Employer Resources Newsletter - August 2024

Irish employment law has developed at an ever-increasing rate in recent years. This accelerated rate of change and the addition of a slew of new regulations have increased the compliance burden on organisations that need to focus on their day-to-day operations. 

One of the most effective ways to identify compliance gaps in your organisation’s employment practices is to conduct regular Human Resources (HR) audits. A HR audit consists of a comprehensive evaluation of your organisation’s HR policies, procedures, and practices to ensure compliance with employment law and to promote best practice. 

In this article, we will explore how regular HR audits benefit Irish not-for-profit’s by minimising employment law compliance risks and promoting positive employee relations.

Minimise Employment Law Risks

There is a huge body of Irish employment law in Ireland that impose a wide array of legal obligations on Employers. The Employment Equality Acts, the Unfair Dismissals Acts, the organisation of Working Time Act, and the Safety, Health, and Welfare at Work Act are just a few of the pieces of legislation that make up the statutory employment law framework. Failure to comply with these laws can result in significant legal repercussions, including hefty orders to pay compensation to aggrieved employeees, the associated litigation costs, as well as damage to the company's reputation.

Regular HR audits help identify potential compliance issues before they escalate into legal disputes. By systematically reviewing employment practices, contracts, workplace policies, and employee records, not-for-profits can ensure they are adhering to all relevant legal requirements. This proactive approach significantly reduces the risk of legal challenges, the distraction of litigation and exposure to compensation orders or fines.

Enhancing Employee Relations

Compliance with employment laws is not just about avoiding penalties; it is also about fostering a positive workplace environment. When employees work for an Employer that is committed to fair and lawful treatment, it boosts morale and enhances trust. In Adare’s latest HR Barometer Report 8.1, our research identified the average cost of replacing an employee in 2024 is €9,461. This figure highlights the significance of investment in HR initiatives like retention and employee engagement. Regular HR audits can identify gaps in policies and practices that might negatively impact employee satisfaction and engagement.

For instance, HR audits might reveal inconsistencies in how performance appraisals are conducted or how grievances are handled. Addressing these issues promptly can lead to more consistent and transparent practices that contribute to improving overall employee relations and increasing employee retention.

Promoting Best Practice

HR audits do not focus solely on compliance; they also aim to identify areas where the organisation can achieve best practice. By benchmarking against industry standards, not-for-profits can enhance their HR functions by being more efficient, effective, and aligned with their strategic goals.

For example, an audit might highlight the need for better onboarding processes, more comprehensive training programs, or updated probation management processes. Implementing these improvements can lead to a more competent and motivated workforce, which in turn drives organisation efficiency and success.

Staying Updated with Legislative Changes

Employment laws are continually evolving, with new regulations and amendments being introduced regularly. Keeping up-to-date with these changes can be challenging for any organisation. Regular HR audits ensure that organisations remain compliant with the latest legal requirements.

Audits provide an opportunity to review and update employment contracts, handbooks, and policies in line with current laws. This not only ensures compliance but also demonstrates to employees and stakeholders that the organisation is committed to maintaining the highest standards of legal and ethical conduct.

Improving Operational Efficiency

An often-overlooked benefit of HR audits is the identification of improvements in operational efficiency. By systematically examining HR processes, audits can identify ineffective work practices, inefficiencies, and areas for improvement. Streamlining these processes not only enhances compliance but also saves time and resources.

For example, an audit might uncover duplication of work or outdated manual processes that could be automated. Addressing these issues can lead to more efficient HR operations, freeing up time for employees to focus on higher priority strategic initiatives that add value to the organisation.

Supporting Strategic Decision-Making

HR audits provide valuable insights that can inform strategic decision-making. By understanding the current state of compliance and HR practices, organisation leaders can make more informed decisions about workforce planning, talent management, and organisational development.

For instance, audit findings might indicate a need for succession planning or highlight gaps in critical skill areas. Armed with this information, leaders can develop targeted strategies to address these needs, ensuring the organisation is well-positioned to achieve future growth and success.

