All you need to know about HR!
Supporting Business Owners, Directors and HR Professionals with the latest in HR trends and news.
June 2015
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. 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. Employee unfairly dismissed for improper internet use awarded €7,000.
Why is having an internet use/social media policy so important? On 17th December 2013, the Employment Appeals Tribunal in Mullingar heard a claim that an employee had been unfairly dismissed by her employer, a wholesale electrical company that employed approximately 36 employees. The individual was employed as a Marketing Assistant from 1 November 2010. With the permission of the employer, the employee worked a three day week for the first year as she was completing a graphic design course simultaneously. The employer was happy for the employee to begin working a 5 day week on 1st November 2011. The Managing Director claimed that both he and the Office Manager had warned the claimant on a number of occasions about her non-work related internet use. According to the Managing Director, these alleged warnings were of a verbal nature. The Managing Director gave evidence to the Tribunal that, on 16 January 2012, he observed the claimant on a social media site and called her to his office before proceeding to dismiss her from her employment with the Company. The Managing Director believed that the actions of the claimant amounted to a waste of the Company’s time and resources and her actions constituted gross misconduct. It became apparent that the Company did not have a formal internet use/social media policy in place while the claimant was employed. It also came to light that the employee did not receive a contract of employment nor did she receive a copy of the Company’s disciplinary procedures. The claimant stated that she completed all tasks that were assigned to her. She was not using the internet in a secretive way (she gave evidence that her computer monitor was in full view of the office) and she did not believe that she was doing anything wrong when she was online. The claimant testified that she was not given a job description detailing the tasks that were assigned to her. The former employee explained that, if she was aware of the company’s policy around internet use/social media then she would have abided by it. The claimant stated that she regularly asked for more assignments to complete during her work hours but was not provided with enough to occupy all of her working time. The employee explained that she was told in December to “wind down” for the Christmas period when she looked for more work from the Managing Director’s son. The claimant admitted to spending time browsing the internet when she had finished with her work assignments but clarified that she spent the majority of her time on the internet carrying out work related activities. The claimant gave evidence that she never received any warnings prior to her dismissal. The Employment Appeals Tribunal considered all of the evidence that was submitted by the claimant and the respondent and concluded that the dismissal of the employee was unfair as, according to the Tribunal, there appears not to have been any valid grounds for the termination. In addition to this the Tribunal found that the dismissal was lacking any procedural fairness because no investigation or disciplinary process took place. The Tribunal also made note of the fact that the claimant was never provided with a any of the following documents throughout the course of her employment:
- A contract of employment,
- Payslips,
- An internet use/social media policy
- A copy of the Company’s disciplinary procedures
Saving Money by Minimising Waste
The Significance of Waste Management in Business. With mounting expenses it is becoming increasingly difficult for companies to remain in operation and to maintain employee numbers.
Managers are faced with a difficult task as they are continuously asked to reduce costs while simultaneously preserving the quality and service levels throughout the business. Every company should implement a minimum waste policy to encourage employees to be more aware of their actions and their use or misuse of resources in the workplace and beyond. Minimising the amount of waste in any organisation will have a positive effect on the bottom line. Consequently, introducing a minimum waste policy is essential if the business is to operate in the most cost-effective and efficient manner possible. Employees should be obliged to avoid extravagant use of the company’s services, time and energy. Employees should be encouraged to take extra care during their normal work duties by avoiding unnecessary use of any resources within the Company. Employees should be trained so that they handle all machines, equipment and stock with the utmost of care. Employers should have a policy in place that deals with the conservation of energy. This policy would direct employees as to how they should proceed when it comes to dealing with lights and heat and so on. The use of all unnecessary lighting and heating should be prohibited and lights/heat should be turned off when their use is not required. Doors/windows should be opened/closed where possible in order to maintain temperature levels. Similarly, taps should not be allowed to drip and any concerns about resources should be reported to management so that they may be evaluated and rectified. The use of paper and ink throughout the course of the working day is something that a lot of companies find to be expensive. It is important that employees only print items that they need to have in hardcopy in order to reduce the waste of paper and ink. It is also significant for employers to encourage employees to print on both sides where possible. E-mailing, rather than posting, documents is another practice that should be encouraged. Recycling/reusing paper, where possible, is also a practice that should be considered. If it is a case that an employee finds himself or herself without assignments to complete during working hours or if their work has come to a standstill for one reason or another then he or she should be encouraged to offer assistance to colleagues who have yet to complete their workload. In terms of productivity, employees should be prepared to start their working day by the time they are scheduled to begin work and should proceed with their work-related activities without delay. The same process should be followed after break/lunch periods and employees should not conclude their work until the time that they are scheduled to do so. If it becomes apparent that certain employees are struggling to organise their time then the provision of time-management training should be considered by management. It is also important to ensure that employees are aware of the most efficient methods of carrying out routine tasks (such as searching for documents or preparing spreadsheets) so time is used in the most efficient manner possible. There are many techniques that a company can use to improve efficiency and exploring and implementing these methods is very important if a company is to remain competitive.The Importance of having an Employee Handbook
An Employee Handbook, often referred to as the employee manual, is a book/document containing information about the company and its policies and procedures. It is given to employees by the employer – typically when they first join the organisation.
