Dáil debates

Thursday, 11 February 2010

Industrial Relations (Amendment) Bill 2009 [Seanad]: Second Stage (Resumed)

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Frank FaheyFrank Fahey (Galway West, Fianna Fail)

I am quoting a company from the west which had the initiative to go to London to try to ensure continuation of employment for its workers. It is currently tendering in London and the purchase price for a load of gravel delivered to Tottenham in London is £5.65. The purchase price for a load of the same material to be delivered in Dublin is €10 per tonne. Structural concrete is €10 to €15 cheaper in London than in Dublin. When one considers that there are no natural quarries within a 100 miles of the centre of London, it puts that price difference into perspective.

If we want to be competitive, get our economy back on track and attract industry, we must be conscious of our cost base and our competitive situation. The registered agreement for the construction industry stipulates that a man operating a stop and go board on a roadworks job earns €850 per week plus €165 subsistence which is more than what a junior doctor or an engineer with four or five years' experience earns. There is also overtime. In this climate in which we are trying to survive, those kinds of rates for water and sewerage jobs or roadworks jobs being paid for by the State make no sense.

The amendment must allow for flexibility. If workers are prepared to work for less than those rates in order to keep their jobs and to keep the company in which they work in business, then that should be allowed. I would not for one moment allow a situation where those workers could be replaced by other people who would be prepared to work for less. I would not allow for any kind of race to the bottom.

I have been made aware by workers and employers in the construction industry that they want to become more competitive in order to keep their jobs and win contracts. Where there could be a local agreement in a company and where the workers say they will work for €10 per hour instead of €15 per hour in order to keep their jobs and keep the company competitive, then that should be allowed. It is vitally important we recognise what is happening on the ground, the number of companies going to the wall and, in particular, that the State is paying for all these public service contracts, including water and sewerage schemes, roads schemes, schools building projects and so on which we all want to see continue.

The Department of Education and Science estimated that the new engineering block in NUIG would cost €52 million. I understand seven of the eight tenders were below cost and that the winning tender was €29 million. The State got good value for money. It should now seek to put more of these kinds of projects out to tender in order that we get good value for money. If a company and its workers agree that in order to get these jobs, they must take some reduction in wages from €15 to €20 per hour to €10 or more per hour, then that should be accommodated.

I very much welcome the Minister's initiative in regard the inability to pay clause, which is of a temporary nature. I am satisfied with that but I believe that in some sections of the construction industry and in some places in Dublin, where some people seem to have lost the run of themselves, flexibility is necessary, as is a recognition that the good times are over and that everybody must take some cut.

I reiterate that I do not for one moment accept that there should be any kind of race to the bottom or that workers in a company should be let go and that the company should be allowed to replace them with workers on lower wages. That is not what I am saying. I would not like to see anything like what happened in the Irish Ferries situation where there was an attempt to get rid of workers and bring in contract workers on low pay and on less than the best terms of employment. Employers should not be allowed to deal unfairly with their workers, take advantage of them and impose changes to the rate per hour, nor should that be the kind of diktat available to an employer.

That is very different from a situation where worker and employer are prepared to reach agreement, as is happening in many places. Union members from several companies have come to me recently to say they are happy to work for €10 per hour and that they do not want those NERA guys telling their employers they will take them to court if they do not pay €15 per hour, which is a ridiculous situation. I ask the Minister to put a stop to that kind of carry-on by NERA. If it has nothing better to do than that, then we should get it into some other kind of employment.

I wholeheartedly support the Bill, in particular the amendment in regard to inability to pay clause. I hope we will see greater flexibility and understanding and that unions and employers will respect this clause as being in the interest of workers, in particular, in order that they may continue in their jobs and that the companies in which they work may continue in business.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.