Employer's Guidance on the Transparent and Predictable Working Time Regulations

February 10, 2023

With the introduction of the Transparent and Predictable Working Time Regulations, many of our clients are considering what the practical implications are when it comes to dealing with probation periods and contracts;


Probationary Periods


The new regulations now restrict employers when it comes to probation periods. Employers cannot set probation periods which are longer than six months, unless exceptional circumstances apply, but in such a case it must be ‘in the interest of the employee do to so’.

So, what does this mean in practical terms for employers?


Well, effectively it means that extending a probation period should be the exception rather than the rule. Employers may still extend, but only if it is for the benefit of the employee, such as it could be to the benefit of the employee to extend the probation, if the alternative is a decision to terminate. However, it remains to be seen how the WRC will interpret this and we recommend employers exercise caution from flippantly extending probation periods, and should make a concerted effort to review the employees’ performance during the initial six month period, thereby identifying issues as early as possible and limiting the number of occasions when it is necessary to extend a probation period to exceptional circumstances only.


If an employee is absent during the probation period, the regulations do allow you to extend the probation period to reflect this.


Do employers need to remove the extension clause from contracts?

Employers should not remove clauses that allow them to extend the probation period but should tailor them to reflect the regulations, in that they should allow for an extension on an exceptional basis and where such an extension is ‘is in the interest of the employee’.


We recommend you contact MSS-The HR People for further guidance or review of probation clauses, and that you implement probation reviews so that you can demonstrate, if challenged, that an employee’s performance was being assessed from day one and that extending their probation period wasn’t due to a laissez-faire attitude towards assessing performance earlier than the six-month deadline.


Terms and Conditions

The Regulations have extended the amount of information that needs to be imparted to employees within the mini statement of terms as per the Employment Miscellaneous Provision Act 2020.


Previously employers were required to ensure that they issued a mini-statement of terms, within the first five days of employment, including the following;

  • The full name of the employer and the employee
  • The address of the employer
  • The expected duration of the contract
  • The method of calculating pay and the pay reference period
  • The expected length of the working day and week

This information has now been extended and employers must also ensure the following is reflected in their mini- statements;

  • Duration and condition of the probationary period, if one is in place.
  • The location of work or where there is no fixed or main place of work, confirmation that the employee is employed at various places or is free to determine their own place of work.
  • The commencement date, title, grade, nature or category of work, or a brief specification or description of work and details of the terms and conditions relating to hours of work (including overtime).

Timeframes for Issuing Terms and Conditions

Importantly, another change is that employers must now ensure they issue a full statement of Terms and Conditions of employment to employees within one month of their commencement of employment, as opposed to the two-month period previously required.


Employers should ensure they make a note of this one-month period, as soon as an employee starts, so that they do not allow any employee to pass this date without receiving a full statement of terms. Failure to do this will be a breach of the Act and could result in an award of up to four weeks’ payment as compensation against the Company.


In line with best practice, we recommend that employers issue a full statement of terms and conditions before an employee commences in their role with you, as this avoids the requirement to issue a mini statement and also failure to do this can result in unnecessary delays and administrative burdens chasing paperwork. 


Changes to the definition of a contract of employment

The Regulations have expanded the definition of contract of employment to now include ‘an individual agrees with another person personally to execute any work or service for that person’. Generally speaking, this means that employees who are working under a ‘self-employed’ arrangement could be deemed to be an employee.


It has always been the case that the status of those working for an employer on a ‘self-employed’ basis could be subject to challenge and review by the revenue or through industrial bodies such as the WRC, in relation to whether or not they should be deemed to be an employee.

These new regulations further emphasize the importance for employers in assessing the legitimacy of any ‘self-employed’ arrangements, to ensure that those entitled to receive any employment law entitlements, do so.