This manual is an excellent place to compile all important information pertaining to the company rules and regulations. It can provide useful details for new staff during the induction process and can be a good reference point for existing employees. An employee handbook gives clarity to employees, advises them in certain situations and creates a culture where problems are addressed in a consistent manner.
An employee handbook communicates all of your workplace and HR policies and protects a business from expensive disputes with employees. The National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) aims to achieve a national culture of employment rights compliance. If a NERA inspector visits your workplace they may ask to see the company handbook to determine whether or not the company has appropriate policies and procedures in place and that it adopts the appropriate measures when various workplace scenarios arise.
Examples of some of the items that should be incorporated in an employee handbook are as follows:
•Annual Leave Entitlements
•Maternity Leave
•Paternity Leave
•Adoptive Leave
•Parental Leave
•Carer’s Leave
•Compassionate Leave
•Jury Leave
•Employment / Career Break
•Induction
•Performance Management
•Probation
•Grievance Procedures
•Disciplinary Procedures
•Bullying & Harassment
•Drugs and Alcohol Policies / Misuse of Substances / Testing for Intoxicants
•Dress Code, Uniforms, Personal Grooming and Hygiene
•Office Phone and Mobile Phone Use
•Internet, Email and Social Media Use in the Workplace
•Breaks and Rest Periods
•Sick Leave / Sick Pay
•Punctuality / Timekeeping
•Unauthorised Absence
•Clock-In and Clock-Out
•Vehicles and Company Property
•Use of Company Property
•Confidentiality
•Right to Search
•Copyright
•Ethics and Conduct
•Retirement
•Time-off-in-Lieu
•Flexitime
•Training & Education Funding / Study Leave
•Use of CCTV
•Garda Clearance / VettingTrade Disputes and Industrial Action
According to the Industrial Relations Act, 1990 a Trade Dispute is any dispute between employers and employees that is “connected with the employment or non-employment, or the terms or conditions of or affecting the employment, of any person”. Industrial Action is collective action taken by employees to compel their employer to “accept or not to accept terms or conditions of or affecting employment.” Typically, employees decide to take industrial action as a result of a grievance over pay, hours of work, holidays or in support of a co-worker (or former co-worker) who is deemed to have been treated unfairly in some way. Examples of industrial action may include strike action, a picket, a ‘work-to-rule’ or even an overtime ban. Employers should make every effort to avoid industrial action by maintaining a harmonious working environment because industrial action can be an extremely trying time for all concerned. A strike is a work stoppage that is caused by the mass refusal of employees to carry out their work activities. Strikes and industrial action in general, are extremely disruptive to a company’s daily operations and can be damaging in both the short and long term. Strikes can last varying amounts of time but even short work stoppages tend to be quite destructive for companies as they can carry negative publicity with them along with the obvious operational drawbacks. A picket is a form of protest where picketers (those involved in the picket) assemble outside of their workplace, or a relevant area, in an attempt to draw attention to their cause or to discourage others from entering the premises (crossing the picket line). The objective of picketing is to harm the company via a loss of business or through negative publicity. The goal is to persuade the employer to meet picketers’ demands to cease certain activities or introduce a pay increase or reverse a decision regarding redundancies, for instance. A ‘work-to-rule’ is where employees do the bare minimum during their work hours. They carry out the tasks required by their contract of employment and nothing more in order to slow down productivity. Employees seek to demonstrate that they are valuable to the company and perform tasks that are above and beyond what they are contractually obliged to do on a regular basis. An overtime ban is similar to a ‘work-to-rule’ in that employees take direction from their contracts of employment. Throughout an overtime ban, employees only work the hours that they are bound by in their contract. As the name suggests, employees refuse to work any overtime.
