Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 10, 12 and 13 could disrupt the balance contained within the Bill that protects the rights and obligations both of employers and employees. To be very clear, if we wanted an excuse not to do this, there were plenty of excuses in the last 24 months and in terms of what is to be ahead of us in the next six or seven months. The Tánaiste still is determined to bring this legislation through the Dáil because he is committed to this and believes it is the right thing to do for the country. To say anybody would want an excuse is wrong because we are here today bringing forward legislation that is weighted and balanced in favour employees, employers and public health. I would not be recommending the legislation to the members if I did not think it was weighted and balanced correctly. It is not heavily weighted in favour of anybody.

We should also recognise that the employer is paying for this, and not anybody else. That should be borne in mind. The legislation is weighted fairly across the board.

It is a progressive Bill and it will ensure that all employees will have financial protection from day one of a medically certified absence. However, the Government does not want to jeopardise jobs by placing an unsustainable cost and administrative burden on business. That is why this is to be phased in over a period of time. The introduction of a statutory sick pay scheme must be balanced with the need to support the viability of the business and enterprise sector, thereby protecting the jobs that we all dearly cherish in this country. It is entirely logical that the Minister would have regard to the state of the Irish economy, of the business environment and of national competitiveness before adjusting the number of paid sick leave days provided for under this Bill. To do otherwise would be reckless and it could lead to unintended negative consequences.

In recent times, as Deputy Bruton just said, we have witnessed a series of unprecedented and unforeseen events that have had significant impacts on the global and Irish economy, including Brexit, the Covid-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine. These events are by their very nature unplanned. Their impacts may be more widely felt by specific sectors of the economy. It is only reasonable that the Minister of the day would take account of any economic shocks when adjusting the number of paid sick leave days that employers are required to cover. There is no sense in adjusting the number of sick leave days to a level that is unsustainable for businesses and that would lead to a loss of jobs. Nobody would win in that situation and nobody would want that. This is about what is fair and right for employees and for employers.

Certain sectors, particularly the retail, hospitality and caring sectors, may be more impacted by sick-related absences than others. We touched on this earlier on. From a cash point of view, employers would have to replace a worker in a customer service role immediately as they would not be able to absorb the work in other ways. These sectors may have the additional cost, when an employee is absent through illness, of paying for an immediate replacement. Ireland's body of employment rights protects all employees equally and we have always avoided the creation of subcategories of rights by sector. That is why we spoke earlier about business supports being handled in other ways through our business development agencies, and not in legislation that gives rights to workers. This is the correct way to do things. Rights should be universal and not by category when it comes to this situation. Yet, the corollary is that sectors which bear greater costs in respect of certain rights should be taken into consideration when new entitlements are being introduced.

Regarding amendment No. 11, these matters are already covered under subsection (1), which provides that the Minister may consider, inter alia, the state of the economy, the impact on employers and employees, the views of trade unions and any other matters the Minister deems relevant. This provides flexibility and allows the Minister to consider all relevant issues, in addition to those that are specifically mentioned under the Bill. Subsection (1)(e) was introduced in response to the recommendations of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment’s pre-legislative scrutiny report on the general scheme of the sick leave Bill, which recommended that the legislation should provide for consultation with the social partners in relation to the implementation of its provisions. Hence, we have made that change. We took this recommendation on board and we included this requirement in section 6. We have taken a collaborative approach in developing this legislation and we wish to ensure that is fair to both employers and employees. We believe that this is the right approach, and we will continue to engage with both employer and employee representative bodies going forward. It would be unfair to consult only with trade unions, which amendment No. 13 would provide for.

The effects of inflation and the cost of living for employees are not particularly relevant matters when considering the number of sick leave days provided for under the Bill, although they are relevant right across the board at Government level. These issues would be more relevant when considering the minimum and maximum rates of payment. That is naturally something that we will deal with in the regulation.