Effective Performance Management Strategies

In this month's webinar with the HR Suite, Caroline Reidy, Managing Director joins Julie Holmes, Knowledge Partner from the Legal Island Team, to discuss the all-important topic of performance management.

Performance management has evolved as most employers continue with blended/remote working – but how can you ensure your performance management process is effective and what strategies should you put in place? Caroline previously spoke about the introduction of the European Union (Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions) Regulations 2022 at the beginning of this year and the implications for probation periods. This is your opportunity to ask questions as Caroline discusses probation reviews and other tricky performance management issues.

Recording

Transcript

Julie:  Hello and good morning, everyone. Welcome to our webinar. My name is Julie Holmes and I work in the Knowledge Team at Legal-Island. And today's guest, we have Caroline Reidy, Managing Director of The HR Suite.

So, Legal-Island's webinars and podcasts are sponsored by MCS Group. And MCS help people find careers that match their skill sets perfectly. They also support employers to build high-performing businesses by connecting them with the most talented candidates in the marketplace. So, if you're interested in finding out a bit more about how MCS can help you, then head to www.mcsgroups.jobs.

Caroline is a popular and regular speaker at Legal-Island's events. So thank you, Caroline, as always for joining us today.

And let me tell you a bit about Caroline if this is your first time attending one of our webinars. So, Caroline is a past member of the Low Pay Commission and also an adjudicator in the Workplace Relations Commission. She completed a Master's in Human Resources through the University of Limerick. She is CIPD accredited, as well as being a trained mediator.

And she's worked across various areas of HR for over 20 years in both the Kerry Group and in the retail and hospitality sector, where she was the Operations and HR Director of the Garvey Group prior to setting up The HR Suite in 2009.

Caroline speaks widely and writes articles and papers on thought leadership in relation to the future landscape of HR and the challenges and opportunities that these present for both employers and employees.

So, in this month's webinar, Caroline is going to look at effective performance management strategies. Performance management has evolved as most employers continue with blended and remote working. So, how can you ensure your performance management process is effective, and what strategies can you also think of?

Caroline previously spoke about the introduction of the European Union (Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions) at the beginning of this year, and the implications for probation periods. So, now is your opportunity to ask questions as Caroline discusses probation reviews and other tricky performance management issues.

So, just a note, there are no slides for Caroline's presentation. It will just be the background slide and then the recording will be available shortly, possibly the beginning of next week.

So, if you have any questions for Caroline, please pop them into the question box and we'll have some time at the end for questions and answers.

So, Caroline, I will hand over to you, and thanks very much. I'll see you in a bit.

Caroline:  Thanks so much, Julie. And good morning, everybody. Thank you all so much for making the effort to join us this morning.

As Julie said, we always take your feedback on board to identify what are the most topical areas that you'd like us to cover in this session. And we got inundated queries linked to performance management, particularly in the area of probation management. As many of you know, because of the new legislation that has come in, probation now is six months, and extending it is a lot more tricky than it was before.

And also, many organisations had probation up to 11 months before as well. So, a lot of organisations have reassessed how they manage probation, and we're going to start with that area this morning based on your feedback.

As Julie said, we welcome questions. So, if anybody has any questions, feel free to ask and we'll give some time closer to the end for you to do that.

So, you will be aware that the new legislation of the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions came in and introduced a six-month probation since 16 December 2022. And that is, I suppose, for all private sector employees.

And this is subject to them having been employed already and their probation not exceeding the six months. Anybody who was previously employed prior to 16 December, the date it was due to expire to make it six months or 1 February were the key dates there.

That's obviously lapsed, so at this stage, any new employees we're taking on have a six-month probation in their contract of employment.

Obviously, probation could be suspended during maternity or adopted leave or other forms of protected leave other than sick leave. It doesn't refer to that. It just mentions statutory sick leave, which, again, is a new introduction for us.

So, I suppose the only exception is the public sector. Their probationary period is up to 12 months, and it's only in the specific scenarios where it is in the interest of the employee that it can be longer than six months, but it needs to be an exceptional basis. And the legislation is very clear about that. It must be exceptional.

Many clients would've said, "Well, if it's a management role, does that make it an exception?" And the answer I would say would be no, because an exception needs to be a very specific reason.

So, for example, we have a client and they work in a very specific set of skilled area where the training period takes nine months for any employee to go through all of the specific training linked to the job. And in that scenario, it's in the interest of the employee, and I would suggest it's also an exceptional basis because it's quite technical and detailed skills that you need to achieve and then build on.