Strikes in the news:
Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) employees at Dublin Street Parking Services, the vehicle clamping Company in Dublin, are due to be balloted today, Monday, 10th March 2014, on whether or not they should go on strike. The dispute is over an outstanding pay rise that is owed since 2011. John King, SIPTU Organiser, stated that it is likely that the members will decide to strike over the 2.5% pay rise that they agreed to postpone until 2013 because they are still waiting for it to be applied. Dublin City Council is threatening to pay the Company less for the service it provides if it does not meet the new target of 60,000 clamped vehicles per year. SIPTU employees of the DAA and Aer Lingus are also threatening strike action as the dispute over their pension scheme continues. They are due to hold a four hour work stoppage at Dublin, Cork and Shannon on Friday, 14th March 2014 – just as the airport gets busy for the St. Patrick’s Day weekend. This strike could prove to be extremely disruptive to many individuals hoping to travel during the four hour stoppage and for the hours, and potentially days, that follow.Employer Responsibilities when it comes to Contracts of Employment
Employers are legally obliged to provide workers with a written statement of the employment agreement between the two parties (the contract) within two months of the employee commencing employment.
Have you heard of NERA?
The National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) delivers unprejudiced information on employment rights legislation to employers and employees in Ireland. NERA is charged with monitoring the employment rights of employees within the country. NERA inspectors perform various checks around the country and investigate suspected breaches of employment rights – it is important to bear in mind that a significant number of these inspection are unannounced. If NERA finds that an employer is not complying with employment rights legislation inspectors will seek reparation from the employer on behalf of the employee. In certain circumstances prosecutions against the employer may result.
NERA has the power to chase awards made by the Labour Court, the Rights Commissioner or the Employment Appeals Tribunal.
In order to pass a NERA inspection; employers must have provided their employees with clarity on the terms and conditions of their employment. The contract should explain the relationship between the employer and employee and should not leave any room for misinterpretation or confusion.
A contract outlines the requirements of the position and conditions the person must work against. In the event of poor performance the employer can refer to the contract and all conditions contained therein, and manage the employee against such conditions.
Having a contract in place will offer protection to the company in the event of a dispute or issue arising. This document will safeguard the company in the event of employee litigation or labour court hearings.
Items that must be included in the written terms of employment are:
•Full name of employer
•Full name of employee
•The address of the employer
•The place of work (if there is no permanent place of work, a statement specifying that the employee is required or permitted to work at various places)
•Appointment/job role – The title or description of the job or the nature of the work for which the employee is employed
•The date of commencement of the contract
•If the contract is temporary, the expected duration of employment
•If the contract is for a fixed-term, the date on which the contract expires; if the contract is for a fixed purpose, then the details of the occurrence of that specific purpose
•The rate of pay, the method of calculation and the frequency of payment (this clause should also include provisions on any permissible deductions in accordance with the Payment of Wages Act, 1991
•The period of notice required from each party to terminate the contract
•The terms and conditions applicable to sick pay, if any
•The terms and conditions applicable to pension schemes, if any
•The terms and conditions relating to paid leave if any
•The terms or conditions relating to hours of work, including overtime
•Reference should be made to any collective agreement affecting the terms of the contract, whether or not the employer is a party to the agreement, including information about the institutions or organisations which drew up any Collective Agreement which affects the terms of the contract to which the employer is not a party.
