Overtime working - how much can your employees do?
Getting employees to work overtime during busy periods is a great way to combat increased workload demands using your existing employees. But how much overtime can you legally require your employees to work and should you have to pay them extra for it? We take a look at what is required to keep you covered.
Overtime
The number of hours an employee is required to work a week will be included in their contract and if an employee works over this it is usually considered overtime. If you do require employees to work overtime during busy periods, this must be stated in their contract of employment. Within two months of commencing work, an employee must be provided with a contract of employment.
How much overtime can employees work?
The Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 states the maximum working week is 48 hours and this will include all overtime or second employment. The 48-hour working week can be averaged out:
- 4 months - for most workers
- 6 months - for employees working in: security industries, hospitals, prisons, gas/electricity, airport/docks, agriculture and employees in businesses which have peak periods at certain times of the year such as tourism
- 12 months - for all employees who entered into an agreement with their employer which is approved by the Labour Court.
Do I have to pay employees for working overtime?
Employers are under no obligation to pay employees for overtime worked as long as they ensure that the average pay for total hours worked does not go below minimum wage. Many employers do pay higher rates of pay for overtime or may give employees time off in lieu for hours worked overtime.
If you do require employees to work overtime you must ensure that this is clearly stated in their contract of employment. If an employee is paid overtime, this should also be included, stating overtime rates of pay and how these are calculated.
BrightPay - Payroll Software
Bright Contracts - Employment Contracts and Handbooks
Staff handbooks are not just for large organisations
Many small businesses that may only employ a small number of employees, often believe that they are exempt from having employee policies and procedures. This is not the case, policies and procedures are essential for not only setting clear boundaries in the employment relationship but also in protecting your business if a claim was ever brought against you to the Workplace Relations Commission or Labour Court.
A recent case study
A recent case was brought to the courts when an employee of a small, family run shoe and leather goods shop, claimed she had been harassed and sexually harassed by another concession stand holder. The employee alleged that her employer had failed to take the appropriate steps to prevent the harassment and then failed to investigate the allegations appropriately.
Finding
The employer claimed that, as a small employer, it was not necessary for them to have any anti-harassment policies in place. The court found that the Acts require employers, regardless of size, to take reasonable steps to ensure employees are protected. The court emphasised that employers must have effective measures in place to ensure sexual harassment does not occur and if it does occur that there are adequate procedures available to deal with the problem and prevent re-occurrence.
Although the court noted that the employer took appropriate action when dealing with the situation when it observed such behavior, it had failed to take appropriate measures to prevent such occurrences. The employee was rewarded €5,000 for distress and the effects of sexual harassment constituting discrimination.
Learning Points
No matter how small your workforce, be sure to protect your business with solid employee handbooks clearly outlining policies and procedures.
Bright Contracts - Employment Contracts and Handbooks
€30,000 awarded to pregnant woman dismissed during probation
The Workplace Relations Commissioner ordered the owner of a seafood restaurant to pay €30,000 compensation to a pregnant employee who was dismissed during her probation.
The employee was pregnant at the time of commencing work at the restaurant as restaurant manager. Two months later, after getting the all clear in an ultra-sound, she informed her manager that she was pregnant. Following this she said she noticed a change in atmosphere. She was no longer invited to managerial meetings and then received an e-mail from her manager outlining some performance issues that had not been discussed with her previously. She replied to the email accepting responsibility to some of the issues but attributed most of them to inadequate training. She also offered to have a meeting with her boss to discuss these issues but despite her request no meeting ever took place. Three days after this e-mail was sent and one month after she gave notice of her pregnancy, she was let go.
She brought a claim under the equality legislation alleging that she had been discriminated against and dismissed due to her pregnancy. The restaurant contended that the dismissal arose from performance issues and was unrelated to the pregnancy. The restaurant claimed that adequate training had been given and that meetings to discuss performance issues took place before the announcement of her pregnancy, although no notes were recorded.
Finding
With no such records, the adjudicating officer ruled that she did not find it credible that such meetings took place. She found that due to the manager’s refusal for a meeting after the email was sent and the close proximity of the announcement of the pregnancy to the dismissal, that the pregnancy was a significant factor to the decision of her dismissal.
Learning Points
This case highlights the importance of following fair procedures and documenting these procedures when dismissing an employee. Even employees on probation are entitled to natural justice and fundamentally fair procedures.
To book a free online demo of Bright Contracts click here
To download your free Bright Contracts trial click here
