Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am conscious that there was probably much discussion of this on Second Stage as well as during the pre-legislative scrutiny phase. I have asked Deputies to understand we need to address this as best we can. The 13-week service requirement is in place to ensure time is allowed for a relationship to develop. Most people will accept a relationship has to develop between an employer and employee before the employer is required or asked to pay for illness-related absences. It is not intended that employees who work for the same employers year after year will be required to repeatedly work 13 weeks before they can access sick leave. That is not the intention, and it will not be the case with the legislation.

We had significant discussions on Second Stage about the position of workers who work term-time type employment. Many Deputies expressed concerns that workers who are laid off over summer months will have to repeatedly requalify for statutory sick leave and routinely be left without protection for the first 13 weeks after returning to work.

Deputy O'Reilly read correctly the language used by the Tánaiste at the time. I think he also said that. That is not a situation he wants to continue with. I assure Deputies that a break in service caused by lay-off will not constitute a break in the employee's continuous service. This is by virtue of the linkage to the provisions concerning continuous service in the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Act 1973. However, we acknowledge that the position is less clear for employees who are employed on new contracts by the same employer, following the end of the previous contract, for which Deputy Murphy has pushed hard.

I confirm that it is our intention that successive periods of employment with the same employer should not give rise to a requirement to re-qualify. I agree this matter requires further clarifications so that employers and employees are fully aware of their obligations and entitlements.

We will table an amendment on Report Stage that will better clarify this issue. I am conscious the Deputies have tabled amendments on this matter but I ask them to hold off on them until we get our wording right, in conjunction with the Attorney General. Officials in the Department are working on the wording of an amendment in conjunction with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel. As the amendment was not ready for today, we will bring it forward on Report Stage.

I recognise what members have said because they have pushed this matter today, during our discussion on Second Stage and during pre-legislative scrutiny. We will have this matter clarified. I hope members understand that we just did not have the amendment ready in time for today's discussion.