All you need to know about HR!
Supporting Business Owners, Directors and HR Professionals with the latest in HR trends and news.
June 2015
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.
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.
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.
Christmas Parties – Advice for Employers
With the Christmas season upon us again many employers will arrange a work-related social event (Christmas party) in order to thank employees for their efforts and hard work over the past year.
Despite Christmas parties occurring mostly outside of the work place, responsibility still lies with the employer for the protection and safety of their employees. Each year cases concerning bullying and harassment are brought before the Rights Commissioner and the Equality Tribunal. These incidents can be perpetrated at work-related social events like the Christmas party and the employer is often held liable for such action.
For the protection of the organisation and to avoid any such issues, below is a list of preventative steps which can be taken:
- Re-circulate the company’s Dignity at Work policy, which should include reference to bullying, harassment and sexual harassment in the workplace. This policy should clearly state that work-related social events fall under the terms of this policy.
- Ensure that it is clearly outlined to employees that they may be subject to disciplinary action leading up to and including dismissal should they be found in breach of the company’s Dignity at Work policy at a work-related social event.
- Ensure that employees are aware of the company’s Disciplinary and Grievance procedures.
- Re-circulate the company’s Social Media policy to ensure employees are aware of the rules surrounding publishing photographs online in order to prevent any privacy infringements arising or damage being caused to the company’s reputation.
- If the event is scheduled on an evening where employees are required to work the following day, ensure employees are aware of the company’s Absence policy.
- Brief members of Management on the above policies and ensure that they know how to deal with behaviour that could be deemed inappropriate at the event should it arise.
- Advise Management not to discuss issues relating to salaries, performance or career prospects at the event.
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.
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).
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.
State Pension Changes Effective January 2014
There is no single fixed/mandatory retirement age (age at which you must retire) for employees in Ireland. Typically, an employee’s retirement age is set out in their Contract of Employment and this can vary from one company/industry to the next. Alternatively, precedent/established custom and practice within the Company can determine the retirement age of its employees. E.G: if Mary was forced to retire at the age of 62 then Jack should also have to retire upon reaching the same age (assuming the circumstances are the same and that Mary was not ill, for instance).
Contracts provided by employers to their employees usually incorporate a mandatory retirement age (Normal Retirement Date/NRD). This tends to make it compulsory for the employee to retire at a certain age, usually this is somewhere between the ages of 60 and 65. Most contracts also include some sort of provision for early retirement on ill-health grounds etc.
In certain occupations there is a state-imposed compulsory retirement age. This arises for members of An Garda Síochána and members of the Defence Forces, for instance. Gardaí are forced to retire from their roles by the age of 60.
General Practitioners are obliged to retire from the General Medical Services scheme when they reach the age of 70. They may, however, continue to practice privately if they are approved by the Medical Council – the Medical Council will ensure that they meet their fitness to practice criteria.
There is no set retirement age when a person is self-employed, similarly, unless specifically set out in the Company’s Articles of Association, Company Directors are not usually bound by a maximum working age either.
Interestingly, employers are allowed to set minimum recruitment ages provided that the minimum age is 18 or under.
The most common company retirement age is 65 and, until recently, people went straight from receiving their salary from the company to receiving a pension from the State (provided they paid enough PRSI contributions during their working life). The Social Welfare and Pensions Act 2011, however, legislated for certain changes to the pensions system in Ireland effective from 1st January 2014. The State Pension (Transition) has been discontinued for new claimants from 1st January 2014. As a result, the State Pension minimum age has been increased to 66 years for all. It will increase to 67 years in 2021 and to 68 years in 2028.
What this means is that:
- If a person was born between 1st January 1949 and 31st December 1954 inclusive, the minimum qualifying State Pension age will be 66 (rather than 65).
- If a person was born between 1st January 1955 and 31st December 1960 inclusive, the minimum qualifying State Pension age will be 67.
- If a person was born on or after 1st January 1961 the minimum qualifying State Pension age will be 68.
When asked, in 2011, about the changes to the State Pension the Minister for Social Protection, Joan Burton, said:
“Given the changes to State pension age and the other proposals in the Framework, both employees and employers must be encouraged to change their attitudes to working longer. In the workplace employers must seek to retain older employees and create working conditions which will make working longer both attractive and feasible for the older worker. Where this is not possible and people leave paid employment before State pension age they will be entitled to apply for another social welfare payment until they become eligible for a State pension”.
