Constructive Dismissal leads to €9,000 Award for Former Employee
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.
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 contract and the resolution of the case. The Employee has often 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. These can be extremely costly.
Here is an example of a case where the Employee (the Claimant) was awarded €9,000 after the Employment Appeals Tribunal found that he had been Constructively Dismissed.
The Claimant in this case started working for the Respondent in 2007. There were no issues until late 2010 when a Technician was promoted to Technical Manager. This immediately created a hostile environment and relationships became strained. The Claimant experienced problematic scenarios in the workplace as a result of the Technical Manager’s temper on numerous occasions.
The final occurrence led to the termination of employment for the Claimant. On the Claimant’s final day working for the Respondent the Technical Manager, a physically intimidating individual, entered the shop where the Claimant and his colleague were working. The Technical Manager lifted the Claimant up from his chair by his arm and proceeded to shout at him. The Claimant, who was frightened, attempted to avoid confrontation and turned away. The Technical Manager again grabbed the Claimant, this time by his shoulder, and spun him around while demanding that he not complain. The Claimant said that he didn’t complain, he just answered questions. The Claimant was pulled closer and then told to leave by the Technical Manager.
The Claimant did as he was told but the Technical Manager proceeded to follow him, grabbing him by the neck. At this stage the Claimant was in a state of shock and told the Technical Manager that he was simply working his way through college. The Claimant’s shirt was torn, there were marks on his neck and his hand was bruised after the incident.
After the event, the Claimant called a Senior Manager and told him what had happened. The Claimant returned his keys to the shop and arranged to collect his jacket from his colleague. A series of meetings with the shop Manager and other Senior Managers were arranged. The Claimant was offered a transfer to another shop, however, this other shop was located far
from the Claimant’s home and, therefore, was not a suitable alternative – he could not accept this transfer proposal.
As a result of the meetings the Claimant was given a written warning, however, as no arrangements were made for him to return to a safe workplace he had no option but to resign.
The Claimant established loss for the Tribunal and it was determined that the Claimant was Constructively Dismissed. The Respondent failed in its responsibility to the Claimant by not responding adequately.
Under the Unfair Dismissals Acts, 1977 to 2007, the Claimant was awarded €9,000 as compensation for being Constructively Dismissed.
The appeal was heard at Dublin on 14th October 2013. Case Number: UD669/2012.
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.).
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.
HR Companies prepare Employment Documentation for their clients and on top of that are there to advise on all individual Employee related issues – discrimination claims, rest and 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. 
The respondent failed to consult the claimant about his redundancy and did not appear to properly consider alternatives before finalising the decision to make the employee redundant – For instance, the employee could have suggested that he work a shorter working week/reduced hours or that he take a reduction in pay. The respondent is obliged to consider these suggestions over a period of consultation, however, the claimant was not afforded this entitlement and was only told the reasons behind the decision to select him for redundancy after asking for these.
The employer should have asked the employee in question if they could think of any alternatives to the redundancy and the employer should have allowed for a period of consultation of at least three days before making their final decision. It is also important to allow employees to be accompanied to meetings like this.
A Selection Matrix will help to clarify the Employee strength and weaknesses and take the personalities out of the decision - and also ensure that no-one can accuse the Employer of
using redundancy simply to remove people the Employer doesn't like from the Company.
As a business owner or manager, the Employer is entitled to make decisions that make business sense. So establishing the logic of any decision before making it is important.
There is a strict redundancy selection process that has to be followed when making job roles redundant. Remember that it is the role that is made redundant rather than the Employee – One cannot make an Employee redundant and then hire a replacement in their role the next day.
Proving that a redundancy was necessary is essential and if the correct process is not followed then this could be very costly for the Company and Labour Court action could follow.
When making an Employee redundant, you should:
*Invite the Employee in question to a meeting, making them aware of what it is about e.g. the closure of the business/need to downsize etc.
*This meeting should be to inform the Employee that they have been selected for redundancy, or, in other words, it is giving them their notice of redundancy. The Employer should make the Employee aware of the reason(s) for this selection etc. at this stage.
