Force Majeure Question

liger

The law states family crisis, but then talks about illness and not much else.

I was due to go to work but my ex rang me to say that her car had broken down and she wouldnt be able to get back to collect our son (10) from school. She was actually a couple of counties away, There was nobody else to look after him and I had to ring work and tell them i wouldnt be in. They werent happy and I expect a bit of backlash.

Anybody know if this falls into "Crisis".

Thanks

amtc

Should do - I used it when my dishwasher flooded, and I had to be at home

tony81

Your ex could have paid for a taxi and sorted out the car later. In my opinion, no, that's not an emergency and you're taking advantage a little. If your work accepts your excuse that's one thing, but I'd advise you to ensure incidents like this don't become a regular occurrence.
You should offer to work up the time to smooth things over.

tony81

amtc wrote: »

Should do - I used it when my dishwasher flooded, and I had to be at home

Youre definitely taking the p155.. per citizen's information: It arises where, for urgent family reasons, the immediate presence of the employee is indispensable owing to an injury or illness of a close family member.

The washing machine does not constitute a close family member.

Eoin

That would definitely not be considered Force Majeure in my place; that'd come straight out of annual leave.

wmpdd3

Agree, when I am its anything from a car accident to a stroke to house fire.

gozunda

tony81 wrote: »

Your ex could have paid for a taxi and sorted out the car later. In my opinion, no, that's not an emergency and you're taking advantage a little. If your work accepts your excuse that's one thing, but I'd advise you to ensure incidents like this don't become a regular occurrence.
You should offer to work up the time to smooth things over.

that is a very unhelpful reply tbh - regarding a 'taxi' as you caringly suggested - ' the OP already said they the partner was 'a couple of counties away'. Force majore is just that - emergencies that can't be foreseen - how defeq would the OP "ensure that incidents like this don't become a regular occurrence'!
Offering to get down to smooth things over is ridiculous - that is what for force majore is about. - dealing with the unexpected, being fair to the employee and recognising that employees do have times when things go wrong. I really really hate this bend over BS that has become all to prevalent as a result of businesses being able to apply thumbscrews because of the current employment situation.

OP - I would suggest go in and politly explain the situation again and how this was a force majore incident. End of story.

Nody

Gozunda have you even read the relevant law?

Parental Leave Act, 1998 wrote:

13.—(1) An employee shall be entitled to leave with pay from his or her employment, to be known and referred to in this Act as “force majeure leave”, where, for urgent family reasons, owing to an injury to or the illness of a person specified in subsection (2), the immediate presence of the employee at the place where the person is, whether at his or her home or elsewhere, is indispensable.

Please share what part OPs situation falls under "owing to an injury to or the illness of a person" can be applied in the OPs case please.

gozunda

Nody wrote: »

Gozunda have you even read the relevant law?

Please share what part OPs situation falls under "owing to an injury to or the illness of a person" can be applied in the OPs case please.

I believe you have missed the essential point here that the OP had a genuine family emergency involving a child. God forbid that in the event of a child alone being at risk any parent would move heaven and earth to deal with this situation.

Ok you have stated with the relevant statute however in a real employment situation this is what genuine family emergencies are often about

even though FM as you stated technically applies to a 'drop and run' injury/illness type situation,many companies do allow employees to use it in situations which may not be classified ad absolute medical emergencies but do involve the health and safety of a child etc.

yes employers 'may' not legally be obliged to do so but I believe that is where employers still employ humans. I doubt very much Any employer would want to risk a parent taking a case against them because a child was hurt or injured because they were not able or sanctioned against in order to deal with such an unexpected event? Would you risk it as a parent? Would you risk it as an employer? I think not

Eoin

All the hand-wringing aside, understanding that a parent needs to take annual leave at short notice is more than enough IMO.

tatli_lokma

AL or leave without pay or if the facility exists, flex or TOIL. These would be the options I would offer someone in this situation. I would of course allow them time off given the circumstances, but would not permit Force majeure as there was no illness or injury at play here. Also, as an employee I would not be inclined to use FM for this, as FM leave is only 3 days in a 12mth period, or a total of 5 days over 3 years. Were someone in my family to genuinely fall sick and my presence was needed I would much rather know I had enough FM to allow me to be there. For the case of a car breakdown and an unforseen circumstance such as outlined by OP, then I would be more than happy to use AL and if that was not an option leave without pay or time off in lieu.

