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

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 6, between lines 24 and 25, to insert the following:

“(b) by the insertion of the following subsection after subsection (1):

“(1A) Where a European Works Council stands established pursuant to the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act 1996 in relation to the employment in which it is proposed to create collective redundancies, the employer or responsible person shall, in addition to the requirements of subsection (1), with a view to reaching agreement, initiate consultation with the European Works Council.”,”.

This relates to what representatives of both Irish and European trade unions as well as business stakeholders, along with the European Commission, have identified as an issue, namely, that Irish legislation transposing the European works council directive, specifically the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act 1996, as amended, fails to make it clear that disputes involving European works councils can be referred to the WRC in the first instance and then to the Labour Court for a legally-binding decision. It appears the Department rejects this argument and points to recent references of EWC disputes to the WRC and now to the Labour Court. However, these disputes concern individual members of European works councils who believe their rights have been denied to them. The Department's position does not address the point that European works councils, as collective bodies, do not appear to have the right of access to the WRC or the court. This leaves us very much out of line with other EU jurisdictions. We have discussed this at this committee with representatives from trade unions and other European organisations. Substantial disputes can arise between European works councils and management when job losses are involved, which is what we are here to discuss with respect to collective redundancies.

This amendment makes it clear that where Irish-based European works councils need to be informed and consulted over job losses, then they will have access to the State's dispute resolution procedures if the need arises. This would be a first step in correcting the gaps in the legislation. The Minister of State might take the position that the Commission will soon be publishing proposals to revise the EWC directive and changes to this legislation should await the outcome of the process, but there are going to be European Parliament elections in 2024, a new Commission is going to be appointed and it will be four or five years at the earliest before the EWC law is changed. This is too long.

I am interested in the Minister of State's view. Is it his position there is enough there already because individuals can go to the WRC and then on to the Labour Court? Alternatively, is it his position that it is not ideal and that there is not enough there, but that if we wait the Commission may act?