The Transition Pension will not be payable to anyone who reaches 65 years of age after 1st January 2014. Instead, individuals will have to apply for Jobseeker’s Allowance and should be entitled to receive this payment until they become eligible for the State pension. Jobseeker’s Allowance is considerably less per week than the pension is (€188 compared to €230.30).
Employees due to retire from their jobs upon reaching the age of 65 may not be able to afford to do so for another year unless they are able to access savings, draw down a private pension or unless their employer graciously extends the retirement age. To date there is no obligation on employers to increase the retirement age or to somehow bridge the gap financially however, employers nationwide may find themselves receiving requests to increase the retirement age for employees.
Please note that if an employer wishes to increase the contracted retirement age he or she is still obliged to consult the employee in relation to same as written consent is required to change the terms and conditions of employment.
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 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.
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.
Worker dismissed at probationary period meeting awarded €10k
On 17th September 2013 a former employee of a coach hire company referred his case under Section 20 (1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 to the Labour Court and agreed to be bound by the Recommendations of the Court.
The case revolved around the alleged Unfair Dismissal of the claimant at his probationary meeting.
An employee with less than 12 months’ service cannot avail of the protections offered by the Unfair Dismissals Acts, however, as this particular employee did, employees with less than 12 months’ service can refer a claim under the Industrial Relations Act as the amount of service is irrelevant in these instances.
The employee claimed that he was made aware that he was being dismissed at the meeting but stated that no issues about his performance were raised at that time. The employee described how he was denied his right to appeal the decision as his employer either claimed to be “unavailable” or simply “failed to respond” to any correspondence relating to an appeal process.
A Labour Court hearing was scheduled for, and took place on, January 10th 2014.
The employer, who was notified of the hearing, did not attend and did not appoint any representation to attend on his/her behalf.
Given his opportunity to speak, the worker claimed that throughout the course of his probation, he was never told of any issues with his performance. He went on to describe how he was not afforded his right to query why he was dismissed and was not given any opportunity to appeal the decision made by his employers to terminate his employment at that time.
As there was no representation on the part of the employer the employee’s claims went uncontested.
With the evidence presented to it, the Court decided that the process used in deciding to dismiss the claimant fell short of the standards of fairness that a reasonable employer should exhibit.
The Court, satisfied with the evidence of the claimant, ruled that he be compensated in the amount of €10,000. This figure was in full and final settlement of all claims arising from this dismissal.
The determination in this case should encourage all employers to ensure that they follow Labour Court approved procedures with extreme care when dismissing an employee - even when doing so during a probationary period.
Employers should note from this case that all employees, including those who are dismissed during probation, are entitled to be afforded details of the reasons why they are being let go and should also be offered the right to appeal the decision to terminate.
As should be the case all employees, even employees on probation, are entitled to natural justice.
Drugs and Alcohol Free Workplace
So far as is reasonably possible, employers are legally obliged to ensure the safety and welfare at work of all employees. Likewise, employees have a responsibility to themselves and to their colleagues. The use of alcohol and/or unauthorised drugs may disturb the safe and efficient running of a business. It can hinder the health and safety of employees within the organisation as well as the customers and other stakeholders.
-
The use of drugs or alcohol by an employee can lead to performance/productivity issues. It can make concentration very difficult for the person in question. Work related tasks can take more time and the number of mistakes can often increase, potentially costing the Company, individual concerned and other employees dearly.
-
Another common consequence of alcohol or drug use is the loss of faculties. This may lead to an inability to properly assess danger which can, in turn, bring about higher accident levels when driving to or from work, or being more prone to having an accident or causing an accident when at work.
-
Absence from work is another likely outcome when using alcohol or drugs in an excessive or irresponsible manner. Other related lapses such as lateness and disproportionate levels of sickness, etc. are also common.
Companies should operate a ‘zero tolerance’ policy when it comes to drugs and alcohol and
employees should not be permitted to work while under the influence of drugs or alcohol under any circumstances. Employees must adhere to all medically prescribed drug instructions and if the medication is likely to cause any side effects that could impair the employee’s levels of concentration or ability to carry out his or her work then he or she should communicate this to Management.
