Search my House!!!?

Guest2011

Hi,

I have been offered a contract of employment by an accountancy practice after my probation period expired and one of the terms in the contract says that my employer has a right to search my person, personal belongings and even my house.

Is this usual now days? I have had a few employments but never seen this before.

Any advice, should I decline the offer, I don't have anything to hide but don't want to grant free access to my house to people I don't know outside of work.

Just to let you know I have been an honest employee always have and never stole work property.

Thanks.

Mr. Incognito

Your house is constitutionally protected.

This should not be in an employment contract and is illegal.

porsche boy

Sign it & take the job. If you have nothing to hide then they won't ever need to search your house. Worst case scenario they do want to search your house, refuse them and let it go to court. Doubtful any judge will find in their favour

Guest2011

Thanks I asked a couple of my friends who thought I shouldn't sign it without legal counsel.

I am sure that its harmless now and will sign the contract without resorting to that.

Manach

Perhaps you could counter-propose a term, stating you do not accept that? I did that (different clause matter) with my own employment contact.

mikom

Not long now until they start adding the "handing over of your first born" clause.

goz83

mikom wrote: »

Not long now until they start adding the "handing over of your first born" clause.

Would that not be a "perk", as opposed to a clause?

Satori Rae

That is an odd clause, I would definitely talk it over with someone who knows about legal contracts/rights or ask to see why it is there.
I am just wondering why would they want to search your house would this be encase you as an employee stole something? Also would it be people from the company personally searching your house?

Wouldn't the guards not do that any way?

Tigger

on a side note; if you take the job and proceed to be illegal in your dealings with them, don't hide the evidence in your house.

MarkAnthony

Are they perhaps, simply making you aware that by working for them you could be the subject of an Anton Piller order and are merely trying to cover their backs?

Guest2011

I have decided to sign the contract with the clause in it, I don't have anything to hide so am not worried, but all the same I did not want to give away access to my house to just anyone.

Thanks.

Stheno

I had a contract where I worked from home and it had a clause that they could inspect my home office for health and safety purposes

Johnboy1951

I would not accept that in the contract if I was not working from home.

I would cross out the 'home' section, and initial it, sign the contract, and bring it back for discussion, explaining why I would not give a 'blanket' permission to anyone to search my home.

That is going a step long stride too far, IMO.

gavindublin

In a retail environment we sign something similar.

Locker, bag and car search are standard in ours. But you can see the obvious reason when physical items can be stored in the car on break or whenever.
Seems strange in an accounting environment.

But I signed mine without hesitation as I know I won't have stuff in the car.

billy few mates

Depends how badly you want the job, if it was me and I really wanted the job I'd sign it as I would never do anything dishonest like stealing items from work and bringing them home, I'm not sure what items they'd be worried about an accountant taking home though...?

I've never seen a clause like this in any of the companies I've ever worked at in many places in various parts of the world but having said that one of the companies I worked at (UK) when people were caught stealing at work it was not unusual that the company would arrange for a HMC raid on their house while the suspect was being held or in very large cases where they'd gathered evidence HMC would come calling in a dawn raid looking for evidence....

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

NUTLEY BOY

OP'S home is inviolable as per Article 40 of the Constitution. All appear agreed on that.

If OP voluntarily signs [as he has] does he not also voluntarily surrender his Article 40 protection ?

Equally, if OP signs and then reneges in the face of a request to search the home is he not effectively estopped from allowing the search by his employers ? i.e. is a court not going to say that he cannot have it both ways acording to what suits him ?

Even if OP had not signed would he not still be open to search by Gardai executing a search warrant ? Suppose something went wrong at work and his employers made a complaint to Gardai who formed a reasonable suspicion sufficient to obtain a search warrant. They could search under the authority of the warrant irrespective of whether or not a consent for the employer had been signed.

I am reading OP to say that his employers are acquiring the right of entry / search for themselves as distinct from Gardai or Customs or whoever. It strikes me that the right acquired contractually by the employer is deeply invasive of a fundamental constitutional right and that is why employees should not give it up lightly.

Some people suggest that the contractual right acquired here is "illegal". What is the exact illegality ?

BTW if there are other legal interests in the home (e.g. a spouse) are they bound by the contractual right given to the employer ? Suppose H and W are married and reside together. H does a major fraud and vanishes. If the employers of H (as distinct from the Gardai) turn up demanding to search pursuant to the contractual right can W say that she is not bound by the contract and tell them to get lost ?

