Mr. David Joyce:

I thank the committee for the opportunity to participate in its deliberations on this Bill. Congress endorses the introduction of paid domestic violence leave as a vital support for survivors. I am joined by my colleague, Ms Mandy La Combre, who will also participate in our discussion.

Economic independence from an abusive partner is essential for women experiencing domestic abuse and employment can play an important role in supporting abused women in remaining financially independent. Therefore, we warmly welcome the Bill. Indeed, we have engaged with Deputy O'Reilly on its contents. We also note the recent publication by the Government of the domestic violence leave report, which includes recommendations on how best to support employees experiencing domestic abuse. I will refer to this in our brief opening remarks.

Domestic violence leave has been a priority for the trade union movement, not only here in Ireland but internationally, as evidenced by the negotiation of International Labour Organization, ILO, convention No. 190 on violence and harassment in the world of work and its accompanying recommendation No. 206, which gives further, more detailed guidance on how the convention should be implemented at national level. One of the most important elements of the convention is that it deals with the issue of domestic violence. This was a key demand of trade unions. The convention recognises that domestic violence can impact the world of work - it can affect employment, productivity and health and safety - and that the world of work can be a key point of intervention in mitigating or reducing the impacts of domestic violence. The convention requires governments to take appropriate measures to recognise the effects of domestic violence and, so far as is reasonably practicable, mitigate its impact in the world of work.

The Bill and the recent announcement by the Minister, Deputy O'Gorman, are in line with the spirit of the convention and recommendation No. 206, which specifies a range of measures to mitigate the impacts of domestic violence in the world of work, including leave for victims of domestic violence; flexible work arrangements and protection for victims of domestic violence; and the inclusion of domestic violence in workplace risk assessments. We welcome the Government's stated intention to ratify this important convention before the end of the year.

While welcoming these moves, congress has from the beginning made our position clear on some of the major issues involved. We believe that the leave should be a minimum of ten days per rolling 12-month period, which is stipulated in the Bill. This should not be reduced to five. In certain cases, ten days may not be enough and additional unpaid leave may be necessary. We also recommend consideration of a process for additional leave to cover exceptional circumstances. Ideally, this should be paid leave but, at a minimum, it should be some unpaid leave provision that could work similarly to maternity leave provisions.

On the issue of proof, for domestic violence leave to be successful, there should be as few barriers as possible to taking the leave. Survivors already face an overwhelming number of barriers when reporting or disclosing violence, including sociocultural attitudes and stigma, sexual assault myths and personal repercussions. Requiring proof for this type of leave reinforces the all-too-common perception that individuals reporting violence are somehow not credible or trustworthy. Given the stigma that abuse carries and the fact that it is vastly under-reported, there is little reason to believe that any such leave would be widely misused. In fact, research suggests the opposite. In Australia, interviews with employers who had had leave in place for several years through enterprise agreements found that the leave was infrequently used even where employers had actively promoted its provision. Furthermore, since violence thrives in secrecy, there will in many cases be no external way for a service provider to confirm that domestic or sexual violence has occurred.

Regarding workplace agreements, economic insecurity is one of the greatest factors inhibiting victims of domestic violence from escaping violent situations at home. To address this problem, unions and employers have developed paid domestic violence leave provisions that allow victims to attend legal proceedings, medical appointments or other events or activities related to the violence they have experienced without risk of lost income or employment. Congress believes that paid leave should be part of a broader domestic violence and work policy that would also support survivors in other ways. My colleague, Ms La Combre, will be happy to discuss what a workplace policy should cover. Her union, along with SIPTU, the Communication Workers' Union, CWU, and others, has been leading the way in this regard.

On the issue of costs, claims that the introduction of such leave might somehow undermine our competitiveness are simply not credible. An Australian study, entitled Economic Aspects of Paid Domestic Violence Leave Provisions, considered the likely impact of domestic violence leave on the payroll costs of employers and found that incremental payments to workers taking the leave would amount to one fiftieth of 1% - 0.02% - of current payrolls. The report argued that this argument misunderstood the nature of competitiveness in a modern, innovation-driven economy. Cementing a reputation as a safe, high-quality and inclusive place to live would be beneficial to national competitiveness, and paid leave for victims of domestic violence would be an important symbol of Ireland's commitment in that regard.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to submit our views on this important legislation. We are happy to respond to whatever questions members may have.