If an employee’s performance or attendance at work is affected as a result of alcohol or drugs, or the employer believes the employee has been involved in any drug related action/offence, disciplinary action may be required. Dismissal may be warranted in severe circumstances.
It should be clearly communicated to employees that anyone involved in the unlawful possession, use, sale or manufacture of controlled substances or illicit drugs etc. on Company premises, in Company vehicles/work sites or during working time will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. They should also be referred for prosecution.
Companies should also include a drug and alcohol testing policy in their employee handbook to improve their rights in these situations.
Smoking regulations for employees:
In line with statutory provisions companies are obliged to operate a strict smoke-free
workplace policy. Employers should make their employees fully aware that any member of staff who breaches this policy will be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. It is imperative that employers enforce the law.Maternity, Adoptive and other forms of leave from Employment
Paid leave of absence for mothers, whose babies are born through surrogacy arrangements, falls outside the scope of the law.
In September 2013 The European Court of Justice found that an Irish teacher (Ms. Z), whose child was born through surrogacy, did not have an automatic right to either paid Adoptive Leave or Maternity Leave from her employment. When Ms. Z’s application for paid Adoptive Leave was denied she brought a complaint to the Equality Tribunal. The woman, who has no uterus as a result of a rare medical condition, claimed that she was discriminated against on the grounds of sex, family status and disability.
The woman was told by her employer that she could take unpaid parental leave instead of the requested Adoptive Leave; however, as the child was genetically hers and her name was on the American birth certificate, Ms. Z felt that she was being treated unfairly.
The surrogacy scenario can be a challenging one for all concerned and blurred lines surrounding what mothers are entitled to in the workplace just adds to the complexity of the situation.
The Equality Tribunal referred the case to the European Court of Justice which found that the woman did not have any automatic right to Adoptive Leave.
The legal opinion of the Advocate General stated that her differential treatment was not based on sex, family status or disability, as claimed, but instead on the “refusal of national authorities to equate her situation with that of either a woman who has given birth or an adoptive mother”.
The recent revelation, that Irish women who have babies through surrogacy arrangements are not afforded the same rights as mothers who have adopted or given birth to their babies, has highlighted the uncertainties/complexities surrounding the issue of surrogacy in both Irish and
EU law.
Rights to Maternity and Adoptive Leave defined:
If an employee becomes pregnant while employed in Ireland she is entitled to take Maternity Leave. This entitlement extends to all female employees regardless of their length of service and the number of hours worked per week etc.
Since March 1st 2007, employees have a statutory right to 26 weeks’ Maternity Leave. A further 16 weeks’ Additional Maternity Leave is available to them should they wish to take advantage of it. Employees are not obliged to avail of the entire period of leave open to them; however,
they must take a minimum of two weeks prior to the birth and at least 4 weeks after giving birth.
If the baby is born prematurely then Maternity Leave starts on the day the baby is born.
Employees are obliged to notify their employer of their wish to take Maternity Leave as soon as is reasonably practicable (not later than 4 weeks prior to the desired commencement date). Employees must produce a medical certificate confirming the expected birth date. Employers must give paid time-off for doctor/midwife recommended medical appointments for all
pregnancies and employees are also entitled to attend one set of antenatal classes during one pregnancy. The employer should be given written notice 2 weeks in advance of such appointments. Expectant fathers are also entitled to be paid by their employer while attending one set of antenatal classes.
While some do, it is important to remember that employers are not obliged to pay employees while they are on Maternity Leave. Employees who have contributed enough PRSI can apply for Maternity Benefit from the Department of Social Protection. Employers, who do continue to pay employee salaries during Maternity Leave, often require the employee to forward to them any
Maternity Benefit Payment from the Department of Social Protection.
Most employees do not have any right to remuneration from their employer during Additional Maternity Leave and there is no state benefit payable during this time, however, employees are still entitled to avail of this extra 16 weeks away from the workplace immediately after the conclusion of their regular Maternity Leave. It is important to note that Employees must
apply to their employer in writing 4 weeks prior to the conclusion of their Maternity Leave if they wish to avail of this Additional Maternity Leave.
Employees are protected against discrimination or loss of employment through redundancy or dismissal on grounds relating to pregnancy and Maternity Leave. Employees must give notice of their intention to return from Maternity Leave at least 4 weeks prior to doing so. Employees must return on the same terms and conditions as when they left (unless this in not reasonably
practicable).
There is an obligation on the employer to carry out a specific risk assessment for employees who are pregnant, and for those who are breastfeeding or who have just given birth, in order to assess whether there are any workplace hazards for these employees. Should this risk assessment determine that hazards (that cannot be eliminated) exist the employee will be
moved to alternative work or, if this is not feasible, the employee will be granted health and safety leave. The employee is entitled to payment from the employer in respect of the first 21 days of such health and safety leave and can apply for social welfare benefit for any period thereafter.
Adoptive Leave:
When an employee is adopting a child she is entitled to a minimum of 24 consecutive weeks’ ordinary Adoptive Leave starting on the day of placement of the child. Only the adoptive mother is entitled to avail of Adoptive Leave from employment, except in the case where a male is the sole adopter.
There is no statutory obligation on employers to provide pay to employees while they are on Adoptive Leave – some companies, however, do offer this benefit to employees. Individuals may be entitled to Adoptive Benefit from the Department of Social Protection.
Employees are also entitled to take 16 weeks' additional unpaid Adoptive Leave immediately following the period of standard Adoptive Leave. As is the case with Additional Maternity Leave, Employees must apply for the Additional Adoptive Leave in writing 4 weeks prior to the end of ordinary Adoptive Leave. In special circumstances, for instance cases involving foreign adoption, Additional Adoptive Leave may be taken at a time not directly following the regular Adoptive Leave period.
An employee’s entitlement to Annual Leave and Public Holidays will continue to accrue as normal during Maternity Leave and Adoptive Leave.
It is essential for employers to remember that, similar to other forms of protective leave, employees are entitled to return to the role they held immediately before commencing Adoptive Leave, subject to the employee having notified the employer of the intention to return to work, not later than four weeks before the date of expected return.
Arm Your Company with the Best Human Resources Support
Since 2001 The HR Company, B2E Ltd. has been successfully providing a cost-effective HR and advice support service(s) for small to medium sized businesses (SMEs) across Ireland. The HR Company also assists several large corporations and multinationals with their HR operations. With so many pieces of employment legislation in place in Ireland it is a challenge for companies to ensure that they are fully compliant on all counts. The HR Company is an Irish-owned company headed up by Philip Carney, former head of HR for Microsoft’s European Operations Centre, and Angela O’Grady, former Staffing and Recruiting Manager. A team of 20 HR specialists provide peace of mind for Employers by guiding them on all aspects of Irish Employment Law.
The HR Company provides a very affordable 24/7 protection service to those who wish to offload the burdens and risk associated with HR activities. Whether it relates
to disciplinary procedures, annual leave, redundancy or anything in between; a dedicated account manager is at the end of a phone to guide Employers and help insulate companies whenever a query about best practices in HR arises.
Not only does The HR Company provide bespoke employment documentation to ensure companies pass a National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) inspection, tailored disciplinary letters and any other relevant material are prepared by dedicated account managers to ease the load on the Employer. The HR Companyacts as the eyes and ears of the Employer on all HR related issues – protecting companies by keeping them informed on any relevant legislation updates.
In this era of increased employee litigation employees know their rights – companies should shield themselves against the risk of a costly dispute by arming themselves with the best on-call
support.
Labour Court Ends Zero-Hours Contracts For HSE Home Helps
The Labour Court has issued a recommendation giving improved terms and conditions to Home Help workers employed by the Health Service Executive (HSE).
The recommendation, which is binding under the terms of the Haddington Road Agreement, was issued on 18th September, 2013, and will affect the employment terms and conditions of approximately 10,000 workers. It is important to note that this agreement only applies to Home Helps who are employed by the HSE. Individuals employed by private companies or not-for-profit providers are not covered by this Labour Court recommendation.
Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) has been campaigning since 2009 in a bid to secure adequate contracts and security of earnings for its members. The Union has welcomed the Labour Court decision which brings an end to the extensive system of zero-hour contracts. Paul Bell, SIPTU Health Division Organiser, stated that the agreement put the terms and conditions of Home Helps on a “firm and binding platform for the first time since the community service was established thirty years ago”.
A Zero-hours contract is a type of employment where an employee must be available for work but does not have specified or guaranteed hours or a formal roster. This can cause challenging circumstances for employees where the hours of work as well as earnings are unpredictable.
