David Cullinane (Waterford, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

I am sharing time with Deputy Quinlivan. Some things are very straightforward and are right or wrong. There is no grey area. The exploitation of people on low-hour contracts, zero-hour contracts and if-and-when contracts is wrong. The abuse of low-hour contracts is also wrong. This appears to be uncontested as, last April when the Dunnes Stores workers were on strike over the very issues this Bill seeks to address, many Members of this Chamber offered support and sympathy. They included the Taoiseach, who said he supported certainty of hours for workers. The leader of Fianna Fáil, Deputy Micheál Martin, said he supported banded hours contracts and said to the Taoiseach that what these workers needed was banded hours contracts. That was the demand of the Mandate trade union at the time which was lobbying all of us, Government and Opposition. We had support from members of the Government and Opposition and a lot of Deputies, including myself, stood on the picket line with them in solidarity with workers who genuinely were being exploited by an employer who treated them disgracefully despite being a hugely profitable company. There was goodwill for the workers from all sides but when Deputy Adams asked the Taoiseach today whether he would support this Bill he said "No" and said the Bill would be dangerous. He said it could cause all sorts of problems for employers and, potentially, for workers too. The Taoiseach was speaking from the two sides of his mouth and he is completely wrong to do so because this Bill deals with the abuse of low-hour contracts in a very real, genuine, practical, reasonable and worked-out way. Checks and balances are built into the Bill, but it was obvious to me that the Taoiseach had not read the Bill. He was given the view from a colleague in Government, or a civil servant, who advised him not to support the Bill.

I hear from Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael that there are now new politics. The Opposition has to listen to the Government, help the Government and support the Government. In the past, we supported a number of Fianna Fáil Private Members' Bills because it was the right thing to do, even though we had concerns over some of them and pointed out that we were not in full agreement with all aspects of them. We allowed them to go to Committee Stage in order that we could iron out any differences. One of their Bills was labelled by the Government as unconstitutional, but we still did the right thing and supported it because we supported the principle. We will not play games with issues but will listen to everybody in this Chamber. We will work with Government and others, including those who pretend they are in Opposition, to get things done for the people we represent. When it comes to Bills and motions we propose, there seems to be a different set of rules. It seems the Government can find any excuse not to support legislation Sinn Féin brings forward. The Minister can shake his head but this Bill has been proofed by the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and by the Mandate trade union and we have legally proofed it ourselves. There are sufficient checks and balances and safeguards in this Bill to protect employers while dealing with very real issues that affect workers in the here and now.

The Government of the day can always say there is a better solution or a better fix, but in that case it should show us what it is. It should come here with its own solution. There was any amount of tea and sympathy for the Dunnes Stores workers and it is not just those in Dunnes Stores who are victims of if-and-when contracts and exploitation. It is rampant in the retail sector, the hospitality sector and many sectors that are not unionised. It is easy for the Taoiseach to say the Government will not support this Bill because it does not agree with aspects of it, but it has not brought forward a worthwhile solution itself. When workers are on strike and the spotlight is on a particular issue, there is tea and sympathy but no action, no legislation and no solutions, yet the Government says we on this side of the House are the ones who oppose for opposition's sake. It strikes me that the mantra of the Government is to oppose what the Opposition put forward, and not the other way around.

I was disappointed that Fianna Fáil tabled an amendment to the Bill. I sincerely appeal to Fianna Fáil to support the Bill because it is worthy of its support.

I say directly to Teachta Collins that his leader, Deputy Micheál Martin, in addressing the Taoiseach, Deputy Enda Kenny, when those Dunnes Stores were on strike in April 2015, whom he rightly supported and gave sympathy to, told him that "we support banded hours". That is what the workers want, and that is what this Bill does.

Fianna Fáil has concerns about our Bill, and that is fine. That is what legislation is about. It is the reason we have Committee Stage and Report Stage, so why did Fianna Fáil table its amendment? Is it that it does not want a Bill proposed by Sinn Féin to be passed? Is Fianna Fáil playing games as much as the Government? I hope not because the workers, and I say this sincerely to members of Fianna Fáil, who are being exploited as we speak, cannot wait 12 months. They cannot wait six months, six days or six hours for us to sit on our hands, do nothing and kick the can down the road as has been done with so many issues. They want us to act now. They want us to pass this Bill and if we have disagreements we should air them in the debates on Committee Report Stages as we have always done in the past.

Many Deputies who have been Members of this House much longer than me have said they have never before seen amendments to Bills proposed by the Government in response to a Labour Party Bill or, in this instance, the Fianna Fáil amendment to our Bill. That Bill will be deemed to have been passed in 12 months time. Why is this tactic being used if it has never been used in the past? Is this the new politics in action in that only Bills tabled by the Government and Fianna Fáil are worthy of being passed and then scrutinised in the proper committees on which we all sit? I would like to know, and I hope we will get some responses from the Government and Fianna Fáil here today, but there are many workers in Dunnes Stores and elsewhere who are watching, and they want us to do the right thing.

