Reference Letters - Stick to the Facts
A recent decision by the Labour Court highlighted once again the importance of having control over the issuing of references to current or past employees.
The case involved the HSE and an employee and the Labour Court found that the employee had a permanent job offer withdrawn by the HSE on foot of an internal reference that contained inaccurate and incorrect information about her work performance and employment record. The Court recommended that the employee be continued in employment by the HSE in a temporary capacity without interruption pending her appointment to the first next suitable and appropriate permanent vacancy that becomes available.
The employee had made efforts to have the reference removed or corrected but it was retained on file and the Court also recommended that the employee be paid a sum of €10,000 in compensation for the delay in dealing with and addressing the issues raised and the distress caused to her.
Employers are advised to think carefully about how they approach the writing of reference letters for current or past employees. It is important to take a consistent approach for all employees and this can best be achieved by ensuring that all letters come from a central source rather than letting individual managers write references for their own staff. It is advisable that the letters are limited to factual information about the employee’s career with the Company such as start date, position, job description, working hours, changes to their role over the course of employment, promotions, locations changes and changes to working hours. Employers should refrain from making any subjective assessment on how the employee performed in their role.
Bright Contracts – Employment contracts and handbooks.
BrightPay – Payroll Software.
Unfair Dismissal ruling against Supermac's for dismissing an employee accused of theft
A FORMER Supermac’s employee, who was fired after being accused of stealing from the restaurant in Portlaoise where he worked, has been awarded more than €33,000 by the Employment Appeals Tribunal for unfair dismissal.
Despite the Garda dropping charges against him, Daryl Mason was dismissed for gross misconduct from his position as a store supervisor following an in-house investigation by Supermac’s into missing cash lodgements. His appeal to the company’s human resources manager failed.
In making its determination, the tribunal noted the area manager had been “too hasty” in making his decision to fire Mr Mason.
The tribunal awarded Mr Mason €32,000 under the Unfair Dismissal Acts, 1977 to 2007, and a further €1,700 under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, 1973 to 2005.
Bright Contracts – Employment Contracts and Handbooks
BrightPay – Payroll Software
Read more at www.irishtimes.com >
Costs of Employment Set to Increase
At a recent launch of a new government website, Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation Richard Bruton TD stated that:
A key part of our plan for jobs and growth is reducing costs, particularly by reducing where possible that Government regulations impose on business.
Recent speeches and mutterings coming from the Government parties suggest however, that the burden being imposed on employers is likely to increase rather than reduce. Some of these mutterings may be considered as kite-flying on behalf of the Government, but can only lead us to conclude that employers need to be prepared to face higher costs of employment.
Minister for Social Protection Joan Burton has suggested in a speech that the PRSI contributions of employers will have to increase and we are facing the prospect of employers being made responsible for the payment of sick leave to their employees. These extra costs are likely to affect the small firms in particular who are already struggling to maintain jobs in a difficult environment. This follows on from the reduction of rebate on statutory redundancy from 60% to 15%, which was made in the budget last December.
If the proposals on sick pay are introduced, employers who currently don’t pay any sick pay will find themselves with an immediate extra cost. At the moment if the business is able to get by without the absent individual and the state pays the benefit costs, the employer may ignore the absence without seeing an effect on their cash flow. The emphasis will have to be different if these changes go through and employers will have to proactively manage the issue.
As part of this absence management, and in order to reduce the exposure to higher costs, it is important that employers ensure that details on how certified absence will be managed within the company are included in the contract of employment and handbook.
Bright Contracts – Employment contracts and handbooks.
BrightPay – Payroll Software
No Employee Contract - Barman Sacked for Being Drunk Wins Unfair Dismissal Case
Gerard Clery a former Barman, of The Mall Bar, Limerick, was dismissed by his employer after receiving customer complaints that he was drunk while working has been awarded €3,000 by the Employment Appeals Tribunal because his employer did not put a Contract of Employment in place.
Despite arguments by both parties as to whether or not Mr Clery was actually drunk on the night of 4th April 2010 the Employment Appeals Tribunal ultimately found in favour of the former employee Mr Clery due to the fact that no contract was in place and disciplinary procedures were “non-existent”.
Mr Clery was awarded €2,200 for unfair dismissal and a further €800 under the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act.
Bright Contracts – Employment contracts and handbooks.
BrightPay – Payroll Software
Read more at www.limerickleader.ie >
