Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees

Thursday, 6 November 2014

Select Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation

Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage

SECTION 1

Question proposed: "That section 1 stand part of the Bill."

12:50 pm

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to make two comments. We are here to discuss a very important piece of industrial relations infrastructure, and I welcome many of the issues involved in it, but it is very difficult to debate this Bill while, in the background, a dispute is going on in the Kishogue site.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is not the appropriate forum for that. We are dealing specifically with this Bill. You know you are not allowed to refer to specific-----

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to make the Chairman aware that I will call a vote on every amendment-----

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You are not allowed to refer to a specific-----

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

------in 22 hours of debate, unless the Government starts to focus on the issues-----

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You are out of order and you know that.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will call a vote on every amendment. Currently, there are three investigation into the Kishogue site. None of those investigations is complete.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is highly irregular and you know that. You are experienced enough to know this is not appropriate.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

These individuals are working for €5 per hour, or €20 per day.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

You are sensible and experienced enough to know you are out of order.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Their families are impoverished and yet the-----

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

If you want me to ask you to leave, I will do so.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The function of the State-----

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Tóibín, please listen to, and respect, the Chair. You are an experienced politician and you know you are out of order. We are here to discuss the Workplace Relations Bill 2014. You also know as a member of this committee and of the Dáil that you are not entitled to speak specifically about individual companies. Please, respect the Chair and let us proceed with what we are supposed to be doing, namely, dealing with the Workplace Relations Bill 2014.

Question put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 6; Níl, 1.


Question declared carried.

12:55 pm

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose we return to private session to further discuss the issue at hand and to get a decision on how we will proceed with the Workplace Relations Bill 2014.

The select committee went into private session at 1.22 p.m. and resumed in public session at 1.38 p.m.

SECTION 2

1:00 pm

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will discuss amendments Nos. 1 to 5, inclusive, 23, 29 and 31 together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:


In page 8, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:" "Act of 1994" means the Maternity Protection Act 1994;
"Act of 1995” means the Adoptive Leave Act 1995;".
This is a technical amendment required in order to provide additional definitions and interpretations of key terms used throughout the Bill. It is also to clarify the intended scope of the application of the Bill to certain existing enactments.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 6; Níl, 1.


Amendment declared carried.

1:05 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:


In page 8, between lines 12 and 13, to insert the following:" "Act of 2012” means the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act 2012;".

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Perhaps I might make a proposal in response to the Minister's comments.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Does the Deputy wish to make it in private session?

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have no problem doing so in public session. The Minister has indicated that all investigations must be fair and objective. I would add the word "timely" to the list. Is there any estimate of when the investigations will take place? Are they likely to take place this year or in the next 24 months? I propose that we suspend the sitting until we receive a report of the status of the investigations.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I can give the Deputy a report on the agency under my control and seek information on the Department of Social Protection and the Revenue Commissioners which have statutory responsibilities in this area. The suspension of the sitting is unnecessary to enable me to seek that information and would not in any way be helpful in accelerating the gathering of the information from the agencies involved. I am happy to undertake to assemble the information for the Deputy.

I cannot guarantee that he will be happy with the information provided, because these are independent agencies that are conducting their work in a fair and objective way. However, I will assemble the information to the best of my ability.

1:10 pm

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the amendment agreed?

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 6; Níl, 1.


Amendment declared carried.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose that the select committee suspend for 15 minutes to clarify the position regarding votes.

Sitting suspended at 2 p.m. and resumed at 2.15 p.m.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The situation pertaining is that we must ring the bells for four minutes and then wait for four minutes or until the full membership is present before proceeding to take the vote.

1:15 pm

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We resume on amendment No. 3, which has been already discussed with amendment No. 1.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 3:


In page 8, to delete lines 20 to 23 and substitute the following:
" "employee" and "employer" shall be construed in accordance with section 3;".

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the amendment agreed?

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 6; Níl, 1.


Amendment declared carried.

1:20 pm

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 4:


In page 10, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:“ “worker” means, in relation to a relevant enactment, a worker within the meaning of that enactment.”.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not agree to the insertion of the amendment as it is unnecessary.

Photo of Anthony LawlorAnthony Lawlor (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is to clarify what is a worker because I feel like an unproductive worker at the moment. It is important to recognise that a worker is someone who is a productive worker. Sinn Féin's tactic is to make me, as a representative of the people of Kildare North, an unproductive worker and see taxpayers' money being spent in an unfruitful manner. It is not right.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 1; Níl, 6.


Amendment declared lost.

1:25 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Could we go into private session briefly? I have received information on one of the issues raised.

The select committee went into private session at 2.38 p.m. and resumed in public session at 2.42 p.m.

Section 2, as amended, agreed to.

NEW SECTION

1:30 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 5:


In page 10, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:"Construction of references to employer and employee
3. (1) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to a relevant enactment—
(a) references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to employer within the meaning of the relevant
enactment concerned, and
(b) references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to employee within such meaning.
(2) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the Act of 1946, references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to worker within the meaning of the Act of 1946.
(3) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the Act of 1994, references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to relevant employer within the meaning of the Act of 1994.
(4) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the Act of 1995—
(a) references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to relevant employer within the meaning of the Act of 1995, and
(b) references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to adopting parent within such meaning.
(5) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the Inland Fisheries Act 2010 (in this subsection referred to as the "Act of 2010"), references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to IFI within the meaning of the Act of 2010.
(6) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the Act of 2012—
(a) references in this Act to employer shall be construed as including references to hirer within the meaning of the Act of 2012, and
(b) references in this Act to employee shall be construed as including references to agency worker within such meaning.
(7) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the European Communities (Organisation of Working Time) (Mobile Staff in Civil Aviation) Regulations 2004 (S.I. No. 494 of 2004), references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to crew member within the meaning of those Regulations.
(8) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the European Communities (European Cooperative Society) (Employee Involvement) Regulations 2007 (S.I. No. 259 of 2007)—
(a) references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to relevant undertaking within the meaning of those Regulations or SCE within such meaning, as may be appropriate, and
(b) references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to a person referred to in clause (a), (b), (c) or (d) of Regulation 20(1) of those Regulations.
(9) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the European Communities (Cross Border Mergers) Regulations 2008 (S.I. No. 157 of 2008)—
(a) references in this Act to employer shall be construed as references to relevant company within the meaning of those Regulations, and
(b) references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to a person referred to in clause (a), (b), (c) or (d) of Regulation 39(1) of those Regulations.
(10) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the European Communities (Working Conditions of Mobile Workers engaged in Interoperable Cross Border Services in the Railway Sector) Regulations 2009 (S.I. No. 377 of 2009), references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to mobile worker within the meaning of those Regulations.
(11) For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent only that this Act applies, in relation to the European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012 (S.I. No. 36 of 2012), references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to mobile worker within the meaning of those Regulations.".
This is required to ensure there is no ambiguity as to how the provisions of this Bill are intended to impact on those of certain existing enactments. It includes, specifically, in respect of Deputy Tóibín's earlier amendment, in subsection (2), "For the purpose of the operation of this Act, and to the extent ... that this Act applies, in relation to the Act of 1946, references in this Act to employee shall be construed as references to worker within the meaning of the Act of 1946." That was why his amendment earlier was deemed unnecessary.

Amendment agreed to.

Sections 3 to 6, inclusive, agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 6 and 83 are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 6:


In page 11, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:“Repeal of enactments
7.(1) The enactments specified in column (3) of Schedule 2are repealed to the extent specified in column (4) of that Schedule.
(2) The repeals effected by subsection (1) shall not apply in respect of complaints or disputes made, presented or referred to a rights commissioner under an enactment specified in column (3) of Schedule 2before the commencement of Part 4.
(3) The repeal of section 11 of the Act of 1973 effected by subsection (1) shall not apply in relation to a dispute referred to the Employment Appeals Tribunal under that Act before the commencement of Part 4.
(4) The repeal of section 11 of the Act of 1977 effected by subsection (1) shall not apply in relation to a claim for redress under that Act brought before the commencement of Part 4.
(5) This section shall come into operation upon the commencement of Part 4.".
Amendment No. 6 is required to clarify the transitional arrangements that will apply in respect of complaints under relevant enactments. The amendment simplifies the arrangement that will apply to complaints under minimum notice and unfair dismissals legislation. The new arrangements provided for in the Bill will not apply to complaints under the aforementioned Acts where those complaints have been formally brought prior to the commencement of Part 4 of the Bill, when enacted. All such complaints referred after the commencement of Part 4 will be subject to the reformed procedures.
Amendment No. 83 is necessary to ensure that all relevant provisions within other individual enactments and statutory instruments which are provided for in Schedule 2 will be repealed upon the commencement of Part 4 of the Bill.
In simple terms, this is providing that the appeal procedures of the new provisions will apply once they are in place.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 7 deleted.

Sections 8 and 9 agreed to.

SECTION 10

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 have been deemed out of order.

Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 not moved.

Question proposed: "That section 10 stand part of the Bill."

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The clerk to the committee has advised me that we can resubmit those amendments for another Bill. The concept of those amendments were that pensioners and deferred pensioners in a company should have a right of representation when it comes to decisions being taken about companies, particularly about company pension funds. We have a situation this week where company pensioners are being subject to severe income cuts and they do not have the potential of making up that cut. I give notice that I will submitting amendments to the industrial relations (amendment) Bill in relation to the rights of company pensioners and company pension holders to be consulted when it comes to the industrial relations aspect of it.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 11 to 18, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 19

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 9 and 10 are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 9:


In page 17, line 30, to delete "may" and substitute "shall".
This amendment seeks to ensure the commission must consult trade unions and employers' groups when drawing up a code of practice. The Bill, as drafted, has not included that. It is a reasonable amendment to ensure the stakeholders in the process have the input they need.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am happy to accept that amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 10:


In page 17, line 31, after "appropriate" to insert ", including trade unions and employer representative bodies,".

