Call Us 016111546
Blog Layout
Right to Claim Redundancy Suspended (Again)
Suspension of Redundancy Rights
The Irish Government, on 24 November 2020, announced yet another extension of certain provisions which preclude an employee from claiming redundancy from their employer, if they have been temporarily laid off, or placed on short-time work, for an extended period. It was expected that the suspension of these rights would expire on 30 November 2020. However, the Government has announced an additional extension of the relevant provisions, until 31 March 2021.
Statement by Tánaiste
The Tánaiste said:
"I want to acknowledge how difficult this year has been for businesses and their staff. I know this news will be really disappointing for some staff who were hoping to take redundancy before the end of the year. This was a really difficult decision for the government to make and not one which was taken lightly. It was taken in the best interests of society as whole in order to avoid the triggering of further business failures and job losses.
"We know that the first quarter of 2021 will be particularly challenging for many businesses which apart from dealing with considerable trading difficulties due to COVID-19 will also be facing the added disruption and uncertainty of Brexit. We want to help businesses to survive this period so that we can protect as many jobs as possible and get people back to work as soon as it is safe to do so."
Lay-off and Redundancy Rights
Section 12 of the Redundancy Payments Act provides that an employee on lay-off or on short-time hours, for 4 weeks or more, or 6 weeks in the previous 13 weeks, can claim redundancy from their employer.
The Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (COVID-19) Act suspends that right during the emergency period:
Section 12 shall not have effect during the emergency period in respect of an employee who has been laid off or kept on short-time due to the effects of measures required to be taken by his or her employer in order to comply with, or as a consequence of, Government policy to prevent, limit, minimise or slow the spread of infection of Covid-19.
The emergency period was originally
defined as that period beginning on 13 March 2020 and ending on 31 May 2020.
This change does not prevent an employer from making an employee redundant, but does prevent an employee from asserting their right to redundancy.
Share
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
Contact Us
For a preliminary assessment of your legal matter, please complete the form below. We will be in contact to advise of your potential options and schedule a consultation.
Find Us
Crushell & Co
1 Arran Square
Dublin D07 PA0D
7 Bell Yard
London WC2A 2JR
Legal Notice
*In contentious business, a solicitor may not calculate fees or other charges as a percentage or proportion of any award or settlement.