An Employee Working Abroad is also entitled to details of the following:
•The period of employment outside the State
•The currency in which they will be paid
•Any other benefits-in-kind or cash that will be provided
•The terms and conditions applicable on the employee's return home
Here are examples of some further terms and conditions of employment that are not required by law but are highly recommended:
•Probationary Period and Probation Policy
•Hours of work / additional hours / overtime / shift liability / weekend liability / night work liability / public holiday liability
•Performance related bonuses
•Absence Management
•Medical examination
•Holidays, public holidays, all other forms of leave
•Grievance and Disciplinary Procedures
•Confidentiality
•Company Property
•Phone and Mobile Phone Usage
•Right to Inspect / Search
•Drugs & Alcohol Policy / Right to Test for Intoxicants
•Retirement
•Company Rules and Regulations
•Bullying and Harassment / Respect and Dignity at Work
•Internet, Email & Social Media Usage
•Use of Company Vehicles
•Suspension without pay
•Break and rest periods / exemption provision for employer for recording breaks
•Return of company property
Labour Court rules – ‘Working in the Rain’ allowance to stay
A group of 27 low income cleaners who work for the South Dublin County Council were delighted yesterday, Thursday 20th March 2014, when they were successful in their fight to keep their ‘Working In The Rain’ allowance which works out at approximately €50 per week per employee. The Labour Court ruling was in response to attempts by South Dublin County Council to abolish the allowance. Brendan O’Brien of SIPTU described the ruling as a ‘significant victory’ as the outcome has been hanging over the workers involved for an extended period of time. The workers, who perform street and park cleaning duties for the Council, are paid between €400 and €500 on average per week so the ‘Working In The Rain’ allowance amounts to approximately 10% of their income each week. The cost of the ‘Working In The Rain’ allowance to the Council is approximately €75,000 per year and the Council claimed that this payment is outdated because all of the employees now have the benefit of protective clothing to ensure they can carry out their duties safely - irrespective of the external weather conditions. The Council claimed that the group of 27 workers affected by this ruling are currently part of a larger group of approximately 140 workers who are all required to work in rainy weather conditions (unless it is unsafe to do so). SIPTU argued that the payment is pensionable and, consequently, to cease paying the allowance would breach the terms of the Haddington Road Agreement. The dispute, which could not be resolved at local level, was the subject of a Conciliation Conference under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission and, when no agreement was reached there the dispute between the workers and the Council was referred to the Labour Court in accordance with 26(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990. The Labour Court ruled that the Claimants (the workers) are entitled to retain the allowance on a personal to holder basis.
The HR Company provides Mediation to Resolve Workplace Disputes
The HR Company provides Mediation as an Alternative Dispute Resolution practice. Workplace mediation involves a third, neutral party bringing two disputing individuals (or groups) together in order to reach an agreement that satisfies both sides.This type of dispute resolution is gaining credibility as an alternative to court/formal proceedings and The HR Company employs experienced mediators who help your workplace to return to a healthy environment. As many of us know, clashes in the workplace can be extremely disruptive – not just to those directly involved but to bystanders also. Conflicts can arise for multiple reasons – for example, they can be as a result of a dispute over performance or something as simple as a personality clash. Conflict can severely impede an organisation’s ability to run efficiently and can damage employee well-being. It can cause stress, anxiety and depression. Conflict can increase employee turnover and can negatively influence reputation in the industry as well as delaying the Company’s achievement of its corporate goals. Another negative consequence of a dispute in the workplace is a decrease in productivity levels. Similarly, morale within the Company can be influenced in a negative manner as a result of work-related disputes and levels of employee absence can also increase. It is clear that workplace disputes can have extensive side effects. In an effort to resolve matters, parties are regularly forced to attend Employment Appeals Tribunal/Labour Court proceedings. However, this is not always the best course of action as, in our experience; these processes can often lead to a complete breakdown in relationships and can prove to be extremely lengthy and costly. In fact, these methods can often aggravate matters as, typically, only one party is satisfied with the conclusion and resources, including time and finances, have