Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Why would that need to be stated? Is it just stated to fill up a paragraph or what? If any other group made a pay claim and its members were not members of the public service, would it state that the pension levy should be part and parcel of the assessment of their pay? I doubt it very much. I am surprised that it is in there. The letter continues:

It is accepted that a number of such agencies have had a pay alignment with rates applicable in the public service and that pay rates were reduced in the "crash" years.

It is now likely that there will be claims to have pay rates restored in such agencies to reflect the developments that are occurring in the public service. Such claims should be dealt with in accordance usual procedures applying in such employment, i.e. direct discussions initially, with referral to the WRC and Labour Court if required.

From what I can gather, there have been a number of referrals to the Labour Court and the Workplace Relations Commission. Deputy Louise O'Reilly - who would have a lot more knowledge of the court than I would, although I have some knowledge of it in that I was Minister of State with responsibility for labour affairs at one stage - has alluded to the fact that the courts and agencies that address issues of employment and pay on behalf of the State take a dim view in general of people shepherding claims to the courts as a way of prevaricating and delaying discussions. Is that a policy or is just the case that these claims are ending up there? Is it a delaying tactic on behalf of some entity - the HSE, the Department of Health or the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform? It seems that it is almost an unwritten policy to get these section 39 claims for pay restoration to end up in the Labour Court even though it is now acknowledged that pay restoration is, and has to be, part and parcel of any discussions.

On the impending strike and the impact it will have on services, this again goes back to what was discussed earlier with the previous witnesses and was just alluded to in this session. These are quite labour intensive services. Most section 39 organisations get very little grant aid in respect of capital development. Funding is primarily for the delivery of services. Quite a substantial amount of funding for capital expenditure is voluntary funding. The organisations will raise funds for capital expenditure and the HSE will step in with a block grant primarily for staff costs and the basic delivery of services. In some cases as much as 97% or 98% of such a grant can be for staff costs, with 3% or 4% for ancillary services. When an organisation which has such a high number of staff delivering a labour intensive service and which has HIQA on the other side of the equation looking at the quality of the service being provided gets a letter from the HSE telling it that its funding base is being cut, clearly only one thing can give. Well two things can give. Either the people who depend on the service are put out on the side of the road or expenditure on pay is reduced. Invariably organisations that have a strong ethos of voluntary and community involvement are not going to put their clients on the side of the road, so the only thing that can happen, unless I am reading this all wrong, is that there would be pay cuts.

It had to be pay cuts, whether direct or otherwise. The only ways to reduce the salary payroll are to remove people from it or to reduce their pay. If staff were removed, due to guidelines set out by the Health Information and Quality Authority, HIQA, the number of clients using the service would have to be reduced. As such, it was inevitably going to be pay cuts. Any analysis that does not accept that as the logical outcome of any correspondence between the HSE and the section 39 staff leaves a lot to be desired.

In that context, what we are trying to do is get the Department, the HSE and the Government to accept that there is now an urgent need for pay restoration. Further, those authorities must not use the Labour Court and the Workplace Relations Commission in these matters any longer, unless a very detailed and protracted discussion is required. In general, it should not be beyond the ability of the HSE and the Department of Health to determine how much pay restoration will cost, and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform should be able to provide funding. That will obviously be a Government decision. Surely, however, there should be no more prevarication on the part of the HSE in ascertaining the bill for full restoration. The HSE should work with the Department of Health to finally determine a figure, which would obviate the need for referrals to the Labour Court and the Workplace Relations Commission.

I stress this for two reasons. There is huge anxiety among those affected. When any member of this committee visits a constituency, one of the first places we will be asked to visit is a section 39 facility, either by party members, other Deputies or colleagues. That is particularly the case for Deputy O'Reilly and me, as spokespersons for our parties on health. That is of because of the work the staff members do and the stress under which they are operating. Furthermore, it is because of the stress that the clients and their families are now under. They are affected by a continual cloud of scraping and scrimping as they try to ensure there is consistency and continuity of service. I can assure the committee that service is being provided as efficiently, and in many cases more efficiently, than it could provided by the public service, because of the voluntary involvement and community ethos. That is putting huge pressure on communities across the country. The more quickly this issue is resolved, the better. If we can get the detail on cost from the HSE and the Department of Health, with its goodwill, then we will help the organisations represented here to get the money from the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform. What we want the witnesses to do is to help us.