WHAT TO KEEP AN EYE OUT FOR…
Barman Awarded €6,500 over forced Retirement at Airport
The company that operates Knock airport has been ordered to pay €6,500 in a discrimination case to a veteran barman at the airport.
This follows the Labour Court finding that the firm, Connaught Airport Development Co Ltd, discriminated against John Glavey on age grounds when forcing him to retire at the age of 65.
Mr Glavey had worked at the airport as a senior bartender since 1991.
On behalf of Mr Glavey, Martina Weir of SIPTU told the hearing that Mr Glavey was fit and well and had no difficulty carrying out the duties associated with his job.
Ms Weir pointed out that the Government has increased the age for receipt of the State pension to 66 years and as a result there is a requirement on those between 65 and 66 years to be available for work.
“Therefore there can be no justifiable objective reason for the airport firm’s decision to place Mr Glavey in such a position, and no legitimate aim or objective, can be served which could not be achieved by allowing Mr Glavey to remain until he reaches 66 years,” she said.
Mr Weir also argued that Mr Glavey’s contract of employment did not contain a retirement age. She also pointed out that Mr Glavey was one of a few staff who held a 39-hour per week contract of employment, whereas new recruits were on temporary and/or part-time contracts.
Human resources manager at the airport, Eoin Flanagan, said that while the airport did not have a policy on retirement age, the custom and practice had been that all employees retire at 65.
In its ruling, the Labour Court ruled that it cannot accept that Mr Glavey had knowledge of a retirement age of 65 years.
Government approves priority Drafting of Legislation to address problems caused by the increased casualisation of work and to strengthen the regulation of precarious work
The Government has approved draft legislative proposals brought forward by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Mary Mitchell O’Connor TD, and the Minister for Employment and Small Business, Pat Breen TD, in response to the commitment in the Programme for Government to address problems caused by the increased casualisation of work and to strengthen the regulation of precarious work. The draft proposals, which address zero hour contracts, low hour contracts, banded hours and related matters, are targeted at low-paid workers in particular.
The proposals address the issue of employees on low hour contracts who consistently work more hours each week but whose contracts do not reflect the reality of their hours worked. The proposals also seek to ensure that employees are better informed about the nature of their employment arrangements and their core terms at an early stage in their employment. They include provisions aimed particularly at low-paid, more vulnerable workers. The proposals also include an amendment to the Organisation of Working Time Act which will prohibit zero hour contracts in most circumstances.
The Ministers’ proposals were informed by the University of Limerick study on zero hour contracts and low hour contracts as well as the extensive material and practical examples provided by Respondents to the public consultation on that study conducted by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.
The draft legislation will now be referred to the Office of the Attorney General for priority drafting of a Bill.
Core Issues being addressed by the draft proposals:
Disabled Employee gets compensation after recordings of him shared for Colleagues' Amusement
A store manager at a retail chain shared three videos of a disabled Employee at work on a staff ‘WhatsApp’ group for the amusement of colleagues.
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has ordered that the Irish-owned Mr Price Branded Bargains pay €7,500 in compensation to the Employee in a discrimination case brought by the man under the Employment Equality Act.
The Sales Assistant's disability arises from a road traffic accident in 2004 where he sustained an acquired brain injury resulting in reduced motor skills.
On becoming aware on December 1 2015 of the circulated video on a WhatsApp group at work, the un-named worker became traumatised and had to go on work-related stress leave and hasn't returned to work since.
The Adjudication Officer in the case, Ray Flaherty, found that three video recordings of the man at work were shared by the shop manager with staff "who had no operational need or entitlement to review the material". Mr Flaherty stated that it was also clear from the footage "that the recordings of the complainant gave rise to some merriment among those who were viewing it".
Mr Flaherty found that it was clear "that not only was the Complainant discriminated against on the grounds of his disability, but his basic right, and that of any Employee, able or disabled, to the provision of dignity at work was seriously undermined".
The company that operates Knock airport has been ordered to pay €6,500 in a discrimination case to a veteran barman at the airport.
This follows the Labour Court finding that the firm, Connaught Airport Development Co Ltd, discriminated against John Glavey on age grounds when forcing him to retire at the age of 65.