Today, a delegation of Dunnes Stores workers, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and the Mandate trade union attended a presentation given by me in the AV room on this Bill. The Dunnes Stores workers asked me to read a statement into the Dáil record on behalf of the Dunnes Stores national shop stewards committee. I am happy to oblige because they are the people the Minister and other Deputies need to listen to. It states:

To all members of the Oireachtas.

Firstly, we want to start by thanking you all for the tremendous support shown to all of the Dunnes Stores workers throughout [this State] when we went on strike last year.

Our dispute with our employer is about decent work and security of hours and earnings for all Dunnes workers.

Three out of every four of the 10,000 Dunnes Stores workers are employed on what are called “flexi-hour contracts”. These contracts have a minimum of 15 hours per week. Despite this, most of us work many hours above that. Some of us work 25 hours and some work 35 hours. [Some work more, some work less]. But the average hours worked per week is 25-30. All we want is a new contract that reflects the hours we actually work so we have an income we can depend on from week to week.

This would give us confidence that we will be able to put food on the table to feed and clothe our families at the end of the week. At the moment, our income can fluctuate from €400 one week, to €150 the next week, entirely at the discretion of a local manager, and this makes it impossible [for us and our families] to plan our lives.

Many of our colleagues have been denied loans with credit unions and mortgages with a bank because of our 15 hour contracts. Bank managers look at our payslips and see [that we have worked] 30 hours every week [for a year or two years], sometimes for 6 or 7 years [and more], but then see [that the contracted 15 hours are the hours we are guaranteed and that is the] guaranteed annual income [which] is €9,000 making it is impossible to give us a loan on that basis.

Some of us have also been denied rental accommodation for the very same reason. This contract is not an accident. In our Decency for Dunnes Workers survey of 1,400 workers last year, 85% of the [workers surveyed] said that allocation of hours is used as a method of control over us.

For instance, after we went on strike on 2nd April 2015, our hours were slashed in a campaign of retribution by the company. All we were seeking was the same type of contracts afforded to Tesco, Marks & Spencer and Penney’s workers, who know from week to week what they’ll be earning.

These ‘flexi-hour contracts’ are about intimidating workers so management can have a compliant workforce. How can you complain about a health and safety issues or be confident about joining a trade union if you know your manager can cut your hours from 35 to 15 spreading them over four or five days – so that you cannot access supplementary social welfare [support]? This is what’s happening all across the retail and hospitality sector.

Our demands have been vindicated by the University of Limerick Report and the Joint Oireachtas [committee] report, both of which recommend that this issue needs to be tackled. And we know that Dunnes Stores is only the tip of the iceberg. There are tens of thousands of workers in the same situation as us and something needs to be done about it now.

We are asking all members of this House to please support this Bill. If we are serious about ensuring workers have some dignity and respect in their lives, then start by allowing us some certainty over our hours and income.

Signed: Dunnes Stores National Shop-stewards Committee.

I could not have put it any clearer than they did.

All our Bill seeks to do is ensure that the hours a person works is what is reflected in their contract. It allows an employee to put in writing a request to their employer to move into the appropriate band, which is the weekly hours they work, and it gives them certainty of hours because they can and do fluctuate up and down, but mostly down.

There are safeguards and checks and balances built into this Bill which give an employer the right to refuse, and it sets out the conditions for that. If there is a dispute between the employee and the employer, it goes to the Workplace Relations Commission.

I cannot see how this is a dangerous Bill or how it will somehow damage the economy, as the Taoiseach stated today. That is why I believe he was speaking out of the two sides of his mouth. I am sick and tired of listening to politicians give tea and sympathy to workers. They sympathise with them when they are on picket lines and on strike. I said at the outset that some things are either right or wrong. There is no grey area when it comes to abuse and exploitation of workers. We have had report after report from the OECD, TASC, the University of Limerick and many other organisations all pointing to the same problem. It is a growing problem with precarious work, the casualisation of labour, low hour contracts, if and when contracts and zero hour contracts, but some employers - not all - are using these so-called flexi contracts to exploit their workers.

This Bill does not do away with flexi work, which is important, and it benefits some workers. It speaks directly to those employers who are exploiting their workers and saying that this will not be tolerated and that workers have a right to have contracts that reflect the hours they do. I ask the Minister to stand up for those workers and do the right thing by supporting the Bill. I ask the Fianna Fáil Members also to please support our Bill and not to play games with this issue because it is far too important for those workers who need their support, my support and the Government's support.

See this speech in context