What HR Audits Consist Of

While the primary focus of HR audits will be employment law compliance, the process will examine all stages of the employment relationship from recruitment to retirement or termination. This examination will also incorporate feedback for managers on both their compliance obligations and any improvements that can be made to improve employee satisfaction. 

Typically, HR audits will examine the following areas: 

The Recruitment Process: HR audits can evaluate job advertisements, application forms, interview processes, and selection criteria to ensure they are non-discriminatory. This not only helps in avoiding employment equality claims but also enhances the organisation’s reputation as an equal opportunity employer.

Employment Documentation: HR audits can verify that employment contracts include all legally required information and written terms of employment. This not only ensures compliance but also helps in managing employee expectations and minimising the risk of disputes.

Probation, Induction and Training: HR audits can check whether performance reviews during probation are documented and decisions regarding the confirmation or termination of employment are made in compliance with legal obligations and crucially, the organisation’s own probation policies. In addition, regular HR audits can assess the effectiveness of induction programmes and employee training.

Legal Compliance: Employment law has been developing at an exceptional rate in recent years increasing the compliance burden for Employers. HR audits identify any compliance gaps with new and longstanding Employer-side legal obligations. 

Employee Satisfaction: employee satisfaction is closely linked to compliance with employment laws. Regular HR audits can include surveys and feedback mechanisms to gauge employee satisfaction and identify any issues related to working conditions, management practices, or workplace culture. organisations that deal proactively and fairly with grievances, disciplinary and health & wellbeing issues for example can prevent potential employee claims related to harassment, discrimination, or unfair treatment. As an added benefit, high employee satisfaction leads to better retention rates and a more positive workplace environment.

Record Keeping and Data Protection: Proper record-keeping is essential for demonstrating compliance with employment laws, such as the organisation of Working Time Act, which governs working hours and leave entitlements. While certain employment records must be retained under a variety of employment laws, Employers must also consider their duties around processing personal data in accordance with the principles of GDPR. 

Termination Processes: The end of the employment relationship should also be considered as part of HR audits. Redundancy, retirement, dismissal and resignation procedures will all be reviewed both for compliance purposes and for benchmarking against best practice.

The Role of HR Audits in Sustainable Business Success

Regular HR audits are an essential practice for Irish not-for-profits aiming to maintain compliance with employment laws and promote best practices. By mitigating legal risks, enhancing employee relations, promoting best practices, staying updated with legislative changes, improving operational efficiency, and supporting strategic decision-making, HR audits provide a comprehensive approach to managing human resources effectively. 

In an environment where compliance and operational excellence are paramount, regular HR audits are not just a good practice—they are a necessity for sustainable organisation success.

Adare is a team of expert-led Employment Law, Industrial Relations and best practice Human Resource Management consultants. If your organisation needs advice, support, or guidance about compliance requirements or any HR issues, please contact Adare to learn what services are available to support your organisation.

Dublin Office: (01) 561 3594 | Cork Office: (021) 486 1420 | Shannon Office: (061) 363 805

info@adarehrm.ie | www.adarehrm.ie

Claim of constructive dismissal by employee rejected due to not complying with employers grievance procedure

Background

The complainant alleged discrimination and victimization under the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015. Diagnosed with breast cancer in January 2023, she requested to work from home during chemotherapy to avoid infection risks, but her employer denied this, requiring all staff to return on-site. Though offered a separate office, she found it unsuitable due to shared bathroom facilities, leading her to feel forced to apply for Critical Illness Provision (CIP), despite being fit to work from home. She also claimed her wages were unfairly reduced over the summer, and that delayed timesheet approvals caused significant stress. Additionally, she argued that she was passed over for a Coordinator role in August 2023 due to her disability and that raising these issues led to further victimization.

The complainant's line manager testified that while the employer could have accommodated her request to work from home, they chose not to, leaving her with the options of unsafe office work or sick leave. It was also stated that the complainant was allowed to work from home until a directive required a return to the office by 1 April 2023. The manager suggested that her dissatisfaction with work-from-home arrangements and payroll issues could have been resolved and noted that no formal request for reasonable accommodation was ever received. HR confirmed that the complainant was never certified as fit to work, so working from home was not considered. The respondent denied all allegations of discrimination and victimization, arguing that the complainant did not establish a prima facie case and failed to provide a comparator. However, they acknowledged a pay discrepancy and agreed to pay her €2,432.52 gross as promised by her line manager. 