This Labour Court agreement provides for the issuing of annualised contracts guaranteeing a minimum of seven to 10 hours of work per week for each Home Help. Caroline Jenkinson, Labour Court Deputy Chairman, explained that “the number of hours to be allocated to each person will be based on 80 per cent of their actual hours worked in the six-month reference period between October 1st, 2011, and March 31st, 2012, with a minimum guarantee of seven hours”.
In addition to welcoming the removal of the zero-hours system Mr. Bell of SIPTU applauded a HSE effort to reorganise and manage the Home Help hours on a county by county basis.
Those who choose not to work under the annualised hour scheme may be entitled to receive compensation of between €2,000 and €3,000 under an exit deal.
Dignity at Work – Workplace Racism at an Alarming Level
Employers - Did you know that you can be held accountable for bullying or harassment in the workplace?
……..Not being aware of it does not get you off the hook!
Bullying in the workplace is any recurring inappropriate conduct that undermines a person’s right to dignity at work. Bullying can be carried out by one person or by several people - it is aimed at an individual or a group where the objective is to make them feel inferior or victimised. Bullying can come in the form of a verbal or physical assault and can also take place over the internet – this is known as cyber bullying and can be performed via many methods - Mobile phones, social networking sites, emails and texts are all common vehicles for cyber bullying.
Cyber bullying is becoming more and more prevalent in society.
Keep in mind that harassment based on civil status, family status, sexual orientation, religion, age, race, nationality or ethnic origin, disability or membership of the Traveller community is considered discrimination.
Harassment in the workplace is prohibited under the terms of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 to 2007. The Act of harassment - whether direct or indirect, intentional or unintentional - is unacceptable and should not be tolerated by any company. Any allegations should be dealt with seriously, promptly and confidentially with a thorough and immediate investigation. Any acts of harassment should be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. Any victimisation of an employee for reporting an incident, or assisting with an investigation of alleged harassment and/or bullying is a breach of equality legislation and should also be subject to disciplinary action.
Bullying or harassment isn’t always obvious – in fact it can come in many shapes and forms – some examples are:
•Social exclusion or isolation
•Damaging someone’s reputation through gossip or rumour
•Any form of intimidation
•Aggressive or obscene language or behaviour
•Repeated requests for unreasonable tasks to be carried out
Employers Beware:
Under current Irish employment legislation (The Employment Equality Acts 1998-2011) companies are accountable when it comes to bullying and harassment in the workplace or workplace disputes. It is vital for employers to be mindful of the legislation as companies are answerable for the actions of employees, suppliers and customers even in cases where the company is not aware that bullying or harassment is taking place.
To defend itself a company must illustrate how it did everything reasonably practicable to prevent bullying and / or harassment from taking place in the workplace. The company must also show that when an instance of bullying or harassment occurred the company took immediate, fair and decisive action.
There is a huge risk of exposure if companies do not adhere to the strict Regulations. Those found in violation of the Act may be liable for fines and in severe circumstances imprisonment on summary conviction. Companies can also end up paying out large sums in compensation.
Bullying creates a very hostile work environment and can negatively affect employee performance – It can lead to disengagement and low levels of morale. It can also cause a company to lose key members of staff. Bullying can affect both the safety and the health of employees – this violates the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005.
It is abundantly clear that it is in the best interest of all stakeholders to prevent bullying or harassment of any form in the workplace.
In order to avoid bullying and harassment an employer should include harassment-related policies and procedures in the Employee Handbook – A Dignity at Work Policy should be communicated clearly to employees. This will clarify what is expected of employees and what the protocol/repercussions are if bullying/harassment does occur.
Last week the Immigrant Council of Ireland (ICI) brought our attention to a shocking statistic – The ICI revealed that the number of racist incidents reported in Ireland over the last 12 months had jumped to a staggering figure – They dealt with 120 individual racism cases in the past
year. 52 of these instances were reported in June/July of 2013 alone marking a huge increase when compared to the same period in 2012 when just 3 incidents were reported.
The racism reported related to alleged discrimination, written harassment, verbal harassment and physical violence.
The most commonly reported setting for racism was the workplace – where a massive 20% of reported incidents occurred.
Employers need to be vigilant and need to make more of an effort to consciously crack down on this type of activity.