Also, OP you said no one would be available to collect the child from school, so why did you need to take the whole day off? And if you knew about this in the morning, surely there was someone you could have contacted to make arrangements with to help you out - you had until that afternoon to sort it. So it was not exactly an immediate emergency. You didn't need to take the whole day off. You could have at least worked a half day. Every parent I know has a few backup parents they know via the school where they can call upon them to help out in such matters. None of my mates with kids would need to take a day FM to collect a child from school - one of the other parents would be happy to collect him and take him to theirs for a few hours.

the_syco

gozunda wrote: »

I believe you have missed the essential point here that the OP had a genuine family emergency involving a child.

You seem to be missing the point where FM is for, and what holidays are for. Also, taking FM for non-FM reasons is often looked at very dimly by HR.

gozunda

the_syco wrote: »

You seem to be missing the point where FM is for, and what holidays are for. Also, taking FM for non-FM reasons is often looked at very dimly by HR.

Maybe in your experience / company. Happily not all employers implement such non flexible employee relationships. As a rejoinder many employees will look dimly at HR and a rigid application of conditions even where employees activly give over and above their own contractural requirements.

Eoin

gozunda wrote: »

Maybe in your experience / company. Happily not all employers implement such non flexible employee relationships. As a rejoinder many employees will look dimly at HR and a rigid application of conditions even where employees activly give over and above their own contractural requirements.

Allowing immediate use of annual leave is being flexible IMO.

tatli_lokma

It is more than flexible, as they could simply offer LWOP. Unforseen circumstance does not equal emergency. And FM does not have to be an emergency, it is just that your presence is required at the side of an injured or sick family member. So if god forbid someone was sick with cancer, and you knew they were dying, when the time comes that you need to be there, that is what FM is for. Or if you are the sole parent of a sick child and are needed to take care of him/her. But it is meant for serious illness - not in cases where your child or family member would be ok to be left with someone else.

In my experience, people who try to use FM as OP outlines are doing so for one of the following reasons:
- either because sick pay is not paid by the employer, try to claim that an unforseen circumstance = emergency = FM. So instead of pulling a sickie and not getting paid they claim its FM.
- Or they don't want to use their own AL, and would much rather have a few extra days at the company expense.

FM is for exceptional circumstances, not for a brokendown car and not when a half day or a few hours would have been enough and instead the employee takes a whole day off. Using FM like that is taking the p!ss and abusing the good will of the FM system. surely OP could have asked to take leave a few hours early and made back the time over the next few weeks?

To anyone who misuses FM or tries to squander away their allowance - 5 days in 3 years isn't much. If someone you love genuinely does get sick, you will have only yourself to blame if you do not have enough FM available to you.

Wanderer2010

OP, I do sympathise with your situation but I cant see any company viewing what happened as a genuine emergency as it didnt really involve the illness of a family member as such but theres nothing to say you cant pretend that that was the case, most of these companies just ask you to fill out a form and they wont probe for details and they definitely wont ask for evidence so why not just lie and say you were needed in a family emergency. Get as much as you can out of them, HR are always trying to make employees life so restricted and miserable, I say lie and hold your head up high.

Eoin

OP - obviously think through the consequences before following dodgy advice like this ^

tony81

Eoin wrote: »

OP - obviously think through the consequences before following dodgy advice like this ^

Heh, reminds me of a woman i worked with who took a FM day off work because her husband fell. Turns out her dog had puppies (a business venture btw) and she had to take one of them to the vet.

