A complaint has been dismissed by the Workplace Relations Commission, brought forward by a TikTok employee, Alina Karabko, who claimed her employer took no account of her requirements when her request to work entirely from her home was rejected. TikTok Technology Ltd, the responding party, was accused by Ms Karabko of not judging her appeal to maintain fully remote work in line with the 2023 Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Act.
Ms Karabko argued that issues obtaining housing in Dublin, among other factors, indicated that the corporation prioritised only its business needs and totally ignored her as an employee. TikTok’s management conveyed to her that in-office collaboration and idea exchange are crucial to the company’s operations and that face-to-face communication offers superior problem-solving methods, something not achievable via remote working.
She further mentioned that during her work week, her colleagues worked from their residences on varying days, resulting in the entire team never being present simultaneously at the office. Her work for the North American and Canadian sectors means her colleagues are not located in Dublin, which is compounded by time zone differences.
Ms Karabko explained she didn’t have a residence in Dublin, and her commute to the office would require her to leave home at 3am for a two-and-a-half-hour drive to reach by 7am.She remarked that the company informed her that employees were given an adequate heads-up to secure accommodation. TikTok countered by stating that her January 2022 contract as a core operations specialist deemed her ‘normal place of work’ to be the company’s Dublin office.
The firm revealed it has incorporated a clause in the company contracts which stipulates that due to the health threats posed by the coronavirus pandemic, the firm may, as and when necessary, ask staff members to perform their duties remotely, even from their homes. This is aimed at promoting their health and safety and adhering to regulatory guidelines.
TikTok, on the 25th of July, 2023, declared that all staff members, who were not previously required to come back to the office, would be expected to return with effect from 9th October 2023. The statement made it clear that all staff are expected to report to the office at least three times a week, unless local laws or regulations suggest otherwise.
According to the firm, one employee had not attended the office at all from the 9th of October, 2023, and had continued working from home full-time. The company asserted, “Against the employee’s belief that she can function fully from her home, prioritises the firm’s research-driven belief that employee presence in the office at least three days a week enhances productivity and efficiency”.
The company maintained its prerogative to decide what would be in the best interests of the business. Following a comprehensive investigation of the complaint, adjudication officer Marie Flynn dismissed it. Flynn confirmed that the company’s response to the complaint was adequately thought through, with HR personnel and a manager from the employee’s work environment meeting several times to scrutinising the matter in-depth. Flynn concluded that the firm duly adhered to section 21(1)(a) of the Act.