Ms Pauline O'Hare:

We were concerned about how the coverage of IBEC’s submission was reported. Looking at the submission in its context, what was reported was absolutely not reflective of what was stated. We fully support victims of domestic violence. In fact, in our engagements with the Department, which went on since March 2021, we made very clear to the Department the challenges that victims of domestic violence would face in having to show proof. In fact, within that submission, we called out coercive control as an issue. We know that section 39 of the Domestic Violence Act defines coercive control as including the fear of domestic violence. We directly asked the Department to explain how victims would be able to prove that fear when they are too afraid to go to the Garda. These are issues that we raised in our submission. When people are in vulnerable and precarious situations, how do they do that?

Coming back to IBEC’s position, as the Deputy mentioned many employers already give this leave and some do it as compassionate leave. The issue that arises is that when the Government decides to legislate for something and put a statutory framework around it, employers need to know how to comply with that legislation. They need to know how to apply the rules in a fair and equal way.

As the Deputy rightly pointed out, on 22 September the Department published its own report in which it recommended that employers reserve the right to ask for reasonable proof. Just to reiterate, employers are very sensitive to these situations. They understand the vulnerability and reserving a right is absolutely not the same as utilising that right. Employers apply compassion to these situations. We absolutely agree that there are difficulties with that proof and we have raised that on a number of occasions with the Department. It is important that we clarify that because it is very far from what was reported, which was that we demanded that proof be given. That is not the case and it is very important to say that. At no point did IBEC say it demanded that proof be required for domestic violence. We understand the difficulties that arise for employees in those situations.

If it is the case that proof is required, we need to know how to apply that. This is a Government decision. If it says no proof is required, employers still need to know how to comply with the legislation. There are other concerns around the general data protection regulation, GDPR. Do we need a legal basis to retain records? Will there be a statutory obligation to retain statutory records on a statutory piece of leave? If so, what do we do if there is an absence of evidence? This is what the Department needs to advise employers to do. There are concerns around that.

Employers absolutely do their best to meet their legal obligations and they are aware of the difficulties around domestic violence and the welfare of employees. They want to support employees in that situation. However, they need to know how to comply with that. If no proof is required, the WRC needs to know how it can determine whether an employee is a victim of domestic violence in the absence of proof. That is a matter for the Department-----