Summary of the complainant’s Case:

The complainant, employed as an unqualified teacher since March 2006, alleges discrimination under the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2015. In September 2022, she agreed to work 35 hours a week, divided between teaching and resource work, with different pay rates for each. After being diagnosed with breast cancer in January 2023, she was initially allowed to work from home during her treatment. However, in March 2023, her request to continue remote work due to chemotherapy was denied, and she was instead offered a private office on-site, which she declined due to shared toilet facilities that posed a health risk.

Feeling forced to apply for Critical Illness Provision (CIP), the complainant began chemotherapy on March 31, 2023. She struggled with the reduction in her summer pay, which was based on an average of previous summer hours, despite a verbal agreement that she would receive full pay for 35 hours. The complainant also found the process of getting her timesheets approved under CIP to be stressful, as she had to repeatedly remind her supervisor, Mr. O’Neill, to sign off on them.

Additionally, her application for an Adult Educator Contract, which would have better aligned with her duties and allowed for summer teaching pay, was stalled. She was also unsuccessful in her application for a Coordinator role in 2023, which she believed was influenced by discrimination due to her disability and her complaints about her working conditions.

During cross-examination, the complainant confirmed several key points, including her decision to apply for CIP and her refusal of the private office due to shared facilities. She acknowledged that her medical certificates stated she was unfit for work but argued that she had been led to believe that returning to the office was mandatory. Her former line manager, Ms. Jackman, supported her claims, testifying that there was no operational reason why the complainant could not have continued working from home.

In closing, the complainant argued that she was treated less favourably because of her disability and that no reasonable accommodation was provided. She contended that the respondent’s handling of her sick pay was both disingenuous and discriminatory, and that her non-selection for the Coordinator role was an act of victimization related to her complaints.

Summary of the respondent’s Case:

Preliminary Matter

The respondent argued that the complainant's complaint to the WRC, filed on October 20, 2023, only covers incidents between April 21, 2023, and October 20, 2023. Issues outside this period are time-barred. The complainant had sought legal advice before filing the complaint, and ignorance of the law is not an excuse.

Testimony of Mr. O’Neill

Mr. O’Neill learned of the complainant's illness in January 2023 and allowed her to work from home. On March 13, 2023, a directive required all staff to return to the office by April 1, 2023. Mr. O’Neill tried to find a suitable office for the complainant but did not instruct her to take sick leave or apply for CIP. He stated that payroll approvals could be simplified if the complainant shared her PIN, with no GDPR concerns. There were no issues with her performance, but no work-from-home policy was in place. He did not receive any formal accommodation requests.

Testimony of Ms. Bolger

Ms. Bolger confirmed the complainant opted for an 'unqualified teacher' contract and was not directed otherwise. She did not receive any requests for reasonable accommodation and noted that working from home was facilitated temporarily. The complainant was informed she did not secure the Co-ordinator role after coming third in the selection process. Ms. Bolger stated that working from home was considered case-by-case, and the complainant’s request was unsupported by medical documentation.

Testimony of Ms. McGrath

Ms. McGrath was informed in March 2023 of the complainant's diagnosis and that she was still working. CIP was approved, as the complainant was unfit for work. HR received no recommendations for reasonable accommodation from Medmark. The respondent introduced a blended working policy in March 2024. Ms. McGrath stated that the complainant’s pay reduction during her absence was correct and consistent with HR practices. She denied that HR had any responsibility to seek clarification from the complainant’s GP regarding accommodation needs.

Closing Submission

The respondent summarized their arguments, stating that some complaints fall outside the cognizable period and are therefore statute-barred. They refuted claims of discrimination and victimization, arguing that the complainant, being unfit for work since March 27, 2023, could not be provided reasonable accommodation. While acknowledging the complainant was promised 35 resource hours over the summer, HR had not authorized this. However, the respondent agreed to honour this commitment, owing the complainant €2,432.52 gross.