Amendment agreed to.

Question proposed: "That section 19, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I want to give notice of an amendment for Report Stage. I am not sure whether I gave it earlier. In section 19, there should be a statement in every workplace of the statutory entitlements of staff. Under the Bill, every employee should have access to that statement.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will ensure section 19 is included on the Report Stage list as well.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 20 to 26, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 27

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 11, 12, 15, 17 and 18 are cognate and may be discussed together.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 11:


In page 24, line 38, to delete "42 days" and substitute "14 days".
Even referencing our previous discussion, it is the experience of some employees that some employers drag their feet in the process and in these investigations the decision-making process can last a long time for individuals. In the current structures, there are persons within the process for two and three years. This amendment seeks to ensure there is timely resolution and that employers, instead of having six weeks' notice, would have two weeks' notice served by the inspector to the Labour Court. That is sufficient time to lodge an appeal. It would ensure there would not be vexatious issues with regard to compliance.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

These amendments relate to the time limit, as the Deputy indicated. They seek to reduce the time period from 42 days, as provided for in the Bill, to 14 days.

The Bill seeks to standardise the time periods for appeals across the broad spectrum of employment rights legislation and provides for a 42 day appeal period for decisions of workplace relations commission, WRC, adjudicators and the Labour Court. This was the existing provision in respect of the Equality Tribunal, for example, and it is in accordance with the rules of court. The proposed amendments would not be consistent with the standardisation of time limits in employment rights legislation generally, which this Bill strives to achieve. This is regarded as a reasonable standard to allow someone who has had an adjudication to provide an assessment of it in the case of a compliance notice or a fixed payment notice. This is regarded as reasonable in terms of a procedure of this nature, which is of considerable significance in the case of those adjudicated against. I am not in a position to accept the amendment.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 1; Níl, 6.


Amendment declared lost.

Amendment No. 12 not moved.

Section 27 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

1:45 pm

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 13:


In page 26, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:“Liability of a company officer or officers for a breach of employment law
28. Where a breach of employment law is committed by a body corporate or by a company officer or officers acting on behalf of a body corporate and is determined to have been so committed, with the consent, connivance or approval of, or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of, a person or persons who, when the breach was committed was a company officer or officers of the body corporate, then that person or persons shall be personally liable for the breach committed.”.
This is an important amendment. The topic is something we have discussed on a regular basis in the past three and a half years. There are many examples. Let us suppose company A tenders for a local authority project. Company A will have the necessary length of time in existence, the necessary insurance capacity, the necessary funds and the necessary turnover, etc. Company A then wins the tender and employs staff through another associated company. Usually these companies have the same directors. This is known as a corporate veil. A paper wall is built within one entity, creating two entities, in an effort to achieve a specific objective. In the case I have in mind, company B, which employed the staff, then went to the Labour Court and argued that it could not afford the rates of pay and was in a position in which it was about to collapse. The determination was that there would be some decrease in the wages of the staff as a result. We have seen this with retail outlets as well. We have also seen it in certain insolvency cases whereby certain people maintained they could not afford redundancy payments, etc. It is an important issue.
The status quohas the effect, in the construction, waste disposal and retail sectors, of significantly reducing people's rights, entitlements, wages and conditions, and often their redundancy and future pensions. I have sought information and advice on the matter. Previously the view was that constitutionally nothing could be done because a corporate entity was a specific person in front of the law. I understand that although we may attribute a criminal offence to such individuals, it cannot be done. Anyway there is no doubt in my mind that there have been cases before the Labour Relations Commission whereby company B has been made responsible for the actions of company A. For example, I know of a case in which an individual employed people under a transport name to, mar dhea, transport items to a construction site. Then, on the construction site, those individuals were involved in construction. The purpose was to avoid paying the rate agreed under the registered employment agreement for the construction site. This amounted to wholesale manipulation of the loophole for the benefit of unscrupulous employers and to the detriment of the workers. It is interesting that the Irish Congress of Trade Unions has supported this particular amendment and said that it is a necessary measure. I am requesting that the Minister support the amendment to pierce the corporate veil.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 13 is not appropriate, as section 6(2) already provides for criminal liability for certain persons connected to a body corporate in certain circumstances. In the case of offences under this Act, extending liability for the debts of an insolvent company to the officers of the company would, I am advised by the Attorney General, be constitutionally suspect and would represent a major departure in company law.

The overriding principle of company law is that a director's duties are owed to the company and not to the individual shareholders or employees. If there is a breach of duty on the part of a director which causes damage to the company, he can be sued or held liable for damages. Claims can be brought by shareholders, by a financial institution or on a director-versus-director basis. Liability may arise out of lack of care and skill in the performance of the director's duties, negligent advice or a misstatement. Any act which goes beyond the limits of the company's constitution, such as excessive borrowing, unauthorised payments, failure to disclose the full extent of the director's interests or a failure to comply with requirements, may involve a director or officer in personal liability.

Company law penalties vary from restriction or disqualification orders to fines and periods of imprisonment. The Companies Bill provides for a four-tier categorisation for most of the offences, with the exception of fraudulent trading and market abuse. The Companies Bill also contains a new provision in section 872 whereby, following conviction for an offence under the Companies Act, a trial judge can order that the convicted person should remedy any breach of the Companies Act in respect of which he was convicted. In effect, the provisions of the Companies Bill amount to a more constitutionally robust rewording of section 383 of the 1963 Act, as amended by section 100 of the Company Law Enforcement Act 2001. From a company law perspective, the proposed amendment challenges the entire principle of company law. If it were to be implemented, the doctrine of separately legal personality would become a exception rather than the rule.

Having regard to the foregoing, I am not going to accept the amendment. What the Deputy is suggesting is, on the advice of the Attorney General, not something I can accept. We are looking to have new enforcement procedures under this Bill. This is one of the areas we are seeking to improve. Where there is a breach and a finding for the worker, the idea is that it becomes easier to enforce such cases, and that is being provided for in this legislation. The Deputy's amendment is seeking to reconstitute company law and, for the reasons outlined, that is not acceptable.

Photo of Marcella Corcoran KennedyMarcella Corcoran Kennedy (Laois-Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is the amendment being pressed?

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This has to happen and I believe it will happen. Most progressive political parties in the State would support the piercing of the corporate veil. Due to the importance of this matter and the wholesale manipulation of the issue, I must press the amendment.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This is an issue of company law. Clearly, there is a far wider debate at issue than a breach of employment law. We are dealing with the enforcement of employment law at the moment. I cannot accept the amendment, but I believe the principles of company law would have to be respected. Any amendment from the Deputy seeking changes in company law would have to be drafted within the understanding of company law. While I understand what the Deputy is getting at, it is not something I can agree to.

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I see where the Minister is coming from, but the principles of employment law and respect should also be understood in company law. That is where the gap lies. Often, company law does not respect the fact that people work in companies.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Often, we get to a position like this and the Minister will go as far as to say that he understands there is a problem but this is simply not the place to sort it out. We had similar debates when discussing the Companies Bill, and we were told then that it was not the right place to sort it out. Most likely, I will bring in legislation to amend the Companies Bill to deal with this issue if we are not successful here. Perhaps the Minister might indicate his openness - I understand he cannot make a promise based on something he has not seen - to tackle this issue of the corporate veil.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It depends. I am not an expert in the field. We do not set statutory obligations in respect of redundancy, except for the statutory two weeks plus provision. That is statutory redundancy. I gather that what the Deputy is referring to are companies that have structures such that when they close they do not pay money in addition to statutory redundancy. I do not believe we have provision in law to oblige people to adjudicate on what ought to be the non-statutory redundancy. There has never been any such provision. I believe the Deputy is trying to introduce, by way of personal liability on an individual director, something we do not provide for in law anyhow.

I am not sure-----

1:55 pm

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is not just redundancy, there will also be holiday pay and ordinary pay. There is a plethora of examples of companies which-----

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On holiday pay, if a company goes down, we provide a safety net through the insolvency fund. It is provided where companies fail. I know that there is another issue where companies do not go into liquidation and remain, if ones likes, unliquidated-----

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Absolutely, Vita Cortex, La Senza-----

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is an issue at which we are looking. As the Deputy knows, Revenue recently took a case to force the wind-up of a company. I accept that there are issues and that we need to try to tease them out, but I do not think the Deputy’s amendment is robust enough to do this or that it would be acceptable. The legal advice is very strongly against it.

Amendment put:

The Committee divided: Tá, 2; Níl, 6.


Amendment declared lost.

Section 28 agreed to.

Deputy John Lyons took the Chair.

SECTION 29

2:05 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No.14:


In page 26, line 29, to delete "or deputy chairman" and substitute "or a deputy chairman".
This amendment simply involves a grammatical correction.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 29, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 30 and 31 agreed to.

SECTION 32

Question proposed:

"That section 32 stand part of the Bill."

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have already referred to the amendments we intend to bring forward on Report Stage. This section is relevant to the debacle that took place at the Kishoge site. The ICTU has sought an amendment such that not only an individual contractor but also the long chain of subcontractors would be subject to procurement rules. Specifically, the contracting authority should be empowered to exclude from a tendering process any operator who has not been responsible with regard to employment law. This type of arrangement is in place in the United States where, under state contracts, not just the main contractor but also the subcontractors can be paid directly and should be subject to procurement rules. It should also be borne in mind that EU directives will be brought into law by 2016 which refer to joint and several liability.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will assess the merits of the Deputy's proposal when we see his amendment. It may be a matter that can be dealt with under the terms of the contract rather than having to be placed in the Bill. When the Deputy submits his proposal, I will have it assessed.

