Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

It is extraordinary to hear the party that claims to represent workers advocating a change in employment contracts on foot of a lobbying letter sent around from IBEC. I do not believe that the mistake referred to was a typographical error. It is directly taken from lines written by IBEC.

An advertisement on the radio currently runs to encourage workers to use a solicitor in a case of having returned from maternity leave or some other form of leave only to be told the job no longer exists and that the employee will have to do something else. The advertisement basically advises employees to seek legal advice on the matter because their rights are being breached. It would be highly ironic for this House to be advocating workers' rights on the one hand and on the other hand to be diminishing them. We should reject this amendment outright. It is not in the interests of workers. it is in the interests of IBEC, which has stated as much. We cannot be contradictory by claiming to advocate for workers' rights in terms of when they return to their jobs. The jobs they were doing have to be kept for them. If a person wants to change a contract by negotiation, that is an entirely different thing. However, enshrining this amendment in law would be a major disadvantage to workers, especially parents.

See this speech in context