Peadar Tóibín (Meath West, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Tógfaidh mé 15 nóiméad nó a leithéid. Cúpla seachtain ó shin ag an gCoiste um Poist, Fiontar agus Nuálaíocht luaigh ionadaithe ón Construction Industry Federation, CIF, cúpla achrann mór a bhí ag titim amach san earnáil construction. Dúirt siad go raibh siad ag titim amach ag an móimint sin de bharr easpa registered employment agreements, REAs. In ainneoin go bhfuil an geilleagar ag teacht chun cinn, cé go bhfuil sé mall, dar leis an CIF go mbeidh conraitheoirí agus oibrithe fós faoi bhrú agus nach mbeidh aon tairbhe ann dóibh siúd as go dtí go mbeidh struchtúr ceart i bhfeidhm agus páirc cothrom iomaíochta os a gcomhair.

It is worth noting the challenges facing workers within the construction sector, although the challenges are not limited to that sector. They have suffered a massive crash in recent years. The construction sector is, in many cases, in chaos. We have seen a vacuum created by the absence of sectoral wage-setting mechanisms, and construction workers have been forced into bogus self-employment arrangements and, in many cases, have been paid less than the minimum wage. As the Minister of State will be aware, I have on many occasions used the opportunity presented in this Chamber and at committees when dealing with legislation on Committee Stage to raise awareness and focus on their particular needs.

One of the most famous of these disputes is the one at Kishoge. It showed how weak Ireland’s compliance and enforcement mechanisms were, even on a publicly funded capital project. In other words, where the State was the employer or had initiated the contract, we saw desperate behaviour by contractors with regard to worker rights and their pay and conditions.

Even where the contractor was in breach of a contract, the State took no action to vindicate the rights of workers. Workers got up at 5 a.m. or 6 a.m. day in, day out to go on the picket line in the lashing rain in order to vindicate their rights. No matter which angle we took, door we knocked on or Minister we brought the information to, we were led to believe that nothing could be done for those workers in the immediate term.

Labour Party Ministers are often found close to microphones blowing their own trumpets about how far they have advanced workers' rights in the past four years. The situation on the ground could not be further from the truth, however. Compliance and enforcement across the industrial relations framework have been weakened under the Government's watch and the resourcing of enforcement bodies has been inadequate. Consider some of the organisations involved. The National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, Scope and the Contractors Administration Services, CAS, do not have the teeth necessary to resolve disputes quickly. Rates of prosecution are low, as are the fines imposed on rogue employers. The Government has stripped out well-established rights provided for under previous registered employment agreement, REA, legislation that, for example, allowed access to workplaces by designated union officials to monitor compliance. If one cannot measure or monitor, it is difficult to manage what is happening. Those agreements tried to ensure that employees were protected from victimisation by employers arising from such visits, for example, the docking of wages where an employee met and spoke to his or her trade union official.

The Government has taken an extraordinary length of time to commence the Construction Contracts Act 2013. How far the Government allowed the construction industry to collapse into chaos is an incredible indictment. It took two years for the Bill to pass through the Houses and a further two years for the appointment of a cathaoirleach to the panel of adjudicators, as required under the legislation. We have not even seen the appointment of the adjudicators yet, nor have we seen the code of practice, which needs to be drafted. We still have no indication from the Government, which is in its dying days, as to the date by which either provision will be delivered upon. The level of prioritisation that the Government has brought to the table on this matter is an indictment of it.

Similarly, the Government has dragged its heels in addressing the industrial relations vacuum arising from the McGowan judgment. Employers and unions do not become united on issues regularly, but they are united in their criticism of the practices that have arisen in the intervening period. For many workers, pay rates have hit the floor and conditions have become intolerable. Across the construction sector, reputable employers are caught between a rock and a hard place. They are forced to compete with unscrupulous companies and contractors that secure tenders by underbidding for jobs, that is, bidding below the price for which a contract can be delivered, after which the bidders either choose a subcontractor down the food chain or their employees to get stuffed on their prices or wages. This leads to decent companies and subcontractors going out of business and workers being forced to take wages less than should be the case. Employees cannot pay their mortgages or rent, feed their children, etc. while those decent contractors that bid at prices commensurate with the jobs in hand and did not win the contracts suffer significantly reduced turnovers. This is happening on publicly funded capital projects and yet no action has been taken. NERA does not have the teeth and the Department of Social Protection has proved ineffectual.

The relevant contracts tax, RCT, system is a mess and a disgrace. These contracts were designed to facilitate a small number of individuals who had to get involved in self-employed contract work, but thousands of employees have been forced into such contracts. The Department of Finance and the Revenue Commissioners appear unwilling to investigate thoroughly what has been described as widespread abuse. When endeavouring to raise and pursue these issues with the Minister, like his colleagues in the Departments of Finance, Social Protection and Public Expenditure and Reform, he presents us with an exercise in political pass the parcel. No one wants to deal with the issue.

I seek flexibility in legislation. One should try to make negative practices uncompetitive instead of banning them outright. However, the situation has reached the point at which it will be necessary for the State to grab the RCT crisis by the scruff of its neck and legislate. This is not just a workers' rights issue, as the Construction Industry Federation, CIF, has highlighted. This matter is a cause of concern for decent businesses tendering for projects.

