Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 2:

In page 6, to delete line 5 and substitute the following:“ “employee” has the meaning given by section 1 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 and includes an individual who is deemed to be an employee by virtue of subsection (2)(a);”.

The amendments in this group could be characterised as essentially technical in nature. However, they are important in providing clarity of the definitions of "employee" and "employer" and that part of the definition of "worker" relating to contractors. We had a long discussion during Committee Stage as both Deputies will recall. I will discuss each amendment in turn.

The purpose of amendment No. 2 is to ensure that members of An Garda Síochána, including members of An Garda Síochána Reserve, and civil servants who do not work under formal contracts of employment will have access to the full range of protections available to employees under this legislation, including recourse to the Employment Appeals Tribunal, the Rights Commissioner Service and the Labour Court, in circumstances where members of An Garda Síochána or civil servants believe that they are being penalised for having made a protected disclosure. We are taking them out of the normal system that operates in such cases and putting them into the regulatory environment that applies to all workers and they will have access to the full panoply of supports, including the Labour Court, the Employment Appeals Tribunal and so on. The proposed section 2(a) in amendment No. 7 explicitly deems that members of An Garda Síochána and civil servants are to be employees for the purposes of this Act.

The purpose of amendment No. 3 is to simplify and clarify the definition of "employer" and "worker" to minimise the risk of any legal uncertainty of the relationship that exists between them in any particular case. The proposal is to replace the existing definition of the term "employer" with a new definition that maintains the feature of the original definition but which clearly aligns definition of "employer" with the definition of "worker". The objective is to create a direct one-to-one relationship between each category of employer, set out in the definition of that term, with each category of worker, set out in the definition of "worker". Deputies will, therefore, see that the proposal includes four clear and distinct categories of employer, each of which can be mapped against the four distinct categories of worker in the definition of that term. The benefit of this change is that it simplifies the legal identification of the employer for the making of a protected disclosure by the worker or for the worker to secure redress for having been penalised for making any such disclosure. Deputies will recall that we debated this on Committee Stage and that the way it was structured is somewhat convoluted. I know Deputy McDonald, in particular, sought greater clarity. I believe this is a clearer approach and it helps to clarify for the employer the category of workers for whom he or she may receive a protected disclosure or is required to safeguard from penalisation for having made such a disclosure.

Amendment No. 4 focuses on the definition of "worker". There are two aspects to amendment No. 4. The first is a simplification of the language used in the definition of "worker", in particular that part of the definition relating to contractors. This follows a point strongly made by Deputy McDonald on Committee Stage. The second is the extension of the description of contractors in the definition to ensure that all types of contractors fall within the definition of "worker". This had been the objective but I wanted to make it clear. The reference in amendment No. 4 to an "employee" is a straightforward simplification of the current definition. The revised definition of "worker" in so far as it relates to a contractor in amendment No. 4 reflects the extensive debate on Committee Stage.

Deputy McDonald submitted a particular amendment on this issue on Committee Stage which is resubmitted and is part of the group we are now discussing. I note that the relevant amendment continues to reflect her concerns in respect of the definition of "worker" as it applies to contractors and proposes the removal of a specific exclusion currently included in the Bill in cases where a contractor carries out work for a client. My policy objective is to include in this legislation, as I have said repeatedly, the widest definition of "worker" that is legally feasible and in this regard I am keen to ensure that contractors come fully within the ambit of the legislation. Following our discussion on Committee Stage I undertook to bring my amendments to Report Stage. That is what I have done and that is what we are now discussing. I hope and I believe they meet Deputy McDonald's concerns as reflected in her amendment, which would also provide clarity with regard to the coverage of contractors. My corresponding amendment replaces what we agreed to be a complex set of definitions with potentially confusing language relating to contractors set out in the original draft of the Bill. I hope the case made by the Deputy is fully made by the amendment that I have submitted and I hope the Deputies opposite will agree that the pursuit of the other amendment in Deputy McDonald's name is unnecessary. I wish to make clear to the House that the overall effect of my amendment legally will be to ensure that all contractors will be included under the ambit of the legislation and, as such, will be in a position to seek redress against detriment experienced for having made a protected disclosure.

The purpose of amendment No. 6 is to confirm that the definition of "worker" includes member of the Permanent Defence Force.

Amendment No. 7 is supplementary to amendment No. 2. It confirms the employment status of members of An Garda Síochána and includes members of An Garda Síochána Reserve and civil servants and deems them to be employees for the purposes of this legislation. It also confirms the employment status of members of the Defence Forces as workers since redress for the Permanent Defence Force will be provided, as we discussed, in accordance with the rules and regulations specifically applicable to the Defence Forces as set out in the Defence Acts, relevant regulations and section 20.

This sounds a little convoluted but, in essence, I am saying that I have listened to the clear message on Committee Stage in respect of the definition and spelling out of who is encompassed as a worker and who is encompassed as an employer. I believe this is a clear set of definitions and that it meets the points made effectively by Deputies opposite on Committee Stage.

See this speech in context