Question put and agreed to.

Sections 33 and 34 agreed to.

SECTION 35

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 15:


In page 30, line 12, to delete "42 days" and substitute "14 days".

Amendment put and declared lost.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 16:


In page 30, line 14, to delete "€2,000" and substitute "€4,000".
There are several problems with existing employment legislation and infrastructure. One of these problems is that the existing regime does not necessarily have the teeth to ensure unscrupulous employers fulfil their responsibilities. Penalties must represent sufficient incentive to bring such employers into line. I realise there is a constitutional consideration in that any fine over €5,000 is, owing to precedence, considered to be a criminal matter and, therefore, cannot be adjudged in such a forum as the workplace relations commission. However, there is nothing to prevent the Minister from increasing the maximum penalty to €4,000. Setting the maximum fine at that level might prevent certain employers from taking a strategic decision to break the law.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The offences in respect of which a fixed charge notice may issue, as set out in subsection (5), are relatively minor. The three "relevant offences" are those under section 11 of the Protection of Employment Act 1977 which relates to the requirement for an employer to consult employees' representatives and the Minister on collective redundancies; section 4(4) of the Payment of Wages Act 1991 which relates to an employer's obligation to provide an employee with a pay slip; and section 23 of the National Minimum Wage Act 2000 which relates to an employer's obligation to provide an employee with a written statement of his or her average hourly pay.

My concern in regard to Deputy Peadar Tóibín's amendment is that doubling the maximum fee would be excessive. I am taking advice on whether it would be appropriate to issue regulations setting out guidelines as to the appropriate monetary amount of notice in specific circumstances. The overriding concern in practice is to ensure consistency in the application of this section and its provisions. We are retaining the full weight of enforcement for more serious offences; this particular subsection, which sets out the fixed notice approach, might be seen as akin to how one deals with more minor traffic offences. The nature of the offences dealt with curtails the level of fine we are considering.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will be disappointed if the Minister does not accept my amendment. There are employers who, despite penalties and other legislative provisions, choose to ignore their responsibilities, often simply because it is worth their while to do so.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have already doubled the proposed fine. The original charge was €1,000, as per the heads of the Bill.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is still a small sum.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I will consider the matter before Report Stage. It is a question of proportionality as between the penalty and the offence. If it is a more serious offence, one goes with the full weight of a prosecution, whereas this subsection is dealing with offences where a summary approach is appropriate. We will re-examine the issue.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My amendment allows for the imposition of a fine of less than €4,000. In other words, those charged with adjudging these matters and who are closest to the information may decide that an offence deserves a lower fine. The figure of €4,000 is the maximum penalty that can be imposed.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The concern on our side is that if we are going to allow for the imposition of that level of fine on a party, it might be necessary to move to a more formal procedure. I will consult on the matter between now and Report Stage to see what the judgment is on it.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments Nos. 17 and 18 not moved.

Section 35 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 19:


In page 30, after line 39, to insert the following:"Prosecution of offence under relevant enactments
36. (1) The power vested in the Minister under any relevant enactment to bring and prosecute summary proceedings for an offence under that enactment is transferred to the Commission.
(2) References in any enactment or instrument under an enactment to the Minister in so far as they relate to a power transferred by this section shall be construed as references to the Commission.".
This amendment is required in order to transfer the prosecution functions vested under relevant legislation in the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to the new workplace relations commission. The Bill, as published, provides that those offences created thereunder will be prosecuted by the commission. The effect of this would be to retain the Minister as prosecutor for a range of existing employment-related offences.

This is not desirable in circumstances where the inspection service is brought within the remit of the workplace relations commission by the Bill and could result in confusion and duplication of resources.

2:15 pm

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The legislation does not allow for the necessary flexibility for an individual who seeks to use one or other of the options given. For example, if a person has to select whether to go for unfair dismissal or a discriminatory dismissal, there are different statutes with different tests available to him or her, which could make it difficult for him or her. A little bit of flexibility in the system could be useful so that the person does not necessarily have to tie himself or herself down so early.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are looking at that and plan to bring in an amendment, I hope in the Seanad. There is an issue there but obviously one cannot get double compensation for the same case.

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will the Minister expand on the thinking behind having a separate early resolution service and a mediation service as separate tiers? Would they not work better together?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

A later amendment will do exactly that, namely, bring them under the same rubric. They are slightly different in the way they work but they will be under the same provision.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 36 deleted.

SECTION 37

Question proposed: "That section 37 be deleted."

Photo of Seán KyneSeán Kyne (Galway West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there a new section 39 in regard to early resolution?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Section 37 is no longer required as the amendment to section 36 removes the director general's power to appoint a separate cohort of case resolution officers. Sections 36 to 39, inclusive, of the Bill, as published, provided separately for the appointment of case resolution officers and mediation officers by the director general to ensure that parties to complaints referred to the director general had access to a range of early intervention options. The proposed amendments provide for the appointment of a single class of mediation officer who will deliver the full range of early intervention options. This is a more streamlined and efficient arrangement from an internal operations perspective. No reduction in the scope of claimants' and respondents' access to early intervention will result.

Question put and agreed to.

SECTION 38

Question proposed: "That section 38 stand part of the Bill."

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not want to be obstructive, as it is not like me, but in regard to the issue we discussed earlier, it might be useful to go into private session for a minute, if that is all right.

The select committee went into private session at 3.53 p.m. and resumed in public session at 3.54 p.m.

Question put and agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 20:


In page 33, between lines 7 and 8, to insert the following:
"Case resolution without reference to adjudication officer
39. (1) (a) Subject to paragraph (b), the Director General may, where he or she is of the opinion that the complaint or dispute is capable of being resolved without being referred to an adjudication officer under section 41, refer the complaint for resolution to a mediation officer.(b) The Director General shall not refer a complaint or dispute for resolution to a mediation officer if either of the parties to the complaint or dispute objects to its being so referred.(2) Where a complaint or dispute is referred for resolution under this section the mediation officer concerned may—(a) convene a meeting (in this section referred to as a "mediation conference") in accordance with subsection (3) for the purpose of resolving the complaint or dispute, or
(b) employ such other means as he or she considers appropriate for the purpose of resolving the dispute.(3) A mediation conference shall—(a) take place at a time and place determined by the mediation officer,
(b) be attended by the mediation officer and the parties to the complaint concerned, and
(c) be conducted otherwise than in public.(4) Where a complaint or dispute referred to a mediation officer under this section is resolved, whether by mediation or otherwise—(a) the mediation officer concerned shall record in writing the terms of the resolution,
(b) each of the parties to the complaint or dispute concerned shall, if satisfied that it accurately represents the terms of the resolution, sign the
record thereof, and
(c) the mediation officer concerned shall send the record as so signed to the Director General and give a copy thereof to each of the parties to the complaint or dispute, as the case may be.(5) (a) Where a mediation officer has attempted (whether by convening a mediation conference or other means) to resolve a complaint or dispute referred to him or her under this section and such conference or the employment of those other means has not resulted in a resolution of the complaint or dispute, the mediation officer shall notify the parties to the complaint or dispute and the Director General in writing of that fact.(b) The Director General shall, upon receiving a notification under paragraph (a), refer the complaint or dispute concerned for adjudication by an adjudication officer under section 41.(6) The terms of a resolution of a complaint or dispute recorded in writing and signed by the parties to the complaint or dispute in accordance with subsection (5) shall be binding on the parties and if either party contravenes any such term, the contravention shall be actionable in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(7) The terms of a resolution referred to in subsection (5) shall not be disclosed by a mediation officer or by either party to the complaint or dispute concerned in any proceedings before a court (other than proceedings in respect of the contravention of the terms of the resolution), or otherwise.
(8) All communications (including communications during a mediation conference) by a mediation officer with the parties to a complaint or dispute referred for resolution under this section to him or her and all records and notes, including records and notes relating to a mediation conference held for the purposes of resolving any matter to which the complaint or dispute concerned relates, shall be confidential and shall not be disclosed in any proceedings before a court (other than proceedings in respect of a contravention of the terms of a resolution referred to in subsection (5)), or otherwise.
(9) In this section—
"complaint" means a complaint presented to the Director General under section 41;
and
"dispute" means a dispute referred to the Director General under section 41.".
Sections 36 to 39, inclusive, of the Bill, as published, provided separately for the appointment of case resolution officers and mediation officers by the director general to ensure that parties to complaints referred to the director general had access to a range of early intervention options. The proposed amendments provide for the appointment of a single class of mediation officer who will deliver the full range of early intervention options.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a view that the amendment, as drafted, could be interpreted in a manner that would exclude representation at a mediation stage. We will submit an amendment to try to relieve it of any chance of misinterpretation.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will examine that in the intervening period.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 39 agreed to.

SECTION 40

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We did not submit it but section 40 is to be deleted for the same reason. It duplicates the new section 39.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister will have to bear with me. My notes-----

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It was an omission on our part but the text is identical to the new one and refers to case resolution without reference to an adjudication officer.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The clerk has advised me that I must deal with the amendments tabled before we can propose to delete the section.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am sorry.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will go into private session for a moment.

The select committee went into private session at 3.56 p.m. and resumed in public session at 3.59 p.m.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 21:


In page 34, between lines 32 and 33, to insert the following:
"(c) Any person appointed as an adjudication officer immediately after the commencement of this Part will be required to be adequately trained in the area of equality legislation, in addition to all relevant industrial relations and employment law.".
The Minister will probably know that the Equality Rights Alliance has raised a number of concerns with the legislation. For example, a case dealing with a breach of employment law may also have a discrimination dimensions. The Equality Tribunal does not operate like an ordinary court in terms of far-reaching powers, such as compelling witnesses, etc. Cases of discrimination are not unique in that the burden of proof passes to the respondent once the complainant has made a prima faciecase.