So, in that specific area, you could argue that a nine-month probation would be relevant. But outside of that, it's six months in private sector, and 12 months for the public sector.

It's also important to note that probation in a fixed-term contract must be in line with the duration of the contract, and it must be proportionate to that. And it can't be an on-going probationary period in further fixed-term contracts that follow if it's far the same job and role. I think that's an important area of consideration just to make sure that your probation is right.

I suppose probation is the opportunity for us to make sure the person is the right fit for the job. And obviously, many would feel that, "Well, look, if I let somebody go during probation because they're not suited, there's little or no risk". However, arguably, there is risk because the employee can take a case under the Industrial Relations Act, under the Employment Equality Act, or under the civil legislation for wrongful dismissal or breach of contract, or indeed seek an injunction in relation to lack of fair procedures.

So, we are a lot more focussed at making sure we manage probation as a result a lot more proactively. And I think that's why the amount of interest this morning in how we manage probation correctly now going forward has been there.

Also, usually, there would be a shorter notice period when somebody is on probation. And again, think about what is relevant under the minimum notice in terms of employment legislation in relation to that.

I suppose there's also a requirement to just think about the Unfair Dismissals Act. So, even though the Unfair Dismissals Act doesn't normally apply, it's obviously important to note that somebody can say they were discriminated, etc. So, again, just to keep a close note in relation to that.

And there's no service requirement either under the Unfair Dismissals Act if somebody says it was linked to trade union membership that they were dismissed, it was linked to anything to do with their pregnancy, anything to do with them exercising a statutory protected leave, for example, maternity, force majeure, etc., it was anything to do with them trying to ensure they were paid the national minimum wage, or if they made a protected disclosure.

So, again, there's quite an array of considerations there that people just need to be aware of.

And also, just be aware of the date of dismissal. One of the questions we got in advance of that is where do employers often fall down? And when I was preparing for today, proactively I was making sure that I was giving you those watch-outs. And one key area where people fall down is not knowing when the actual date of dismissal is.

The date of dismissal as outlined in the Unfair Dismissals Act clearly states that it is the date of which the notice of termination either expires or would have expired in line with the minimum notice legislation, whichever is greater.

For fixed-term contracts or specified purpose, the date of dismissal is the date of the expiry or the actual date that the person resigns and actually finishes.

So, again, just to be careful in relation to being clear in relation to what that date is.

I suppose there's a very clear indication from all the courts, and I'm going to give you some case law examples this morning, both in the WRC and in the Labour Court that they require us to make sure that fair procedures and the right of natural justice is given to all employees, including those that go through probation.

And the really important consideration in that regard is that we make the employee aware of any performance issues, we give them the opportunity to improve, and we also give them any additional training, any mentoring, etc., to give them that fair opportunity to improve.

I suppose there is a key specific case that reflects that very much, which many of you will be aware of, which reminds us that probation, even if there is a clause in the contract of employment that says we can terminate the employee for no reason or any reason whatsoever, it's really important to be clear on what it says in your contract of employment in relation to your probation clause. And that case is the Over-C Technology case.

In that case, the employee was a CFO. The contract included a six-month probation. Performance issues were flagged, but the employee was terminated. And basically, the Court of Appeal in this case . . . Because originally, this case went to the High Court and it basically ordered that the process wasn't fair.

However, when this exact case went back to the Court of Appeal, the company argued that the High Court didn't adequately consider what it deemed as the fact . . . A critical scenario in this case was that the employee was on probation. And the purpose of probation and the clause the employee signed up to was very clear that the employer could terminate for any reason or no reason whatsoever.

So, again, really important that . . . two points to note. One is the contract needs to be crystal clear, and second of all, you are going to rarely invoke that procedure simply because it, I suppose, doesn't give that employee that rules of natural justice.

You're much better off if you can, as we already said, give the employee some feedback in relation to the performance issues, give them that opportunity to improve, give them any support or advice, etc., that they might need. And then if they fail to improve, they fail their probation, which you're giving them every opportunity to do so.

I suppose from working in this area for so long, I also feel strongly that what it does is it means that the person is not going into a scenario that they're like a rabbit in the headlights and they really did not see this coming.

