Can I keep working from home?

LegacyUser

Regular user, unreg for this.

I'm wondering where I stand with my current contract at work?

I've been with the same employer for almost exactly 10 years. For the last 8 years, I've worked from home apart from meetings. Nothing was said about this. The room I was based in previously was full of chatterboxes and it was impossible to get work done there. I've signed numerous contracts over the years, and on each occasion, the location where the work would be done was never raised at all.

I signed my most recent contract less than two months ago, when I returned from maternity leave. I only took 26 weeks because I believed I would be able to continue breastfeeding while working from home.

Last Thursday, I was sitting in a meeting with my boss and several staff from my current project. Someone mentioned something about one of the tasks I'll be handling and I said I was doing x bit of it from home. My boss said, "well, you can forget that anyway!" and kind of laughed a bit. I was shocked! It had never crossed my mind that I would be required to suddenly start working in the office again, with absolutely no notice. Had it not come up in conversation, I don't know when I'd have been told!

I live about 30 miles from work, but in traffic this can easily take an hour each way. Then there's petrol and €15 parking a day. Even beyond the loss of valuable time and money, I'm suddenly expected to teach my child to drink bottles in one week! I would undoubtedly have taken the maximum unpaid leave after the paid maternity benefit if I had known this was a possibility, not to mind likely.

I would love to be fired or quit. I don't like the job at all. Unfortunately I'm a registered student so I will not qualify for jobseekers AFAIK. Also, my boss is my PhD supervisor, so I can't afford to piss her off, and the reason they need me to work from the office is legitimate, although this wasn't made clear to me before.

Do I have any options? Do I simply have to go along with this?

Mrs OBumble

Who was going to be minding the child while you were working from home?

While I can understand that you could time your lunch break to suit feeding times, there is no way that you could possibly be working from home if you're also doing childcare.

Assuming that you have hired a full-time childminder for this purpose, I think you need to sit down with your boss ASAP, and find out exactly what the deal is - explain it's because your childminder wants to know when you'll be around and when you won't.

LegacyUser

I've a full time au pair who minds the kids while I'm working. I don't have anything to do with them during the working day, except for 2 x 20 min sessions (my break times) to feed the baby.

I also won't have any opportunity to talk to my boss about this; its take it or leave it. She won't be in the office again until around Xmas as she's based elsewhere.

I just can't believe I wasn't made aware of this when I signed my latest contract. There's no way I'd have committed to so large a role in the project if I knew about the massive parking, petrol and time outlay, not to mind the situation with the baby.

davo10

What does your contract say about location of work place?

Sorry but I think it is reasonable to request that you attend job base if the project you are working on requires it.

The proximity of your home to the base, commute costs, time taken, child care arrangements and culinary ability is not really their concern, your contract should state your working hours and it is the employee's responsibility to attend during those hours, how you get there is your business the same as everyone else.

Also it was your decision to return to work early, your employer did not request it.

If your contract says your home place is your work place, that is a different matter.

If you are working there 10 years and still signing contracts, are you an external contractor with a contract to carry a specific task or for a specific time period? If so, though you have most of the rights of a permanent employee, you do not have them all. If you refuse to attend base, you may not be able to carry out the task referred to in the contract, if you have a term contract then you may not have rights under the Unfair Dismissals Act.

As with all jobs, the details on the contract are very important, check that first.

Mrs OBumble

Can I keep working from home? wrote: »

Last Thursday, I was sitting in a meeting with my boss and several staff from my current project. Someone mentioned something about one of the tasks I'll be handling and I said I was doing x bit of it from home. My boss said, "well, you can forget that anyway!" and kind of laughed a bit.

I've been pondering your post all day.

Firstly, have you actually been told that you are required to do all working hours from the office, ie was there more than just the snippet above? It seems totally inappropriate for a conversation about your T&Cs to take place in front of other staff.

It seems rather odd to me that you both took maternity leave and are still signing contracts after 10 years. Either you are a true contractor, in which case maternity leave does not apply, or you should well and truly be on a standard contract by now.

But I think what it all boils down to is whether or not you are prepared to go down a legal route or not. If your boss is also your PhD supervisor, then perhaps not. OTOH, the university could have a troublesome discrimination case on its hand if your supervisor let an employment matter affect their academic judgements - if you were prepared to take the case that far.

And even if you are willing to go legal, the fact that you've said "the reason they need me to work from the office is legitimate" makes me wonder how much success you'd have. (We cannot offer legal advice here.)