This amendment tries to deal with that.

2:25 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Deputy for his amendment. We are recruiting the new panel for the adjudication service through the Public Appointments Service. It will be a balanced panel with equal numbers of people appointed from legal, human resources and industrial relations streams. The PAS is undertaking a selection process with the external panel of adjudicators. The competition for inclusion on the external adjudicator panel was advertised on 26 September and the closing date was 16 October. There were approximately 300 applications. The National College of Ireland has developed a 20-day training programme for WRC adjudicators. It has been accredited by Quality and Qualifications Ireland, QQI. It is intended to run the training programme as soon as the external panel of adjudicators has been appointed which will be on or very soon after the establishment day of the WRC. Those selected for appointment will then have to complete the training programme and pass the associated examination which will cover the full range of requirements. The training will cover all types of cases.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is a tangential issue of resources. While this will not be dealt with in the Bill, the current infrastructure does not have the resources to deal with issues in a timely manner. This should not be the case for the new infrastructure.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is why we are recruiting additional people. There was a large backlog, part of it because the procedure was not as streamlined as it ought to be but we are aiming to get the waiting times back on track. Already there has been a great improvement in the scheduling of cases. For rights commissioners that happens on demand. There are backlogs in certain areas, which the Deputy knows about. We are determined to eliminate them over time.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 22:


In page 35, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:“(9) A reference in any enactment to a rights commissioner shall be construed as including a reference to an adjudication officer.”.
This is an additional safeguard to ensure that the full range of functions is transferred seamlessly between rights commissioners and adjudication officers and there are no unintended omissions in this regard.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 40, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 41

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 23:


In page 36, to delete lines 5 and 6.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 24 and 25 have been ruled out of order.

Amendments Nos. 24 and 25 not moved.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 26, 27 and 88 are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 26:


In page 36, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:“(iv) make a decision that a separate hearing for an employment equality case is required, in addition to a general employment rights decision,.”.
This concerns the flexibility issue. Not all cases before a commission will fall neatly into one area. How will an adjudication officer determine an equality claim where he or she has parallel investigation powers and proceed to hear other aspects of a case where he or she has no similar powers?

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are very distinct differences between equality cases and employment law cases and that needs to be recognised in the legislation.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Section 41 does not apply directly to employment equality and equal status cases. Instead, sections 80 to 82, inclusive, amend the Employment Equality Act 1998 and the Equal Status Act 2000 and make them consistent with the provisions of section 41. There is no merit in requiring a separate hearing of equality cases from other employment matters which may be in dispute between an employer and an employee. We are trying to ensure that these cases can be heard in a streamlined way. The amendment would provide for double hearings in the case of the same set of circumstances. We will not consider that.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Equality and Rights Alliance has warned that the Bill is devoid of reference to claims under the Equal Status Act 2000. It questions how such cases would be dealt with and says there is no reference to redress as having any meaning regarding a contravention or dispute in regard to the provision of goods and services, disposal of premises or provision of accommodation as set out in the Acts.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Equal Status Act 2000 will remain in place but will be subject to certain amendments through this Bill. We are not doing away with the Equal Status Act 2000 in any shape or form but we are having single hearings.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 27:


In page 36, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following:“(iii) in relation to the disposal of goods and provision of services and the disposal of premises and provision of accommodation as set out in the Act of 2000.”.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 28, 30, 32 and 35, inclusive, are cognate and may be discussed together.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 28:


In page 36, line 26, to delete “6 months” and substitute “2 years”.
This amendment is to increase the length of time, from six months to two years, in which complaints can be submitted from the date of the contravention.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The standard period in most of the existing employment enactments within which a complaint can be referred to one of the workforce relations bodies is six months, which can be extended to 12 months where either reasonable cause or exceptional circumstances are demonstrated, depending on the individual enactment. The Workplace Relations Bill seeks to standardise these time periods across the broad spectrum of employment legislation, that is, six months for referral of a complaint which can be extended to 12 months where exceptional circumstances are demonstrated. I consider that a period of two years within which to refer a complaint to the WRC would be unnecessarily long and unreasonable. Such a proposal would also be inconsistent with employment legislation in other EU member states. Therefore I am not going to accept these amendments.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 29:


In page 36, line 31, to delete “Adoptive Leave Act 1995” and substitute “Act of 1995”.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment No. 30 not moved.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 31:


In page 37, line 4, to delete “Maternity Protection Act 1994” and substitute “Act of 1994”.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendments Nos. 32 to 35, inclusive, not moved.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 36:


In page 38, to delete lines 5 and 6 and substitute the following:“(10) The Commission shall publish on the internet in such form and in such manner as it considers appropriate every decision (other than information that would identify the parties in relation to whom the decision was made) of an adjudication officer under this section.”.
At first instance, adjudication proceedings before an adjudication officer will be conducted otherwise than in public. It was always intended that the consequent decisions would be published in an anonymised format. The amendment provides a statutory basis for such anonymised publication to ensure the identity of neither the complainant nor the respondent can be known from the decision as published.

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

What happens in the circumstance that it might be in people’s interest to have a claim heard in public?

It might be in the greater public interest.

2:35 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are providing that all hearings on appeal will be in public, but the initial hearing will be in private.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments No. 37 and 38 are related and will be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 37:


In page 38, to delete lines 7 to 11 and substitute the following:“(11) A complainant may, in proceedings before an adjudication officer or the Labour Court in respect of a complaint presented, or dispute referred, by the complainant under this Part, be accompanied and represented by—
(a) a trade union official within the meaning of section 11 of the Act of 1990,
(b) an official of a body in respect of which the adjudication officer or Labour Court, as the case may be, is satisfied represents the interests of employers,
(c) a practising barrister or practising solicitor,
(d) in the case of a complainant who is less than 18 years of age, the complainant’s parent or guardian in addition to a person specified in paragraph (a), (b) or (c),
and
(e) any other person with the permission of the adjudication officer or Labour Court, as may be appropriate.”.
Subsection 41(11), as published, created some ambiguity about the range of persons who would be permitted to accompany or represent a complainant or respondent at proceedings before an adjudication officer and before the Labour Court. The wording, as published, could also be read as vesting in the adjudication officer or the Labour Court the power to determine whether a particular person could accompany or represent a party appearing before him, her or it. This was not intended.
The proposed amendment removed the ambiguity in both respects by specifying in detail the full range of persons whom a party may choose to be accompanied or represented by and by carefully identifying the specified matters in which an adjudication officer or the Labour Court may exercise their discretion - that is, in accepting whether a body which purports to do so in fact represents the interests of employers and whether, in respect of a particular complainant, it is appropriate to permit some other person who does not come within the categories listed, (a) to (d), to represent a part in respect of that complainant. The purpose of the latter discretion is to ensure that an adjudication officer or the Labour Court can intervene when he, she or it is of the view that it is in the best interests of the party concerned to do so in the matter of that party's choice of representation in circumstances where the party has chosen to be represented by a person not falling within the usual categories of representative.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's amendment probably deals with the objective of my amendment. I am happy to agree to the Minister's amendment and withdraw mine.

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There was a lot of ambiguity around that, and the amendment clarifies the situation.

Amendment agreed to.

Amendment No. 38 not moved.

Section 41, as amended, agreed to.

Section 42 agreed to.

SECTION 43

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 39:


In page 39, between lines 15 and 16, to insert the following:“(2) Upon the hearing of an application under this section in relation to a decision of an adjudication officer requiring an employer to reinstate or re-engage an employee, the District Court may, instead of making an order directing the employer to carry out the decision in accordance with its terms, make an order directing the employer to pay to the employee compensation of such amount as is just and equitable having regard to all the circumstances but not exceeding 104 weeks’ remuneration in respect of the employee’s employment calculated in accordance with regulations under section 17 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977.”.
It is required to ensure that the District Court, in dealing with an enforcement application in respect of an award of reinstatement or re-engagement under the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977, has the discretion currently available to the Circuit Court in such circumstances to make an order directing an employer who has failed to comply with the award of reinstatement or re-engagement to pay compensation to the employee in question in place of reinstating or re-engaging that employee, as the case may be. Vesting this discretion in the District Court is desirable to allow for the making of an order which may be more practical from the party's perspective at that stage in the proceedings.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The EU equality directive provides in Article 18 that:


[C]ompensation or reparation that the member states shall introduce into the national legal system such measures as are necessary to ensure real and effective compensation or reparation as the member states so determine for the loss and damage sustained by a person injured as a result of discrimination on the grounds of sex, in a way which is dissuasive and proportionate to the damage suffered. Such compensation or reparation may not be restricted by the fixing of a prior upper limit except in cases where the employer can prove that the only damage suffered by an applicant as a result of discrimination within the meaning of this Directive is refusal to take his/her job application into consideration.
ICTU is seeking to develop an amendment on that.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that on the basis that the compensation level is not strong enough?