Why Companies are choosing to Outsource their HR
The number of cases annually referred to the Employment Appeals Tribunal increased three fold during the Irish economic recession and the average compensation awarded by the Tribunal in Unfair Dismissal cases rose from €11,476.00 to €18,047.85 between 2009 and 2011.
During this time of economic hardship Employers must pay even closer attention than ever before to their expenditure. Many organisations are forced to downsize and - in this era of increased Employee Litigation - making sure you follow appropriate procedures in redundancy or disciplinary scenarios, for example, is growing in importance.
It is at times like these that Companies need to concentrate on their Human Resource functions even more. Some elements of HR, however, can be both complicated and time consuming – an enormous burden on Employers. In recent years the focus has moved towards legal compliance (which can be a minefield with all of the pieces of Employment Legislation currently in operation) and administrative processes that can slow down the productivity of the firm.
For SMEs in particular, it makes a lot of business sense to outsource HR tasks as firms specialising in the field can improve efficiency dramatically. Outsourcing allows Companies to offload work that isn’t part of their core business. It also saves money. At a Company that doesn’t have the funds to hire specialists outsourcing can allow it to gain access to a vendor’s services when required as well as the expertise and wealth of experience that they have accumulated – all at an affordable price.
While SMEs don’t have the same number of Employees as larger corporations and multinationals they still require the same HR elements on a smaller scale. For instance, they still need to recruit staff, they still need to abide by the vast array of Employment Laws and still require Employment Documentation (Contracts of Employment etc.).
Although some Companies do it, most SMEs cannot justify spending a large portion of their annual budget setting up a HR department comprehensive enough to incorporate the abundance of skills required to achieve a smooth-functioning, compliant working environment. Consequently, more and more Companies are choosing to outsource operations like HR and are directing vital, scarce, finances and resources towards other core/revenue-generating areas of the business.
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.Searching Employee Belongings Appropriately
Many employers have experienced theft by an employee in the workplace and, consequently, need to put certain measures in place in order to protect the profits of the company. It is the policy of some companies to search employees’ personal belongings when they are leaving the work premises. Employers can also reserve the right to search employee lockers and vehicles if this is agreed with the employee in advance.
If the employer wishes to have the option to carry out personal searches then it is crucial that all details surrounding these searches are clearly communicated to the employees in the contract of employment. Employees sign this contract and by doing so agree to the policies and procedures contained therein.
If an employer reserves the right to search an employee’s belongings then he or she must do so in a dignified manner – giving the employee appropriate levels of privacy. There are several significant procedures to observe when performing a personal search. The individual carrying out the search should be in a management position and, in the interest of clarity; the employees should be made aware in advance who it will be.
The location of the search is also something that should be considered very carefully – it is important to maintain consistency and to carry out searches in an area that offers privacy to the employee involved. Employees should be notified of the location of the search and, ideally, it should be out of the view of customers and other employees. The shop floor is not appropriate search setting – the canteen is not suitable either.
Ideally the area should be covered by CCTV in order to prevent a “he said she said” situation from arising. If this is not possible then a witness should be present so that this scenario is avoided. Either way discretion is of cardinal importance.
As is procedure with airline security screening a male should search a male and a female should search a female, although, as the searches
should not involve body contact this is less of a priority. It is essential
that the employee is asked to open his or her bag, for instance, and that the person performing the search doesn’t breach privacy by putting their hands into the employee’s bag or on the employee’s person.
Employees should be asked politely to remove any suspicious items from their bag for further inspection – the item/items should be placed on a clear surface in order to ensure that there is no confusion over what was actually in the bag. The searching employee (management/security where possible) should never assume that an item has not been paid for. If the item in question was from the store then the employee should be asked to produce a
receipt for same.
Further action can be taken if the employee cannot furnish proof of purchase. When an employee purchases an item in the store during the working day it is good practice for companies to put in place a policy where the bag is sealed and the receipt is attached to the bag. This removes any ambiguity.
Some companies will carry out spot checks on employee belongings rather than checking them on a daily basis – it is vital to be fair and to ensure that the same employees are not targeted all the time.
Not following appropriate procedures can lead to employees being awarded large sums of money.
How to avoid an unfair dismissal claim when making someone redundant
Redundancy is a minefield if you take chances. You must remember that employees now know their rights better than ever before. They have lived through a time when friends, family and work colleagues have been laid off - there is also a lot of information readily available for them online.
