Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Ceann Comhairle. If the unaligned Deputies present themselves, I will be happy to share time with them.

I have no hesitation in agreeing that au pair hosting is a valuable tradition. It can benefit both host families and young foreign visitors who are helped in a domestic environment to improve language skills and enjoy a positive cultural experience. None of us wants to undermine the viability of genuine au pair arrangements, but we must recognise there are two sides to this story. Not all experiences are mutually beneficial. We must also recognise that this Bill, no matter how it is presented, is aimed at removing statutory protections that are currently enjoyed. Until now, au pairs have not been treated as a separate category of worker in our employment law. If there is an agreement to do work, regardless of what title one gives the worker, he or she is entitled to the benefit of our employment protection laws, including on the national minimum wage.

A realistic debate on this issue has to take into account the facts on the ground. It seems clear that in many cases au pairs are being used as underpaid domestic workers because of our crisis in child care provision. For example, last year’s survey by Migrant Rights Centre Ireland showed an age profile for au pairs that does not match the popular perception. It showed that 37% had no contract at all and 40% a verbal contract only. Some 20% had paid a fee to get the job, 38% were expected to work more than originally agreed, 31% had been asked to work when they were sick, 58% were paid €120 or less per week, one in ten did not have her own bedroom, and one in five was expected to be on call at night. A balance is needed here. On the one hand, au pair relationships are unique and deserve to be fostered. I agree that the allowance for providing board and lodging, which can be deducted from the minimum wage but which was last properly examined in 2000, needs to be reviewed urgently. On the other hand, I do not believe the best way to regularise activity in the sector is simply to exempt individuals who are legally employed on an employer–employee basis from our entire suite of employment rights legislation.

One should remember that, traditionally understood, au pairs are here primarily to improve their English. They stay here as language students and the domestic setting is an adjunct to the time spent in a language school or college. It is important to bear this in mind when considering how much time an au pair should be required to devote to what this Bill describes as "light domestic duties". Section 2(1)(b) of the legislation states a criterion for placement is that one “be a non-citizen of the EU ordinarily resident in the Republic of Ireland with a student entry visa as prescribed by Ministerial Order under the Immigration Act 2004."

Our immigration laws restrict part-time students to working no more than 20 hours per week. I see no reason we should expect au pairs to work longer than other students for less pay in an entirely unprotected statutory environment and to the detriment of the studies that bring them here in the first place. The objectives of the Bill are inadequate. For example, it proposes an au pair accreditation council to perform important statutory functions but it does not make any provision in respect of the membership of the council, who gets to appoint the members and to whom they are accountable. The Bill does not explicitly state au pairs are exempt from minimum wage legislation, which I presume is its central purpose and the reason for the reference to “pocket money”.

There are so many questions raised but left unanswered by this Bill that my party and I cannot support it. It seems to us to be designed more to meet the demands of those in the au pair sector who want light alternative regulation rather than registering as employment agencies than it is designed to meet the needs of families or au pairs themselves. Perhaps the Deputy who is proposing the Bill might respond to that. I do not make that point as a charge. We are all inherently in favour of what the sector delivers for families and the au pairs themselves in terms of the experience they gain. However, we want to ensure we have the right motives when presenting legislation of this nature.

It may be that wholesale amendment could improve the Bill but we would not in any circumstances support a legislative regime brought in simply to ensure foreign au pairs could be used in an unprotected way as a resource to meet a need that is not being met within the domestic labour market.

See this speech in context