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Yes.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am considering further amendments to sections 43 to 45, inclusive, to provide that non-compliance with an order of the Workplace Relations Commission or the Labour Court regarding the enforcement of awards in employment rights cases would be an offence prosecutable summarily in the District Court. I am currently in discussions with the OPC on this matter and will revert to the committee on Committee Stage in the Seanad in this context.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I have a brief question. There are an usual amount of amendments to this Bill. We had a similar experience previously. It makes it difficult for us to fully analyse the process, because such a large number of amendments can change the nature of a Bill. Is there a particular reason why there are so many amendments? Is it a resource issue in the Department?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is consolidating a range of enactments and bringing in common procedures that will apply. Like any other restructuring process, it is a difficult Bill. Amendments come which provide greater clarity. It is the nature of this sort of Bill. We are also working to move this rapidly to deliver the consolidation within a timeline. We are trying to balance getting a strong agency up and running and in place, while also ensuring that the legal underpinning is robust. As we moved along amendments arose and we were willing to accept them.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 43, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 44

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 40:


In page 39, lines 38 and 39, to delete “affirming, varying or setting aside that decision”.
This amendment is required to clarify that the terms of the decision reached by the Labour Court under section 44 of the Bill on any specific appeal are provided for in the individual employment enactment concerned. These are detailed in Schedule 6.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 41:


In page 40, to delete lines 5 and 6 and substitute the following:“(3) Subject to subsection (4)*, a notice under subsection (2) shall be given to the Labour Court not later than 42 days from the date of the decision concerned.
(4) The Labour Court may direct that a notice under subsection (2) may be given to it after the expiration of the period specified in subsection (3) if it is satisfied that the notice was not so given before such expiration due to the existence of exceptional circumstances.”.
This amendment is required to provide greater clarity regarding the time limit within which an appeal may be brought on a decision of an adjudication officer by either party to that decision. It is now proposed that a time limit of 42 days will run from the date of the decision. This eliminates the scope for confusion as to whether a particular appeal has been lodged in a timely manner by the party bringing the appeal.
The second aspect of the proposed amendment provides a basis on which the Labour Court may extend the time period for accepting a particular appeal application where the appellant demonstrates that exceptional circumstances applied and prevented the appellant from lodging the appeal within the normal 42-day period.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 42:


In page 40, line 10, after “Court” to insert “, an Adjudication Officer, complainant, or respondent”.
Is it the case that this Bill proposes to delete sections 79(5)(a) and 79(7) of the Employment Equality Acts?

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There are currently three bodies carrying out the adjudicative function at first incident level, which will comprise the WRC adjudication service, namely, the EAT, the Rights Commissioner Service and the Equality Tribunal. Under existing procedures, neither the EAT nor the rights commissioners have the power to refer a point of law to the High Court, whereas the director of the Equality Tribunal has the power to refer to the High Court a point of law arising in the course of an investigation. This power of the Equality Tribunal was created in August 2011 and has not been used to date. Given that every case can be appealed to the Labour Court, and from there to the High Court on a point of law, there does not seem to be a compelling reason for short-circuiting this process. Therefore, I will not accept the amendment.

Amendment put and declared lost.

2:45 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 43:


In page 40, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following:"(10) Proceedings under this section before the Labour Court shall be conducted in public.".
Labour Court hearings dealing with the appeals of a workplace relations commission adjudicator in respect of employment rights in equality cases will be in public, thus ensuring compliance with the requirements of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, other than in cases where there are circumstances justifying a departure from this practice, such as a complaint about discrimination, disability, Traveller status grounds or cases involving allegations of sexual harassment. Hearings dealing with disputes of interest will continue to be heard in private by the Labour Court. Deputy Calleary raised the point a moment ago and all hearings will be in public other than where there are compelling circumstances not to have the hearings in public.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 44, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 45 and 46 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 44, 53 and 66 are cognate; amendment No. 52 is consequential on amendment No. 63; and amendments Nos. 64 and 65 are consequential on amendment No. 66. Amendments Nos. 44, 52, 53 and 64 to 66, inclusive, may be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 44:


In page 41, between lines 34 and 35, to insert the following:
“Appeal to High Court on point of law
47. A party to proceedings before the Labour Court under this Part may, not later than 42 days from the service on that party of notice of the decision of the Labour Court in those proceedings, appeal that decision to the High Court on a point of law, and the decision of the High Court in relation thereto shall be final and conclusive.".
This makes no substantive change to the section of the Bill as published. The proposed amendment is required to provide greater clarity with regard to the time limit within which an appeal on a point of law may be brought from a decision of the Labour Court to the High Court by either party to that decision. It is now proposed that the time limit of 42 days will run from the decision of the Labour Court. This eliminates the scope for confusion as to whether a particular appeal on a point of law has been lodged in a timely manner by the party bringing that appeal.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Are we discussing this with amendment No. 45?

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We are discussing amendments Nos. 44, 52, 53 and 64 to 66, inclusive.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 53 provides that any party to the decision of the Labour Court under the Redundancy Payments Act 1967, as amended, would be able to appeal that decision on a point of law only to the High Court, with the decision of the High Court to be final and conclusive. This amendment also provides for the standardisation of the relevant time limit applicable to refer an appeal to the High Court on a point of law in line with the corresponding provisions of amendment No. 44.

Amendment No. 52 is a drafting amendment consequential as a result of amendment No. 53. Amendment No. 66 provides for the insertion of a specific provision in the Unfair Dismissals Act to allow either party to a decision of the Labour Court on appeal under the 1977 Act to appeal the Labour Court's decision on a point of law to the High Court. Currently, there is no statutory provision for such an appeal under the Unfair Dismissals Act. This amendment also provides for the standardisation of the relevant time limit applicable to refer an appeal to the High Court on a point of law in line with the corresponding provisions of amendments Nos. 43 and 44.

The reason we are not encouraging appeals on points of law at an early stage is that it gives the stronger party an opportunity to go to appeal on a point of law early in a procedure. That would be contrary to what we are trying to achieve in terms of adjudication being a less legalistic arena and where people would have a better chance of getting a quick resolution of concerns.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Will we deal with amendment No. 69 now?

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

No.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 64 and 65 are just drafting amendments.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 47 deleted.

SECTION 48

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 45:


In page 42, line 2, after "may," to insert "in cases not relating to the Act of 1998 or the Act of 2000,".
This is a simple provision. The parties to the claim can refuse to have the matter dealt with by way of written submission but equality advocates argue that under equality legislation, this is another hill to climb for highly vulnerable complainants. It may deflect a complainant from proceeding. Equality advocates have also warned that the provision could be in breach of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, EU equal treatment directives and Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The power to deal with cases by way of written submissions only is already provided for in equality legislation. Section 70(2)(a) of the Employment Equality Acts of 1998 to 2011 empowers the director of the Equality Tribunal to propose to the parties concerned that suitable cases be dealt with on the basis of written submissions only and without the need for a hearing to the director of the WRC. The parties in such a case are currently afforded the opportunity to make written representations in response to any such proposal by the director. If either party objects to the matter being dealt with on the basis of written submissions only, the director is prohibited from investigating the case in that manner and a hearing would be scheduled. The right of parties to object in such circumstances will also be replicated in the Workplace Relations Bill. Based on the experience of the Equality Tribunal, it is envisaged that this power would only be used very sparingly by the director general. Therefore I will not accept the amendment.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Section 48 agreed to.

Section 49 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 46:


In page 42, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:
“Provisions relating to winding up and bankruptcy
50. (1) (a) There shall be included among the debts that, under a relevant provision are, in the distribution of the assets of a company being wound up, to be paid in priority to all other debts, all compensation payable under this Part by the company to an employee, and the relevant provision shall have effect accordingly, and formal proof of the debts to which priority is given under this subsection shall not be required except in cases where provision is otherwise made in relation thereto under the Act of 1963 or any enactment that repeals that Act.(b) In this subsection—
“Act of 1963” means the Companies Act 1963;
“relevant provision” means—
(i) section 285 of the Act of 1963, or
(ii) any provision—
(I) of an enactment that repeals that Act, and
(II) that makes provision in relation to the payment of debts in priority to other debts in the distribution of the assets of a company that is being wound up.
(2) There shall be included among the debts that, under section 81 of the Bankruptcy Act 1988 are, in the distribution of the property of a bankrupt or arranging debtor, to be paid in priority to all other debts, all compensation payable under this Part by the bankrupt or arranging debtor, as the case may be, to an employee, and that section shall have effect accordingly, and formal proof of the debts to which priority is given under this subsection shall not be required except in cases where provision is otherwise made in relation thereto under that Act.".
The matter provided for in this amendment is currently dealt with in an uneven fashion under employment legislation. Some enactments include a provision for priority payments of awards thereunder in insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings and others, for no good reason, admit to do so. This amendment aims to provide consistency and universality for the priority payments of awards under all relevant enactments in the context of insolvency and bankruptcy proceedings.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 50 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 47 and 101 are related and will be discussed together. I remind members that acceptance of this amendment involves the deletion of section 51.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 47:


In page 43, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:
“Amendment of enactments
51. (1) The enactments specified in column (3) of Schedule 6are amended to the extent specified in column (4) of that Schedule.
(2) The amendments to the enactments specified in column (3) of Schedule 6shall not apply in relation to complaints or disputes made, presented or referred to a rights commissioner under any such enactment before the commencement of this Part.".
This is largely a drafting provision. The amendment separates the transitional arrangement applying to first-instance complaints from those applying to appeals into separate sections for clarity and ease of understanding. The new procedural arrangement will apply to the enactments as specified in Schedule 6 on the commencement of Part 4 of the Act. The new arrangements will not apply to any matter referred to a rights commissioner prior to such a commencement.
Amendment No. 101, relating to Schedule 6, sets out the consequential amendments necessary for other employment enactments and statutory instruments as a result of the establishment of the new structures for the adjudication of complaints and disputes introduced by this Bill. This amendment is necessary to amend Schedule 6 as published to ensure relevant amendments are reflected in all the existing enactments and statutory instruments which will be subject to the new structures for the adjudication of complaints and disputes, following commencement of Part 4 of the Bill.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 51 deleted.

