Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

Under existing law, directors are required to have regard to the interests of employees. This amendment would change it to a duty to employees. This may mean that members and employees would have a directly enforceable right against directors where they act contrary to their respective interests. This would compromise the fundamental structure of the directors' relationship with the company, which is described to be fiduciary, that is to say it requires directors to prefer the interests of the company over their interests or those of others, even where those others include some members of the company.

The amendment puts into question the status of the law of oppression, which is the principal protection of minority shareholders under the current law and much of the employment law. Such a vague and general declaration of a duty without any explanation as to how it interacts with existing law would serve to create great uncertainty in company law. This is directly contrary to one of the key objectives of the Bill, which is to clarify directors' duties. The amendment may also breach constitutional property rights.

Ultimately, bolstering protections for employees should be done using employment law. These provisions only serve to complicate company law and do nothing to protect employees of partnerships and sole traders and public employees. Therefore, I am not in favour of adopting this amendment.