Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal North East, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I apologise on behalf of Deputy Peadar Tóibín who could not attend today as he has a funeral in his constituency.

It is important to state from the outset that it is a shared objective of the Members of this House to reform the current industrial relations structures. From Sinn Féin's perspective, we have stated from the start of the Minister's consultations with stakeholders that we will support progressive proposals aimed at strengthening workers' rights, streamlining and simplifying employment rights bodies and procedures, ensuring satisfactory resolutions of workplace disputes and the robust and fair enforcement and compliance with employment rights legislation. As the Minister has acknowledged, promoting and supporting harmonious relationships in the workplace is an important element in achieving lasting economic growth and creating and sustaining jobs. It is our strong view that the best way to achieve this is through mutual recognition, respect and the creation of a level playing field.

Aiming for lasting economic growth built on a foundation of sustainable jobs means the Minister and his cabinet colleagues must confront issues such as trade union recognition, compliance with and enforcement of existing employment legislation, underemployment, excessively low pay and the myriad of issues facing vulnerable workers such as informal insolvencies, blacklisting and the rogue actions of subcontractors who are forcing workers into registering as sole traders. Reforming employment rights structures is a good move but it will mean little at the end of the day if fundamental flaws in employment rights are not dealt with. On most of the issues mentioned the Minister's silence has been deafening.

Some 129,700 workers in this State are underemployed and some 300,000 workers, or one in five, are earning less than the living wage of €11.45 an hour. To put this meagre salary into context, a worker on a living wage earns just 14% of the Minister's current salary. One in ten working families is in receipt of a family income supplement payment. Of course, low pay is not just the preserve of the private sector as nearly one in ten recipients of family income supplement payments are public servants. We should not forget that hundreds of JobBridge participants work in Government Departments each year never to be offered a full-time position, despite the critically important work that they do. Some 120,000 workers are living in poverty - those working in hospitality are most at risk and, not surprisingly, those working in the financial sector are least so.

Prior to the local and European elections we were promised a low pay commission but the necessary legislation remains languishing on the C list of the Government's legislative programme despite the fact the Government had the summer to draft what must be a straightforward piece of legislation. In addition to establishing the commission on a statutory basis and progressing the legislative process, the Minister said consideration is being given to establishing the commission on an interim administrative basis to carry out its functions as early as possible. When will we see progress on this and why is there a delay in publishing the draft heads of the bill? The challenges facing workers in a deeply competitive employment market mean we believe it is critical that, in enhancing workers' rights, the issues of trade union recognition and the right to collective bargaining be addressed. This is perhaps a debate for another day but underpinning all employment rights legislation must be a commitment by the Government that such rights will be defended and upheld.

Sinn Féin's workers' rights spokesperson, Senator David Cullinane, raised a number of areas of concern in his submission on behalf of the party to the Government consultation process on the proposed changes to the industrial relations structures. We welcome the Minister's decision to constructively engage with our submission and in a number of instances he has heeded our concerns. We hope that on Committee Stage of the legislation amendments tabled by Opposition Deputies will be given the same consideration.

The right to take a case, have it heard and adjudicated upon fairly by an independent third party and the right to an appeal must be the cornerstone of the broad area of employment rights. We welcome proposals to reform the structures of the employment rights bodies and the delivery of a more efficient, fair, simple and user-friendly system is also to be welcomed. It is also good that employees attending the various services of the WRC, be it the early resolution service, the mediation service or attending before the commission, will be entitled to trade union representation at all times.

Concerns were raised by many trade unions and others in their submissions regarding the role of the registrar as set out by the Minister at the start of the process. In effect, he or she will act as a filtering mechanism deciding which cases should or should not proceed. We note that the Minister likened the role of the registrar to that of the legal advisor to the Equality Tribunal and we note too the case law the Minister quoted in responses to parliamentary questions. Of course, a small number of cases will fall before they begin for technical reasons but transparency regarding these decisions by the registrar will be critically important.

An adjudicating officer may dismiss a complaint on the opinion that it is frivolous or vexatious and anxiety is always heightened when officialdom uses this language - too often we are not aware of how such charges are measured. We welcome the Minister's decision to provide for an appeals process to the Labour Court where an adjudicator dismisses a case in these circumstances. Again, in the Minister's initial proposals he indicated his intention to remove the right to an appeal - a measure we absolutely opposed in our submission. The right to an appeal must be an absolute entitlement, an integral part of due process, and we are not alone in this view.

Concern was raised regarding the Minister's proposed introduction of fees for access to WRC services. He also sought a reduction in the time limit for making complaints - he wishes the limit to be six months. We recommended a time limit of years and the right to seek to extend the date where there is reasonable cause. While the legislation enables the Minister, through regulations, to levy fees and charges on users of the WRC and the Labour Court, it appears the Minister only intends to do so where a party fails, without good cause, to appear at the first instance hearing of the WRC and then wishes to appeal the decision to the Labour Court. When lodging the appeal the party will have to pay a fee of €300 which will be refunded if the Labour Court determines good cause.

It would appear that while the Minister may not intend to introduce fees for accessing the Workplace Relations Commission at this time, the legislation enables him or a future Minister to do so at any time. It is worth noting that in their submissions to the Government’s workplace relations blueprint review, employer representative groups such as the American Chamber of Commerce and ISME sought the introduction of fees when making an initial complaint. The legislation imposes a time limit of six months within which to make a complaint, beginning on the date of the contravention to which the complaint relates, which is clearly not sufficient.

Deputy Tóibín asked the Minister in a parliamentary question last month to set out the checks and balances that have been put in place to ensure equality rights will not be eroded as a result of the subsuming of the Equality Tribunal into the WRC. There are a number of concerns regarding the upholding of equality legislation within the legislation as it is presented. Equality officers in the Equality Tribunal will transfer to the Workplace Relations Commission to become part of a wider pool of adjudicators. It does not appear that specialist adjudicators trained in the complex area of equality law will be assigned to equality or equal status cases. It appears the legislation does not specifically outline how equal status cases will be dealt with. When complaints are lodged with the Equality Tribunal currently, its officers apply the legislation to the case to determine the issues and how the case should proceed. Concern has been raised that the commission's adjudication process may require complaints to lodge a more legally robust case in the first instance, and this enhanced requirement may act as a barrier to future cases.

Enforcement and compliance remain two key areas of concerns pre and post the consultative process. We raised concerns in our submission regarding the proposed compliance notices, fixed charge notices and Labour Court orders to enforce compliance by employers to reduce the need to resort to prosecution. While employers who are generally compliant with employment rights law should not be unfairly punished for unintentional breaches, a balance must be struck where serious or consistent breaches occur. Deputy Tóibín asked the Minister last month what further action will be taken in the event an employer pays in full and in time a fixed payment notice but does not discharge in part or in full the outstanding award to a current or former employee to whom the notice relates. As is often the case, the Minister did not answer the question. We are no clearer as to what happens in such a circumstance. Almost all workers and employment rights bodies were unanimous in their opinion that a hefty fine and the imposition of a fixed charge notice should not rule out the possibility of prosecution. As the Minister noted, if the person on whom the notice is served pays the charge, the matter will not proceed to court. Arguably the monetary figure provided for in the legislation could result in an employer hedging his or her bets, coughing up the cash for a fixed payment notice, avoiding prosecution and having more money in his or her pocket where the notice amounts to less than the outstanding award.

It does not appear the Minister has struck a balance in these provisions. It is important to state why enforcement is necessary in the first place; it is because employers regularly breach employment law. It is that simple. I hope the Minister will engage constructively with Opposition Deputies on Committee and Report Stages of the legislation and will consider amendments put forward.

See this speech in context