Also, the fact that your boss is based elsewhere is irrelevant: you can and should be having regular conversations by phone or video-conference. Face to face is best, when that's not possible, you've got to work with what you have.

Godge

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/after_your_baby_is_born/breastfeeding.html

have you read this?

davo10

Godge wrote: »

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/birth_family_relationships/after_your_baby_is_born/breastfeeding.html

have you read this?

How is this relevant to OPs situation?

banbhaaifric

I would contact NERA for some advice. Custom and practice might apply in your case if you have worked from home for this length of time without it being specified in your contract.

In the meantime while you are sorting things out, document everything, take notes including times, dates and witnesses to any conversations and try to get as much correspondence in writing as you can.

Regardless of whether it is legal or not, to jokingly refer to a change in your work in front of colleagues before informing you is incredibly unprofessional.

davo10

banbhaaifric wrote: »

I would contact NERA for some advice. Custom and practice might apply in your case if you have worked from home for this length of time without it being specified in your contract.

In the meantime while you are sorting things out, document everything, take notes including times, dates and witnesses to any conversations and try to get as much correspondence in writing as you can.

Regardless of whether it is legal or not, to jokingly refer to a change in your work in front of colleagues before informing you is incredibly unprofessional.

OP would seem to be a term contracted worker (still waiting for clarification on this) employed to do a specific task (large role in project referred to in previous op post). What has gone before may not have a bearing on this as this is a specific task which requires that she be present on site whereas previous contracts may not have.

Again, the contract should refer to place of work. OP could you inform us if you have a fixed term contract to carry out a specific task and where exactly it defines your place of work during this latest contract term.

Diziet

Maybe this is a storm in a teacup. If the task can be done to a high standard from your home, why not continue doing that, and see what they say? They have not put anything in writing to you and you have been working like this for a while without issues. There is custom and practice in your working arrangements so even if not explicitly in the contract, they have been implicitly agreed to.

If the task cannot be done from home, then it's different. BTW, you have the same rights as a premanent employee given the period of service. Universities are notorious for poor employment practices, but that does not make your rights any less valid.

It is better to do these things with negotiation rather than argument, so have a chat with your boss. My advice would be to keep the conversation to how well you can do the task from home and how you can counter any arguments to the contrary. Maybe you can be in the office a couple of days a week, for example. Whatever you do, please leave your childcare arrangements completely out of it, as they are not your employer's responsibility. I can understand they are important to you (of course they are) but the professional discussion should centre on teh requirements of the project. You want to convince them that you are a more productive worker under the current arrangements and you would be less productive in the office.

davo10

I agree completely Diziet but I think all posters and readers would benefit from OP clarifying what the contract terms are that she signed specifically for this project. If OP's contract says she has to be on site for this specific task then what has gone before is irrelevant as the previous contract has reached determination. If she agreed to a contract which requires her to be on site and she refuses to comply with these terms.......

I agree with you about baby/travel time/costs etc, they are not the employers concern.

sideshowsue

I'd also love to hear whether the OP has been working on her PhD for the last 10 years, since that's double the time for the average doctorate. This is definitely a red flag. Could well be that her PhD supervisor either thinks that the current 'work at home' arrangements are preventing the PhD from moving forward, or perhaps the supervisor just wants her to drop out by forcing her hand.

LegacyUser

davo10 wrote: »

What does your contract say about location of work place?

Sorry but I think it is reasonable to request that you attend job base if the project you are working on requires it.

The proximity of your home to the base, commute costs, time taken, child care arrangements and culinary ability is not really their concern, your contract should state your working hours and it is the employee's responsibility to attend during those hours, how you get there is your business the same as everyone else.

Also it was your decision to return to work early, your employer did not request it.

If your contract says your home place is your work place, that is a different matter.

If you are working there 10 years and still signing contracts, are you an external contractor with a contract to carry a specific task or for a specific time period? If so, though you have most of the rights of a permanent employee, you do not have them all. If you refuse to attend base, you may not be able to carry out the task referred to in the contract, if you have a term contract then you may not have rights under the Unfair Dismissals Act.

As with all jobs, the details on the contract are very important, check that first.

I was not given a copy of my current contract, but it didn't say anything about where I work. It's a variable hours contract, so no hours of work were specified either.

davo10

OP, in your opening post, second paragraph, first sentence, you said you signed your most recent contract less than two months ago. What did you sign? This is very relevant to the advice you seek, did you ask for a copy since you posted here?