NEW SECTION

2:55 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 48:


In page 43, between lines 11 and 12, to insert the following:"Certain decisions and recommendations of rights commissioners appealable to Labour Court under section 44
52.(1) Where a decision or recommendation in relation to a complaint or dispute to which subsection (2)of section 7applies was made by a rights commissioner before the commencement of Part 4and no appeal was brought from the decision or recommendation before such commencement, the decision or recommendation shall be appealable to the Labour Court under section 44as if the decision or recommendation were a decision of an adjudication officer under section 41.
(2) Where a decision or recommendation in relation to a complaint or dispute to which subsection (2)of section 7 applies was not made before the commencement of Part 4, any decision or recommendation made by a rights commissioner in relation to the complaint or dispute after such commencement shall be appealable to the Labour Court under section 44as if the decision were a decision of an adjudication officer under section 41.".
This provides for a new section 52, which provides that no party to a decision of a rights commissioner who wishes to appeal the decision after the commencement of Part 4, regardless of whether the original complaint was decided before or after the commencement of Part 4, and is within time to do so may only bring his or her appeal to the Labour Court, as if the first instance decision were the decision of an adjudication officer under section 41. This means certain appeals which would have been lodged with the Employment Appeals Tribunal but for the commencement of Part 4 will have to be lodged with the Labour Court.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will probably table an amendment on this. We are concerned the patchwork nature of the legislation dealing with this could mean a danger of employer reprisals against staff who have used this infrastructure.

Photo of Dara CallearyDara Calleary (Mayo, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We should acknowledge the work done by the Labour Relations Commission. It transformed industrial relations in this country and has been used as a model throughout the world. I pay tribute to all who served on it, as it is being kicked out of action.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Point noted.

Amendment agreed to.

Sections 52 to 68, inclusive, agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Acceptance of amendment No. 49 involves the deletion of section 69.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 49:


In page 48, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:"Fees
69.The Minister may, in respect of—
(a) such services provided by the Commission as may be prescribed, and
(b) such services provided by the Labour Court as may be prescribed,
charge the recipient of any such service a fee for the purpose of defraying the cost of the provision of that service by the Commission or the Labour Court, as the case may be.".
As published, the section inadvertently restricted the enabling provision whereby the Minister could, by order, prescribe fees in respect of specified services to the services of the workplace relations commission alone. The proposed amendment extends this enabling provision in like manner to the services of the Labour Court.
I note Deputy Tóibín's opposition to section 69. Section 69 is an enabling provision which would allow the Minister to levy fees and charges on users of services to be provided by the commission or the Labour Court. However, I have decided not to introduce charges for access to workplace relations commission services for many reasons, chief among which is the belief that forum shopping will not be a feature of the new system. The only exception will be in the case where a party who failed to appear at the first instance hearing of the workplace relations commission without good cause wishes to appeal the decision to the Labour Court; he or she will have to pay a fee of €300 when lodging the appeal. I wish to clarify that the introduction of any fees will require regulations, and such regulations can be annulled by the Oireachtas.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We oppose section 69 and we also oppose this new section. While the present Minister might have good intent, and makes a logical argument for an application of a fee to prevent people skipping the first part of the process, the regulations mean it will be in the hands of future Ministers and there is the possibility a future Minister could be inequitable in his or her application of a fee. We oppose the section.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Any such action by the Minister would have to go before the Oireachtas, so it is not that the Minister can do it on his or her own. It must be presented to the Oireachtas. This is the basis on which it is proposed. Some people wanted fees and others did not want fees under any circumstances. I made the decision to provide for fees only in the case of an unreasonable failure to appear at the first instance. It is reasonable to allow experience inform a Minister in future. There is no ulterior motive in this. It is just to allow flexibility without primary legislation. It would require regulations and the Oireachtas has scrutiny of these.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 69 deleted.

Sections 70 to 72, inclusive, agreed to.

SECTION 73

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 50 and 51 are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 50:


In page 50, to delete lines 15 to 20 and substitute the following:" "(3A) The person who immediately before the commencement of section 73of the Workplace Relations Act 2014stood appointed as chairman shall, from such commencement, continue to be chairman for the unexpired period of the term of his appointment subject to the same terms and conditions as applied to his appointment immediately before such commencement.".
These amendments provide for a number of additional practical matters concerning the appointment and reappointment of persons to the Labour Court. There are small drafting amendments to the subsection intended to ensure the ongoing appointment of the current chairman of the Labour Court for the unexpired term of his appointment. The amendment also inserts additional subsections to ensure in like manner that the worker and employer members of the Labour Court can continue in their roles for the unexpired term of their appointments. In addition and to remove any ambiguity, the amendment provides the Minister, having consulted the relevant nominating body, may reappoint an incumbent ordinary member of the court for a further term. The provision is made to allow the Minister to make a temporary appointment to cover the temporary absence of a worker member and employer member in specified circumstances to ensure all divisions of the Labour Court can continue to function at full capacity at all times so as to provide a smooth transition.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 51:


In page 51, to delete lines 1 to 11 and substitute the following:"(d) the insertion of the following subsections:
"(4A) (a) A person who, immediately before the commencement of section 73of the Workplace Relations Act 2014, stood appointed as a workers’ member of the Court shall, from such commencement, continue to be a workers’ member of the Court for the unexpired period of the term of his appointment subject to the same terms and conditions as applied to his appointment immediately before such commencement.
(b) A person who, immediately before the commencement of section 73of the Workplace Relations Act 2014, stood appointed as an employers’ member of the Court shall, from such commencement, continue to be an employers’ member of the Court for the unexpired period of the term of his appointment subject to the same terms and conditions as applied to his appointment immediately before such commencement.
(4B) (a) The Minister may, after consultation with the designated body concerned, reappoint a person whose term of office as a workers’ member of the Court expires by the efflux of time to be a workers’ member of the Court.
(b) The Minister may, after consultation with the designated body concerned, reappoint a person whose term of office as an employers’ member of the Court expires by the efflux of time to be an employers’ member of the Court.
(4C) Where a person—
(a) appointed under subsection (4) to be a member of the Court,
(b) who continues to be a member of the Court by virtue of subsection (4A), or
(c) reappointed in accordance with subsection (4B) to be a member of the Court,
is, for whatever reason, unable to perform his functions as such member and the Minister is of the opinion that his inability to so perform his functions would unduly disrupt the performance by the Court or a division of the Court of its functions, a temporary vacancy in the membership of the Court shall be deemed to exist and the Minister may, after consultation with the designated body that nominated the person under that subsection, appoint a person to fill that temporary vacancy subject to such terms and conditions as the Minister shall determine.".".

Amendment agreed to.

Section 73, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 74

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 52:


In page 52, line 35, to delete "modifications."." and substitute "modifications.", and".

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 53:


In page 52, between lines 35 and 36, to insert the following:"(e) the substitution of the following section for section 40 (inserted by section 9 of the Act of 1967):
"Appeal to High Court on point of law
40.A party to proceedings before the Labour Court under this Part may, not later than 42 days from the service on that party of notice of the decision of the Labour Court in those proceedings, appeal that decision to the High Court on a point of law, and the decision of the High Court in relation thereto shall be final and conclusive.".".

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 54:


In page 52, to delete lines 38 and 39 and substitute the following:"(a) an appeal to the Employment Appeals Tribunal under subsection (15) of section 39 of that Act brought before the commencement of this section, or".
This is required to ensure certain procedural matters provided for under the Redundancy Payments Act 1967 are amended appropriately and in a manner consistent with the standard procedural arrangements provided for in the Bill. In addition, the amendment is intended to make appropriate transitional arrangements to ensure any appeal of a decision of a deciding officer referred to the Employment Appeals Tribunal before the commencement of this section will continue in accordance with the current statutory scheme. Once the section is commenced, any appeal brought thereafter will lie to the Labour Court.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 74, as amended, agreed to.

Sections 75 and 76 agreed to.

SECTION 77

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 55 to 59, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 55:


In page 53, to delete lines 26 to 31 and substitute the following:" "(1A) A person who immediately before the commencement of section 77 of the Workplace Relations Act 2014 stood appointed as deputy chairman shall, from such commencement, continue to be deputy chairman for the unexpired period of the term of his appointment subject to the same terms and conditions as applied to his appointment immediately before such commencement.".
These amendments are largely of a drafting nature intended to better effect the purpose of the section. It is proposed to substitute a new subsection (2) in section 4 of the Industrial Relations Act 1969 to enable the Minister to designate a particular deputy chairman to perform certain functions of the chairman when the position of chairman is vacant or otherwise in the absence of the chairman.

This is necessary to ensure that in such circumstances, those functions which, under statute, are currently reserved to the chairman alone can be performed when the position is vacant and in circumstances in which the incumbent chairman is unavailable for the time being due to absence. I am considering some further amendments to section 77 and will revert to these on Committee Stage in the Seanad.

Amendment agreed to.