Another time she took a FM day to mind her husband's brother's children while the brother went to hospital with his wife or something daft like that.

She abused the system but got off with it as she worked a 4 day week and was there forever.. And more or less still got her work done.

Wanderer2010

Eoin wrote: »

OP - obviously think through the consequences before following dodgy advice like this ^

I dont think its that dodgy, most companies will not probe for details over FM and its not as if its happening all the time. If the OP is a decent hardworking person theres nothing wrong with a little white lie to make the situation that little bit easier to deal with. Its not the end of the world.

liger

Little Ted wrote: »

AL or leave without pay or if the facility exists, flex or TOIL.

Also, OP you said no one would be available to collect the child from school, so why did you need to take the whole day off? And if you knew about this in the morning, surely there was someone you could have contacted to make arrangements with to help you out - you had until that afternoon to sort it. So it was not exactly an immediate emergency. You didn't need to take the whole day off. You could have at least worked a half day. Every parent I know has a few backup parents they know via the school where they can call upon them to help out in such matters.

I have plenty of AL days I could use except my company doesnt have a short notice AL option. They are fairly tight with allowing AL at the best of times anyway.

Also I work shift and in transport, If I miss my start time I cant just go in half way during the day and start working.

And being honest, after separating from my ex and fighting to go thru courts for access rights and being granted weekend daddy status, I wouldnt know any of the other parents in his school, nor would I say to my ex, Eh why dont you ring one of the other parents to hold him until whatever time you arrive back at.

Not everybody has a larger family & friend support network they can lean on at a whim

Little Ted wrote: »

In my experience, people who try to use FM as OP outlines are doing so for one of the following reasons:

- either because sick pay is not paid by the employer, try to claim that an unforseen circumstance = emergency = FM. So instead of pulling a sickie and not getting paid they claim its FM.

- Or they don't want to use their own AL, and would much rather have a few extra days at the company expense.

To anyone who misuses FM or tries to squander away their allowance - 5 days in 3 years isn't much. If someone you love genuinely does get sick, you will have only yourself to blame if you do not have enough FM available to you.

Yes my job pay for sick leave and in 7 years of working there I have only taken 2 days sick when I really couldnt work, I dont like the Idea of lots of sick days on my record and I dont want to abuse the system.

I have plenty of AL, days carried over from last year too but we dont have Short notice AL system, Imagine I rang up and said can I take AL I need it and they say NO then I am stuffed and either no show or say fine i am taking FM. They really think i am taking the mick.

Like I said The law states FAMILY CRISIS, to me a child being left standing on the street is a crisis, but then when you read on it only mentions about illness. I was just looking for some opinions regarding if my situation is covered, seems like a split opinion and I think my boss is also of the opinion that its not.

gozunda

Little Ted wrote: »

It is more than flexible, as they could simply offer LWOP. Unforseen circumstance does not equal emergency. And FM does not have to be an emergency, it is just that your presence is required at the side of an injured or sick family member. So if god forbid someone was sick with cancer, and you knew they were dying, when the time comes that you need to be there, that is what FM is for. Or if you are the sole parent of a sick child and are needed to take care of him/her. But it is meant for serious illness - not in cases where your child or family member would be ok to be left with someone else.

In my experience, people who try to use FM as OP outlines are doing so for one of the following reasons:
- either because sick pay is not paid by the employer, try to claim that an unforseen circumstance = emergency = FM. So instead of pulling a sickie and not getting paid they claim its FM.
- Or they don't want to use their own AL, and would much rather have a few extra days at the company expense.

FM is for exceptional circumstances, not for a brokendown car and not when a half day or a few hours would have been enough and instead the employee takes a whole day off. Using FM like that is taking the p!ss and abusing the good will of the FM system. surely OP could have asked to take leave a few hours early and made back the time over the next few weeks?