Are you a term contractor rather than a full time employee?

Teyla Emmagan

Tell your boss that you only took on the position under the understanding that your place of work would not change and you were never given any indication that it would until X day, 2 months after the contract was signed. Suggest the company find you a job you can do from home (or 90% from home). Leave it to them to sort it out. If there's been work for you for 10 years, surely they have something you could be doing.

LegacyUser

My current contract is for 12 months and I know there will be an identical one for the following 12 months. This is the longest one I've had since my original one; usually I'm contracted on and off for various bits of work, sometimes with consecutive contracts and at other times with gaps. I'm very much at their beck and call.

Just to put some figures on it, because some posters seem to perceive this as a fairly petty issue, I will be spending € 100 weekly on petrol, and losing 10 hours working time to driving, thereby losing another €175 weekly. So I'll be €275 a week worse off than when I worked from home. Fine if you make huge money, but I'm only getting €441 weekly, before tax. I can't afford to work 10 less hours a week, so I'll have to sleep less and pay the au pair more.

I was actually much better off financially last year when I was only on a 3 day week, working from home, and on job seekers the other two days!

davo10

OP you sign short term contracts to undertake specific functions or tasks. They are not continuous so you are not a full time employee but a part time contractor.

Each contract for each new task will stand on its own merits as the previous one ended when the term/task was completed. Therefore again, whatever T&Cs were agreed in this new contract apply, if it says you are required to be on site then if you do not comply, the agreement can be terminated without compensation as you are not doing what you agreed to do. It will not matter a jot if previous tasks were done from home as they were done under the terms of a different contract.

OP, you have posted the costs involved in travelling to work, this must be weighed up by you, the same as everybody else, in deciding whether it is worth your while going to work. Your employer is not in any way responsible for these expenses, it makes no difference whether employees live across the road or 50 miles away, if you have to be there at 9am, so be it. Also if its a 9-5 job, you are not missing out on hours worked just because you travel to and from work, you are still working 7-8 hours.

As for the "beck and call" bit, these are offers and contracts to do work and be paid, many unemployed IT professionals are currently looking for work like this.

What you made previously is irrelevant as it was for a different task and a different contract. Your options would seem to be simple enough, do the job as per contract or inform them that you cannot due to the travel expenses involved.

rovoagho

Who said anything about IT?

davo10

The sector really doesn't matter that much as this is a contractual issue and what has gone before under previous contracts is not relevant with this new one.

i would change my opinion completely if the new contract said nothing about place of work and had the same T&Cs as previous contracts but if that were the case OP would/should have posted this detail already as it is the crux of the matter.

I could be wrong but most tasks that can be done remotely/at home involve a computer and are IT based. Perhaps OP could clarify this.

JustAThought

A lot of things don't hold together on this And - 10 years and you're still not finished a phd??????
Your costs are irrelevant to your employer - its simply not a factor but seems to make up the majority of your argument .
The streets are filled with people who would bend over backwards & do anything for a proper regular reliable contract . I would play this extremely safely & speak to your boss - but go in with a clear & realistic mindset. There are 400,000 + on the dole - and you don't want to go into the office???

The other elephant in the room is the child - if it has actually taken you, so far, an excess of ten years not to complete a phd then s/he are right in asking what you have been doing - from what you say your child care needs are taken care of 100%... But you query how you can be expected to work as your new baby isn't bottle trained yet but you say you spend no more than 20 minutes with it per half working day. ...


Lots of things really are not holding together from a basic HR perspective in your story - I' d tread extremely carefully - you can be terminated in a simple meeting & tbh you sound totally clueless about the basics . I would be having a very big reality check and honest evaluation on how much you need or want the contract, or your supervisors reference or you will be left with nothing very very quickly.

rovoagho

Since when do tasks done on computers indicate careers in IT? My 75 year old mum helps me out with things occasionally, does that make her a network engineer?

The OP has said quite clearly that they weren't given a copy of their contract. They should probably be asking for one if they haven't already, but if they don't know the content of it, you certainly don't.

How long the OP takes to complete their PhD is irrelevant, and none of anyone's business but theirs. Everyone has different circumstances.

Perhaps a little less jumping to conclusions and a little more focus on the facts that are available might be more appropriate.

davo10

rovoagho wrote: »

Since when do tasks done on computers indicate careers in IT? My 75 year old mum helps me out with things occasionally, does that make her a network engineer?

