David Cullinane (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the witnesses and thank them for their presentations. Representatives of a number of employer organisations appeared before the committee last week, so this is our second set of hearings on this issue. Obviously, we are examining low pay and a living wage, as well as income and economic inequality across the economy.

There is a clear conflict between what the employer organisations have said, and will say, and what the trade unions say. That is probably no surprise. The problem is that we all appear to be saying the same thing, that we want a fair economy and workers to have decent wages, but the approaches are certainly not the same. I am interested to hear the witnesses' views on what the employer organisations have said, because there are differences even in terms of the data that are provided. It would helpful to hear their views. The Irish Business and Employers Confederation says that the minimum wage is appropriate, competitive and affordable while also taking account of changes in the cost of living. It goes on to say that the living wage comes with a fiscal cost as it will hurt employment. What is their view on that?

The Irish Small and Medium Enterprises association said that the real concern for workers is not a national minimum wage subject to tax deductions, and that such a concern would be the responsibility of the State. It talked about the social responsibility of the State and said it is not the responsibility of employers to deal with wealth redistribution. We hear that from all of the employer organisations. ISME said it is not the responsibility of employers to be wealth distributors in the economy and that increasing the minimum wage is a blunt instrument in addressing poverty and only serves to increase the cost base of business.

Those are the arguments they have made against increasing the minimum wage and moving to a living wage, or increasing wages generally in the economy. What is the response of the witnesses to that? In terms of the three constituent trade unions, do they support an increase in the minimum wage? If so, at what level? Do the individual unions support a living wage and how would they envisage that being implemented and over what timeframe?

The second question relates to the challenge workers face. Perhaps the witnesses could give examples of the human cost of the facts that we have. The Unite presentation referred to almost 400,000 workers who are working but who are living in poverty, with huge levels of deprivation, and the 20% of the workforce on low pay. What is the human, social and economic cost of that?

My third question is about precarious work and under-employment. While we can increase the minimum wage hourly rate or increase wages generally, that does not achieve much for a worker on a low-hours contract in terms of their overall situation. How important is dealing with precarious work and under-employment when dealing with the issue of low pay and in-work poverty?

Finally, the employer organisations appear to be saying that we should continue building an economy on low pay. They are against increasing the overall tax take, despite the fact that we have one of the lowest levels of tax take in the EU. They are also against wage-setting mechanisms and collective bargaining. Are there examples of countries that have much better and more robust employment legislation, better and fairer progressive taxation systems and better wages that are more competitive than us? Where do we fit in competitiveness terms given that we have such high levels of low pay, low levels of overall taxation and rate very badly in respect of weak wage-setting mechanisms?