often been significantly drained throughout the process. In some instances, mediation can be an acceptable alternative to court proceedings when disputes arise in the workplace. Mediation is a confidential process where our experienced mediators encourage both parties to discuss all elements of the dispute without fear that their legal position could be compromised or prejudiced. Mediation can encourage a more swift resolution of differences and aims to find a solution that satisfies all parties while avoiding the types of adversarial procedures that have become very common in this era of increased employee litigation. Efficient working relationships can often be restored through the practice of mediation. Mediation is an informal approach to dispute resolution. It can be used in an attempt to resolve a vast range of differences. In our experience, mediation is most effective when introduced at the initial phase of disagreements, however, it can also be availed of later in the process – after Tribunal proceedings have concluded, for instance. At this stage mediation could assist in repairing the relationship between the parties that have been in conflict. When we are engaged by a Company to perform mediation, an unbiased facilitator assists the two parties to a dispute in reaching an agreement by listening to and understanding both sides to the story. The purpose of a skilled mediator is to encourage the parties to arrive at a mutually satisfactory solution. Our role as a neutral third party is not to judge or to determine who is at fault but, instead, to enable the meaningful exchange of information between parties with an ultimate goal of resolving the conflict. The HR Company mediator will not determine the outcome – this should come from the disputing parties. Mediation is morally binding but normally does not carry any legal status. There is usually one mediator or two co-mediators. One significant advantage of mediation is that it tends to be far less of a financial burden when compared to formal proceedings. Both parties to a dispute are encouraged by The HR Company’s skilled mediator to talk very honestly and openly during the process and, as a consequence of that, mediation can assist in the discovery and resolution of the root cause of the conflict that exists in the workplace and can prevent the same situation from arising in the future. This is less likely to be the case in a Tribunal type scenario. Mediation is not always a suitable dispute resolution method, however, if it is determined that it is appropriate then it can involve either an internal scheme or an external provider like The HR Company. Internal schemes mainly exist in larger organisations. During mediation The HR Company’s neutral mediator chairs the process which helps to dispel tension that may have built up between disputing parties. It is vital that levels of tension in the workplace are minimal especially where the parties are expected to continue to work together. The process can take an entire day or more. Either way the process is far less time consuming than going through the courts. Mediation is beneficial because it is a voluntary non-confrontational process – both parties will be more likely to co-operate as neither is obliged to be involved in the process. The stages of mediation are as follows:
- Normally, both parties meet with the mediator separately initially so that the procedure can be discussed and so each party has the opportunity to illustrate their ideal outcome.
- Usually a joint meeting is then scheduled in order that the issues may be heard.
- Next, the issues are explored and an agreement is drawn up. The mediator will support the parties in solving their problems and will assist in ensuring that the agreements are workable. If he or she feels that it is necessary, the skilled mediator will separate the parties and will deal with them individually at various points.
- The last stage in the process includes the explanation of responsibilities and the distribution of a copy of the agreement to all involved.
Why Not to Ignore Stress in the Workplace
In recent years Stress and Work Related Stress (WRS) have been cited more and more regularly on medical certificates provided to employers when employees are out of work on sick leave. While, for some people, a certain amount of stress can actually act as a challenge or a motivating factor, Work Related Stress generally has an adverse effect on employees and, consequently, on business operations. A broad definition of Work Related Stress (WRS) is a negative personal state that arises in response to aspects of the work environment or how a person perceives the work environment to be. Work Related Stress gives the sufferer the feeling that he or she cannot cope with their current situation and that the demands placed upon them exceed their ability to actually fulfil those demands. The source of this Work Related Stress can lie in the home or personal life of the sufferer and can be exacerbated by work issues or it can come directly from the work environment. The origin of the stress varies depending on many factors.