We also offer advice on DISMISSAL DURING PROBATION - An Employers Guide


For further advice and guidance on self-employment or on any other matters outlined above, as always, feel free to contact the team at MSS- the HR People


Contact Us
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
The Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) has updated its Code of Practice on Access to Part-Time Work, providing clearer guidance on best practices for employers and employees in today’s flexible working environment. While the revised Code is similar to the previous version, it adopts a more positive tone towards part-time work, presenting it as a modern and flexible way of working rather than an exception . In particular, the Code places greater emphasis on work–life balance considerations, including from the perspective of parents and carers. Although the Code does not create a legal right to part-time work, it sets clear expectations for employers in terms of how requests should be handled and reinforces the importance of fair and consistent treatment of employees. Key Updates and Takeaways Part-Time Work as a Positive Option The updated code recognises part-time work as a valuable way to enhance labour market participation and provide flexibility. Employers are encouraged to view part-time arrangements as a strategic and beneficial option, rather than a limitation. Equal Treatment A central principle of the code is that part-time employees must not be treated less favourably than full-time employees. This means that pay, benefits, access to training, and career progression should be proportionate and fair, ensuring that part-time staff are not at a disadvantage. Structured Procedures for Requests A key development in the revised Code is the increased emphasis on employers adopting a clear, step-by-step framework when dealing with requests to move between full-time and part-time work. Employers are encouraged to: Review and update policies to reflect the code’s guidance. Respond to requests following a clear, structured procedure. Provide meaningful reasons if a request cannot be accommodated. Rather than informal consultation alone, requests should now be considered through a structured and documented process. Flexible Roles and Recruitment The revised Code encourages employers to consider whether part-time working can be accommodated at the point of job design and recruitment. This may include job-sharing arrangements, flexible schedules, or adjusting workloads to maintain role effectiveness. Responsibilities of Employers and Employees Under the revised code, employers are expected to establish clear policies, actively monitor roles for flexibility, provide part-time employees with equal access to training, and ensure that no employee is penalised for requesting part-time work. It is equally important to communicate with all staff about part-time opportunities, including how to request them and the criteria used to assess requests. Clear communication helps maintain transparency and ensures a fair, consistent approach to flexible working across the organisation. Employees, in turn, are responsible for complying with agreed arrangements, understanding that not all roles may be suitable for part-time work, and performing their duties as required. Both employers and employees play an important role in making part-time arrangements fair, transparent, and effective. Legal Relevance Although the code is not legally binding, it is admissible in evidence. Adjudicators may rely on it when assessing whether an employer’s approach to part-time work requests is reasonable, fair and aligned with best practice. What Does This Mean for Your Business? The revised Code encourages employers to take a more structured and considered approach to part-time working, while also protecting the operational needs of the business. For SMEs in particular, clear procedures and consistent decision-making are essential to managing requests effectively and avoiding unintended legal or operational risks. Having a documented process helps employers demonstrate fair consideration of requests, apply objective business grounds where flexibility is not feasible, and maintain continuity of service. Done properly, part-time arrangements can support retention and engagement without undermining productivity or resourcing.  Part-time work should not be viewed as an automatic entitlement or an informal arrangement. Employers are encouraged to review their policies, communicate expectations clearly, and ensure that any flexibility granted is sustainable, consistent, and defensible if challenged. If you need any assistance reviewing your company policies in line with this revised Code of Practice, please do not hesitate to contact MSS The HR People. PH: 018870690 Email: info@mssthehrpeople.ie
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