Whereas if they get the feedback that's clear and gives them specific scenarios and outlines specific examples of where there are performance issues, and give them that opportunity to improve, normally they can see why the probation is being terminated. And often, they decide to leave before that next meeting even occurs. So, again, really strongly encourage that.

Another case that I want to remind you about, again, was a probation-related case and it was under the Industrial Relations Act. And this was an employee who took a case against a hotel in Kerry. And in this scenario, the claimant was a senior manager in the hotel and he basically said that he was dismissed during his probation without warning.

And the Labour Court accepted that an employer has the right during probation to terminate. However, fair procedures should still apply. And they felt that this was a seriously flawed process, not in line with the S.I. 146, which is that code of practice in relation to grievance and disciplinary, and they recommended compensation of €90,000.

And again, it was only a recommendation, but the main scenario here, I suppose, is you don't want to have to go through the expense and the business distraction of having to defend a claim because of a disgruntled employee.

Whereas if you go through the fair process that we're advocating in the session, you're going to avoid that the majority of the time, which is a really important scenario.

I suppose we spoke as well when we're managing performance in general, whether it's probation or it's thereafter, about the importance of treading carefully in relation to any performance linked to any of the nine equality grounds.

And just to remind us, that's gender, age, race, disability, religion, sexual orientation, civil status, family status, and membership of the Traveller community.

And in particular, be very careful with age linked to retirement and with disability, because they're two areas that we notice a lot more claims and grievances being taken where employees are flagging concerns linked to those concerns. So, again, just to tread carefully.

Remember, retirement, there's no specific retirement age in Ireland. So, again, it needs to be objectively justified. And again, remember with disability, we always need to provide reasonable accommodation.

And again, we often have performance issues that may be linked to, for example, an intoxicant, an abuse of same, that overflows into the work environment and becomes a disability that we need to support the employee with.

So, again, just be very careful because probation or performance management can often overflow into concerns linked with these equality grounds. So just an important watch-out in relation to that.

So, other points to note in relation to disability is if you have an employee where their performance may be not at the required standard, but they flag concerns, or we have concerns linked to their health, that we refer them to Occupational Health and we follow the Occupational Health advice in relation to the specific recommendations or reasonable accommodations that we are obliged to make.

And I suppose these Occupational Health recommendations can be anything from less hours, more support, etc.

And again, if the person is during the specific position still not able to fulfil their role, as we've seen in the Nano Nagle case, we're not obliged to create a new role. But we are obliged to do all that is reasonable to support that employee and, again, make the accommodations and then assess, "Can the employee with their engagement and with their consultation, can we help them ensure that they can perform their role?"

If they're not in a position to perform their role at that stage, then obviously we are not going to be discriminatory in terms of that dismissal in terms of performance management.

And again, complementing Nano Nagle is the case of Ergo Services Ltd, where an employee didn't pass her probation. Yet during her probation, her performance was assessed, she was given a reasonable accommodation, she was sent to Occupational Health, and Occupational Health recommended that she would get a less stressful role and she would also have her hours modified.

The company obliged in that regard, but her performance was still not at the required standard. And in this case, it was found that her dismissal was not discriminatory, which, again, reinforces the Nano Nagle position as well. So, again, very important to note in relation to both of those.

I suppose moving then to performance, we've seen a huge shift from very detailed comprehensive performance review forms to a much tighter system, particularly now that we're working in a hybrid.

And what we're seeing is that people are doing much more frequent check-ins in a formal way, and they're giving the opportunity for either the employee or the manager to do a minimum of four, for example, during the year, but then either party can call an additional one if they feel that they require it.

We're finding that rather than there being an annual performance review, we're having a lot more frequent job chats linked to performance. And I suppose the driver of hybrid means that we need to make sure that we're having those regular check-ins much more often.

I suppose our recommendation in relation to these types of conversations is that the most important thing is they're open and they're transparent, though we're having conversations like, "What's going well? What's not going so well? What areas do you need support in, and have you any other issues?"

And obviously, you may be having other specific goal reviews linked to the SMART goals that you've set with the employee. But additional to that, you're also doing that overview and that check-in.

Again, now in the hybrid world that we're in, we're having a lot more conversations to ensure the person is performing at the required standard and is getting the support that they need.

We're also identifying a lot more employees openly now flagging any neurodiversity concerns that they may have, and accommodations that they feel would assist them in the work environment.

And again, very proactively, we're ensuring that those employees are getting those supports to maximise their potential. So, those open-door conversations are providing hugely positive engagements and opportunities as a result of that.

