Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

We debated this at some length in the other House. As I said in response to the Deputy on the last amendment, the basis of this legislation is to afford workers protection against harm, if one likes, in terms of their employment status, so that nobody can demote them, ensure they would not get proper remuneration, fire them or exclude them from promotion. None of that applies to volunteers.

The idea, in essence, is to ensure that people can out wrongdoing without detriment to themselves. The problem with volunteers is that there is no contractual relationship and, as they are not paid, they do not fall into the normal definition that would require the sort of supports and protections the Bill sets out for workers in the broadest possible way. Normal workers have a role in employment within an organisation. If they have information on which they want to blow the whistle, they should be able to do that without detriment to themselves.

That applies to a volunteer. There is no financial or employment consequence an employer can impose on a volunteer in that context. I have examined international best practice in this area and it shows that volunteers are not generally included in this type of legislation. I do not see a compelling case for their inclusion in these provisions. Moreover, it would be very difficult for a volunteer to find a mechanism that would fit him or her within the architecture of this protection system. Seeking a restitution of position, pay or anything like this from the Labour Court would not apply. Having said that, I am interested in hearing the Deputy's views on how this might work.