*At the meeting, the Employer should ask the Employee to think about alternatives to this redundancy and these options can be discussed at the second meeting to explore whether any of these alternatives are viable options to save this Employee’s job. The Employee may request a pay cut, to be laid off for a period of time, reduced working hours etc., (all of the options
mentioned should have already been ruled out by the Company in coming to the decision of making a position redundant). If there is a potential transfer situation, this may arise as an alternative to the redundancy.
*The Employer should end the meeting by telling the Employee that he/she will be meeting with them again. The next meeting should be scheduled more than 3 days from the first meeting as the Employer should have ample time to consider all suggestions or alternatives to redundancy that the Employee presents.
*The period between the first and second meeting is known as the 'period of consultation'. It
will be at this second meeting that the Employer will discuss any alternatives to redundancy that the Employee suggests. If none of the suggestions are feasible for the Company the Employer will explain the reasons why they are not feasible. At that point, the Employer will go through the terms of the redundancy i.e. what payment the Employee will receive. In advance of this meeting the Employee should be made aware of their entitlement to bring a representative with them – for instance, the employee could bring a colleague or some other person who has an in-depth knowledge of the Company.
*The Employer should tell the Employee that, prior to the meeting, he or she should inform the Company if they intend to bring a representative and, if so, who this will be. This is in case the Employee decides to bring:
a) A Solicitor:
The Employee is entitled to bring a solicitor if they wish (if they do, the Employer too will need to bring a solicitor). The solicitor will not be able to speak on behalf of the Employee, but will be entitled to ask questions on behalf of the Employee.
b) A Trade Union Representative: If the Company does not engage with/negotiate with Trade Unions, the Employer will have to make the Employee aware that they will only recognise this person in a personal capacity, that they do not have a collective agreement with any Trade Union and that they have not, nor will not ever recognise a Trade Union. The Employer should ensure that this is clear to the Employee.
*The use of the RP50 hardcopy form is not in place any longer and as there is no longer any Employer rebate, there is no requirement to lodge the RP50 with the Department of Social Protection. However, in line with best practice, it is recommended that the RP50 form is completed online through the following link: https://www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/secure/RedundancyForm.aspx and printed so that the Employee is signing something to confirm they are receiving their payment from the Company.
*If the Company is not in a position to cover the cost of these redundancies, the Employee can claim their redundancy entitlements through the Social Insurance Fund, however, the Company does need to prove its inability to pay the redundancy amounts to the Department of Social Protection. In this case, the Employee will need the RP50 to claim his/her own redundancy payments.
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.
An Employee Handbook, often referred to as the employee manual, is a document containing information about the Company and its policies and procedures. It is given to employees by
their Manager/Employer and employees should have to acknowledge (in writing) that they have read and understand it.
This manual is an excellent place to compile all important information pertaining to the Company rules and regulations. It can provide very useful details for new staff during the induction process; however, it can also be a good reference point for existing employees. An Employee Handbook gives clarity to employees, advises them in many situations and creates a culture where problems are addressed in a consistent and fair manner. Employees will know what to expect in certain scenarios because a comprehensive employee handbook outlines all of the relevant procedures.
An Employee Handbook communicates workplace and HR policies and can protect a business from expensive disputes with employees.
Some examples of items that should be discussed in the Employee Handbook are as follows:
Where relevant, confidentiality and employer expectations surrounding this should also be included in an Employee Handbook.
Employers should ensure that employees keep the following sensitive information confidential -
• Information that has been acquired during, or in the course of employment, or has otherwise been acquired by the employee in confidence;
• Information that relates to customers, suppliers or that of other persons or bodies with whom the Company has dealings of any sort;
• Information that has not been made public by, or with Company permission.
The Employer should ensure that all such information should remain confidential, and, save in the course of business or as required by law, should ensure that employees know that they are
not allowed to disclose the data to any person without the Company’s prior written consent (whether before or after the termination of employment).
Employees should have to exercise reasonable care to keep safe all documentary or other material containing confidential information. Employees should also be obliged to return any such material in their possession to the Company at the time of termination of employment, or at any other time upon demand.
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.
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
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.
