Mick Barry (Cork North Central, Solidarity)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I am a supporter of this legislation. At the outset I will say - this might be a controversial point to make - that a company which cannot survive unless it pays people 30%, 20% or 10% below the minimum wage should not be in business. If it can only survive on the basis of that level of exploitation, it should not be in business. That is my view.

I have three points to make. I will try to make them in time to allow a bit of feedback on them. First, is it the case that the number of people who are affected by the sub-minimum rates is low? It is argued that it is low on the basis that just 15,000 people are directly affected. However, I would argue that when those who are indirectly affected are considered, the number is a hell of a lot more than 15,000. For example, it is reported that 80% of people on sub-minimum rates are students, whose costs of going to college are considerable. If they cannot make enough money in their jobs in order to cover those costs, what tends to happen is that they have to be subsidised by their mothers and fathers. So there are hard-working parents in this society who are, in effect, subsidising the sub-minimum low-pay rates that their children are being paid. That is a lot more than 15,000 people, when those indirectly affected are considered.

Is it the case that 80% of those affected by sub-minimum wages are working in hospitality, broadly speaking? I see a report this morning from Anthony Foley of the Dublin City University Business School, commissioned by a coalition of tourism and hospitality employers. Once again we have a report linked to this sector which pinpoints increases in the minimum wage and the introduction of the living wage as being a problem. I am not unsympathetic to some of the challenges that are faced by small and medium-sized restaurants and people in food service provision. However, the solutions cannot be at the expense of the lowest paid workers or at the expense of hard-working staff. I repeat my point of view, which is that if a business cannot survive without paying people 30%, 20% and 10% below the minimum wage, it should not be in business in the first place.

We heard that it would take six to nine months to complete the reports and that the committee is being urged to hold off on making a decision or a recommendation until those reports are completed in another six to nine months. That would mean that these changes recommended by the Low Pay Commission would not be implemented by this Government and would not be implemented by this Dáil. This would be a case of justice delayed being justice denied. I cannot support that. When the Minister rises to introduce the budget on 1 October, it should be clearly announced that some minimal rates in the minimum wage will be abolished from 1 January and no later than that. What is the witnesses' estimate of the number of people who might be indirectly affected by this, given that 80% of people in receipt of sub-minimum wages are actually students?