Employees have picked up a great deal of information about their rights. We say to Employers "your employees know their rights - do you?" Some businesses are now facing into a second phase of redundancies. In that instance, you can be guaranteed that staff know their entitlements even better than they did for the first phase. If you don't follow process, or if you make a false move, it could cost you - you could quite easily end up in the Labour Courts with an Unfair Dismissal case on your hands.
Unfair Dismissal cases are very common these days and they are very difficult for employers to win as the onus is on the employer to prove that he or she made the correct choices when letting someone go. Proving that a redundancy, for instance, was necessary is essential - making the position, not the person, redundant is crucial - an employer cannot make an employee redundant and then hire a new staff member to carry out the same tasks the following week. Commissioners will scrutinize every detail and decision and will want to see that the employer has dotted every "I" and crossed every "T".
Employers have a 50/50 chance of leaving Labour Court hearings with a large figure to pay out - it is important to remember that a huge number of cases are also settled prior to court proceedings so the odds are heavily stacked against the employer coming away from the Court with no fine on their hands.
Without a doubt redundancies can be required to keep a business viable. Employers need to ensure that they make their decisions based on what's best for the business - not because they want to get rid of Danny the storeman who you feel hasn't done a tap for years. Before making people redundant, look at the business overall and see what areas are suffering a downturn, what areas are picking up, and how best you should react to changed circumstances.
A Selection Matrix will help to clarify your thoughts and take the personalities out of the decision - and also ensure that no-one can accuse you of using redundancy simply to remove people you don't like from your company. As a business owner or manager, you are entitled to make decisions that make business sense. So establish the logic of any decision before you make it.
Probationary Periods in the Irish Workplace
Employment references for prospective employees can be great indicators of employee skills or characteristics and they should always be thoroughly vetted. However, for various reasons, they may not always give a true and present reflection of the candidate or they may reflect what the employee’s capabilities were at a different time and this may not necessarily match their current skills. References can also depict suitability for a role that is dissimilar to the one being filled. For this reason it is advisable for employers to engage new members based on multiple evaluations to protect themselves and to ensure not to waste any time or resources on someone who is not adequately equipped for the role.
An applicant’s cover letter and curriculum vitae, as well as the resulting interview(s), can tell an employer a lot about the potential new employee - it is not uncommon, however, to ask shortlisted candidates to perform competency-based assessments or aptitude tests so that the employer can acquire a full picture of the candidate’s abilities and determine whether or not he or she is the right fit for the vacancy. It is customary for employers to hire new members on a probationary period of 6 months or a term not dissimilar to this.
This probationary period does not prejudice the Company’s right to dismiss in accordance with the notice provisions contained in the employee’s individual statement of main terms of employment, or without notice for reasons of gross misconduct, should this be necessary.
This period should be used by the employer to fully assess the employee’s work performance and establish suitability. If the work performance is not up to the required standard or the employee is considered to be unsuitable the employer should either take swift remedial action or terminate the employment, without recourse to the disciplinary procedure.
At the end of the probationary period the employee should again be reassessed. If he or she has not reached the required standard the employer should, at their discretion, either extend the probationary period in order that remedial action can be taken or terminate the contract of
employment.
The probationary period should not in any case exceed eleven months in total. The employee should receive notice of the Company’s intention to extend the probationary period before or at the end of the initial 6 month probationary period.
A clause should allow that any continuous period of absence of four weeks or more would suspend the probationary period until the employee’s return to work.
To avoid any risk of discrimination, policies (like the probationary period outlined above) should be fair and consistent and should apply to all new employees throughout the Company. In disciplinary proceedings, when dealing with employees on probationary periods, progressive steps can be skipped but it is a common misconception that fair procedures and natural justice need not be adhered to during the probationary period.
The Unfair Dismissals Acts 1997-2007 will not apply to the dismissal of an employee during a period at the beginning of employment when he/she is on probation or undergoing training provided that:
•the contract of employment is in writing
•the duration of probation or training is one year or less (including annual leave) and is specified in the contract
It is important to bear in mind that this exclusion from the Acts will not apply if the dismissal results from trade union membership or activity, pregnancy related matters, or entitlements under the maternity protection, parental leave, adoptive leave and carer's leave legislation.