The OP has said quite clearly that they weren't given a copy of their contract. They should probably be asking for one if they haven't already, but if they don't know the content of it, you certainly don't.

How long the OP takes to complete their PhD is irrelevant, and none of anyone's business but theirs. Everyone has different circumstances.

Perhaps a little less jumping to conclusions and a little more focus on the facts that are available might be more appropriate.

Read previous posts. OP was asked what the contract terms are and asked if she requested a copy. She has not answered this so we have no choice but to draw some conclusions, OP is the only person who knows but does not wish to inform us even though the info is the key to the problem/options. It's fair to assume she read the contract first before signing it.

As for the IT part, it doesn't matter, ignore it, this is not about the type of work nor you needing help from your grandmother. As I keep posting, it's all about T&CS and OPs unhappiness with travel expenses.

JustAThought

OP signed a contract - s/he has to have seen /read it to do so.

S/he seems to be a research student working towards a phd -taking over double the time to do so & still not having completed, while " working" from home ; saying she is unaffected /undisturbed from her work by family demands & yet quoting them when she says she cannot be expected to go into work...

I see this quickly going from a PHD to a P45

rovoagho

JustAThought wrote: »

I see this quickly going from a PHD to a P45

Charming. I see you're both incapable of reading even short messages like mine, never mind the OP's. Perhaps your advice would be better kept to yourselves.

davo10

rovoagho wrote: »

Charming. I see you're both incapable of reading even short messages like mine, never mind the OP's. Perhaps your advice would be better kept to yourselves.

Fair enough, your Granny is not an IT professional because she is not being paid for the service she supplies to you, if she was, then she would be an IT professional regardless of qualifications.

Quite right, none of us know what's in the contract including apparently the person who signed it, this thread would be a lot shorter if we did.

The PhD has nothing to do with the situation apart from the fact that OPs boss is her supervisor. It has no baring on travel expenses, child care provision etc which are the OPs main gripes.

The conclusions are fair ones given the little info the OP has provided about her contract and the fact that she works full days at home providing a service for the employer, IT is a good guess but OP could easily provide a correction.

I think you should read the posts.

stevenmu

davo10 wrote: »

OP you sign short term contracts to undertake specific functions or tasks. They are not continuous so you are not a full time employee but a part time contractor.

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think the OP's status can depend a lot on how their pay and tax is handled. AFAIK if the OP is paid directly by the company they are contracted to, and they handle the tax affairs etc, then the OP is a full time employee with all of the normal rights (except that the company may not renew the contract). If the OP invoices the company then they are a contractor without the normal full employee's rights.

davo10

stevenmu wrote: »

I'm not 100% sure about this, but I think the OP's status can depend a lot on how their pay and tax is handled. AFAIK if the OP is paid directly by the company they are contracted to, and they handle the tax affairs etc, then the OP is a full time employee with all of the normal rights (except that the company may not renew the contract). If the OP invoices the company then they are a contractor without the normal full employee's rights.

This is incorrect, you are confusing this with someone who has a "self employed" status, the company pays a gross fee and contractor pays their own tax.

Employees can be employed on term contracts not lasting more than 4 years except in cases where they are hired for specific tasks which sounds like the OPs situation as she stated work was not continuous and that it involves a new project. Where term contracts apply, the contract ends on a certain date or when project is finished and as long as it says the Unfair Dismissals Act does not apply on determination, when its done, its done and both parties walk away.

Guys we can go around in circles about this but until OP fills in some of the blanks, no one knows where she stands including herself.

_Kaiser_

From what I can make out the OP is a contractor who has been given several unrelated contracts over the years for various different projects/pieces of work she did for the company.

Somewhere along the line she decided to start working from home - it's not even clear if this was by mutual consent or just something she started doing and wasn't brought up with her ("For the last 8 years, I've worked from home apart from meetings. Nothing was said about this.")

Now she's signed her latest contract (without knowing the details or having a copy?) and had a child in the interim that she has a full-time nanny for (she only sees the child for 20 mins during the working day) and her boss has suggested her days of working from home have come to an end because of the demands of this latest project which the OP has a problem with.

However, commuting costs, childcare arrangements etc are not the employer's problem. While many are flexible to an extent, this is not an automatic entitlement or right.

