Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)

I move amendment No. 11:

In page 5, between lines 17 and 18, to insert the following:

"2.—In any disciplinary proceedings against an employee, the employee may be represented by his or her trade union representative regardless of whether or not the trade union concerned is one recognised by the employer.".

This is an important issue on which we had some discussion on Committee Stage. I do not want to anchor it in a particular dispute but I was minded to table it on foot of what unfolded with regard to disciplinary proceedings against an employee of Dunnes Stores who was disciplined for wearing a trade union badge. That has been resolved, but a significant issue is involved. If a worker wishes to be represented by a trade union, it should clearly be his right. On Committee Stage, the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, gave a very full response, for which I thank him. He was somewhat restrained in all he said because at that stage, the issue was before the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the Minister of State did not want to trespass on it. The issue on which I now seek clarity is whether an individual — I am not talking of any particular case — has the statutory right to be represented by a trade union even when it is not recognised by the employer concerned.

On Committee Stage, the Minister of State told the House it was part of the code, but that the code was "of the voluntarist tradition". With regard to the 1999 Industrial Relations Act, the Minister of State informed the committee that the Labour Court must have regard to the code of practice. What does that mean? In essence, the Employment Appeals Tribunal makes findings which are binding. The tribunal and the Labour Court must have regard to the code of conduct. The simple question remains: does an individual employee have a statutory right, an enforceable right to be represented by a trade union official in a disciplinary hearing, where that trade union is not recognised by the employer?

See this speech in context