WHAT TO KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR…
Section 39 Employer Required to Pay Increments
Whilst noting funding challenge faced by a ‘section 39’ Employer, the Labour Court has recommended the re-instatement of increments to be paid by the Employer. The Labour Court in making this recommendation noted that the funding authority, the HSE, has previously supported the resolution of similar issues in other similar employers.
The dispute concerned a claim for payment of increments by SIPTU at North West Parents & Friends. The Employer provides person centred services for children and adults with special needs and their families.
At the hearing, SIPTU claimed that the workers were entitled to be paid salary increments in line with their peers in the HSE. The Employer advised that the Organisation could not afford to pay the increments given a reduction in funding from the HSE, similar to other non – statutory Organisations which are under Section 39 – Health Act 2004.
Whilst expressing “considerable sympathy” with the employer “who finds itself in an unsatisfactory situation influenced largely by its funding authority” the Labour Court “noted the agreed alignment with HSE and therefore an entitlement of the staff concerned to the pay increments.
Arravasc Limited V Gerard Cahill
What Constitutes as a Disability under the Employment Equality Acts
The case of Arravasc Limited v Gerard Cahill as provided some clarity in relation to what constitutes as a disability under Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015.
Gerard Cahill, an agency worker, worked with Arravasc Limited from October 2014 until July 2015 when he suffered a heart attack at home. His wife contacted the Organisation notifying them of the situation and a medical certificate was submitted, indicating that it would be another 4-6 weeks before he was likely to recover.
The Organisation said that it was difficult to sustain long term absences. On 9th September 2015 the agency wrote to the Organisation and advised that they needed to receive confirmation to terminate Mr Cahill’s week to week contract. The Organisation provided this and two days later, Gerard Cahill was dismissed.
The claimant consequently took a claim under the disability ground of the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015, alleging that the company had failed to provide reasonable accommodation to him as required by the legislation. It was argued that a heart atack was not a disability as defined by the Act, and was rather a “once off event” and that it does not automatically follow that a person who suffers such is limited in their participation in work.
This was ultimately rejected by the Labour Court and they found that a heart attack was a malfunction at the material time and that it did amount to a disability. The claimant was awarded €42,000 in compensation.
Government set aside €16M for Paternity Benefit this year
The Government has set aside €16million for paternity benefit this year as it expects 20,000 applications from fathers. Social Protection Minister Leo Varadkar confirmed his Department has received 7,403 requests since the scheme was introduced last September.
The benefit is paid for up to two weeks to employed and self-employed people who satisfy certain PRSI contribution conditions. The rate is €230 per week.
However, the projected 20,000 applications – or 384 per week on average – show that more than two-thirds of fathers won’t avail of the new payment. This estimate is based on 65,909 babies born here in 2015.
To qualify applicants must satisfy social insurance contribution conditions. The scheme is available to employees paying PRSI Class A, E or H contributions and to self-employed people paying PRSI Class S contributions. Employees will need to give four weeks’ notice to their employer to qualify for the accompanying Paternity Leave.
Whilst noting funding challenge faced by a ‘section 39’ Employer, the Labour Court has recommended the re-instatement of increments to be paid by the Employer. The Labour Court in making this recommendation noted that the funding authority, the HSE, has previously supported the resolution of similar issues in other similar employers.
The dispute concerned a claim for payment of increments by SIPTU at North West Parents & Friends. The Employer provides person centred services for children and adults with special needs and their families.
At the hearing, SIPTU claimed that the workers were entitled to be paid salary increments in line with their peers in the HSE. The Employer advised that the Organisation could not afford to pay the increments given a reduction in funding from the HSE, similar to other non – statutory Organisations which are under Section 39 – Health Act 2004.
Whilst expressing “considerable sympathy” with the employer “who finds itself in an unsatisfactory situation influenced largely by its funding authority” the Labour Court “noted the agreed alignment with HSE and therefore an entitlement of the staff concerned to the pay increments.
Arravasc Limited V Gerard Cahill
What Constitutes as a Disability under the Employment Equality Acts
The case of Arravasc Limited v Gerard Cahill as provided some clarity in relation to what constitutes as a disability under Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015.
Gerard Cahill, an agency worker, worked with Arravasc Limited from October 2014 until July 2015 when he suffered a heart attack at home. His wife contacted the Organisation notifying them of the situation and a medical certificate was submitted, indicating that it would be another 4-6 weeks before he was likely to recover.
The Organisation said that it was difficult to sustain long term absences. On 9th September 2015 the agency wrote to the Organisation and advised that they needed to receive confirmation to terminate Mr Cahill’s week to week contract. The Organisation provided this and two days later, Gerard Cahill was dismissed.
The claimant consequently took a claim under the disability ground of the Employment Equality Acts 1998-2015, alleging that the company had failed to provide reasonable accommodation to him as required by the legislation. It was argued that a heart atack was not a disability as defined by the Act, and was rather a “once off event” and that it does not automatically follow that a person who suffers such is limited in their participation in work.
This was ultimately rejected by the Labour Court and they found that a heart attack was a malfunction at the material time and that it did amount to a disability. The claimant was awarded €42,000 in compensation.
Government set aside €16M for Paternity Benefit this year
The Government has set aside €16million for paternity benefit this year as it expects 20,000 applications from fathers. Social Protection Minister Leo Varadkar confirmed his Department has received 7,403 requests since the scheme was introduced last September.
The benefit is paid for up to two weeks to employed and self-employed people who satisfy certain PRSI contribution conditions. The rate is €230 per week.
However, the projected 20,000 applications – or 384 per week on average – show that more than two-thirds of fathers won’t avail of the new payment. This estimate is based on 65,909 babies born here in 2015.
To qualify applicants must satisfy social insurance contribution conditions. The scheme is available to employees paying PRSI Class A, E or H contributions and to self-employed people paying PRSI Class S contributions. Employees will need to give four weeks’ notice to their employer to qualify for the accompanying Paternity Leave.