Sorry if this seems harsh, but from what the OP has said the main reason behind this issue seems to be that working in the office just doesn't "suit" her after all this time and it seems to me that she needs to accept that her little arrangement was nice while it lasted, and get on with it - or quit of course!

sideshowsue

Her boss is her PhD supervisor, so to say how long she takes to complete her PhD is irrelevant is patently false. Her boss may just want to see the back of her and sees this as an opportunity to be rid of her.

rovoagho

Since you don't know the details of the OP's academic career, you're hardly qualified to comment. If you want to comment, then perhaps you should ask for those details first.

Some of the comments made here are positively obnoxious, the P45 one in particular was a sly little piece of nasty.

I'll leave ye to it, the sensible people seem to have abandoned the thread to you lot anyway.

Good luck sorting it out OP, just set the ignorance of these people aside, you're wasting your time with them.

JustAThought

rovoagho wrote: »

Since you don't know the details of the OP's academic career, you're hardly qualified to comment. If you want to comment, then perhaps you should ask for those details first.


A research grant for completion of a phd is granted year on year for a max of 5 years - for quality work. - if you are lucky. I know - I work in phd programme finance . Anyone " still doing " a phd " from home" after 10 years would easily be percieved by all involved as a total waste of space.

OP won't fill in the blanks & seems to think the world owes her a cushy lifestyle & living - perhaps she should just retire to life on social welfare - there she won't have to worry about having to perform, turn up for work or contribute - items from her lists she has a major resentment towards & issues with.

LegacyUser

OP here. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply - when I try to post from my phone it doesn't appear on here.

I'm at my PhD 10 years because I've had several long leave of absences - for babies, getting married, when my employer needed me to work full-time, etc. In total, I've done 2 years full time, and 3.5 part time; I have 0.5 part-time left to do, which is what I'm currently enroled for. I haven't been working on it for 10 years continuously!

The contracts don't change; they're all the same apart from the project name and particular tasks I'm to complete - and that's usually very vague. They don't specify anything about where the work is done.

I do desk research - literature reviews, analysing data, writing reports and grant applications - in a fairly esoteric area. I hope this clarifies why it's possible to do it from just about anywhere. It's just that the next lot of data will need particularly high security levels, so working on it outside of the office isn't possible. I just hadn't been told about the security issues at all.

As to why I was working from home, like I said, impossible work environment (noise) combined with the fact that I wasn't provided with a usable computer (Windows 98, Microsoft Works and IE5 if memory serves; locked so nothing could be installed/updated), and every time someone walked in the door of the room, they hit my chair with the door. I did organise an office clean-up to move the furniture around and create a bit more space, but then they put more people in with us so the noise got even worse.

Having said all that, I've now accepted that I will have to work in the office, but at least the project is running late so I've had a couple of weeks to work things out domestically. When I was told originally, it came across as something that they were expecting to start the following Monday morning.

Someone back along said I was clueless about the basics, and I think they hit the nail on the head. I don't even know what "the basics" are! I've always worked in research, with a few related bits of other work on the side at times when things were a bit lean. I've never had any contact with a HR person, never had an induction, a company handbook or similar doesn't exist (to the best of my knowledge - certainly I've never heard of or seen one).

So, I suppose my question now is what should I read up on to be better informed when the next contract comes around, baring in mind that it's an academic rather than a corporate environment? Or is there any point considering that the contracts are non-negotiable and I can't say no until I have my PhD in the bag?

LegacyUser

JustAThought wrote: »

rovoagho wrote: »

Since you don't know the details of the OP's academic career, you're hardly qualified to comment. If you want to comment, then perhaps you should ask for those details first.


A research grant for completion of a phd is granted year on year for a max of 5 years - for quality work. - if you are lucky. I know - I work in phd programme finance . Anyone " still doing " a phd " from home" after 10 years would easily be percieved by all involved as a total waste of space.

OP won't fill in the blanks & seems to think the world owes her a cushy lifestyle & living - perhaps she should just retire to life on social welfare - there she won't have to worry about having to perform, turn up for work or contribute - items from her lists she has a major issue with.

Eh ... research grant? Where'd you get that from?! I'm funding myself.

_Kaiser_

JustAThought wrote: »

OP won't fill in the blanks & seems to think the world owes her a cushy lifestyle & living - perhaps she should just retire to life on social welfare - there she won't have to worry about having to perform, turn up for work or contribute - items from her lists she has a major resentment towards & issues with.

