Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 20 June 2019

Joint Oireachtas Committee on Social Protection

Bogus Self Employment: Discussion (Resumed)

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

I thank Unite the Union and Captain Cullen for appearing before us and for their very interesting presentations. A number of points that Captain Cullen made stick out. In his presentation he states that only about half of pilots operating in Irish registered airlines are employed directly by those airlines and that the rate of so-called self-employment among pilots here is three times the European average. Why is that the case?

In regard to safety, I am absolutely stunned by what he has said about safety implications. I will keep to my usual practice and stay at home for my holidays this year again. In his opening statement, he states:

According to the University of Ghent, nearly half of self-employed pilots struggle to amend instructions of the airline based on their own safety or liability objections – so atypical employment can have an influence on the independent decision-making process and safety choices made by crews during or before flights.

Will he elaborate on that point?

The Chairman asked about IALPA's approach to the Revenue Commissioners and to the scope section of the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection. I think that what is happening in respect of the association's difficulties with scope raises questions as to whether there is any interest in enforcing what we all understand to be the law of the land?

In his opening statement Captain Cullen points out the criteria set out by the Revenue Commissioners and demonstrates very clearly that these criteria point almost exclusively in one direction, to employee rather than self-employed. Has there been any discussion with the Revenue Commissioners about this? How can the Revenue Commissioners stand over a situation whereby their criteria are being so clearly ignored?

I want to raise the structure of these companies. Apparently companies are set up, where the people who are being appointed as directors of the company do not know the other directors. My understanding is that under company law there has to be a board meeting at least once a year, there has to be an AGM. This seems to be driving a coach and four through company law. Has anybody even attempted to enforce the law of the land in this regard? It beggars belief.

I want to thank Unite the Union for its presentation. Most of what the union is saying is not news to me because I have said it repeatedly. I put forward legislation to deal with this situation which has disappeared into the Bermuda Triangle, like much of the legislation being put forward by the Opposition.

Unite the Union certainly justifies what I have been trying to argue on the figures. The figures would strongly indicate that this is a growing phenomenon. We have raised this and other issues with the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection and asked questions in the Dáil. The Minister is trying to argue that the phenomenon is reducing. All the anecdotal evidence in my constituency and further afield is that it is a growing phenomenon and that as a result of the development of the gig economy, it will grow further. I thank the union for producing the figures which will be useful ammunition when we get to debate this subject in the future.

I note also the State seems to be a willing participant in this scandal. The State should use its purchasing power. When the State employs a contractor to build an extension to a school, to repair a school or to build a school, a price is agreed and the State has no further involvement. It does not care what the contractors are doing or how many are bogus self-employed. The State acts as if it is a completely independent player and has no involvement whatsoever.

The witness has cited the case of the two accredited language schools in Dublin, which are forcing teachers who are employed by the schools to pretend for tax, social welfare and employment law purposes that they are self-employed. That is outrageous.

I thank the witnesses for their presentations which have given us food for thought and extra ammunition in our campaign to do something about this.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.