3:05 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 56:


In page 53, to delete lines 36 to 39, and in page 54, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute the following:“(c) the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (2):
“(2) (a) The Minister may designate a deputy chairman to perform the functions of the chairman in the absence of the chairman or where the office of chairman is vacant, and a deputy chairman so designated shall in such absence or upon such position becoming vacant perform those functions.
(b) References in any enactment shall, for the purposes of the performance of the functions of chairman by a deputy chairman designated under paragraph (a), include references to that deputy chairman.
(c) A person who, immediately before the commencement of section 77 of the Workplace Relations Act 2014, stood appointed under subsection (1) shall be deemed to have been designated under paragraph (a).”,
(d) the deletion of subsections (3) and (4), and”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 57:


In page 54, to delete lines 4 to 7.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 58:


In page 54, line 10, to delete “Court.”,” and substitute “Court.”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 59:


In page 54, to delete lines 11 to 20.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 77, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 78

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 61, 62, 63 and 67 are drafting amendments related to amendment No. 60. These amendments will be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 60:


In page 54, lines 34 and 35, to delete “and paragraph (b) of subsection (3)”.
These amendments are of a drafting nature and are to ensure that the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 is appropriately amended to bring the procedural arrangements that will apply to complaints and appeals under that Act following the commencement of this section and that they will be in line with the standard procedures provided for in Part 4 of the Bill. In particular, the amendments provide for the insertion of a specific provision into the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 to allow either party to a decision of the Labour Court on appeal under the 1977 Act to appeal a Labour Court decision on a point of law to the High Court. Currently, there is no statutory provision for such an appeal under the Unfair Dismissals Act.
Importantly, in so far as the transitional arrangement that will apply to complaints under the Unfair Dismissals Act is concerned, first-instance complaints that have been brought under the Act prior to the commencement of this section will continue to be subject to the current procedural arrangements. The new arrangements effected by this section will apply only to complaints referred following the commencement of the section.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 61:


In page 54, line 36, to delete “subsections (5), (9) and (10)” and substitute “subsections (3), (5), (9) and (10)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 62:


In page 55, to delete lines 6 and 7 and substitute the following:“(iii) by the substitution of “decision of an adjudication officer” for “recommendation of a rights commissioner” in paragraph (a) of subsection (1A),”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 63:


In page 56, line 31, to delete “to that” and substitute “in relation to that”.
Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 64:


In page 57, to delete line 21.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 65:


In page 57, line 22, to delete “section 9.” and substitute “section 9, and”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 66:


In page 57, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following:“(f) the insertion of the following section:
“Appeal to High Court on point of law
10A. A party to proceedings before the Labour Court under this Act may, not later than 42 days from the service on that party of notice of the decision of the Labour Court in those proceedings, appeal that decision to the High Court on a point of law, and the decision of the High Court in relation thereto shall be final and conclusive.”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 67:


In page 57, to delete lines 23 to 25 and substitute the following:“(2) The amendments to the Act of 1977 effected by this section shall not apply in relation to a claim for redress under that Act brought before the commencement of this section.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 78, as amended, agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 68:


In page 57, between lines 25 and 26, to insert the following:“Amendment of Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act 1984
79. (1) Section 1 of the Act of 1984 is amended, in subsection (1), by the insertion of the following definition:
“ ‘Act of 2014’ means the Workplace Relations Act 2014;”.
(2) Section 6 of the Act of 1984 is amended —
(a) in subparagraph (xxx) of paragraph (a) of subsection (2), by the deletion of “and” after “that Schedule,”,
(b) in subparagraph (xxxi) of that paragraph, by the substitution of “that Schedule, and” for “that Schedule.”,
(c) by the insertion of the following subparagraph after subparagraph (xxxi) (inserted by paragraph 6 of Schedule 2 of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014) in paragraph (a):
“(xxxii) any amount that an employer within the meaning of the Act of 2014 is required to pay by virtue of a decision of an adjudication officer or the Labour Court under Part 4 of that Act.”,
(d) in paragraph (b) of subsection (2), by the substitution of “, (xxxi) or (xxxii)” for “or (xxxi)”,
(e) in paragraph (c) of subsection (2), by the substitution of “, (xxxi) or (xxxii)” for “or (xxxi)”, and
(f) in the definition of “relevant date” in subsection (9), by the substitution of “, (xxxi) or (xxxii)” for “or (xxxi)”.
(3) Section 9 of the Act of 1984 is amended by —
(a) the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (1):
“(1) A person who has applied for a payment —
(a) under section 6 of a debt described in subparagraph (i), (ii) or (iv) of subsection (2)(a) of that section, or
(b) to be made under section 7 of this Act into the resources of a pension scheme,
may present a complaint to the Director General that —
(i) the Minister has failed to make such payment, or
(ii) any such payment made by the Minister is less than the amount that the Minister is required to pay under section 6 or 7, as may be appropriate.”,
(b) the insertion of the following subsections:
“(1A) The Director General shall refer a complaint presented to him or her under subsection (1) for adjudication by an adjudication officer.
(1B) An adjudication officer shall not entertain a complaint referred to him or her under this section if it has been presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period of 6 months beginning on the date of the decision by the Minister in relation to the application to which the complaint relates.
(1C) An adjudication officer may entertain a complaint or dispute to which this section applies presented to the Director General after the expiration of the period referred to in subsection (3) (but not later than 6 months after such expiration) if he or she is satisfied that the failure to present the complaint within that period was due to reasonable cause.”,
(c) the substitution of the following subsection for subsection (3):
“(3) Where a claim for payment is made under section 6 or 7 and it appears to the Minister that a doubt exists as to whether or not such claim is allowable (in whole or in part), he may refer any matter arising in connection with the claim to the Director General, and the Director General shall refer the matter for adjudication by an adjudication officer.”,
(d) the substitution, in subsection (4), of “adjudication officer” for “Tribunal” and “he” for “it”,
(e) the insertion of the following subsection:
“(6) In this section —
‘adjudication officer’ has the same meaning as it has in the Act of 2014; and
‘Director General’ means the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission.”,
and
(f) the deletion of subsections (2) and (5).
(4) The following section is inserted in the Act of 1984:
“Appeal to Labour Court from declaration of adjudication officer under section 9
9A. Section 44 of the Act of 2014 shall apply to a decision of an adjudication officer given in relation to a complaint under section 9 as it applies to a decision of an adjudication officer given in proceedings under section 41 of that Act, subject to the following modifications:
(a) the reference in subsection (1) of the said section 44 to —
(i) proceedings under section 41 shall be construed as a reference to a complaint under section 9 of this Act,
(ii) those proceedings shall be construed as a reference in relation to that complaint;
and
(b) any other necessary modifications.”.
(5) In this section “Act of 1984” means the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act 1984.”.
This amendment is required to bring the complaints and appeals procedure under the Act of 1984 into line with the new complaints and appeals procedure that will be in place following the commencement of Part 4 of the Workplace Relations Act 2014.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 79 agreed to.

NEW SECTION

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 69, in the name of Deputy Tóibín, has been ruled out of order.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Why was this amendment ruled out of order? It is on the issue of collective bargaining.

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendment No. 69 proposes that provision be made to ensure that all citizens have the right to form and be represented by trade unions and that recognition of trade unions be mandatory. In the current Bill, trade unions are provided for in that they are entitled to represent employees under the adjudication process being established. However, the effect of the proposed amendment would be to ensure that trade union members could engage in collective bargaining and industrial action, which is beyond the scope of the current Bill. This amendment is not relevant to the provisions of the Bill as read a Second Time and, therefore, must be ruled out of order in accordance with Standing Order No. 131(1).

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Respectfully, if the Minister had made that statement, I would have said that it expressed an opinion that recognition of a union should not be made mandatory in this particular system. I understand it is linked to the wider collective bargaining issue, which is important as people have the right to association and to have people they choose represent them. I am aware there is a problem with this in this State. While this issue is far bigger than the infrastructure the Government is building, there is no doubt that this infrastructure should be able to recognise the rights of citizens in this regard.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would point out that legislation on collective bargaining is being drafted as part of the programme for Government and the Minister of State, Deputy Nash, is steering that along. That legislation will be before the House shortly.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I understand that legislation does not require full recognition of unions either.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That legislation will be debated when presented. We will not debate it here.

Amendment No. 69 not moved. SECTION 80

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 70 to 79, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together. Amendments Nos. 77 and 78 are consequential on amendment No. 79.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 70:


In page 58, line 11, to delete “subsection (4)” and substitute “subsection (4B)”.
Amendments Nos. 70 to 79, inclusive, are largely of a drafting nature and are intended to ensure the continued seamless processing of complaints under the Employment Equality Act on the commencement of Part 4 of the Workplace Relations Act. I am considering a further amendment to section 80 to make provision for the manner in which parallel claims under the Employment Equality Act and Unfair Dismissals Act will be dealt with by the WRC. I will revert to this on Committee Stage in the Seanad.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 71:


In page 58, line 12, to delete “section 75” and substitute “section 78”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 72:


In page 58, line 13, to delete “75. Section” and substitute the following:
78. Section”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 73:


In page 58, line 14, to delete “under this Act” and substitute “under section 77 of this Act”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 74:


In page 58, lines 16 and 17, to delete “that Act” and substitute “the Act of 2014”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 75:


In page 58, to delete line 38, and in page 59, to delete lines 1 to 3 and substitute the following:“ “91. (1)Section 43 of the Act of 2014 shall apply to a decision of the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 79 as it applies to a decision of an adjudication officer under section 41 of that Act, subject to —”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 76:


In page 59, to delete lines 17 to 24 and substitute the following:
“(iii) references to decision of an adjudication officer shall be construed as references to decision of the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 79 of this Act;
(iv) the reference to decision of an adjudication officer under that section shall be construed as a reference to decision of the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 79 of this Act; and
(v) references to employee shall be construed as references to complainant within the meaning of Part VII of the Act of 1998 and references to employer shall be construed as references to respondent within such meaning.
(2) Section 45 of the Act of 2014 shall apply to a decision of the Labour Court under section 44 of that Act upon an appeal from a decision of the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 79 subject to the modification that the following paragraph is substituted for paragraph (b) of subsection (1):
‘(b) on application to it in that behalf, with the consent of the complainant, by the Equality Authority,’.”,”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 77:


In page 59, line 28, to delete “and”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 78:


In page 59, line 30, to delete “ “Minister”.” and substitute “ “Minister”, and”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 79:


In page 59, between lines 30 and 31, to insert the following:
“(m) in section 103, by —
(i) the substitution, in subsection (1), of “under this Part or section 44 of the Act of 2014 in accordance with section 83” for “under this Part”,
(ii) the substitution, in subsection (1), of “under this Part or under section 44 of the Act of 2014 in accordance with section 83” for “under this Part”,
(iii) the deletion of paragraphs (a) and (d) of subsection (3), and
(iv) the substitution of the following paragraph for paragraph (c):
“(c) a decision under section 44 of the Act of 2014 to which section 83 applies.”.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 80, as amended, agreed to.

