David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I commend Mr. John O'Sullivan for lodging the petition which means the committee can have a discussion on all of the issues. I do not have a difficulty with a streamlining of the employment rights bodies and making them more effective for the employee and for the employer. The new single body of first instance and the new appeals body can work well if properly structured.

When will that Bill be before the Houses of the Oireachtas? Workers and employers need to have certainty.

I wish to make some observations and to ask questions arising from Mr. O'Sullivan's contribution and those of the witnesses. The first three questions relate to penalties for employers who breach employment law sanctions currently in place or perhaps sanctions which are not in place, and the enforcement of awards. Mr. Niall McCutcheon painted a picture of a service which is very easy to work with and is very worker-friendly. That is not everyone's experience. For example, it is not a level playing field for a young worker or any worker in a vulnerable position who takes a court case and is up against an employer's legal team.

I can give a personal example. When I was 20 years of age I took a case to one of the employment rights bodies. I won my case and an award was made. I had to go to the Circuit Court twice to have the award enforced. I never received one single penny, despite the fact that the sheriff served notice on the employer. I was not a member of a trade union at the time, which was my mistake. I was a victim of that system and nothing much has changed in the past 20 years for the many people who find themselves in a similar situation. I found it difficult to listen to the contribution from IBEC which referred to frivolous claims by workers. Perhaps the representatives can give the committee a definition of what is a frivolous claim.

On the question of costs, there may not be a cost involved in taking a case to an employment body as such, but there is a cost involved in terms of time off work. Even if the claimant is represented by a trade union this is at a cost to the trade union which is passed on to the members through their subscriptions. People who are not members of trade unions will feel the need to have legal representation. These are the associated costs. I hope the new regime will correct some of those points. The sanctions are certainly not strong enough for some employers who blatantly disregard employment rights law.

On many occasions, unscrupulous employers simply do not pay their workers overtime, holiday pay, redundancy entitlements or whatever. They do so in the full knowledge that the worst that can happen to them is that they will be brought before an employment rights body and asked to pay. That is not good enough. The sanctions are just not adequate and they do not encourage employers to do the right thing. I hope this matter will be contemplated by the review that is taking place. My experience in this regard is that the sanctions are not strong enough. The enforcement measures certainly are not strong enough because in many instances awards have been made but these were not binding and were never enforced.

I brought forward a Private Members' Bill on informal insolvency. The legislation in question was very straightforward in nature and would have allowed - in circumstances where a company is, to all intents and purposes, insolvent but where a liquidator has not been appointed - employees to access the insolvency fund. At present, employees can take cases under the provisions of the Organisation of Working Time Act, they can be given awards and they know exactly that to which they are entitled. However, they cannot apply for moneys under the insolvency fund and, as such, they find themselves in a legal limbo. That is grossly unfair. There is an opportunity, whether by means of the budget, the companies legislation or the proposed workplace relations Bill, to resolve this anomaly. It simply cannot be allowed to be left unresolved. If we do not use the budget or the legislation to which I refer in order to deal with this matter, it will be a major mistake on our part.