To anyone who misuses FM or tries to squander away their allowance - 5 days in 3 years isn't much. If someone you love genuinely does get sick, you will have only yourself to blame if you do not have enough FM available to you.

A child being potentially left without an responsible adult to collect them could constitute a genuine emergency in my opinion and be an exceptional circumstance - not an illness but enough of concern to cause an urgent absence.

'Taking the p/ss", "abusing the goodwill of the FM system" "squandering away their allowance' - all rather extreme language for what the OP as outlined would normally be a quite straightforward response in my experience. I was once at an IBEC conference that gave something of a similar spiel about how employees abuse their employers at every single turn. I left shortly after the coffee break tbh.

Eoin

liger wrote: »

Like I said The law states FAMILY CRISIS, to me a child being left standing on the street is a crisis, but then when you read on it only mentions about illness. I was just looking for some opinions regarding if my situation is covered, seems like a split opinion and I think my boss is also of the opinion that its not.

From what I can see, the law does say family crisis, but also specifically says "owing to injury or illness" (link, as posted above earlier by Nody):

13.—(1) An employee shall be entitled to leave with pay from his or her employment, to be known and referred to in this Act as “force majeure leave”, where, for urgent family reasons, owing to an injury to or the illness of a person specified in subsection (2), the immediate presence of the employee at the place where the person is, whether at his or her home or elsewhere, is indispensable.

Gillo

Eoin wrote: »

From what I can see, the law does say family crisis, but also specifically says "owing to injury or illness" (link, as posted above earlier by Nody):

Maybe I just lucky with my employers but most companies I have work for would not limit it to injury or sickness, that said its been years since I've had to take one, it looked like I might need to take one a few weeks back so I called my boss the night before I was due to come in, he basically said no worries.

The few times I have taken them, I always offered to take them as AL as I felt it would make it easier to ask, my employers always took the attitude of being fair though.

tony81

Gillo wrote: »

The few times I have taken them, I always offered to take them as AL as I felt it would make it easier to ask, my employers always took the attitude of being fair though.

This is the crux of it. Different employers have different expectations, conditions, levels of flexibility..

The op expects that her employer does not appreciate the lost day... So like you, gillo, she should offer to take the day as annual leave. Besides, the op had extra time with her child and surely did productive housework or relaxed for the remainder of the day. Typical activities on an annual leave day, but not covered under the definition of FM.

gozunda

tony81 wrote: »

This is the crux of it. Different employers have different expectations, conditions, levels of flexibility..

The op expects that her employer does not appreciate the lost day... So like you, gillo, she should offer to take the day as annual leave. Besides, the op had extra time with her child and surely did productive housework or relaxed for the remainder of the day. Typical activities on an annual leave day, but not covered under the definition of FM.

Desirable employer / employee situation.
employment > willingness for give and take on both sides >contingency planning and allowance > good employer / employee working relationship > = excellent working environment and levels of productivity.

I may be wrong but I took it from the OP posts that "she" is a "he" ....'productive housework' ? Relaxed? So by this definition during a period of FM leave - if an individual goes to a restaurant to eat and or while waiting in the hospital watches a spot of footy on the TV they should report themselves as actually having had a nice holiday???

Maybe the OP would help clarify - thou unsure what if anything a presumed gender or related activities would have to do with any of this...

Eoin

Anyway, OP - the link posted earlier seems to make it pretty clear that your manager is technically correct.

They should be more flexible, but unfortunately they don't have to be. I would not expect my day off to be considered Force Majeure if this happened to me, but I certainly would expect some flexibility around my annual leave.

gozunda wrote: »

I may be wrong but I took it from the OP posts that "she" is a "he" ....'productive housework' ? Relaxed? So by this definition during a period of FM leave - if an individual goes to a restaurant to eat and or while waiting in the hospital watches a spot of footy on the TV they should report themselves as actually having had a nice holiday???

