[241]

Ok, maybe someone can advise me on this. It has been bugging me for a while and i do not know where to find out info on this.

I have been working with a private Engineering Consultancy Firm for 5 years.

When I started employment I was given a 1 page contract stating that I was employed as a Graduate Engineer, my salary and my start date.

Other terms and conditions etc. were contained within the employee handbook.

In terms of the employee handbook, this stated that staff below Project Manager Level were to work 38 hour week, Project Managers were expected to work 50-60 hour week.

Additional work outside of theses hours were to be agreed with Project Manager and that staff would be compensated either by Overtime or by Time in Lieu.

In terms of pay increases, the employee handbook stated that this would be discussed during annual review and that payment of same was dependent on the profitability of the company.

Since the recession, the employer has reduced wages by 10% (some persons have experienced larger pay cuts). However, this was done through a group meeting (Section by Section) and staff were told that it would be necessary to cut wages by 10%. This was done in 2008/2009. No individual meetings with staff to discuss pay cuts was undertaken. However, on entering the meeting, all staff were asked to sign an attendance sheet so they had a record of who they discussed the situation with.

Following this, the company have stopped payment of overtime and also receipt of Time in Lieu of additional time worked over the minimum requirement.

My first question is simply this, as an Engineer, am I entitled to be compensated for time worked outside of core hours? (At present we are working more than the minimum and receiving nothing in return).

Second question - Was the employer entitled to cut my wages without discussing on an individual basis?

Someone has told me that Engineers are not usually employed under the standard terms of employment and that as an engineer we are expected to put in whatever hours are necessary. This does not seem right to me but if it is true, i think it is time for a change of occupation.

If anyone can advise me or direct me to someone who can, it would be greatly appreciated.

[Procrastastudy]

Look at the NERA website and join a union.

[nuac]

Any engineering consultancy that has been able to survive and keep jobs on just an across the board 10% wage cut is doing well

[Procrastastudy]

Also if you're working under 50 hours a week you're also doing well!

[godtabh]

This happened to me in 2009/2010

We were brought into a meeting and told that every one was taking a 10% pay cut. Expense across the board were being cut. Any travel expenses exceeding €60 had to be approved by a director first. Some people were put on a 3 day week. Very pain full.

The alternative was redundancy.

Your options are the same. Agree to the new conditions which you have by continuing to work as you have. Or redundancy. If you are lucky enough to have a job in a civil engineering company I know what I would be advising you.

In saying that we got everything in writing. The length of the 10% pay cut/3 day week. The pay at which redundancy would be calculated etc

[godtabh]

Originally Posted by Procrastastudy

Look at the NERA website and join a union.

I dont get this attitude.

Why is the first call always to get a solicitor/join a union/agitate the situation? Why not speak to your employers first?

[Procrastastudy]

Because I don't see unions - run properly - as a negative. I was also trying to resist the urge to pontificate (which failed me in my next post ) and simply pointed to a source for info the OP requested.

[jblack]

Originally Posted by godtabh

This happened to me in 2009/2010

We were brought into a meeting and told that every one was taking a 10% pay cut. Expense across the board were being cut. Any travel expenses exceeding €60 had to be approved by a director first. Some people were put on a 3 day week. Very pain full.

The alternative was redundancy.

Your options are the same. Agree to the new conditions which you have by continuing to work as you have. Or redundancy. If you are lucky enough to have a job in a civil engineering company I know what I would be advising you.

In saying that we got everything in writing. The length of the 10% pay cut/3 day week. The pay at which redundancy would be calculated etc

While speaking to your employer may be seen as the most amicable way to conduct such an enquiry this may also not be practical. Seeing as you are looking for specific legal advice without giving specifics, which are required in detail for advice on such a matter, then the only advice that can be given is for you to see a solicitor or contact NERA if you cannot talk to your employer.

I find it difficult to understand how legal advice is given on the basis of someone's personal experience in their own matter. Your options may well extend beyond "take it or get made redundant."

[241]

First of all thanks for the replies.

Secondly, as far as i am aware, most unions will only accept Construction Trade Professionals (i.e working for a contractor) not consultants, but I may be wrong.

Secondly, the 10% cut was not all that happened. Some staff were subjected to 20% others more, depending on their income. But the majority that received the cuts, received them on a wage that was above their initial contract.

A small few of us (4-5) never received a pay increase so therefore our wages are now below our contract salary - Which i understand cannot be done as there is a contract in place.

Thirdly, in addition to this, the employer put the majority of staff on 3 day week. This would mean the staff member would be required to work 60% of there 40 hour week (3 out of five days).