Causes of stress can include, for example:
- a lack of definition or ambiguity around organisational tasks,
- a lack of control or support,
- poor relationships with colleagues,
- long working hours,
- unachievable deadlines and time pressures,
- too many tasks to complete at one time,
- significant change to an employee’s role,
- expansion of the company,
- poor systems for dealing with bullying,
- a sense of job insecurity and
- barriers to communication
Breaks and Rest Periods in the Irish Workplace
Under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 every single employee in Ireland has a legal entitlement to breaks during their working day (or night) and is entitled to have clearly defined rest periods between their working days/nights. Under the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 a rest period is defined as any time that is not ‘working time’. In general, an employee is entitled to a 15 minute break after the completion of 4.5 hours of work. If the employee is working a shift of 6 hours then he or she is entitled to a 30 minute break (the first break of 15 minutes can be included in this 30 minute break allocation). The employer is not obliged to pay employees for these break periods and they are not included when counting the total amount of time that the employee has worked. The regulations vary slightly for different categories of employees - for instance, shop employees who work more than 6 hours at a time are entitled to a break of one consecutive hour between the hours of 11:30 and 14:30 if they are scheduled to be in the workplace during that time. Employees are entitled to 11 consecutive hours of rest in a 24 hour period – on top of this, an employee should receive 24 consecutive rest hours in every 7 day period and this 24 hour allocation should follow an 11 hour rest period. Where an employer does not give his or her employee a full 24 hour consecutive rest period throughout the course of one week he or she must give two of these 24 hour rest periods in the following week. This rest period, unless otherwise stated, should include a Sunday. Not all employees are governed by the break and rest period rules described above. Members of An Garda Síochána, The Defence Forces and employees who manage their own working hours are exempt. Family employees on farms or in private homes are also excluded from the Organisation of Working Time Act, 1997 directives. The working terms and conditions for people under the age of 18 differ from those listed here. They are regulated by the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996. In exceptional circumstances or emergencies an employer is exempt from providing the above mentioned rest periods but only where he or she provides equivalent compensatory rest. Where the rest period is postponed the employer must allow the employee to take the compensatory rest within a reasonable period of time. Employees working in transport activities or certain categories of civil protection services are exempt from the statutory break regulations specified above (the equivalent compensatory rest rules do not apply for these employees). Employers should be aware that employees have 6 months to make a complaint regarding breaks and rest periods in the workplace (in extreme circumstances this period can be extended to 12 months).
The Applicable Minimum Notice Periods for Employees in Ireland
The Minimum Notice Acts 1973 to 2005 ensure that every employee who has been in the continuous employment of his or her employer for at least 13 weeks is entitled to a minimum notice period before you, as the employer, may dismiss that employee. The statutory period varies depending on the length of service (outlined below). It is essential to note that if you do not require the employee to work out their notice you, as the employer, are obliged to pay the employee for the applicable period.
- If the employment lasted between 13 weeks and 2 years the Acts provide that you should pay the employee one week's notice before termination of employment
- If the length of service is between 2 and 5 years then the notice period must be 2 weeks
- For 5 to 10 years then the appropriate notice is 4 weeks
- From 10 to 15 years then 6 weeks’ notice must be given
- For more than 15 years the employee is entitled to a notice period of 8 weeks.
- Members of the Permanent Defence Forces (except temporary staff in the Army Nursing Service
- Members of An Garda Síochán
- Seamen signing on under the Merchant Shipping Ac
- The immediate family of the employer (provided they live with the employer and work in the same private house or farm
- Established civil servants
- information provision in relation to employment, equality and Industrial Relations rights and obligations
- the receipt and registration of all complaints referred to the five Workplace Relations Bodies, and
- dealing with enquiries concerning all complaints.
From 3rd January 2012 all complaints to the Workplace Relations Bodies have been channelled through Workplace Relations Customer Services, where they are registered, acknowledged and referred to the relevant adjudication body.
No Adoptive or Maternity Leave Ireland for "Commissioning Mothers"
In September 2013 the legal opinion of the European Court of Justice was that an Irish teacher (Ms. Z), whose child was born through surrogacy, did not have an automatic right to either paid Adoptive Leave or Maternity Leave from her employment.
On 18th March 2014 a European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling, that referred to the mother who did not give birth to the child as the “commissioning mother”, upheld this opinion. The ruling stressed that it is the birth mother who should benefit from Maternity Leave even where she does not keep the baby after giving birth and even in cases where the mother who takes on the responsibility of the child after birth is the biological mother. The reason for this is to improve the health and safety of pregnant workers and and those who have recently given birth.