I suppose what's also really important as we have these conversations is that we have a paper trail in place. We give people due process and we give them reasonable opportunity to get support, to get training, etc.

I suppose we keep reminding ourselves in HR that if there's no paper trail, it never happened, and more and more so because we're making the performance management systems more informal, yet there's still a structure. Many companies are using online systems instead of actually an ordinary paper trail.

But whichever you're using, the importance of making sure that you record what you've agreed in terms of SMART goals, and you've discussed and agreed any other issues that the employees flagged, or any other concerns linked to their performance.

Excuse me. One sneeze wouldn't be enough. Apologies. Sorry about that.

So, really important that if you've expressed concerns, you're also flagging those and you're recording those in writing.

And remember, once you write to the employee and record them on your system, you're now providing a line in the sand just to confirm that from that date, you've flagged those concerns or issues. And equally, if they flag concerns and issues, we have an obligation to make sure that we close those out on a timely basis.

I suppose because of hybrid, we're now also encouraging people to do those feedback conversations in person where the opportunity arises rather than do them in Teams.

Particularly if people are working some days in the office and some days at home, we're strongly encouraging that people would do these types of meetings in person because they're a lot more effective as a result of doing them in that way.

Other key considerations in relation to performance and performance management. Again, we've had a lot of performance issues linked to gross misconduct where there's been slating reviews from the organisation in relation to the complexity of the process that is required in terms of dotting the Is and crossing the Ts in relation to addressing the issue.

So, particularly, if it's gross misconduct, there is no alternative but to go through that S.I. 146 and to provide the person with those rules of natural justice that you're obliged to do.

And as I say, many employers would be scathing in terms of the amount of steps they need to follow, particularly when it's linked to gross misconduct. However, that's one of the key pitfalls where employers fall down when they're managing a really serious performance issue like alleged gross misconduct.

Again, we've seen cases from the Labour Court and the WRC flagging concerns in relation to the investigation process not being conducted comprehensively, or not being conducted by a trained investigator. So, again, key areas that you need to make sure when we're managing performance that we consider.

I suppose the final mention, because I want to facilitate your Q&A as always, is to mention proactive training. We've a lot of employees who have progressed in organisations because they were good at the day job, they were good at being an accountant or being an engineer, and as a result, they got promoted into a more senior position, and now they're managing large numbers of people.

And for many of them, they will say that the biggest challenge they have is managing people, because even though they spent years working in their technical skill/knowledge area or being trained in that area, they've little or no people management skills or training received.

So, please make sure that you consider doing people management training with your people managers, particularly those that are new to the role or particularly those that are managing employees now in hybrid.

The type of performance management that's required in a hybrid is very different to the performance management if your full team is either fully remote or fully in person. And for many managers, they're struggling to manage how they manage both areas of that. So, again, I would strongly recommend that we try and retrain people in that area.

And obviously, you hopefully all follow The HR Suite on our LinkedIn and on our social medias. We provide lots of training and support in all of these areas and also provide topical information to all of you in relation to any case law, etc. So, my ask is if you're not already following us on LinkedIn, Caroline Reidy or The HR Suite, we'd love it if you would.

So, Julie, I'm going to pass back over to you to facilitate some Q&A, and hopefully we've got some creative juices going there with our rapid fire journey in relation to what today was all about, which is the tricky areas of performance management.

And because we've such a short time, arguably we could have done a session on each of these areas in huge detail. Reasonable accommodation arguably could be a really long session, or probation itself could be a much longer session related to the skills.

But I think today is designed to give people food for thought in relation to areas that they might need to revisit or re-look at as they consider their performance management processes and procedures, etc., going into 2023 and beyond.

Julie:  Thanks, Caroline. That was very comprehensive. And you've already partially answered some of these questions, but we'll go through them regardless and you can maybe highlight just any key takeaways that you have.

Caroline:  I'd be delighted.

Julie:  One of the questions was, "How has performance management changed in a hybrid working environment?" So, from what I understand, you've basically talked about how people have changed to more frequent type of check-ins, quarterly basis, and you've also highlighted about in-person rather than remote, being careful about choosing that. Anything else?

Caroline:  I think people have reassessed their full performance model, Julie. And for many organisations, they've . . . We've seen a lot of organisations cascading their core values, for example, into their performance management conversations, because that's what makes them different and unique.