Throughout the Kishoge dispute, I was deeply shocked by the blasé attitude of Ministers to the reported abuse of RCTs, paying of brickies below the national minimum wage and flouting of contractual obligations that were clearly set out in the public works contract. It is widely accepted that compliance and enforcement in industrial relations is lacking. The Labour Party has not addressed this matter during its term in office. For many, particularly trade union members, that has been deeply disappointing.

On collective bargaining, neither the Labour Party nor Fine Gael can claim credit for the introduction of the legislation that is before us today. The programme for Government affirms this. In order to ensure compliance with European Court of Human Rights judgments, the Government committed to reforming the law on employees' right to engage in collective bargaining by introducing statutory recognition of that right. The Government promised this legislation more than four years ago. While we welcome its arrival, the delay in introducing it underlines where the Government's priorities have laid to date.

The Labour Party in government has not set out a clear strategy on how it intends to address the challenges that arise from the voluntary nature of Ireland's industrial relations system. Many wonder why the Labour Party has shied away from ambitious actions to achieve what were long-held values. When the Labour Party faced a decision between betraying its hard-pressed, working class base or its new, leafy, liberal, middle class constituency, it made its choice.

The compliance and enforcement of employment and industrial relations Bills are not what they could and should be. This Bill's measures on non-compliance fall short of what is required. Monitoring and compliance rights established by the previous wage-setting mechanism have not been replicated in the new REA framework. We raised similar concerns when dealing with the workplace relations legislation and had hoped that the Government would incorporate them in this Bill. When presenting to the Joint Committee on Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation, a number of amendments were suggested and clarifications sought by stakeholders on the draft heads of the Bill. While the legislation has addressed a small number of the concerns raised, I hope that the Minister will keep an open mind when revisiting those omitted when presented on Committee Stage. Trade unions asked for it to be clarified that the basic plus two higher rates of pay could be set in respect of each category of worker coming from the various classes, types or groups in the sectors concerned. Facilitating the ability of an employer to sign up to an agreement where he or she was not party to the original agreement was also raised during the pre-legislative scrutiny phase. It was noted that the protection of agency workers was not adequately secured.

With specific reference to the collective bargaining provisions, we remain concerned that the mechanism will not adequately meet the goal and that the voluntary system underpinning this approach is fundamentally flawed. Conclusions raised by the jobs committee in its pre-legislative scrutiny report on the REA provisions have been dealt with by the Minister in the final draft.

5 o’clock

For example, legislation still provides that the Labour Court may have regard to work in similar employment of an associated employer outside the State. Obviously, the legislation does not contain any corresponding obligation on the Labour Court to take into account general wages as compared to cost of living issues. I have raised this issue with regard to the Low Pay Commission as well. A comparison between corresponding rates of pay in the South and the North of Ireland is simply not comparing like with like if the cost of living is excluded as a comparable factor. For example, many people in the North of Ireland have far greater access to health care at a far lower level of cost to them. That is just one of the cost of living factors that need to be taken into consideration. When the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation was speaking in the Seanad earlier this year, he told Senators they need to recognise that the State's approach "has always been voluntarist". He said the Government is seeking to remain within the voluntarist tradition because it "has served us well". Of course many people would disagree with the Minister in that regard.

The labour movement sees the collective bargaining Bill that is before the House as a stepping stone that marks an improvement in the rights of workers. I do not doubt that they are correct because this legislation represents an improvement on the absolute absence of the right to collective bargaining. However, it falls short. I will explain exactly why SIPTU on behalf of the Labour Party is championing this Bill as a win for the party’s programme for Government negotiations. The leadership of SIPTU needs the perception, at least, of a Labour Party win on workers’ rights primarily because the Labour Party in government has failed the labour movement over the last four years. Trade unions and their members know well that we have to thank the International Labour Organisation and the European Court of Human Rights for the collective bargaining provisions in this legislation. I suppose we should not take the claims of labour leaders too seriously, given that they told us in 2009 that a "Yes" vote in the Lisbon treaty referendum would deliver collective bargaining and of course jobs, jobs, jobs. Neither has came to pass.

I want to mention the case of the Tara Mines workers and pensioners in my constituency. The pensioners are engaged in major difficulties as they see their own pensions being reduced in part by legislation from the Department of Social Protection. These pensioners find themselves voiceless in this whole process. They do not seem to be able to have a direct impact on the pensions they paid into and were told they would be able to draw down in the future. I am concerned that the system being used by the Government with regard to pensions can be exploited by companies by front-ending their claims under that pensions legislation. I appeal to the Minister of State to ascertain whether a mechanism is available to allow the rights of former workers to be upheld. It seems to me, as was the case with the previous issue, that this problem is being exacerbated by those who are playing political pass-the-parcel with it. In other words, everyone we consult on it tells us that it is not exactly their responsibility and that they are broadly in favour of doing something. At the end of the day, nothing gets done. I hope the Minister of State will see this as an opportunity for him to resolve this crisis for these workers.

The legislation before the House is a reinstatement of rights that have already been won and a real step forward with the international right to collective bargaining. The anti-victimisation provisions in the Bill are welcome. The Minister and the Minister of State should be commended for addressing some of the concerns that were raised at the early stages of the legislative process.

See this speech in context