Ms Michele Rohan:

Regarding the over-55 cohort, two thirds of those on my scheme are aged over 55 and one third of participants are aged over 60. Those aged over 55 do not have to engage with training. Prior to the last contract approved with the Department of Social Protection, I had a 40% progression rate. I do not know how I am supposed to get 40% of my participants into a job if two thirds of them are over 55 and one third is over 60.

I had a training goal for years 1, 2 and 3, which included a certain number of minor and major awards, which is impossible when half of those involved do not have to engage. Last year, the progression target for me was reduced to 25%. In the middle of Covid, that was very difficult. I managed to get some into employment. These are the targets that are, in some cases, imposed on us and we are not able to achieve them.

What was very welcome is the fact that the over-60s were allowed to stay on the scheme but that blew my target out of the water. We need more flexibility for our scheme. For me, taking on two extra sponsors and four people last year meant an extra workload. It means I have to go to two extra areas every day and do individual learning plans, ILPs, payroll and so on for four extra people without any additional increments for me or any benefit. It simply gives me more work to do.

Mr. Mahon referred to helping people with form filling and that sort of thing. My scheme is more about rural social inclusion. If I have to do extra paperwork for some people, which I will have to do, that is on top of all of the information and paperwork I have to have in place for the Department of Social Protection. In terms of the bureaucracy and red tape involved, almost 70% of my time, including ILP, welfare partners and payroll, is taken up with such work. Before I even get out to see what jobs need to be done, I get calls from sponsors. It is a significant responsibility and the stress level on supervisors at the moment is quite significant. That is before we even talk about pay, terms and working conditions.

On material budgets, we used to get €20 per participant prior to the recession, which was cut in some cases to €8 or €9. None of us have gone back to €20. I have gone back up to €15. There are different figures across the country. No two areas are the same. The direction from the CDO in one part of the country can be completely different to that given in another.

As supervisors we have established a network whereby we are able to communicate with one another about training and get better pricing. We have reduced our insurance costs. There are three different insurance companies in the market and various different costs per person. All we had to do was check what people in Kerry or Donegal were paying, and we were then able to use that information. Insurance companies realised we were communicating. As a result of this communication, we got better pricing for training. This is something that supervisors have initiated. It has not come from the Department of Social Protection.

We are saving money but at the same time, we are not getting recognition for any of that. We have become more efficient, proficient and professional in what we are doing. I cannot understand why someone in one part of the country is getting €15 per person for materials, but someone in another is getting €12.50, €9 or €10. Some sort of uniformity needs to come from policy.

Everything has to go back to policy. Yesterday, I was asked if I could deal with a playground. Playgrounds are being built, but once they get funding and are up and running there is nobody to cut the grass and look after them. I now have to ask whether I can include that area and get approval from policy, via the CDO. I have to get an amendment to the agreement, if it is agreed. I then have to go back to the insurance company and ask whether we can add that in. Nobody has asked me about the extra work that will entail and whether I will be able to do it.

I was asked if I could add in a walkway. Every pitch in the country has doubled their grounds and added walkways, but we have not doubled our number of people. It is only in the past couple of weeks that, as people have come off the pandemic unemployment payment, PUP, and we are getting some referrals, I have been able to increase my numbers near to where they should be. Nobody has considered the fact that we now have four pitches to deal with rather than two and only one person instead of two people. We need a little bit of joined-up thinking.

As supervisors, we need to be able to give advice and our opinion on what is happening. However, we are kept at arm's length because we are not employees of the Department of Social Protection; we are employees of limited companies whose boards are all working full-time or comprise people who are semi-retired or retired and depend on us to give them guidance.