Ms. Z and her husband are the baby’s full genetic parents. When Ms. Z’s application for paid Adoptive Leave was denied she brought a complaint to the Equality Tribunal. The woman, who has no uterus as a result of a rare medical condition, claimed that she was discriminated against on the grounds of sex, family status and disability.
The woman was told by her employer that she could take unpaid Parental Leave instead of the requested Adoptive Leave; however, as the child was genetically hers and her name was on the American birth certificate, Ms. Z felt that she was being treated unfairly.
The surrogacy scenario can be a challenging one for all concerned and blurred lines surrounding what mothers are entitled to in the workplace just adds to the complexity of the situation.The Equality Tribunal referred the case to the ECJ and the Court ruled yesterday that mothers like Ms. Z do not have any automatic right to Adoptive Leave or Maternity Leave.
In September 2013, the legal opinion of the Advocate General stated that Ms. Z’s differential treatment was not based on sex, family status or disability, as claimed, but instead on the “refusal of national authorities to equate her situation with that of either a woman who has given birth or an adoptive mother”.
The Court ruled that Ms. Z did not fall within the scope of the Pregnant Worker’s Directive as the Directive in question presupposes that the worker has been pregnant or has given birth to a child. The claim of discrimination on the grounds of sex failed as fathers in this situation are also denied leave. The claim of discrimination on the grounds of disability also failed as, the judgement stated that, while “a woman’s inability to bear her own child may be a source of great suffering” it does not amount to ‘disability’. The concept of ‘disability’ within the EU Employment Equality Framework Directive “presupposes that the limitation, from which the person suffers, in interaction with various barriers, may hinder that person’s full and effective participation in professional life on an equal basis with other workers”.
The recent revelation, that Irish women who have babies through surrogacy arrangements are not afforded the same rights as mothers who have adopted or given birth to their babies, has highlighted the uncertainties/complexities surrounding the issue of surrogacy in both Irish and EU law.
Surrogacy is becoming a more frequent option for women; however, legislation in Ireland has not kept up with this change.
The ECJ stated that member states are “free to apply more favourable rules for commissioning mothers” and paid leave for mothers, who have children through surrogacy arrangements, is being legislated for in The United Kingdom.
On 30th January 2014, Justice Minister Alan Shatter published the General Scheme of Children and Family Relationships Bill for consultation. According to Minister Shatter, the draft bill ‘seeks to provide legal clarity on the parentage of children born through assisted human reproduction and surrogacy’.
Pay Slips – Wage Deductions and Associated Employer Responsibilities
The Payment of Wages Act, 1991 forces employers to provide a pay slip in respect of all employees. A pay slip is a statement in writing that outlines the total pay before tax (gross pay) and all details of any deductions from pay. The employer’s responsibility regarding the required provision of pay slips is set down in Section 4 of the Act.
The Act protects against unlawful deductions from employee wages. Here are the important points for employers to remember: -Deductions from employee wages must be authorised by either the employee’s contract of employment or by written consent of the employee – a trade union subscription, for instance. -An exception to this is where the employer makes a deduction from pay when there is a need to recover an overpayment of wages or expenses. -There is an obligation on the employer to make a deduction from an employee’s wages if they are required by a court order to do so - an example of this might be an Attachment of Earnings order in a family law case, for instance. -The employer is entitled to make a deduction if the employee is due to make a payment to the employer –An example of this would be if expenses arose due to the employee being on strike. On the other hand an improper deduction made by the employer is one which is not authorised. -(Income tax, universal social charge and PRSI contributions are a separate category as they are compulsory deductions required by law). -Where the deduction from wages arises because of either an act or omission of the employee - till shortages or breakages, for instance, or the supply of goods to the employee by the employer (cleaning of uniforms, perhaps) - then the amount of the deduction must be fair and reasonable. -The amount of the deduction must not exceed the loss experienced or cost of the service. -The deduction must take place within 6 months of the loss/cost occurring. Failure to pay all or part of the wages due to an employee is considered an unlawful deduction and a complaint can be made under the Payment of Wages Act. Similarly, unpaid notice, holiday pay, bonus and commission payments can also form part of a claim under the Act.Under 18 Work Register – Employer Responsibilities
In accordance with the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act, 1996 employers are required to keep a register of employees that are under the age of 18. The basis for this is to guarantee the protection of young people and to ensure the workload assumed is not jeopardising their education. During a National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) assessment the inspector will request access to the company’s register of employees under the age of 18 (if the company employs workers in this category). There are strict rules that employers must adhere to when employing those under the age of 18. According to the Act employers cannot employ children under the age of 16 in regular full-time jobs. Children aged 14 and 15 may be employed on a controlled basis.