SECTION 81

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 80 to 82, inclusive, are related and will be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 80:


In page 60, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following:
“(g) in section 31, by the substitution of “District Court” for “Circuit Court” in each place that it occurs,
(h) in subsection (1) of section 32, by the substitution of “District Court” for “Circuit Court”,”.
These three amendments are required to ensure consistency between the enforcement of awards made under the Equal Status Act 2000 and the enforcement arrangements provided for in the Workplace Relations Bill 2014. Currently, awards of the Director of the Equality Tribunal made under the Equal Status Act 2000 are enforceable via the Circuit Court. These amendments will bring the enforcement procedures into line with those provided for in the Workplace Relations Bill. That is, enforcement under the 2000 Act will be via the District Court.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 81:


In page 60, to delete lines 24 to 27 and substitute the following:“ “31. Section 43 of the Act of 2014 shall apply to a decision under section 25 in relation to a case referred to the Director General of the Workplace Relations Commission under section 21 as it applies to a decision of an adjudication officer under the said section 41, subject to —”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 82:


In page 60, line 30, to delete “(a) on” and substitute “(b) on”.

Amendment agreed to.

Section 81, as amended, agreed to.

Section 82 agreed to.

Schedule 1 agreed to.

SCHEDULE 2

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 83:


In page 65, to delete lines 3 to 46, and in page 66, to delete lines 1 to 34 and substitute the following:
“Repeal of Enactments
Part 1
Acts of the Oireachtas

Reference (1)Number and Year (2)Short title (3)Extent of Repeal (4)1.No. 26 of 1946Industrial Relations Act 1946Sections 45C, 45D and 45E2.No. 14 of 1969Industrial Relations Act 1969Section 13(1), (4), (5) and (7)3.No. 4 of 1973Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973Sections 11 and 134.No. 25 of 1991Payment of Wages Act 1991Sections 8 and 95.No. 5 of 1994Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994Sections 6A, 9 and 106.No. 34 of 1994Maternity Protection Act 1994Part V (other than sections 30(1), (2), (3), (5) and (6), 32 and 33A)7.No. 2 of 1995Adoptive Leave Act 1995Part V (other than sections 31, 32(1), (2) and (4) and 33)8.No. 16 of 1996Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act 1996Sections 20, 21 and 229.No. 20 of 1997Organisation of Working Time Act 1997Sections 8, 27 (other than subsections (1) and (3)), 29, 30 and 3110.No. 30 of 1998Parental Leave Act 1998Part IV (other than sections 18(1) and (2) and 21), 27(5)11.No. 49 of 1998Protections for Persons Reporting Child Abuse Act 1998Section 4(7)12.No. 5 of 2000National Minimum Wage Act 2000Part 5 (other than sections 24, 25, 26, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39 and 40)13.No. 19 of 2001Carer’s Leave Act 2001Part 4 (other than sections 17, 18 and 21) and sections 25 and 3214.No. 27 of 2001Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act 2001Schedule 1 (other than paragraphs 1(1) and (3), 2 and 3(7) and (8))15.No. 45 of 2001Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001Section 1816.No. 14 of 2002Competition Act 2002Schedule 3 (other than paragraphs 2, 3 and 5)17.No. 29 of 2003Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003Part 3 (other than sections 14 and 15)18.No. 4 of 2004Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004Sections 9 (other than subsections (5) and (10)), 11, 12 and 1319.No. 42 of 2004Health Act 2004Sections 55M (other than subsections (1), (1A), (2), (3), (4), (6) and (11)), 55N, 55O and 55P20.No. 10 of 2005Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act 2005Sections 30 and 3121.No. 9 of 2006Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006Paragraph 3 of Schedule 322.No. 16 of 2006Employment Permits Act 2006Schedule 2 (other than paragraphs 1, 2, 5 and 6)23.No. 19 of 2007Consumer Protection Act 2007Paragraph 3 of Schedule 624.No. 13 of 2008Chemicals Act 2008Section 26 (other than subsections (1), (1A), (2), (3), (5) and (7))25.No. 6 of 2009Charities Act 2009Section 62(4), (6), (7) and (8)26.No. 34 of 2009National Asset Management Agency Act 2009Schedule 2 (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)27.No. 10 of 2010Inland Fisheries Act 2010Schedule 4 (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)28.No. 22 of 2011Criminal Justice Act 2011Schedule 2 (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)29.No. 40 of 2011Property Services (Regulation) Act 2011Schedule 4 (other than paragraphs 1, 2 and 3(7) and (8))30.No. 13 of 2012Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act 2012Schedule 2 (other than paragraphs 1, 2 and 6)31.No. 25 of 2013Further Education and Training Act 2013Schedule (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)32.No. 26 of 2013Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013Schedule 5 (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)33.No. 14 of 2014Protected Disclosures Act 2014Schedule 2 (other than paragraphs 1 and 2)

Part 2 Statutory Instruments

Reference (1)Number and Year (2)Short title (3)Extent of Repeal (4)1.S.I. No. 488 of 2000European Communities (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2000Regulation 62.S.I. No. 131 of 2003European Communities (Protection of Employees on Transfer of Undertakings) Regulations 2003Regulations 12, 13 and 143.S.I No. 507 of 2006European Communities (Organisation of Working Time) (Mobile Staff in Civil Aviation) Regulations 2006Regulation 174S.I. No. 259 of 2007European Communities (European Cooperative Society) (Employee Involvement) Regulations 2007Paragraph 4 of Schedule 25.S.I. No. 285 of 2007European Communities (Occurrence Reporting in Civil Aviation) Regulations 2007Paragraphs 3 and 4 of Schedule 46.S.I. No. 157 of 2008European Communities (Cross Border Mergers) Regulations 2008Paragraph 4 of Schedule 27.S.I. No. 377 of 2009European Communities (Working Conditions of Mobile Workers Engaged in Interoperable Cross Border Services in the Railway Sector) Regulations 2009Regulation 108.S.I. No. 36 of 2012European Communities (Road Transport) (Organisation of Working Time of Persons Performing Mobile Road Transport Activities) Regulations 2012Regulations 20, 21 and 22

”.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule 2, as amended, agreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

SCHEDULE 4

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 84:

In page 70, to delete lines 10 to 12 and substitute the following:

No. 20 of 1997Sections 6(2), 11, 12, 13, 14(1), 15(1), 16(1), 17, 18, 19(1), 21, 22, 23(1) and (2), and 33(1)

”.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule 4, as amended, agreed to.

SCHEDULE 5

3:15 pm

Photo of John LyonsJohn Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Amendments Nos. 85 to 87, inclusive, and 89 to 100, inclusive, are related and may be discussed together.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 85:


In page 71, between lines 5 and 6, to insert the following:“1. Section 4(2) or 5 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973”.
These amendments are necessary to provide that the enactments, specified provisions of enactments and statutory instruments referred to are included in Schedule 5. They will allow a person to present a complaint or refer a dispute to the director general of the WRC under the enactments or statutory instruments.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 86:


In page 71, line 9, to delete “, 14, 15, 16”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 87:


In page 71, to delete lines 11 and 12 and substitute the following:“5. Section 17 of the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act 1996
6. A relevant provision within the meaning of section 27 of the Organisation of Working
Time Act 1997”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Peadar TóibínPeadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 88:


In page 71, between lines 13 and 14, to insert the following:“7. Section 77 of the Employment Equality Act 1998
8. Section 21 of the Equal Status Act 2000”.

Amendment put and declared lost.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 89:


In page 71, line 15, to delete “, 10, 12, 13, 14”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 90:


In page 71, to delete line 18.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 91:


In page 71, between lines 19 and 20, to insert the following:“12. Section 8 of the Industrial Relations (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2004”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 92:


In page 71, between lines 21 and 22, to insert the following:“14. Section 26(3) of the Employment Permits Act 2006
15. Section 13 of the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 93:


In page 71, between lines 23 and 24, to insert the following:“16. Section 62(1) of the Charities Act 2009”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 94:


In page 71, line 30, to delete “Section 35” and substitute “Section 35(1)”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 95:


In page 71, after line 30, to insert the following:“22. Section 41(1) of the Central Bank (Supervision and Enforcement) Act 2013
23. Section 12(1) of the Protected Disclosures Act 2014”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 96:


In page 72, to delete line 7 and 8.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 97:


In page 72, between lines 14 and 15, to insert the following:“7. European Communities (Occurrence Reporting in Civil Aviation) Regulation 2007”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 98:


In page 72, between lines 20 and 21, to insert the following:“9. An employment regulation order under section 42C (inserted by section 12 of the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2012) of the Industrial Relations Act 1946.”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 99:


In page 72, between lines 22 and 23, to insert the following:“1. Section 4(2) or 5 of the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973”.

Amendment agreed to.

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 100:


In page 72, after line 28, to insert the following:“6. Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003”.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule 5, as amended, agreed to.

NEW SCHEDULE

3:20 pm

Photo of Richard BrutonRichard Bruton (Minister, Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation; Dublin North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 101:


The text of amendment No. 101 can be viewed in the Word document at the top of the page.

Amendment agreed to.

Schedule 6 deleted.

Title agreed to.

Bill reported with amendments.

Report Stage ordered for Wednesday, 12 November 2014.