Blog Layout

Part Time to Full Time


Part Time to Full Time

Can a part time employee be forced to work full time?


Ordinarily, no. A part time employee is usually entitled to remain a part time employee on the hours for which they were originally contracted. The contract of employment may contain a clause which refer to the amendment of working terms and conditions, but it would be most usual for an employer to be permitted to significantly change the working hours of an employee without their consultation and consent.


Part Time to Full Time - Changes under Irish Employment Law


An interesting case recently came before the Labour Court, on appeal from the Workplace Relations Commission, which examined some of the legal formalities to be completed when moving an employee from a part-time to a full-time position.


The complainant, Ms Mary Twohill, commenced employment with the respondent company, Windzor Pharma Ireland Limited, on 02 April 2018. The complainant’s contract noted that she would work 20 hours per week and that her salary would amount to €2,334 per month.


Approximately a hear later, on 23 May 2019, the complainant received a letter from the respondent company noting that they now required an individual to undertaker her role on a full-time basis.


The complainant protested but was ultimately dismissed on 30 June 2019.


The Workplace Relations Commission found that the complainant had been unfairly dismissed and awarded her €14,000 in compensation. The respondent company asserted that this award was not reasonable under the circumstances.


Part Time to Full Time - Mitigating Circumstances


The respondent company noted that they had made every possible attempt to retain the employee once the role had become a full-time position. They noted that the complainant was offered a full-time role or an alternative role on a commission only basis.


The respondent company also pointed out that the contract of employment clearly anticipated that the role may change to a full-time role as the company developed.


The Unfair Dismissals Act, at Section 1, notes that a dismissal in relation to an employee means “the termination by his employer of the employee’s contract of employment with the employer, whether prior notice of the termination was or was not given to the employee”. Section 6 of the Unfair Dismissals Act notes that “in determining for the purposes of this Act whether the dismissal of an employee was an unfair dismissal or not, it shall be for the employer to show that the dismissal was wholly or mainly from one or more of the matters specified in Sub-Section 4 of this Section or that there were other substantial grounds justifying the dismissal”.


Part Time to Full Time - Unfair Dismissal


The Labour Court held that there were not substantial grounds justifying the dismissal of the complainant in this instance.


The Labour Court noted that there was no substantial engagement with the complainant prior to the issuance of the letter, which noted that her role would be terminated.


The Labour Court noted that the contract of employment provided that “the company may require you to vary the pattern of your working hours if required on a temporary or permanent basis should the need of this post require this”. However, the Labour Court noted that, on plain reading of the contract of employment, it is clear that the changes relate to the pattern of working rather than the quantum of hours contractually required.


Furthermore, the Labour Court noted that, at no point was it argued by the respondent company that the part-time position was redundant.


Part Time to Full Time - Process and Procedure


Based on all of the evidence before it, the Labour Court concluded that the respondent company followed no discernible procedure in arriving at the decision to dismiss the complainant and furthermore offered the complainant no avenue of appeal of that decision. In those circumstances, the Labour Court concluded that the conduct of the respondent company in relation to the dismissal was unreasonable, thereby affirming the order of compensation made by the Workplace Relations Commission to the complainant.


Further Information


For further information, please contact the author of this article, Barry Crushell.


Share

Remote  work laws in Ireland
by RG343171 16 Aug, 2024
The case of Aline Karabko v TikTok Technology Ltd (ADJ-00051600) examines the obligations employers have, under Irish law, when a request for remote work is made by an employee. As the law in Ireland currently stands, there is no right to remote work per se. This may be overcome when an individual has been guaranteed remote work in their contract of employment or remote work has been determined to constitute a reasonable accommodation in accordance with relevant employment legislation, where applicable. However, none of these exceptions applied in the present case.
Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act
09 Aug, 2024
The case of Dean Hart v Komfort Kare (ADJ00051923) examines the circumstances under which a request for time off, by a parent, from their employer, must be given due consideration. Dean Hart (the Complainant) brought a complaint under Section 18 of the Parental Leave Act 1998 against Komfort Kare (the Respondent) to the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC), alleging that they denied him the right to take force majeure despite extenuating circumstances.
Constructive Dismissal and Sexual Harassment
31 Jul, 2024
The case of Care Worker v Costern Unlimited Company (ADJ00046268) examines the circumstances under which it will be deemed reasonable for an employee to resign and bring a claim of unfair dismissal by way of constructive dismissal on foot of a failure of their employer to properly investigate their complaints.
Payment of notice pay after probation
06 Jun, 2024
The case of Eric Bentley v Carcharger EV Limited (ADJ00050468) examines the circumstances under which an employee will be entitled to a payment in lieu of notice if dismissed during their probationary period. This is a very interesting case, as it was brought under the payment of wages provisions, but decided upon under notice legislation.
Interview discrimination
05 Jun, 2024
The case of A Job Applicant v A Public Body (ADJ00049321) examines the burden of proof in discrimination claims, particularly when discrimination is being claimed at the interview stage.
The Burden of Proof in Constructive Dismissal Claims in Ireland
03 Jun, 2024
The case of Mark Lowry v JJ Fleming and Company Limited (ADJ00036677) examines the burden of proof issues that often arise in constructive dismissal claims. Uniquely, the employer offered no substantive evidence to support their case, yet won, highlighting the very difficult hurdles an employee often faces in bringing an unfair dismissal claim following their resignation.
Show More
Share by: