Alan Farrell (Dublin Fingal, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I am pleased to have the opportunity to address this very important Bill. I note, as did the Minister in her opening remarks, the significant contribution made by others to the production and progress of the Bill to this Stage.

The legislation before us is essential in terms of providing workers, especially those in low-paid and precarious employment positions, with additional protections. As such, I am pleased to have the opportunity to address this matter in the House. In recent years, job creation has been to the fore of the agenda for many Members of this House. It is perhaps fair to say that it was probably the sole objective and in that regard, certain matters were not necessarily skipped over or left to the wayside but it was a priority and it was necessary to have presented the opportunity to study the prevalence of zero-hour contracts in particular, as well as precarious work employment and practices. That is why bringing this Bill forward has been so important to so many people, especially workers such as those who are employed in Dublin Airport where a significant number of individuals are on bandless contracts. I am pleased that once this Bill is enacted, it will have an effect on those individuals who are such a significant contributor to the State with more than 3.5% of GDP.

Job creation has been essential in terms of getting our economy on the road to recovery and ensuring the State builds the resources necessary to provide communities across this country with the investment in social infrastructure they deserve. However, it is essential now that we act to provide workers with certainty and security in their employment. This Bill puts forward a number of worthwhile protections and advances in terms of employment rights, particularly for people in more vulnerable working positions. I refer to the fact that this Bill will prohibit the use of zero-hour contracts in the vast majority of instances. With the exception of cases of genuine casual labour, and where they are required to provide cover for emergency situations, zero-hours contracts will become a thing of the past as a result of this legislation. That will be an important milestone in improving employment conditions for so many people working on tenuous and unfair terms and conditions.

Essentially, the intention in this regard is to remove the phrase "zero-hour practice" from the title of section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. That will effectively mean that, apart from the aforementioned exceptions, an employer will be prevented from engaging an employee on a contract which would fall within the meaning of section 18(1)(a) or 18(1)(c) of the 1997 Act. Getting rid of those unfair contracts in most circumstances will undoubtedly benefit individuals and families across the country, and will prevent companies from abusing their position of power. That will be built upon through the provisions of the Bill, which will mandate that employees receive a new minimum payment in cases where they are called in to work but sent home again without having worked. The fact that a minority of employers deem it acceptable to call people in to work to just send them home again without work is outrageous. Many such scenarios have been brought to my attention in recent years but especially in recent months whereby six or eight people are called into work but there is only enough work to sustain three or four people and the balance are sent home. That is incredibly unfair.

To go back to the example I gave of Dublin Airport, some individuals might be called into work before the public transport system is up and running so they have to get a taxi to work and then get a bus or train home. It is very difficult for an individual on relatively low pay and banded-hours contracts to be able to afford to do that on an ongoing basis. Accordingly, the provisions set out in the Bill as I have read them are most welcome. Requiring a new minimum payment for those who are called into work but then sent home without being required to work will certainly be a positive step in stamping out that practice by the select few companies who engage in it. The focus of the provision is on protecting and supporting employees who are low paid. Linking that to the minimum wage is also important to prevent employers from finding a work-around. I am pleased that the Minister has included such a provision in this Bill.

Stating that this floor payment or new minimum payment is linked to the national minimum wage means that workers who find themselves called into work, and who are then sent home without receiving any hours, will have to receive a payment of three times the minimum wage, or three times the minimum rate set down in an employment regulation order, ERO. Ensuring people who find themselves in such a situation receive that level of compensation is important, especially for those on very low pay grades. Making it a requirement that this compensation is paid is an acknowledgement of the disruption such a call into work can have to an individual's social and family life, as well as to one's finances, given the requirement on some to travel to work outside the hours when public transport is provided.

Strengthening the rights of employees with regard to their basic terms of employment is also of paramount importance and I am pleased that the Bill also aims to do that. Should the Bill pass into law, it will be a requirement that employers provide their employees with five core terms of employment within five days of the employee starting work. These core terms are: the full names of both employer and employee; the address of the employer; the expected duration of the contract in instances where the contract is temporary or fixed-term; the rate or method of calculating pay and; what the employer reasonably expects the normal length of the employee's working day and week will be.

It is a positive step that this legislation will make it an offence for employers if they fail to fulfil this obligation within one month of an individual commencing employment, and subsequently it will be possible for the employer to be prosecuted. Furthermore, the employer will also be open to sanction in cases where he or she deliberately misrepresent the information required in the statement of the five core terms of employment which each employee must receive. While it is all well and good to talk about how placing new requirements upon businesses can benefit employers, I am pleased that we are coupling this with sanctions through the creation of these offences. In fact, the inclusion of the offences shows that the Minister and the Government are committed to putting the well-being of employees at the centre of policy.

As it stands, employers must provide employees with 15 terms of employment within two months of an individual commencing work. The new requirement for the five terms of employment to be provided within five days will not detract from this as employers will still be required to furnish the employee with the remaining terms within a two-month period.

With regard to banded hours, I am pleased that the Government is taking action to address the reality in which many workers find themselves. Often, determining the hours an employee works by simple examination of their contract can be tantamount to examining working conditions through rose-tinted glasses. The reality is that the hours a person habitually works can be significantly different to, and in excess of, those listed in their contract.

While an employee can habitually work many hours in excess of those listed in the contract, and be paid for that work, he cannot access credit or gain access to a mortgage due to the fact the contract does not reflect the reality of the employment or the work done. Under the banded hours provisions, employees will be able to be placed in bands of hours that are more reflective of the hours they actually work on the basis of time worked over an 18-month reference period.

Why is the reference period 18 months? It seems 18 months is a significantly long period, sufficient to provide a genuine overview of the conditions of a person's employment, taking into account the normal ebbs and flows of business activities. Therefore, it provides a strong reflection of the reality of working hours within a company.

Let us suppose we were merely to look at the hours a person worked during a quiet period. That would not allow for the longer hours the person may work during the festive periods to be taken into account. Likewise, let us suppose we were merely to look at a given timeframe. Should it be examined during the festive period, when the employee is working longer hours, it would not take notice of the fact the business may be significantly quieter at other times of the year when working hours are shorter. In this regard, it is important to ensure employers receive the protection they require and deserve while also being cognisant that measures will not put jobs at risk in instances where the provisions may be deemed unfair to employers, particularly in the cases of smaller businesses.

I note that the proposals in this area include a mechanism for a review of the arrangement after a period of 18 months. This applies where the employee has been sought and placed in a band of hours through utilising the rights as provided for under this legislation. I am pleased the Workplace Relations Commission will be able to place an employee in an appropriate band of hours when that employee has sought redress through the Workplace Relations Commission. Of course this is a last resort, but the measure should be included and I am pleased to see it written into the Bill.

The measures outlined with regard to an employee's request include the rationale by which an employer can refuse an employee's request. The rationale is reflective of instances where an employer is genuinely adversely impacted. The defences for employers include cases where the employee's claim is not supported by the facts; cases where significant adverse changes have impacted the business and may have a detrimental effect on future operations, for instance, where an important contract is lost or where emergency situations have occurred and adversely impacted the business, like flooding - unfortunately we have seen a good deal of flooding in recent years; and where the employment situation was genuinely temporary, for instance, where it was maternity cover for another employee or a specific term or contract hours for the festive season or the summer season etc.

The changes in this regard will be significant to many employees, particularly since employees will finally be able to use effective working hours to access credit or the mortgage they have been saving for. That is an important point to dwell upon. Given the escalation of house prices and rental prices in recent years, especially in the past two years, individuals may find themselves on lucrative but uncertain contracts. Where the contracts are not reflective of the income that they receive, it can be problematic in saving deposits and getting credit from financial institutions. That is so important. Even motor or home improvement loans are difficult to come by when a person does not have a contract that stands up to the credit analysis of the various financial institutions. It is worthy of mentioning that point in the context of the current housing market. The changes in this regard will be significant in providing individuals who have been saving for months or years with the ability to access the credit they so richly deserve. Moreover, it will provide them with greater security in employment and more freedom in planning their home and social lives.

Providing this safety in respect of employment will, I hope, allow many people to leave the stress of their working environment in work and no longer bring it home. Of course such stress can have a severe effect on family life, especially given the stresses and strains of bringing up children. Concern over employment status or the work schedule and how a person might organise child care early in the morning or late in the evening, depending on the industry, is relevant as well. Having an enjoyable and relaxing home and social life is vital for physical and mental health, something the Oireachtas has spent some time focusing on in recent months and years on an all-party basis. Anything we can do to support employees in that regard is most certainly positive.

I commend the fact that anti-penalisation provisions are included in the legislation. When we pass legislation to benefit any member of society, we must never be afraid for any reason if they access their rights. On that basis, I am glad that where employees invoke their rights under the provision of the Bill, once it is passed into law, they will be protected by any recourse on the part of the employer. This is of particular importance to any individual who may be in less-secure employment. Should an instance arise where an employer threatens to reduce an employee's working hours due to the fact that the employee sought to exercise his rights under this legislation, the employee can pursue penalisation through the Workplace Relations Commission against the employer. The inclusion of this protection will undoubtedly provide peace of mind to more vulnerable workers and ensure they have access to their rights and can exercise them without fear of potential consequences.

I note that in developing the Bill the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection, Deputy Doherty, and her Department have engaged in extensive consultation with bodies such as ICTU and IBEC. They have worked to ensure the Bill is balanced and fair to employees and employers. I see nothing in this proposed legislation that could be deemed to be anything but positive. I thank the Minister and her Department. I thank the former Minister with responsibility for this area, Deputy Mary Mitchell O'Connor, and the former Minister of State, Senator Ged Nash, for the significant contribution they have made. I thank the relevant people in the University of Limerick who carried out the back-work to put this Bill forward.

I look forward to participating in the various stages of the Bill as it comes through the floor of the House and through Committee Stage. Thank you, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle, for the opportunity to address the House on this matter.

See this speech in context