Some rules to pay attention to:
- They can do light work during the school holidays – 21 days off must be given during this period.
- They can be employed as part of an approved work experience or educational programme where the work is not harmful to their health, safety or development.
- They can be employed in film, cultural/advertising work or sport under licences issued by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.
- Children aged 15 may do a maximum of 8 hours of light work per week during the school term. The maximum working week for children outside of the school term is 35 hours (or up to 40 hours if they are on approved work experience).
- The maximum working week for children aged 16 and 17 is 40 hours with a maximum of 8 hours per day.
- The full name of the young person or child
- The date of birth of the young person or child
- The time the young person or child commences work each day
- The time the young person or child finishes work each day
- The rate of wages or salary paid to the young person or child for his or her normal working hours each day, week, month or year, as the case may be, and
- The total amount paid to each young person or child by way of wages or salary
- The employer is obliged to ensure that the young person receives a minimum rest period of 12 consecutive hours in each period of 24 hours.
- The employer is obliged to ensure that the young person receives a minimum rest period of 2 days which shall, where possible, be consecutive, in any 7 day period.
- The employer cannot require or permit the young person to do work for any period without a break of at least 30 consecutive minutes.
When should you use a Non Disclosure Agreement (NDA)?
A non-disclosure agreement (NDA), often referred to as a confidentiality or a secrecy agreement, is a legal contract between two or more parties outlining knowledge and/or information that the parties wish to share with one another but wish not to have accessed by third parties.
By signing the document the parties agree not to disclose information that it contains. An NDA creates a confidential relationship between the parties to protect any type of sensitive material such as details of trade secrets – it prevents the dissemination of company or project-specific information that, if leaked, could be damaging for one or both of the parties involved. It usually prevents the signing party from benefiting commercially from the information.
NDAs are commonly signed when two companies are considering doing business with each other and need to exchange information to benefit the partnership. A mutual NDA restricts both parties in their use of the materials provided; alternatively, an NDA can also exclusively restrict the use of material by one of the individuals or groups involved.
Employers often request that an employee signs an NDA or a similar form of contract when he or she commences employment, or a new assignment, in order to maintain confidentiality.
An NDA incorporates various basics – the details of the parties who must adhere to the agreement and the information to be kept confidential (often including items such as unpublished patent applications, financial information, customer lists, discoveries and business strategies). When drafting an NDA it is important to include the disclosure period in the contract.
Those writing the NDA should note that if the recipient had prior knowledge, obtained legally, of the matters contained within the NDA - or if the contents are publically available - the signatory cannot be held liable for dispersing the material. Similarly, if the materials are subject to a subpoena or a court order, this would override the contract.
The NDA should have a clause that forces the signing party to return or destroy the confidential information where the project or assignment is abandoned or when they no longer need access to the information.
Breach of the NDA is a serious offense – when this occurs the information owner can apply to court to have an injunction put in place to stop future breaches – Often it is too late at this stage as the damage has already been done. A second option here is to sue the party at fault for damages suffered by the breach. The consequences of breaching the NDA should be set out in the NDA and should include loss of profit as well as loss of reputation and costs and expenses caused by the breach. It is important to remember that Court proceedings can be a long and arduous process.
It can be extremely difficult to prove that an NDA has been breached but if a breach is proven, this can provide the basis for a claim. Given that it is not always possible to prove that an NDA has been breached some people do not rate them – however, at the very least the NDA holds some value in that it clearly sets out in writing what is expected of the parties to avoid any ambiguity and NDAs also serve as a reminder of the confidential nature of the information and act as a deterrent.