Again, continuing to develop culture, especially when people are in a hybrid working environment. The worry of culture getting diluted being a very real concern if you're not doing things like cascading the values into your HR processes.

And I suppose the other major thing is we're finding that a lot of people are retraining managers in terms of how to give feedback in a hybrid. And one of the key top tips around that is to try and give feedback in person, especially if it's constructive feedback, if that's possible, rather than doing that over an email or doing that over Teams.

But we're finding that a lot of managers are overusing email as a kind of copout, I suppose, in many ways when they're giving feedback. And because there's no context, because there's no two-way process, it never lands well. So, again, just trying to encourage that rethinking how we give feedback both positively and constructively.

And the final point I'd suggest to mention there is the piece around assessing how we can support and maximise the potential of the team more. So, there's a lot more focus on training. There's a lot more focus at removing barriers, like I mentioned, neurodiversity.

For example, in one organisation we were working with, there was an employee who wanted to use their earphones at work when they were in the office. The manager made the decision that because they were supposed to be interacting and engaging in the office, they wouldn't use the earphones.

And when we had the conversation and I was saying, "So, have you asked them why they want to use the earphones?" the person said that they found the open-plan, which is now the way the office is set up to facilitate hybrid, they just couldn't concentrate. And again, from a neurodiversity perspective, we weren't maximising their productivity or their potential by not allowing them to have earphones.

So, again, I think we're opening our mind because the work environment has changed physically, i.e. the open plan is a lot more common now when people are in the office, and hot desking, etc. But also, the process around how we give feedback is, as I said, less focussed on once a year and a really big form, and more focussed on quarterly in many organisations and having more regular discussions around those SMART objectives, but also the supports in relation to those as well.

Julie:  Great. Thank you. And you highlighted a couple of areas as well about where employers can go wrong in relation to paperwork, maybe perhaps if during the probation period things haven't gone as well and so people are choosing that option of terminating after probation. So, what would you suggest in relation to paperwork?

Caroline:  So, I think one of the biggest things, Julie, is a lot of organisations don't start recording the feedback from the very start. And it's when the problem is at the stage that they feel they want to terminate that they then start saying, "Well, look, we've been having conversations with Johnny for the last three months". And then I say, "Well, look, send me on the paper trail", or, "Send me on the emails you've sent Johnny, etc.", and they have no paper trail.

So, I suppose that's the biggest challenge, and that's why a lot of organisations now are putting a more formal probation process in place where they would do a check-in with the employees Month 1, Month 3, and make a decision by Month 5.

Before, because they had up to 11 months and they could extend it, etc., much more easily, they weren't really zoned in on probation, whereas a lot of organisations now are retraining their managers in terms of how to manage probation.

Six months creeps up very quickly. And you'll have remembered in my session that I discussed the termination date. Again, you must take into account the notice period, etc.

And for many people, that all lapses and all of a sudden, it's gone past and the person says, "Well, actually, they're here Month 7 now", and the probation was only six months, so therefore it's not probation any longer. Now you're managing them through your performance management system, which, as we all know, is a lot more steps involved with a verbal warning, written warning, filing a written warning, etc.

And that reasonableness I mentioned as well, you have to give a reasonable amount of time to any employee to improve their performance. And the goals that you set must be fair, reasonable, and realistic.

So, again, if you have somebody who is underperforming or . . . Today we didn't talk about performance improvement plans, for example, but if you have somebody who is on a performance improvement plan, that's often where it goes wrong because unrealistic goals are set for that employee ahead of goals that would be set for a comparable employee doing the same job.

So, you're not giving them the best chance of success and, again, that would be deemed to be not in keeping with the rules of natural justice.

There are a lot of areas, Julie, where we're finding employers are going back to the basics of, "What is it that I need to have in place for both my probationary system and my performance management system?" and making it easier on the manager, keeping it simple. And as a result, they're much more likely to ensure that that paper trail, whether that's on an electronic system or another format, they're much more likely to use it as a result.

Julie:  I think, as you said before, we could probably do a whole session just on performance improvement plans as well and about the specifics and details. And you've already tied that into the SMART objectives as well, which is great.

So, kind of related on to the same topic, we have somebody who's seeking a little bit of clarification and asking, "Do employees have the right to be accompanied and right to appeal when being dismissed on probation in light of the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions?" So, has anything changed, Caroline?

