Willie O'Dea (Limerick City, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

On the jobseeker's transitional payment, the three-day rule is a disincentive to people to take up employment. A person can earn X amount over three days and get social welfare benefit for the remainder of the week. A person who earns exactly the same amount but does so over four or five days is not entitled to any social welfare payment. That is an anomaly. It constitutes a disincentive to a person who is working three days a week to take up more hours unless they can take them up within the three days. It can create a disincentive to take up a job for four days a week because the person will lose their social welfare payment. There are technical difficulties in moving from that system, which is a relatively simple system, to a hours worked based system. I am seeking a report on that to see if it would be possible to advance something along those lines.

I am also seeking a report on the matter referred to by Deputy Bríd Smith in her amendment concerning the change in the rules brought in by the previous Minister for Social Protection regarding qualification for the State contributory pension. Under the current system, a person who pays 520 contributions can, in some circumstances, be entitled to the full pension while a person who pays double that number of contributions might be entitled to a smaller pension. Obviously, that is unjust. That cannot be right. We have received many complaints on this issue. People are contacting me on a weekly basis asking what is happening about this. It is a grave injustice. People believe that the contribution of their payments have not been properly awarded on the basis that they know people who have paid fewer contributions who are in receipt of a higher pension. I understood the Minister to say, and he can correct me if I am wrong, that some work is being done on that within the Department. Is that correct? I take it we will discuss the family income payment in conjunction with the report on the working family dividend when it comes before this committee.

Subsection (7) of my amendment deals with part-time and seasonal workers. As my colleague, Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher, said this morning in the Dáil, this has particular relevance in Donegal and certain coastal counties. The method of, and regulations for, paying social welfare to seasonal and part-time workers has changed in recent years. In order to qualify for benefit, a person is now required to have 117 contributions over a three-year period. That equates to 39 contributions per annum. It is pretty difficult for people in seasonal and part-time work to make that number of contributions in that space of time. In addition to that, the subsidiary income threshold is €12.70 per day. That seems grossly unfair. That is €63 a week. If a seasonal worker earns that from farming, he or she is not entitled to unemployment benefit. People are told that they can depend on an income of €3,302 per annum, which in these times seems somewhat unreal.

There is also a new requirement that when a social welfare claim ceases, a person has to make 13 contributions in order to transfer on to the next claim. That does not make any allowance for the unique nature of seasonal work. Some Deputies from coastal counties have told me that they have been dealing with these people for up to 20 years and it is only in the past two or three years that they have had difficulty accessing the social welfare system. I am also advised that the current regulations are giving rise to skill shortages in seasonal and part-time work in businesses and that they urgently need to be addressed. If I were to propose an amendment to change the system, it would be ruled out of order on the basis that it would pose a charge on the Exchequer.

I am trying to put some focus on this problem because it affects a number of people, especially in coastal counties. On the face of it, it seems to be rather unfair. The system appears to me to warrant close examination. This is why I have proposed that we write into the Bill that the Department should carry out a report and then report back to the committee. I am interested to hear what the Minister has to say about it.