That's not really what tony81 said though, is it?

Gillo

tony81 wrote: »

This is the crux of it. Different employers have different expectations, conditions, levels of flexibility..

The op expects that her employer does not appreciate the lost day... So like you, gillo, she should offer to take the day as annual leave. Besides, the op had extra time with her child and surely did productive housework or relaxed for the remainder of the day. Typical activities on an annual leave day, but not covered under the definition of FM.

Collect child, feed child, help child with homework etc, yes the OP, possibly did some housework or may have relaxed but as he or she said in their OP, they are separated so hopefully the actually got to spend some quality time with their child.

Tony do you mind me asking do you actually have children?

gozunda

Eoin wrote: »

...
That's not really what tony81 said though, is it?

See the preface in my post but by logical extension I would say yes...

Kat1170

Little Ted wrote: »

It is more than flexible, as they could simply offer LWOP. Unforseen circumstance does not equal emergency. And FM does not have to be an emergency, it is just that your presence is required at the side of an injured or sick family member. So if god forbid someone was sick with cancer, and you knew they were dying, when the time comes that you need to be there, that is what FM is for. Or if you are the sole parent of a sick child and are needed to take care of him/her. But it is meant for serious illness - not in cases where your child or family member would be ok to be left with someone else.

In my experience, people who try to use FM as OP outlines are doing so for one of the following reasons:
- either because sick pay is not paid by the employer, try to claim that an unforseen circumstance = emergency = FM. So instead of pulling a sickie and not getting paid they claim its FM.
- Or they don't want to use their own AL, and would much rather have a few extra days at the company expense.

FM is for exceptional circumstances, not for a brokendown car and not when a half day or a few hours would have been enough and instead the employee takes a whole day off. Using FM like that is taking the p!ss and abusing the good will of the FM system. surely OP could have asked to take leave a few hours early and made back the time over the next few weeks?

To anyone who misuses FM or tries to squander away their allowance - 5 days in 3 years isn't much. If someone you love genuinely does get sick, you will have only yourself to blame if you do not have enough FM available to you.

Hardly an unforseen circumstance, seems you can twist it to suit yourself same as OP :rolleyes:

Eoin

No, you're making a strawman argument.

I still don't think you understand Force Majeure. It does not apply to child minding because alternatives are not available.

Gillo wrote:

Collect child, feed child, help child with homework etc, yes the OP, possibly did some housework or may have relaxed but as he or she said in their OP, they are separated so hopefully the actually got to spend some quality time with their child.

But do you think that's not what annual leave is for?

Gillo

The child needed to be collected from school due to the OP's ex car breaking down, that's the crux of the matter.
Regarding the quality time, I should have explained better that hopefully it was a nice bonus to a crap situation.

Stheno

Kat1170 wrote: »

Hardly an unforseen circumstance, seems you can twist it to suit yourself same as OP :rolleyes:

I'm sorry I think that is a disgraceful statement.

My father was diagnosed as terminally ill with cancer, but with no timeframe.

I got a call in work one day that he had hours left, compared to the "weeks/months" the doctors had given two days before as he deteriorated quickly against doctors expectations.

FM was invaluable to me for the day and a half I got to spend with my father before he died, and not something I could have known in advance at all. It's something I was incredibly appreciative of, and admired my employers for being so good, my manager even offered to drive me 100 miles to the hospital my father was in, given the situation.

FM is there for valid reasons, but not for "I've no childcare arrangements in place" That's what AL is for.

amtc

tony81 wrote: »

Youre definitely taking the p155.. per citizen's information: It arises where, for urgent family reasons, the immediate presence of the employee is indispensable owing to an injury or illness of a close family member.

The washing machine does not constitute a close family member.

You don't know my family -

No, I had to take it as this as I had no AL left and this was my boss's suggestion - voluntarily gave up a day next leave year.

gozunda

Eoin wrote: »

No, you're making a strawman argument.

