Roderic O'Gorman (Dublin West, Green Party) | Oireachtas source

I thank Deputies for their support for the legislation. I agree with Deputy Funchion's comments on the very significant distance the Houses of the Oireachtas have to go towards a family-friendly and particularly a gender-friendly system of work.

To refer specifically to Deputy Funchion's proposed amendment, it seeks to delete the words "if any" in respect of the publication of reasons in the employer's opinion for any gaps and of the measures, if any, that an employer is taking or proposes to take to eliminate or reduce these gaps. The use of the term "if any" provides for circumstances in which no measures can be taken by a particular employer to eliminate or reduce the gender pay gap in their particular situation. This may be due to segregation in education and the overall labour market, whereby women are under-represented in certain sectors of the economy. These are policy issues which cannot be addressed by the individual employer but must be examined on a sectoral basis and will probably require Government intervention to address. Indeed, the whole purpose of this Bill is to allow us to identify these situations more easily and more readily. This is exactly what the Bill is about. It is about providing the information on where there are certain sectors of the economy where there is that gender pay gap, looking not only at its size but also at its origins and giving the government of the day the relevant information that it can use to respond. It will be possible in many cases for the employer to pursue positive action measures that are within the law and which will increase the number of women in more highly remunerated roles in that particular firm. However, the legislation recognises a reality in including the words "if any". The text recognises a reality that in certain situations the solution to the gender pay gap may not always be in the gift of the individual employer but may require wider and co-ordinated State action. On that basis, it is my view that we should leave that phrase in. As a result, I do not propose to accept Deputy Funchion's amendment.

See this speech in context