A recent Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) decision highlights the significant risks employers face when they fail to follow fair procedures in managing employee illness and highly sensitive personal circumstances. In this case, a sushi chef who was dismissed shortly after suffering a miscarriage was awarded €8,000 in compensation for unfair dismissal. The decision serves as an important reminder to employers that regardless of previous concerns around attendance or conduct, employers must act reasonably, compassionately and in accordance with fair procedures. Background of the Case The complainant was employed as a sushi chef with Beacon Sushi Limited. In early 2024, she informed her employer that she was unwell and subsequently confirmed that she had suffered a miscarriage. She later provided a medical certificate covering her absence from work. Approximately five days after the miscarriage, the employee received a WhatsApp message notifying her that her employment was being terminated and that she was expected to work her notice period, even though she was medically unfit to do so at the time. The employer claimed that the dismissal was due to concerns regarding timekeeping and the employees alleged failure to follow the company’s absence reporting procedures. WRC Findings The WRC adjudication officer found that the dismissal was unfair and was critical of the manner in which the employer handled the situation. The WRC noted that the dismissal letter did not set out any clear reasons for termination and that no meeting was held with the employee prior to the decision being made. In addition to this, the employee was never given an opportunity to respond to the concerns raised, nor was she afforded a right of appeal. The adjudicator also considered that the employer was aware of the employee’s medical circumstances when the dismissal decision was made. The WRC found that dismissing an employee in such circumstances, while she was on certified sick leave and without any fair or transparent process, fell well short of the standards required under Irish employment law. As a result, the employee was awarded €8,000 in compensation for unfair dismissal. Key Lessons for Employers This case serves as a reminder that fair procedures are essential in all dismissal situations, regardless of the surrounding circumstances. Even where an employer believes there are legitimate concerns relating to attendance or conduct, employees must be informed of those concerns, given a meaningful opportunity to respond, and provided with access to an appeal process. The decision also highlights the need for particular care where an employee is medically vulnerable or experiencing significant personal trauma. Employers are expected to exercise sensitivity and sound judgement when managing illness-related absences, particularly when the employer is already aware of the employee’s medical condition. Dismissals that take place during periods of certified sick leave carry an increased level of risk and will be closely scrutinised by the WRC. This risk is further heightened where dismissals are communicated informally, such as by text message or WhatsApp. Informal communication around dismissals has been repeatedly criticised by the WRC. Finally, the case demonstrates that management policies should be applied thoughtfully and must consider the individual circumstances at hand, rather than being rigid. While policies provide an important framework, they should not be used as a substitute for fair judgement or proper procedures. Conclusion This WRC decision is a timely reminder of the legal and reputational risks that can arise when employers fail to follow fair procedures, particularly in cases involving illness or sensitive personal circumstances. Employers should regularly review their practices around sick leave management, disciplinary procedures and dismissals, to ensure compliance with employment legislation and alignment with best practice.  If you require advice on managing sick leave, dismissals or disciplinary processes, please do not hesitate to contact MSS The HR People: Ph 018870690, Email: info@mssthehrpeople.ie
The Cost of a Bad Hire: Why Recruitment Decisions Matter More Than Ever
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
A bad hire is no longer just inconvenient. In today’s environment, a poor recruitment decision can cost an organisation tens of thousands of euro
When Workplace Rights Collide: UK Tribunal Ruling Highlights Employer Risk Complaint
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
A recent UK tribunal decision highlights the challenges employers face in balancing competing workplace rights, particularly around sex, gender identity and dignity.
Recruitment in 2026: Why Employers Are Struggling to Attract Talent and What Actually Works
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
Recruitment in 2026 is no longer about filling vacancies its about understanding candidate behaviour, expectations and risk tolerance in a post pandemic, high cost of living labour market.
WRC Awards €6,500 in Discriminatory Dismissal Sick Leave Case
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
A recent WRC decision highlighted the importance of handling sick leave and disability accommodations appropriately in the workplace.
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
Salary transparency is no longer optional.
Revenue Clampdown on ‘Bogus’ Self-Employment
By Tara Daly February 4, 2026
Revenue Commissioners are stepping up enforcement against bogus self-employment, situations where workers are incorrectly classified as self-employed
Last Minute Regulation on Auto Enrolment
By Tara Daly January 7, 2026
Last minute regulation signed by the Minister for Social Protection provides important clarification for employers ahead of the introduction of My Future Fund.
The EU Pay Transparency Directive: What Employers Need to Prepare for in 2026
By Tara Daly January 7, 2026
The Directive is designed to address gender pay inequality by increasing transparency around pay, recruitment practices and internal pay structures.