Mr. Gerard Reynolds:

We have had discussions in general terms but the Department has taken such an extreme stance on it that it is insisting the compensation package will only include statutory redundancy. As I mentioned, it has suggested that if the farmers wish to give the employees any further amounts, it would take that from their own compensation amounts. In general terms, we would expect a multiple of the statutory redundancy should be an agreed compensation package. However, that would obviously be subject to negotiations.

That is why Ms Heffernan is hesitating about what the level of the compensation will be, because the Department has been vehemently opposed to anything other than statutory redundancy. As a further example, we have asked about assistance and support services for any mental health issues, or career coaching and retraining facilities for employees, and we have been advised that they can just avail of the services that are generally available. That is unacceptable because of the circumstances of this prohibition and because of the locations these farms are in. It is a very unusual circumstance and the Department is taking the view that statutory redundancy is the top line and it will not discuss anything other than that. It has said that it cannot change the redundancy legislation. We are aware that statutory redundancy is enshrined in legislation and we accept that but in most negotiated closures agreements are reached that the employees will benefit to a level higher than the statutory redundancy to reflect their commitment to the business over a period of years.