data Protection Breach

Several IT managers admitted that data protection policies are not implemented at all in their company or they are only partially adhered to. The survey has highlighted the need for companies to manage their data processing environment much more carefully and provide additional training for their IT administrators and all employees who have contact with personal information pertaining to employees/clients. According to the ICS survey, negligence on the part of employees accounted for 77% of the reported incidents. Hackers seeking to obtain data and unencrypted laptops were also cited as major threats. According to Fintan Swanton, Chairman of the Association of Data Protection Officers, “Clear policies and procedures are vital, with regular refresher training and timely reviews to ensure that staff are complying with the structures.” It is important for employers to be aware that new data protection legislation will require most organisations to appoint a Data Protection Officer.

By The HR Company Administrator|2017-01-02T11:00:03+00:00June 17th, 2015|Data Protection|0 Comments