Seamus McGranaghan qualified as a Solicitor in O'Reilly Stewart Solicitors in 2003 and is an experienced Commercial Lawyer dealing with employment, commercial and education cases.
He has experience in the Industrial Tribunal representing both Claimants and Respondents and has provided seminars in relation to particular areas of employment law. Seamus is the only member of the Education and Law Association in Northern Ireland. He specialises in advising schools and colleges on policy matters, employment issues and student welfare. He is also responsible for the Education Law Quarterly Review.
In addition to having contributed at Legal Island’s Education Updates since 2010, Seamus in association with Legal Island provides a live “Employment Law @ 11” webinar on the first Friday of each month, dealing with all aspects of Employment law affecting Northern Irish employers.
Christine: Yeah. So we've got contractual pay rise on one hand, which obviously becomes a legal obligation once you do it, it's in the contract there, versus the one-off payment. So how would you manage a one-off payment? How do you express that to make sure it's not, "Oh, it's October. It's time for my one-off payment again"?
Seamus: Yeah, there is that risk. And just going back to the poll there, clearly we can see that the contractual payment is the way that the majority of employers have gone. Second, then, you have this aspect of the one-off payment.
Again, Christine, it's just about good communication. I think that if there is a one-off payment being made, it needs to be notified to the employee in writing. If it's a one-off payment across the board to all employees, maybe even a general company memorandum just to inform and to notify that it is specifically related to the current cost of living crisis and that it is a goodwill payment and a goodwill gesture being made by employers to essentially look after and care for the welfare of their employees. And that's important that it is put forward in that way.
I think if you start to get into an aspect where a payment is being made every quarter, you could start to build up this idea of a custom or practice or a precedent taking place and an expectation from employees that this is going to happen. So you do need to carefully manage that.
I think when you're looking at pros and cons and ups and downs of whether it's a contractual one-off payment, or whether it is a . . . Sorry, a one-off payment or contractual pay rise, it's a difficult one. What goes down better? What do people appreciate more?
I think if you break it down and look at it in relation to a contractual pay rise, it ensures retention of employees. It rewards longevity. If you stay, you will be rewarded. And it also helps employees plan budget for the next year, if they are aware of what their salary is going to be. This idea of not knowing can put pressures on.
And it can be more cost effective than paying bonuses. Bonuses can fluctuate. They can go up and down in regards to sales, commissions, targets, things like that.
And I suppose if it's given across the board, it reduces competition and the risk of animosity between members of staff, as opposed to bonuses and some people getting more than others and things like that.
The difficulties in relation to it are obviously that it's a permanent increase and permanent cost for the business. And it's not suitable for all types of businesses either in relation to annual pay rise. And in most contracts, you'll always see that pay rises are discretionary, and they're usually set against some sort of performance review or target.
I think when we come to a one-off payment, it can be more financially feasible, and it's not contingent on variables. If it's given, it's given across the board and it's a one-off payment that everybody gets.
And it might also assist in relation to motivation. An employee might be very appreciative of that and they might be motivated. It might improve their dedication since it's not performance-based and it's not looking at loyalty and things like that.
I think the difficulties and the negative aspects of it are that it could also demotivate as well as motivate. That's the other risk. They may see it as a one-off payment, and it may not go down well. It may not be enough, and there may be complaints about it.
But it can result in a quick turnover of employees, where you have a one-off payment, someone will stay, get their payment, and then move on somewhere else. It can attract that aspect of it.
And I think, as well, it can also affect your tax position, whether or not you are going to pay a high percentage of tax in relation to a bonus you weren't expecting to pay. So it really just depends on how the employer wants to look at that.
I know certainly some of my clients gave the option. They worked it out and said, "This is the budget. You can either have it as a pay rise or one-off payment. It's up to you what you want to do". And for families, maybe it worked out better. Maybe for higher earners, the bonus worked out better that they could do something with the bonus, where for other people, the preference was stability across the year, "I like to know where I stand".
Christine: Got a few questions coming in, Seamus. So we're being asked, "For a one-off payment, how do you determine the cut-off?" So would you offer it to all staff earning below a certain amount? It's really up to you how you want to play it, isn't it?
Seamus: Yeah, basically it is. I mean, I think that you do need to have your antenna up in relation to how these are going to be received, not just by the people that are getting them, but if you are excluding others as to what their position will be.
I did read during the week this idea now of the sort of middle to upper earners that haven't really been affected before by cost of living, and that's where the pinch is for them now because they are being impacted there. So I do think you need to be careful in relation to how you go about selecting one group to the other group.
It's a difficult one in that you don't want . . . I mean, that's the key thing that would look to demotivate people, is if somebody gets something that you don't get and you don't understand why.
But you could look at it also maybe on a sliding scale. Maybe there's a higher payment for the lower earners and a moderate or lower payment for anybody that is earning above a certain amount.
But you're always going to get difficulties in and around the borders of where there's a little bit of crossover there, but essentially, you can make that decision.
And I think if you're doing it on an across-the-board basis, that's fair enough, but my mind does trickle into if there is a certain element of the workplace that is more focussed on women and that they don't get a pay rise, is it then going to become discriminatory and things like that. So you probably need to look at it in more detail, but I think in general it's up to the employer as to what they want to do.
Continue reading
We help hundreds of people like you understand how the latest changes in employment law impact your business.
Please log in to view the full article.
What you'll get:
- Help understand the ramifications of each important case from NI, GB and Europe
- Ensure your organisation's policies and procedures are fully compliant with NI law
- 24/7 access to all the content in the Legal Island Vault for research case law and HR issues
- Receive free preliminary advice on workplace issues from the employment team
Already a subscriber? Log in now or start a free trial