Marie Sherlock (Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I sincerely thank Ms Plunkett, Ms Ní Bhrógáin and Ms Crider. Ms Plunkett's testimony was extremely powerful and we owe a huge debt of gratitude to her for telling her story, as well as to the CWU and Foxglove for working with her and the other workers and bringing us to where we are today, which is allowing this story to be told. I thank them for all the work they have done with the other workers because it would be much easier not to do it. Another member referred to hidden employment and Ms Plunkett's job is very much away from the public eye. We enjoy a safer Facebook because of the work she does but she is coming here today at a potential personal cost to her and her work.

I thank her for that. To think she is a number of weeks on antidepressants and still working is just mind-blowing and a reflection of the work that must be undertaken.

Thinking about the outcomes from this meeting, we, as legislators, cannot have a situation where in five or ten years we look back and say that we did nothing about regulating this work, particularly as Ireland is a global and EU headquarters for so many major social media platforms. There must be very clear actions that we undertake as a committee arising from the testimony today.

I have four questions about this. A number of members asked about the working environment. I would like to hear more about the pay because we know it is a fraction of that earned by Facebook's direct employees. I am not talking about the specific pay of the witnesses but rather the average pay of these workers. There is also the question of qualifications that individuals may have coming into the role.

The second question may be for Ms Ní Bhrógáin and Ms Crider. It seems these NDAs and the taking back of those agreements after they are signed is a breach of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act 1994, which entitles any employee to be able to access his or her contract of employment. From what I understand of the NDA, it is effectively part of the contract of employment. Do the witnesses believe this is a breach of the legislation?

The next questions relate to regulation. I would like to know what is the position with TikTok, YouTube and other social media companies. How do they handle the content moderation in those companies, as Facebook is not the only social media platform having to deal with toxic, vile or challenging content? In terms of regulation and health and safety legislation in particular, what do we need to put on the Statute Book to ensure content moderation is brought in-house as a hazardous activity rather than being outsourced? I am throwing out all the questions but it is because I have very limited time. Ms Plunkett can start before we go to Ms Ní Bhrógáin and Ms Crider.