Caroline:  So, I suppose this has always been a debate prior to the Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions, and there's nothing specific in the legislation that mentions the right to representation or the right appeal.

However, what we have emphasised in this morning's session is some case law examples where ensuring fair procedures are in place during probation.

Obviously, we also mentioned "What does the contract say?" So, in the example of Over-C Technology, it said, "We can terminate during probation for no reason or any reason whatsoever". However, in the hotel example or in the Ergo example, in both of those we spoke about the Labour Court and the WRC emphasising the need to facilitate fair procedures.

So, again, like all of these scenarios, you need to consider what your policy in your organisation says. And if your organisation says, "During probation you can have somebody with you, or you can appeal it", then that's something that you need to afford to the employee.

I think in most cases, we always try and exhaust the internal process to facilitate the employee to feel they've got fair process. Even though they may not win their case in the WRC because you have dotted the Is and cross the Ts and don't feel you need to offer, for example, an appeal, you might be best advised to do so if the employee is insisting that they want it. Otherwise, it's likely they will go to the WRC and you're going to have to defend the claim there.

So, even though you might be successful in defending it, it's still time and distraction that you may not need to do if you give them that internal opportunity.

So, like most things from a HR and unemployment perspective, each case turns on its own facts, so you need to know the full detail before you make a final decision. But I think we've given good guidance there, Julie, in terms of points to consider in relation to that.

Julie:  Okay, thanks very much. And this one is probation related as well, and it's almost that exceptional basis. Can you argue that extending somebody's probation as opposed to dismissing them is in their best interest? So, for example, you get to six months and it's either you terminate the contract or you give them an extended period so that they won't be unemployed. Again, what would you advise around that?

Caroline:  I think you'd have to show very clearly that you've been giving that structured feedback all the way through probation, and there's a very good chance of them passing the probation in the coming weeks after that. Otherwise, you are basically back to pre-Transparent and Predictable Working Conditions legislation where you're just extending the probation. And I think you'd have to make a very good business case as to why you would do that.

For example, you may say, and some of my clients do say, "Caroline, it's a skill that I can't get. They're very difficult to get and I prefer to take a risk and extend". Of course, again, you can prove the rationale, etc. But I would say extending should be a rare exception, that you have a very strong business case.

And again, I flagged also the legislation that you need to be aware of if somebody is taking a case. So, that's always a consideration when making that decision as well.

Julie:  That's great. Thank you. Now, I think that those are most of the questions that we have at the moment.

Caroline:  Brilliant.

Julie:  So, thank you very much, as always. Well-organised and fantastic presentation, and thank you for answering all those questions for us as well.

So, we'll just move on to the next slide then. Caroline had mentioned that The HR Suite . . . she regularly features at Legal-Island events, but also those are the contact details for The HR Suite. You can take a look at those and get in touch with Caroline and see what else she's up to in relation to articles and events as well.

As I mentioned, as well, this webinar will be available later on, so it'll be available on Spotify, Amazon Music, and Apple Podcasts as well. So, if you didn't get a chance to listen to the whole thing or you want to go back over and just listen again to make sure that you picked everything up that you can, then, again, please come back to any of those applications in order to pick it up later on.

And then I just want to go through a couple of events with you as well. So, you'll see that we have on the screen that we have our Data Protection Update in Ireland 2023, which is on 14 May. This event is specifically designed to provide you with a comprehensive overview of the data protection issues that matter to HR professionals and employers. And our GDPR experts will set out the most important data protection risks and solutions facing employers and their organisations.

We also have one of the areas that Caroline had mentioned about managers and about people being aware of those essentials about employment law. So, this is an online training event that will give attendees a thorough grounding in the main components of employment law in Ireland.

And as you can see, with so many changes taking place in today's workplaces, including hybrid and remote working, an understanding of core employment laws is now more important than ever before.

So, this will be an interactive two half-day online event. It's delivered by a team of highly experienced employment law experts. Attendees will also receive a comprehensive pack of notes as well as several practical exercises that they'll work through throughout the sessions to help enforce your learning.

We have an early bird pricing available at the moment, and it's available up until 5 May. So, act fast to save up to €70.

So, to find out more about either of those, please visit www.legal-island.ie/events.

I just want to thank Caroline for an informative session. And thank you to all of you for attending with us today and for sending us your questions in advance and sending some through the session as well. Thanks very much as well to Maria for offering tech support. We look forward to seeing you next time.

Sponsored by: