Finian McGrath (Dublin North Central, Independent)

I welcome the opportunity to contribute to the debate on the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Bill 2011. In the context of the debate, we have been presented with the chance to address the issue of the protection of workers' rights, nationally and across the European Union. This matter is clearly back on the political agenda in view of the levels of mass unemployment and issues such as the announcement earlier today that Ulster Bank is to lay off staff and the fact that the Vita Cortex workers are protesting outside the gates of Leinster House. Earlier, I met the Vita Cortex workers and expressed my complete solidarity with them. The situation regarding these workers is disgraceful, particularly in the context of employee rights and matters relating to treatment and equality. The individuals to whom I refer have been engaged in a sit-in at the Vita Cortex plant since before Christmas as a result of the disgraceful way in which they have been treated by the company. They were informed that they would not receive any redundancy payments but were offered €1,500 each by the company just prior to Christmas in an attempt to buy them off.

I raise this matter because it is relevant to the debate on the Bill. It is important that all Members should express their support for the 32 Vita Cortex workers in the context of the terrible way in which they have been treated. When discussing the protection of employees, it is important to note that three shareholders in Vita Cortex received €2.5 million while the 32 workers to whom I refer, who have 846 years of service between them, received nothing at all. This is an example of the kind of injustice that exists in Ireland at present. Such injustice is not acceptable. Neither is it acceptable that people are being obliged to engage in a sit-in to obtain justice and achieve equality. All the workers in question are seeking is 2.9 weeks' pay per year of service, which is line with the redundancy deals previously given to former workers at the plant. The Minister of State should do his best in respect of this matter and he should ensure that the organs of State work for the rights of the Vita Cortex employees. It appears that a Pontius Pilate-type approach is being taken to these individuals, for whom there is massive public support. Sitting on the fence in respect of this issue is not an option.

The Bill is required to give effect to Directive 2008/104/EC of 19 November 2008 on temporary agency work to give equal treatment in terms of basic working and employment conditions for temporary agency workers as if they were recruited directly by the hirer to do the same job. This is the key element in the context of the legislation and the debate on it.

Section 1 gives the Short Title of the Bill and enables the legislation to come into effect from 5 December 2011. The retrospective provisions will not apply to the provisions of the Bill that create offences. While I welcome the broad thrust of the legislation, I am obliged to note that the trade union movement has a number of concerns in respect of it. The Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, must be brave. He must listen to those concerns and take the necessary steps to ensure that they are addressed in the legislation.

I am in complete agreement with Deputies Tom Fleming and Catherine Murphy with regard to the concerns they expressed in respect of issues relating to pensions, sick pay, professional representation and maternity rights. These are fundamental rights and issues which must be contemplated within the legislation. The Deputies also expressed reservations regarding whether the organs of the State would be able to deal with the issues in question. That is an extremely important matter.

Another matter upon which several speakers touched is the concept of stability and continuity of service in the context of agency workers. This is an issue to which consideration must be given. We must ensure that when staff are employed, there is some degree of stability and continuity of service in place. I have direct experience in this regard in the context of disability services, and so on, and I am aware that it is necessary to ensure that the right people occupy the right positions on a regular or continual basis. We know from direct experience that chopping and changing staff can sometimes cause major difficulties for people with intellectual disabilities. This is particularly the case with regard to respite services. We should examine this matter in the context of the concerns relating to the legislation.

We need to engage in a detailed consideration of section 7 on Committee Stage. Section 10 provides that an agency worker is entitled to be provided with information on job vacancies within the hirer that would be available to a comparable employee. This section is an important, relevant and progressive section. We can talk all we want about agency workers and legislation to protect the rights of workers. However, we must also ensure that everyone is treated with the maximum of support and equality.

I agree with some of the comments made by Deputy Tom Barry about small business people and how they treat and work with their staff. This is an important issue. Before Christmas one constituent of mine told me of his small business which employs seven people. Because of the downturn and the crisis he has taken a salary cut. He used to earn €81,000 per year and he has down-sized his personal salary to €35,000 per annum so that he can keep his staff. This is the type of story I like to hear about employment. The business person in question is on the northside of Dublin and I take my hat off to him. Many small businesses treat their staff with integrity and respect and they work with their staff. Anyone who knows anything about the matter will know that this increases productivity. It is important that one works with and motivates one's staff and gives them the key skills so that they can do the jobs that they are best at. One does not hear many stories of people taking a personal hit for themselves and their families to retain staff.

I put it to my colleague from Dublin North Central, the Minister, Deputy Richard Bruton, that when he is examining these issues he should look closely at improving and trying to support these people rather than making life more difficult for them. The Minister should not be afraid to go back and examine the rent problem and deal quickly with the issue of rates and so on. Anything that will help to employ people with meaningful jobs and which treats staff with respect is good for the country, the economy and good for any attempt to try to turn around the situation.

Section 12 prohibits the charging of work-seeking fees by the employment agencies. It strengthens the current provision under the Employment Agency Act 1971. I strongly welcome section 12, which is important. Section 13 provides that an agency worker is entitled to be treated no less favourably than a comparable employee for access to collective facilities and amenities provided by the hirer to employees.

I welcome the publication of the legislation and I welcome the debate. I note in the section dealing with the financial implications for the public sector and the health sector, in which agency workers feature prominently, it is estimated that based on the current usage levels of agency work, additional costs will be incurred by the Exchequer in terms of providing equal treatment in basic work and employment conditions for agency workers. This is a hit we can afford to take and it is important. Everyone in the House has an interest in creating jobs and providing for the rights of agency workers, supporting them and treating them with respect.

See this speech in context