Thank you. This new law so very well explained by you, would appear to benefit and restore some dignity and moral value to the employee. Hitherto, I think, employers including corporations, viewed human beings as NOT born to be free, but to serve as productive units for self serving and self interested groups . Perhaps, this new law will, encourage the noveau riche Irish Oligarchs to take note.
Looking through the S.I., it's almost entirely made of declarations of amendments to Acts of the Oireachtas. We settled this matter back in the 1990s, when the Supreme Court gave judgements in Meagher v. Minister for Agriculture. Statutory instruments cannot contravene any provision of the Constitution. Amending the law contravenes Article 15 except in the highly limited circumstances where "having regard to the number of community laws, acts done and measures adopted which either have to be facilitated in their direct application to the law of the State or have to be implemented by appropriate action into the law of the State, the obligation of membership would necessitate facilitating of these activities, in some instances, at least, and possibly in a great majority of instances, by the making of ministerial regulations rather than legislation of the Oireachtas." So long as the Oireachtas can pass an annual European Communities (Omnibus) bill without reading it, there's no practical or technical necessity for transposing directives into law by ministerial action. The Oireachtas is not _that_ busy. Therefore, exercises of the section 3 power that purport to amend statute law are _always_ ultra vires. I keep waiting for the other boot to drop on this rather important constitutional crisis in waiting. I just hope that the Government wises up to the danger before someone successfully challenges a s. 3 regulation on lack-of-necessity grounds. A statutory instrument like 686/2022 is just the kind of thing, because it is likely to aggrieve unscrupulous employers who would like to evade responsibility for mistreating employees, and don't mind raising hell to do it.
@TerryGorry where does the statute book give the details of what exceptions to probation extensions look like? That clause would seem to negate the purpose of the regulation no?
@TerryGorry Hi. please help me. these days I was called to a work meeting, where I was informed that I did not pass the probationary period and without any reason I was dismissed from the workplace, the reason being that I did not pass the probationary period which was extended 3 months after the 6 months that were already consumed and I mention that I was not notified, informed that the probation period was extended, thinking that I was already no longer on probation. Also recently, the company issued me a salary certificate for a bank loan where they stipulated in black and white that I am permanently employed and at the section (has employed has completed his/her probationary period) where it was marked YES. I am very confused, and disappointed 😞
Another very useful and informative video on Employment Law. Thanks Terry!
Thank you.
This new law so very well explained by you, would appear to benefit and restore some dignity and moral value to the employee. Hitherto, I think, employers including corporations, viewed human beings as NOT born to be free, but to serve as productive units for self serving and self interested groups .
Perhaps, this new law will, encourage the noveau riche Irish Oligarchs to take note.
Seems like a positive change to me. Gives more clarity to employees and forces employers to be more organised
Looking through the S.I., it's almost entirely made of declarations of amendments to Acts of the Oireachtas. We settled this matter back in the 1990s, when the Supreme Court gave judgements in Meagher v. Minister for Agriculture. Statutory instruments cannot contravene any provision of the Constitution. Amending the law contravenes Article 15 except in the highly limited circumstances where "having regard to the number of community laws, acts done and measures adopted which either have to be facilitated in their direct application to the law of the State or have to be implemented by appropriate action into the law of the State, the obligation of membership would necessitate facilitating of these activities, in some instances, at least, and possibly in a great majority of instances, by the making of ministerial regulations rather than legislation of the Oireachtas." So long as the Oireachtas can pass an annual European Communities (Omnibus) bill without reading it, there's no practical or technical necessity for transposing directives into law by ministerial action. The Oireachtas is not _that_ busy. Therefore, exercises of the section 3 power that purport to amend statute law are _always_ ultra vires. I keep waiting for the other boot to drop on this rather important constitutional crisis in waiting. I just hope that the Government wises up to the danger before someone successfully challenges a s. 3 regulation on lack-of-necessity grounds. A statutory instrument like 686/2022 is just the kind of thing, because it is likely to aggrieve unscrupulous employers who would like to evade responsibility for mistreating employees, and don't mind raising hell to do it.
All those Act numbers and dates are too much for an early rise on a Saturday!😶🌫️💤🛌
Come on! Get out of that scratcher and dive into the activitirs of life.🏋
@TerryGorry where does the statute book give the details of what exceptions to probation extensions look like? That clause would seem to negate the purpose of the regulation no?
@TerryGorry Hi. please help me. these days I was called to a work meeting, where I was informed that I did not pass the probationary period and without any reason I was dismissed from the workplace, the reason being that I did not pass the probationary period which was extended 3 months after the 6 months that were already consumed and I mention that I was not notified, informed that the probation period was extended, thinking that I was already no longer on probation. Also recently, the company issued me a salary certificate for a bank loan where they stipulated in black and white that I am permanently employed and at the section (has employed has completed his/her probationary period) where it was marked YES. I am very confused, and disappointed 😞
👍🏻