I still don't think you understand Force Majeure. It does not apply to child minding because alternatives are not available.

But do you think that's not what annual leave is for?

As the OP explained this was not a case of the OP not having normal child care arrangements. The OPs (separated ) other half had the child but then had to rely on the OP to take charge of the unplanned situation when her car broke down.

The OP was obliged to go and collect the child who was stranded alone without a known or responsible adult to take charge.

Any aditional activities - if they happened at all would be incidential to the primary request - which was to deal with an unforeseen emergency situation of a child left alone without the supervision of a trusted / responsible adult.

I really don't get it that in a country that so many things generally go by tand where there are many grey areas - that employees are often held to the button if their collar by some employers and all hell breaks lose if any genuine consideration or leeway is sought. It is really quite bizarre imo. As I recounted in a previous post - I have attended employer interests seminars where i found that similar attitudes were being preached and ingrained to the point where it resembled a political ideologocial rally.

At the end of the day Employees are human and we must accept this in order to maintain a healthy work environment without penalising employees with genuine issues or making such a big deal of these maters. To treat it otherwise defies any common sense or good management.

Nody

liger wrote: »

Like I said The law states FAMILY CRISIS, to me a child being left standing on the street is a crisis, but then when you read on it only mentions about illness. I was just looking for some opinions regarding if my situation is covered, seems like a split opinion and I think my boss is also of the opinion that its not.

Actually there's no split opinion at all; everyone agrees that according to the law your situation does NOT fall under the FM definition. Most if not all also agree that there should be a bit of give and take for situations like this (but that's not a law but more common sense/good policy) but assuming your local policy does not expand the definition of FM the reality of the situation is as follows:

You called in and said you'd not come to your shift with out a valid (by definition of FM as per the definition in law) reason to work that day and did not show up.

Everything beyond that is arguing about should be etc. but that's the position you're currently in. Hence when you meet your boss I'd be careful in the approach to it all because you're skating on very thin ice.

tatli_lokma

Kat1170 wrote: »

Hardly an unforseen circumstance, seems you can twist it to suit yourself same as OP :rolleyes:

Stheno wrote: »

I'm sorry I think that is a disgraceful statement.

Indeed Stheno, it is disgraceful. Kat1170 if you want to be technical about it and split hairs in such a unsavoury manner, then no death is unforseen, as we are all guaranteed to die. Death and taxes and all that.

However, the whens, wheres and why's are not always planned to a calendar or to an AL booking. Hence FM. My good friend recently died. She had been battling cancer for almost 13 years. Until 6 mths ago, she had been winning the battle. But six months ago the cancer finally managed to spread to her lymph nodes. She was advised 3 weeks ago that it had now spread to the brain was now a matter of months and she should get her affairs in order. The doctors conservatively said 3 mths. She died last week, 10 days after being told she had 3 months. These things cannot be held to a timetable.


Aside from all that, OP, I would suggest you offer to take AL, given that you have a carry over etc. At this stage, it is done with, you can't turn back the clock, you have already missed a days work. So if you reasonably present it to your boss that it would be better in fact for the company to give the day as AL, because then it would not be an additional day off paid, which would be the case if it were FM. If you explain to him/her that it was a once off, and not to become a regular thing and that you would appreciate their cooperation, you might be surprised. I'm not saying grovel, I'm just saying approach it in a reasonable manner and assure your boss that you are not intending to take the mick or misuse your leave, that it was an awkward situation and that in the circumstances unfortunately you had no option but to take the day off. Perhaps even point out, that you are being upfront about it and honest, when you could have just phoned in sick. The fact you would not misuse sick leave is a testiment to your work ethic normally, so remind him/her of this. If they stop and give it some thought, they might agree that it is best all round if the day is listed as AL.

As others said, many bosses will be reasonable and even offer to give you FM when you didn't request it. But it is at their discretion, so allow them to offer rather than just tell them this is what will happen.