Finally, why do employers want this type and depth of right ? It occurs to me that some businesses try hard to keep details of "mischief" in-house and try to avoid outside involvement with Gardai because of reputational damage to their name. This type of right might help them in that aim but it is still very heavy-duty stuff !!

Carawaystick

If the OP and one or more other people own the home, then surely the other owners can stop the employer searching the house.

NUTLEY BOY

Carawaystick wrote: »

If the OP and one or more other people own the home, then surely the other owners can stop the employer searching the house.

On what legal basis ?

galljga1

You need to get a lock-up.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Wanderer78

take the job and ignore the sticky bit. id say theyd have some job trying to search your house and belongings.

seamus

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

If OP voluntarily signs [as he has] does he not also voluntarily surrender his Article 40 protection ?

Constitutional rights cannot be signed away by the individual in a contract.

You can waive your rights if and when the question appears, but you cannot sign a blanket waiver forfeiting your rights. Actually, you can sign it all you want, but in court that waiver would be invalidated and deemed unenforceable.

Wanderer78

seamus wrote: »

Constitutional rights cannot be signed away by the individual in a contract.

You can waive your rights if and when the question appears, but you cannot sign a blanket waiver forfeiting your rights. Actually, you can sign it all you want, but in court that waiver would be invalidated and deemed unenforceable.

was thinking that. some employers have some cheek. i wonder what other games are they getting up to?

seamus

Wanderer78 wrote: »

was thinking that. some employers have some cheek. i wonder what other games are they getting up to?

A lot of this stuff is boilerplate. They're US or UK companies who don't bother to engage any employment law people in Ireland and instead just make some minor amendments to their existing standard contracts without checking what is and isn't possible in Ireland.

They will on occasion attempt to enforce these and get a surprise when they realise half of the contract is nonsense.

I joined a UK company whose contract included me signing over authorisation to carry a complete credit and background check on me. Knowing full well that they wouldn't be able to access ICB records or court records in Ireland (not that I'm a defaulter or a criminal ), I was more than happy to let them run background checks on me in other jurisdictions that I've never lived in.

Wanderer78

seamus wrote: »

A lot of this stuff is boilerplate. They're US or UK companies who don't bother to engage any employment law people in Ireland and instead just make some minor amendments to their existing standard contracts without checking what is and isn't possible in Ireland.

They will on occasion attempt to enforce these and get a surprise when they realise half of the contract is nonsense.

I joined a UK company whose contract included me signing over authorisation to carry a complete credit and background check on me. Knowing full well that they wouldn't be able to access ICB records or court records in Ireland (not that I'm a defaulter or a criminal ), I was more than happy to let them run background checks on me in other jurisdictions that I've never lived in.

ah companies have some cheek at time though. interesting story though, thanks for sharing

mikehn

seamus wrote: »

Constitutional rights cannot be signed away by the individual in a contract.

You can waive your rights if and when the question appears, but you cannot sign a blanket waiver forfeiting your rights. Actually, you can sign it all you want, but in court that waiver would be invalidated and deemed unenforceable.

This is correct, you cannot sign away your rights. not legally enforceable.Sign away.

NUTLEY BOY

seamus wrote: »

Constitutional rights cannot be signed away by the individual in a contract.

What is the legal authority for that proposition ? I am not arguing with your point but would just like to know the basis on which it is grounded.

seamus

I'm no law-talking guy, but my understanding is that civil/contract law is automatically superseded by national law, which in turn is superseded by the constitution.

So if you are provided a right in national or constitutional law, that right can only be forfeit if provided for in law, it cannot be arbitrarily signed away. That is, your right continues to exist regardless of what paper you sign and a breach of that right is actionable.

Could be wrong of course, that's just my understanding of it.

endofrainbow

Sign the contract, move house and don't leave a forwarding address

Carawaystick

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

On what legal basis ?

Say A & B own the home.
A signs a contract to let C in and search.
C turns up to search the home.
B says go away.
C says but, but A said its alright.
B says are you not gone yet?

jimmycrackcorm

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

OP'S home is inviolable as per Article 40 of the Constitution. All appear agreed on that.

If OP voluntarily signs [as he has] does he not also voluntarily surrender his Article 40 protection ?

Stupid is as stupid does - point out to the employer that their contract violates the constitution. Just because they wrote something in it doesnt make it legal