Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the opportunity to speak to this motion. Of course workers should get the best from their work situation for themselves and their families. The motion brings that home. Trades unions, through their representations, particularly through collective agreement and negotiation have played a great part in achieving this over the years.

As we reflect upon the 1913 Lock-out and all that happened prior to it, is it really accurate to find resonance with the issues facing workers today with those that faced workers in 1913? We have come a long way since then.

In 1921 we gained our independence and we are a self-determining democratic republic with enforceable rights for individuals and workers alike. There is a raft of laws protecting workers and their rights. In fact, these rights, when invoked, can prove to be a sea which employers, in particular small businesses in this country, must negotiate at their peril.

Modern day engagement with employees cannot simply be a case of having one's hand out, like a child would asking for a parent to give something, without regard to the situation that an employer is in. It is good that we mark this as another issue with which our nation struggled to bring us to where we are today but it is not a matter of comparing like with like. We are now a consumer society. We are also a society driven by virtue of the European Union towards rights for workers and, as my colleague also referred, rights for women, which we did not develop in our own right. That was perhaps forced on us by EU legislation, for example, when we had to grant equal pay.

In negotiating representation or negotiations with workers, the financial state of the employer must be recognised. Equally, modern and progressive employers recognise that if employees are dealt with in the right way it is good for business. That is also an aspect of the way capitalism works.

One of the dubious positions in much of the socialism I hear trotted out here is that it is contradictory. Its basic premise is that we have a capitalist society where one can shop until one drops, where we all are consumers, etc., and where we want this open economy where there is foreign direct investment and powerful multinationals. Yet, we want all these things without also having a dialogue about responsibilities and about benefits for employers. Employers do not merely exist to have employees in place. We all know that is the truth. That is why, in many of the tough decisions we make, this debate is more concerned with those who are privileged to work in the public sector rather than with those who work in the private sector, who face the realities that their employers must face and which sometimes mean they end up not having a job.

See this speech in context