Actually I wouldn't suggest retiring to a life on welfare as an option for anyone - I know there are some that do exactly that, but those are the ones that should be identified and forced back into the labour market or made earn their dole through working in their communities etc

But yes, looking back over it it doesn't add up in several ways. The OP goes on about the costs, but is employing/supporting a full time au-pair as it is?

The facts are that you go where the work is - especially these days and particularly as a contractor, and it seems to me (in the absence of confirmation to the contrary) that the OP took advantage of absent/offsite management to start working from home, and think that this lifestyle should continue indefinitely.

My advice is still to suck it up and get on with it personally, but her employer is under no legal or moral obligation here IMO

Mrs OBumble

JustAThought wrote: »

OP won't fill in the blanks & seems to think the world owes her a cushy lifestyle & living - perhaps she should just retire to life on social welfare - there she won't have to worry about having to perform, turn up for work or contribute - items from her lists she has a major resentment towards & issues with.

Lads, please tone it down.

My finger hovered over the warning button ove the post I've quoted here - finally I decided that it's simply making unjustified assumptions, rather than being personally abusive - but it may be that another mod would call it differently.

Sometimes it's worth remembering that other people's working life can be vastly different from your own.

From now on, please only post if you can contribute some useful observation or suggestion for the OP.



/moderation

davo10

OP thank you for the info, it clarifies your predicament a lot. If the contracts are the same then in theory you should be allowed to continue to work at home but because it is a new contract it is seperate and distinct from the one before therefore they may not allow you to work at home.

Also, where some may have assumed that your employer just decided you had to work on site, the new info provides a very good and valid reason for this, imagine the consequences for you and your employer if highly confidential documents were lost/stolen while you had them off site.

Diziet

OP, most academics are not informed on their employment rights, and most academic institutions are pretty exploitative in their work practices. It is a good idea to join the union in your workplace.

Successive short term contracts after 4 years give you the same employment rights as perm employees under EU legislation, including pension, etc. I know your immediate questons has been answered, but it is no harm to be informed.

_Kaiser_

Ah yes, in light of the OP's updates (which didn't show until after I posted above - presumably cause they're posting as unreg) the picture changes somewhat.

To be honest, if the company is that disorganised I'd probably be looking elsewhere but your PhD complicates that, however you should checkout if there's a stipulation that you commit x amount of further time to the company or compensate them for the cost of it if you left before this (most companies that sponsor/fund employee education usually have a clause like this worked in).

The next question I'd be asking is what the environment in the office is like now and is it still as bad as you described above? If so, some frank but polite words with your manager would be in order along the lines of that to deliver on this project you will need a suitable workspace, laptop etc

You should also talk to HR immediately to get a copy of your contract and look over it to see what it contains. As mentioned above you may be entitled to rights that you aren't being given, or at the very least you should know where you stand.

The commuting/costs issue is still yours either way, but maybe as part of your discussions with your boss something can be worked out.

_Kaiser_

Diziet wrote: »

OP, most academics are not informed on their employment rights, and most academic institutions are pretty exploitative in their work practices. It is a good idea to join the union in your workplace

Disagree there. Assuming there even IS a union, the employer may be under no obligation to deal with them - and why pay membership fees when she could check these things out with the help of the various employment rights sites online.

davo10

Diziet wrote: »

Successive short term contracts after 4 years give you the same employment rights as perm employees under EU legislation, including pension, etc. I know your immediate questons has been answered, but it is no harm to be informed.

This is incorrect. If the employee works continuously for 4 years on successive term contracts, then if they are retained beyond this period, they must be given a full time contract.

OP was employed for specific projects on short term contracts which were not continuous but occasional (see "beck and call" reference), therefore each contract was determined when each project ended, therefore she is not entitled to permanency. Think of it this way, if a person got contracts totalling 4 years over a ten year period with gaps in between, would the person be entitled to be full time at the end of the last contract? No.

Diziet

davo10 wrote: »

This is incorrect. If the employee works continuously for 4 years on successive term contracts, then if they are retained beyond this period, they must be given a full time contract.

OP was employed for specific projects on short term contracts which were not continuous but occasional (see "beck and call" reference), therefore each contract was determined when each project ended, therefore she is not entitled to permanency. Think of it this way, if a person got contracts totalling 4 years over a ten year period with gaps in between, would the person be entitled to be full time at the end of the last contract? No.

