M
That's my understanding of how force majure should apply. It should just be for days when you have to drop everything and run with no notice, relative in a car accicent or child sick suddenly, something of that nature. It's not for days after the emergency, when you'll have had at least one day to make some arrangements.
That's how we apply it in work in circumstances like yours, the expectation would be that paid or unpaid leave would be used to cover the two next days.
Same where I work. IF force majeure didn't exist you would have had to take unpaid or annual leave.
Your child minding arrangments are of no concern to your employer.
Force Majeure Leave
This is paid leave which arises when injury or illness of a close relative (as specified in the act) makes the immediate presence of the employee indispensable.
Maximum allowance is three days in one year or five days over three consecutive years. Part of a day is counted as a full day.
All employment rights are protected during force majeure leave.
Personally I would insist on getting the three days and appeal if necessary.
Tall paul - Is this 'suddenly' requirement part of the law? I don't see any mention of it http://www.equality.ie/index.asp?locID=22&docID=-1 or http://www.citizensinformation.ie/e...ve_and_holidays/types_of_leave_from_work.html. Indeed, the legislation specifically states a maximum of three consecutive days, so why you ruling out consecutive days?
Sorry, you're right. I misread that in the rush.It doesn't state anywhere in those links complainer anything about consecutive days. So I would think FM only covers the first day.
Just to be clear, Paul - when you say 'it is not tenable', is this your view or the Rights Commissioners view or what?
Accordingly, these three criteria for Force Majeure must apply on each individual day for which FM is requested (and not just the first day). It is not tenable to suggest that while an issue that arises can continue to be 'urgent' and someone's role is 'indispensible', the claim would fall on the 'immediate' requirment. By definition something cannot be 'immediate' after a period of time has elapsed!
For this reason subsequent days are not allowed and where 'suddenly' comes into the equation..
For parents of a young child with an illness, it may well be just as difficult to arrange alternative cover on day 2 or day 3 as it is on day 1. Some people have family around to support situations like this. Some people don't.
Dont disagree with this but in the case of someone who doesnt have family around to support such situations should they not be taking those days as holidays or unpaid leave?
Sorry, you're right. I misread that in the rush.
Just to be clear, Paul - when you say 'it is not tenable', is this your view or the Rights Commissioners view or what?
For parents of a young child with an illness, it may well be just as difficult to arrange alternative cover on day 2 or day 3 as it is on day 1. Some people have family around to support situations like this. Some people don't.
'Suddenly' is not expressly mentioned in Section 13 of the Parental Leave Act but Force Majeure has been adjudicated on at various Rights Commissioner hearings. The essence of these decisions is that the three key elements of ‘urgent’, ‘immediate’, ‘indispensible’ need to be satisfied for FM to be given.
Accordingly, these three criteria for Force Majeure must apply on each individual day for which FM is requested (and not just the first day). It is not tenable to suggest that while an issue that arises can continue to be 'urgent' and someone's role is 'indispensible', the claim would fall on the 'immediate' requirment. By definition something cannot be 'immediate' after a period of time has elapsed!
For this reason subsequent days are not allowed and where 'suddenly' comes into the equation..
Dont disagree with this but in the case of someone who doesnt have family around to support such situations should they not be taking those days as holidays or unpaid leave?
I agree - unpaid leave or holidays if agreed with employers. Force Majeure is for unexpected events that prevent you going to work on a particular day. Abuse of this valuable facility should be actively discouraged!
That's the gist of Rights Commissioner rulings as I understand them but is my own wording.
Unfortunately, the care of children on second or third day and who can or cannot mind them is irrelevant as far as Force Majeure is concerned. FM is not meant to be used for such purposes.
I come back to my previous point, day 2 or day 3 is not and cannot be 'immediate'.
Why? It is the same problem as day 1? Why is this not force majeure?
Why? It is the same problem as day 1? Why is this not force majeure?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?