Tony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)

I agreed on Committee Stage to examine the strong case made by Deputy Howlin in this area. I was concerned that the potential loophole he pointed to might be one that would be available to people. The Bill applies to undertakings. The original choice was whether to go for undertakings or establishments and we went for this option. The Bill applies to undertakings and would not preclude the provision of information and consultation at the level of establishment by agreement with the parties. That goes without saying. There is also the possibility of setting up arrangements that cover more than one undertaking or different arrangements being put in place for different parts of an enterprise. We dealt with that on Committee Stage.

It is important to note that an undertaking may be part of a group of companies. That is not relevant to working out whether the undertaking has enough employees to fall within the scope of the legislation. What is relevant is the number of employees employed by an individual undertaking, not those employed by a subsidiary of the undertaking. That is the key point. I understand there is some case law in this regard which supports the position taken in the Bill. The advice from the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel is to the effect that in a group of undertakings, each undertaking constitutes a separate legal entity. If that is the case, the threshold must be applied to each company separately but if a number of entities within a group constitute one legal entity, they must be treated as one for the purpose of the threshold. I understand that is Deputy Howlin's point and that is what the Parliamentary Counsel advises me is the position as it stands.

See this speech in context