Catherine Murphy (Kildare North, Independent)

I had the pleasure of meeting a group of employees of Clongowes Wood College last week. Approximately 80 staff are employed in non-teaching roles, for example, in the kitchen, housekeeping, maintenance, the library, administration and so on. Some of the jobs are relatively low paid. While the subject I am raising affects these workers, it also affects staff like caretakers and school secretaries in most schools around the country.

When the workers in Clongowes were recruited, they signed contracts with the school in the same way as any other private sector worker would have signed a contract. They asked me what was the difference between them and the bankers who were not required to repay large bonuses because of private contractual arrangements that predated the banking failure. The provisions of the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (No 2.) Act 2009 preclude the renegotiation of that aspect of the bankers' contracts. What is the difference between the school's workers and the senior bankers who could not have their contracts renegotiated? These workers did not have the benefit of benchmarking or public service salary increments. They ask how the Government can interfere in a private contractual arrangement when no public funds are used to pay their wages.

If Clongowes is not the largest employer in Clane, it is close to it. Of the 140 staff, 80 are in non-teaching roles and are directly affected by this measure. The money has been taken out of their wages and, in turn, the local economy. Since some of the workers are required to sign on during the summer, we are not referring to wealthy people. They have ordinary jobs.

The legislation was accompanied by circular 70/2010, which states that all staff employed by a recognised school or vocational education committee fall within the definition of a public servant solely for the purpose of the Act. This "applies regardless of the source of the money used to fund the salary", notwithstanding the fact that the Minister does not determine their terms and conditions of employment and irrespective of whether they are eligible for or members of a public service pension scheme. The jobs initiative announced this week will dip into their pockets again, this time through their pension contributions. It makes their situation doubly unfair.

The 2009 emergency measures are due for review in June 2011. Perhaps the Minister of State will confirm at what point the review will occur and whether it is intended to amend the section that applies specifically to workers in this category. They are also seeking the withdrawal of circular 70/2010. They have private contracts and are not paid out of the public purse. As they are private sector workers, how can they be targeted in this way when they have private contractual arrangements with their private employer, namely, the school? While I stress that they are not the only people affected, as caretakers and school secretaries are also involved, they comprise a particularly large group in a boarding school.

See this speech in context