Mr Glavey had worked at the airport as a senior bartender since 1991.
On behalf of Mr Glavey, Martina Weir of SIPTU told the hearing that Mr Glavey was fit and well and had no difficulty carrying out the duties associated with his job.
Ms Weir pointed out that the Government has increased the age for receipt of the State pension to 66 years and as a result there is a requirement on those between 65 and 66 years to be available for work.
“Therefore there can be no justifiable objective reason for the airport firm’s decision to place Mr Glavey in such a position, and no legitimate aim or objective, can be served which could not be achieved by allowing Mr Glavey to remain until he reaches 66 years,” she said.
Mr Weir also argued that Mr Glavey’s contract of employment did not contain a retirement age. She also pointed out that Mr Glavey was one of a few staff who held a 39-hour per week contract of employment, whereas new recruits were on temporary and/or part-time contracts.
Human resources manager at the airport, Eoin Flanagan, said that while the airport did not have a policy on retirement age, the custom and practice had been that all employees retire at 65.
In its ruling, the Labour Court ruled that it cannot accept that Mr Glavey had knowledge of a retirement age of 65 years.
Government approves priority Drafting of Legislation to address problems caused by the increased casualisation of work and to strengthen the regulation of precarious work
The Government has approved draft legislative proposals brought forward by the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, Mary Mitchell O’Connor TD, and the Minister for Employment and Small Business, Pat Breen TD, in response to the commitment in the Programme for Government to address problems caused by the increased casualisation of work and to strengthen the regulation of precarious work. The draft proposals, which address zero hour contracts, low hour contracts, banded hours and related matters, are targeted at low-paid workers in particular.
The proposals address the issue of employees on low hour contracts who consistently work more hours each week but whose contracts do not reflect the reality of their hours worked. The proposals also seek to ensure that employees are better informed about the nature of their employment arrangements and their core terms at an early stage in their employment. They include provisions aimed particularly at low-paid, more vulnerable workers. The proposals also include an amendment to the Organisation of Working Time Act which will prohibit zero hour contracts in most circumstances.
The Ministers’ proposals were informed by the University of Limerick study on zero hour contracts and low hour contracts as well as the extensive material and practical examples provided by Respondents to the public consultation on that study conducted by the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation.
The draft legislation will now be referred to the Office of the Attorney General for priority drafting of a Bill.
Core Issues being addressed by the draft proposals:
- Ensuring that workers are better informed about the nature of their employment arrangements and in particular their core terms at an early stage of their employment.
- Strengthening the provisions around minimum payments to low-paid, vulnerable workers who may be called in to work for a period but not provided with that work.
- Prohibiting zero hour’s contracts, except in cases of genuine casual work or emergency cover or short-term relief work for that employer.
- Ensuring that workers on low hour contracts who consistently work more hours each week than provided for in their contracts of employment, are entitled to be placed in a band of hours that reflects the reality of the hours they have worked over an extended period.
- Strengthen the anti-victimisation provisions for employees who try to invoke a right under these proposals.
Disabled Employee gets compensation after recordings of him shared for Colleagues' Amusement
A store manager at a retail chain shared three videos of a disabled Employee at work on a staff ‘WhatsApp’ group for the amusement of colleagues.
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has ordered that the Irish-owned Mr Price Branded Bargains pay €7,500 in compensation to the Employee in a discrimination case brought by the man under the Employment Equality Act.
The Sales Assistant's disability arises from a road traffic accident in 2004 where he sustained an acquired brain injury resulting in reduced motor skills.
On becoming aware on December 1 2015 of the circulated video on a WhatsApp group at work, the un-named worker became traumatised and had to go on work-related stress leave and hasn't returned to work since.
The Adjudication Officer in the case, Ray Flaherty, found that three video recordings of the man at work were shared by the shop manager with staff "who had no operational need or entitlement to review the material". Mr Flaherty stated that it was also clear from the footage "that the recordings of the complainant gave rise to some merriment among those who were viewing it".
Mr Flaherty found that it was clear "that not only was the Complainant discriminated against on the grounds of his disability, but his basic right, and that of any Employee, able or disabled, to the provision of dignity at work was seriously undermined".
