Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I welcome that the Department is open to looking at it. We only have to look across the water to see how the legislation is working in Britain. It is reviewing it on the basis that the eight grounds there represent a situation whereby all someone has the right to is to be in a bad mood about not having a request for remote working granted. To be honest this is what is most disappointing. I would have assumed the Department looked at other jurisdictions but it did not look at what is happening in Britain and see the difficulties it has for exactly the reasons the Department is proposing to stitch into the legislation.

I have a question on the right of appeal. At present, as I understand, the appeal is to the WRC. This is not for having been refused but because the employer did not say why the request was refused. I will be straight with the witnesses, and I have a fair amount of experience in this, employers are never shy about telling workers why they cannot have what it is they might be looking for. I do not think the Department is fixing a problem that actually exists with this.

The problem arises because there is no assessment tool for objectively managing why something will be refused. Employers have been given a suite of options to tick a box and pick from the 13 reasons to say "No". What has not been given to the worker is the right to go to the WRC and say, for example, the employer has refused the right to remote working because he or she has determined the person lives too far away. The person may live in the same postcode but this cannot be offered as a reason. Do the witnesses see where the difficulty with this is? Do they see that coming from this position makes it very difficult? I read this as 13 reasons someone cannot have remote working. Workers read this as the Tánaiste listing the reasons people cannot have remote working. This policy should be positive. It should be about granting it to the maximum extent possible. I do not accept what Mr. Mulligan said in his opening remarks about the need to reinforce to people that some jobs cannot be done remotely. People know this. They are not foolish. A nurse working in the emergency department in Beaumont Hospital this morning does not imagine for a minute that she can do her job remotely. She knows. These are not the people who request remote working.

Specifically on the right to appeal, Mr. Mulligan says the Department is examining it. From what perspective is it being examined? What type of changes is the Department looking at making? Is it looking to ensure this will be rebalanced? In my opinion it is not balanced at present. It is very much out of kilter and balanced in favour of the employer. Is this what the Department is looking at with regard to the appeal? Is it that it will keep the 13 grounds but include a reinforced appeal? Is it looking at dropping some of the 13 reasons for refusal?