Tom Fleming (Kerry South, Independent)

The most important matter in this Bill is that in making any amendments to the Industrial Relations Act 1946 in order to conform to the High Court judgment, these amendments should not only be within the parameters of the judgment but in unambiguous wording which is also compatible with the spirit and intent of the 1946 Act. Any amendments must be framed to ensure the approximately 200,000 workers covered by employment regulation orders, EROs, cannot have their entitlements detrimentally affected and do not lose out on any benefits they currently receive.

The JLCs have served this country well since their introduction and provide a very democratic representation between employers and the unions representing workers. It is well known this has been a tried and tested procedure whereby the JLCs make recommendations to the Labour Court, which then makes an employment regulation order. This process has been highly successful down the years and I would be apprehensive of any major overhaul of the existing Act, particularly as it has survived the test of time and has contributed enormously to industrial peace in many sectors of employment.

The JLCs have also introduced an element of civilisation into the wage structures and conditions of employment in the work system. Employers and employees in certain industries are bound in a highly disciplined fashion by the labour regulations. In the past, low paid workers had often not been represented by trade unions and the JLCs were introduced at that time to give them, in a civilised manner, a floor for wages and employment conditions. Therefore, the main thrust of the JLC concept in the 1946 Act will have to be retained in conforming to the High Court judgment. We must take cognisance of the success of the old system, although the reality is that adjustments have to be made to make it more responsive to the needs of the current economy.

The main emphasis of the legislation will have to be, as it has always been, the protection of vulnerable workers as well as being in the fair interests of the employers in order to ensure the business is viable and remains competitive so as to survive in these challenging economic times. Therefore, it is crucial to strike a fair balance in an equitable manner.

A number of matters arise. The Bill inserts a new section in the Act of 1946 that sets out the principles and policies the Labour Court must take into account when considering whether to register an agreement. The Labour Court will be required to have regard to whether the parties to the agreement are substantially representative of the workers and employers in the sector. In this context, the court shall have particular regard to the number of workers represented by the trade union party. However, given some 200,000 workers are not represented by a trade union, there is an anomaly in so far as the 2010 budget removed the income tax relief for trade union subscriptions. I call on the Minister for Finance to reintroduce that relief. We tend to forget that in private industry only a minority of the workforce is unionised, which leaves a majority of such workers with no professional representation. This incentive should be reintroduced to give them the chance to be properly represented.

Subsection (13) of section 33A provides that if a new worker replaces a worker to whom an exemption relates, the employer may pay the new worker the lower rate. The current protection of employees in regard to temporary agency work is very relevant in this regard. There is a need for protection and I hope that when the legislation for temporary agency work is introduced, it will cover aspects of this. I ask the Minister to take note of this point and to ensure that temporary workers replacing full-time workers would be entitled to all the increments, entitlements and pension rights they should have. This should be considered when drafting the Bill.

Another matter is the reduction of the number of existing JLCs from 13 to six, which is not an acceptable method of dealing with the matter. I ask that the 13 JLCs would be retained for a period of five years. The Bill provides that the Labour Court will, following the commencement of this Act and at regular five-year intervals thereafter, conduct a review of all establishment orders in respect of existing JLCs. I ask that we would retain the existing 13 JLCs for that five-year period.

The composition of the boards of the JLCs is another issue given new appointments to the boards are being considered. I ask that the existing members would be retained to give recognition to the work they have done as well as to their capabilities and the experience and knowledge they have gained, which will be vital in setting up the new JLC system.

Deputy Clare Daly referred to the section precluding JLCs from setting Sunday premium rates but allowing compensation for Sunday working to be assured under the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. I support the call by Deputy Daly on this matter. We should have a complete reconsideration because there should be some input from the JLCs.

Overall, the main point is that we would have legislation that will be workable, practical and rational and which will follow the concept of the old JLCs, which were set up to protect vulnerable employees. Naturally, we want to ensure our business people will also flourish and continue to exist in the market and create new jobs. We will have to look at all aspects of the issue and strike a very fair balance.

See this speech in context