However, for those on 5 day week, with overtime they could be working close to their 40 hour week over three days, do not receive overtime, do not receive time in lieu and are then dependant on social. This cannot be legal that a company who deems the industry to be quite et. al. that we end up working the same amount of hours, do not get paid for additional hours over and above the 3/5 of the contract hours and have to rely on the tax payer to make up the shortfall when we claim on social!

Furthermore, those that have been kept on 5 day are kept on 5 day while busy then put on 3 day when quite without the required months notice. While on 5 day (i.e. when it is busy) these same staff members may work overtime also, do not receive payment for additional hours worked, do not receive time in lieu. So in fact, over the year, these staff members may work close to their full contract hours, but are only being paid a portion of their salary. Similar to above, these staff have to claim social for the time they are on 3 day week!

I agree with the comments that i am lucky to be in a job, I like my work but believe that (a) not being paid/given time in lieu for overtime is unfair and cannot be legal and (b) expecting staff to rely on social for reduced working hours and being a further burden on the economy is wrong.

I suppose what i am asking is, (a) am I, as a consultant engineer, entitled to compensation, either payment or time in lieu, for overtime worked regardless of whether we are working a 3 day week or 5 day week?

With regards to Gotabh's comment about discussing with the employer first, if we do this we run the risk of being made redundant.

I have heard of the same situation in engineering companies in the last number of years, but surely this cannot be legal!

[seavill]

Originally Posted by 241

My first question is simply this, as an Engineer, am I entitled to be compensated for time worked outside of core hours? (At present we are working more than the minimum and receiving nothing in return).

Second question - Was the employer entitled to cut my wages without discussing on an individual basis?

To be honest had your entire post been this length above I would have thought you were definitely trolling purely by those two questions, however considering the length of your posts you are obviously genuine.

Now I am not trolling by my response here, but in relation to your first question you do realise that this is basically what the entire country is doing. I would say that you would struggle to find anyone that strictly works their contracted hours any more. Overtime is now seen as standard, expected without being asked.

In relation to the second question company's generally do not discuss pay reductions with staff individually, in larger companies this would obviously take too long, look at the public sector imagine how long this would take, this is where unions come in really company can then deal with one union speaking on behalf of their staff. I do think it is unrealistic to expect a company that needs to make cuts to discuss individually with each staff member and agree terms with each.

[jblack]

Originally Posted by seavill

To be honest had your entire post been this length above I would have thought you were definitely trolling purely by those two questions, however considering the length of your posts you are obviously genuine.

Now I am not trolling by my response here, but in relation to your first question you do realise that this is basically what the entire country is doing. I would say that you would struggle to find anyone that strictly works their contracted hours any more. Overtime is now seen as standard, expected without being asked.

In relation to the second question company's generally do not discuss pay reductions with staff individually, in larger companies this would obviously take too long, look at the public sector imagine how long this would take, this is where unions come in really company can then deal with one union speaking on behalf of their staff. I do think it is unrealistic to expect a company that needs to make cuts to discuss individually with each staff member and agree terms with each.

The OP has sought the legality of what has happened and with regard to an original agreement with the employer. What is happening with the rest of the country has no relevance legally if there is an agreement in place.

With regards to reductions, companies regardless of size are required by statute to consult with employees regarding proposed alterations to their employment terms. What the above poster thinks is unrealistic is in fact an obligation on the employer.

[seavill]

Originally Posted by jblack

The OP has sought the legality of what has happened and with regard to an original agreement with the employer. What is happening with the rest of the country has no relevance legally if there is an agreement in place.

With regards to reductions, companies regardless of size are required by statute to consult with employees regarding proposed alterations to their employment terms. What the above poster thinks is unrealistic is in fact an obligation on the employer.

Although my post was not going into legalities of the situation there were a few other posts of shorter lengths saying similar things.

My post was more legality v reality. Although there may be specific legal routes to take in this situation like to demand your individual meeting like Others have pointed out the reality of work today in Ireland is as important to consider as the legal aspects. I am referencing posts like numbers 3&4 here

[241]

Thanks to everyone, your comments have been helpful. I was just trying to get things straight in my head

[Procrastastudy]

In all honesty OP - I'd just keep my head down and keep the job. When things pick up then rock the boat. It's very likely you can't join a union - the reason I believe they can be a positive influence, however, is because if you stand up for your rights individually you can guarantee you'll be the guy that gets made redundant.

Maybe some diplomatic overtures to your line manager and see where that gets you - careful though. Good luck - and remember this recession wont go on forever - will it?