Findings and Conclusion

The complainant believed she was entitled to six months of full pay at her hourly rates—15 hours at the teaching rate and 20 hours at the lower resource rate—during her sick leave. She initially received this amount, but it was reduced on June 1, 2023, for the summer break to 24 hours at the lower resource rate.

The Adjudicator found that the full rate was not due during the summer months, so this part of the complaint is not valid.

However, the respondent admitted that the complainant should have been paid for 35 hours at the lower resource rate instead of 24 hours from June 5 to August 25, 2024. They agreed to pay the difference, amounting to €2,432.52, which the complainant accepted. The Adjudicator found this reduction in hours was an unlawful deduction under the 1991 Act. Therefore, I direct the respondent to compensate the complainant with €2,432.52.

Decision

Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 required the Adjudicator to decide in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.

Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 required the Adjudicator to decide in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under s 82 of the Act.

CA-00059520-001

The Adjudicator decided the claim of discrimination and the claim of victimisation under the Employment Equality Acts, 1998-2015 are not well-founded.

CA-00059520-002

The Adjudicator decided the claim under the Payment of Wages Act, 1991 is well-founded in part. They directed the respondent to pay the complainant compensation of €2,432.52.

Our Commentary:

Employers are strongly urged to acquire a thorough understanding of the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015, with particular emphasis on their legal obligations to prevent discrimination against individuals with disabilities and any subsequent victimization. It is imperative to recognize that the term 'disability' encompasses a wide range of conditions, including physical, mental, and psychological impairments, and that this inclusive definition is integrated into all organizational policies.

Employers are advised to proactively provide reasonable accommodations to employees with disabilities, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on the organisation operations. Additionally, maintaining comprehensive and contemporaneous records of all decisions pertaining to employment practices is of paramount importance, particularly those concerning promotions, remuneration adjustments, and accommodations.

It is further recommended that employers implement regular training programs for all staff members, including management, on anti-discrimination legislation and the organization's commitment to fostering an equitable and inclusive workplace environment. In the event of any allegations of discrimination, employers are obligated to respond promptly and thoroughly, ensuring meticulous documentation of all actions undertaken.

Finally, it is incumbent upon employers to ensure that all employment practices, including promotions and salary reviews, are conducted in a fair and transparent manner, based solely on objective criteria that are entirely unrelated to any form of disability.

Parent’s Leave To Increase from Seven to Nine Week

The Parent's Leave & Benefit Act 2019 provides for leave to those relevant parents eligible under the Act. 

Parent’s Leave Benefit is a payment for people in employment who meet the eligibility criteria to allow them to take time off work to care for their child.

• This leave may be taken any time in the first 24 months after they were born.
• Parent's Leave Benefit leave must be taken in minimum blocks of at least one week.
• These weeks can be combined up to a maximum of seven weeks depending on their circumstances.
• You must apply for Parent’s Benefit within six months of taking your Parent’s leave.

From August 2024:

• Parent’s Leave & Benefit will increase from 7 weeks to 9 weeks for children born or adopted after 1 August 2024.
• The additional two weeks of Parent's Leave applies to children who are under the age of 2 in August 2024, or adoptive children who have been placed with their parents for less than two years in August 2024.

Actions For Organisations to take:

• Update future employment contracts
• Update Organisation handbook and policy documents
• Notify all Employees on update in legislation.

Join Adare's HR Workshop on 25 September!

What are your key HR priorities for 2025? See how your organisation compares with industry benchmarks in attracting, retaining and engaging employees.

The HR Barometer Survey 8.2 provides expert insight, highlights, trends and identifies the key HR challenges and priorities currently facing employers to support your strategic HR planning into 2025.

To launch the newest version of Adare's HR Barometer Survey 8.2, you are invited to join Adare on 25 September where they will be holding in person workshop in The Clayton Hotel, Sir John Rogerson Quay and discussing the latest findings in the HR Barometer Survey 8.2.

The workshop will be conducted by Adare's HR experts with each topic being carefully selected based upon the results of the HR Barometer survey 8.2.

To join Adare, please complete the 7 minute survey which you can find here.