You are correct, the contracts have to be continuous, but they may be part time (hence the 'beck and call') but still continuous. In that case, the entitlement is not so much permanency but they would be entitled to redundancy at the end of their contract.

BTW, in response to a previous comment, I made the assumption that the OP works for an academic institution, and they do recognise unions.

davo10

Diziet wrote: »

You are correct, the contracts have to be continuous, but they may be part time (hence the 'beck and call') but still continuous. In that case, the entitlement is not so much permanency but they would be entitled to redundancy at the end of their contract..

Nope. Again you are confusing a "part time" employee with a term contract, one works part time indefinately or for a certain period, the other for a defined term/task duration.

Term contracts normally have a clause outlining that when the term/task ends, the contract is determined (expired) and the unfair dismissals act does not apply. Therefore no payment, no redundancy at end of contract, when its finished, its finished.

rovoagho

davo10 wrote: »

If the contracts are the same then in theory you should be allowed to continue to work at home but because it is a new contract it is seperate and distinct from the one before therefore they may not allow you to work at home.

So yes but no then?

Also, where some may have assumed that your employer just decided you had to work on site, the new info provides a very good and valid reason for this, imagine the consequences for you and your employer if highly confidential documents were lost/stolen while you had them off site.

"Having said all that, I've now accepted that I will have to work in the office"

What a completely redundant post.

Diziet

davo10 wrote: »

Nope. Again you are confusing a "part time" employee with a term contract, one works part time indefinately or for a certain period, the other for a defined term/task duration.

Term contracts normally have a clause outlining that when the term/task ends, the contract is determined (expired) and the unfair dismissals act does not apply. Therefore no payment, no redundancy at end of contract, when its finished, its finished.

I am not confusing them - the reference to the legislation is here http://www.labourlawnetwork.eu/national_labour_law_latest_country_reports/national_court_rulings/court_decisions/prm/64/v__detail/id__1392/category__17/index.html

davo10

rovoagho wrote: »

So yes but no then?



"Having said all that, I've now accepted that I will have to work in the office"

What a completely redundant post.

Inform yourself. One more time for the boy at the back of the class, term contracts are singular contracts in this case for specific tasks, each task being different. If OP was doing the same job each time and each contract was the same, then it would be reasonable to assume that she could continue to work from home. But this project is different and we now know it involves confidential documents so new and distinct contract for new and distinct task. We didn't know this until OP posted it.

Rovagho, for those who understand, no explanation necessary, for those who do not at this stage, none possible.

davo10

Diziet wrote: »

I am not confusing them - the reference to the legislation is here http://www.labourlawnetwork.eu/national_labour_law_latest_country_reports/national_court_rulings/court_decisions/prm/64/v__detail/id__1392/category__17/index.html

Yes you are, read the last sentence of that link, the term contract was valid.

Also look back through my posts, you will see reference to the "unfair dismissals act" which if stated does not apply at the end of the contract, then contractor has no right to full time employment. Also OP was employed to do different tasks at different times.

Also, what does this link say about redundancy? An employee must work continuously for 104 weeks to qualify for redundancy, which OP seems not to have as each contract was approximately 12 months.

rovoagho

davo10 wrote: »

Inform yourself.

Inform myself about what, the fact that you can quote a reply to a completely different person and respond completely out of context in some vain attempt to demonstrate how super-clever you are? And super-condescending into the bargain? Well done, you must be super-proud.

davo10

rovoagho wrote: »

Inform myself about what, the fact that you can quote a reply to a completely different person and respond completely out of context in some vain attempt to demonstrate how super-clever you are? And super-condescending into the bargain? Well done, you must be super-proud.

What are you on about?, you are using a previous post by me in your dialogue and replying to my posts, therefore my post is in context. Quoting the correct interpretation is not showing how clever a poster is, it's merely quoting the correct interpretation.

rovoagho

I see. Even more ridiculous then. Do me a favour, go away and waste someone else's time with your nonsense.

stevenmu

davo10 wrote: »

Term contracts normally have a clause outlining that when the term/task ends, the contract is determined (expired) and the unfair dismissals act does not apply. Therefore no payment, no redundancy at end of contract, when its finished, its finished.

Is unfair dismissal really relevant here? I thought the main issue is habitual place of employment?

Diziet

Successive contracts, even if not absolutely day to day continuous, provide considerable additional protection to the employee. I have no wish to enter into an argument; my advice to the OP to inform herself on contacts and employment rights stands, even though the original question has been resolved.