Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

That is very welcome. I ask that when the Minister and Minister of State consider the amendment that they ensure the people who are intended to be captured in it do not have an additional requirement. Reference has been made to the need for a worker to be repeatedly employed. Let us say we stick with the 13 weeks, then a worker will end up with a 26-week requirement in a certain instance. Let us say a worker signs his or her first contract at the start of 2000 and qualifies after 13 weeks, then experiences a period of being laid off, then signs another contract at the start of 2001 and has a another 13-week period, that means that worker will have needed a 26-week period to qualify when another worker would only have a 13-week period, assuming that we stick with the latter period. If there is a service requirement, then it cannot be doubled only for the person who finds himself or herself in the precarious situation of having rolling contracts. I ask the Minister of State to keep that practical aspect in mind.

I hope to support the amendment but the result of it cannot impose an additional requirement on a person. We have already established these people are among the most vulnerable workers in the State and, therefore, the Government cannot make the period of 26 weeks or double whatever the service qualification is going to be. Of course, if the Minister of State accepts the amendments tabled by either of my colleagues, then he would not have that problem as employees would qualify from day one. If that is not the way the Minister of State is going to tackle this matter, then, if there is a service requirement, it cannot be double the period for someone on a low income.