Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank both Deputies for bringing forward this Private Members' Bill. I welcome the opportunity to speak on it today. It is a shame there are not more people here to have a very focused conversation on the Bill. While I might not agree with all that is in it, conversation on this topic is essential to clarify what is in existing law, how we intend to strengthen it and how those changes compare to the Deputies' legislation. I totally accept the motives behind the Bill and I acknowledge the efforts and work that have gone into it because it is an important area about which the Deputies are genuinely concerned. I totally accept that and have no issue with it at all. The work and research that have gone into it are very clear from Deputy Boyd Barrett's speech.

In the Employment Permits (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill 2021, the Deputy has called out particular sectors, mostly in the area of food production. I refer to the meat factories, the horticulture industry and our farms. It aims to cover those picking fruit and vegetables, for example. This is a sector we have worked with quite a lot over the last year or two with regard to preventing the spread of Covid in those work environments and among the families those workers go home to. We have also been working to make sure there are enough workers to save the harvest in the first place. The Deputy is absolutely right. These are essential workers and, in many cases, are on the front line when it comes to food production and supply and looking after everybody in this country. I compliment them on their work and their efforts over the last year and half in making sure that we had food on our shelves not just in Ireland but in the many countries we supply. That whole sector does not get discussed enough in here. It is fair to say that quite a lot those who work in the sector are from abroad. They come in to work here under the permits or have set up their lives and families here for a long number of years. Without their involvement, we would struggle to have enough people in that sector to save the food harvest and to produce the food, working in the meat factories and our other food facilities. I meet them regularly when I visit various companies.

I ask for the assistance of the House over the next year to help us work out new ways to generate more interest among people from different countries who are already living in Ireland in working in the sector. We could then develop new long careers to develop skills and make sure a career path is set out to allow people to move into management. From talking to those in the sector, I know that many genuine employers would like to be part of that journey. The majority want to look after their staff. We want to develop new training programmes, new initiatives and, perhaps, new packages. I believe there are plenty of people in this country who would like a career in this sector if we could join all the dots and make such a career worthwhile. Some of this work is seasonal and we want to reflect that but we should be able to develop new fruitful careers for many that pay well and have good conditions. That is something we should work towards, although it is separate from this legislation.

The Government fully understands and appreciates the reasons for bringing this Private Members' Bill forward and is supportive of the important policy objectives that underpin it. The Private Members' Bill is intended to provide an employer-paid sick leave scheme for workers employed on general employment permits in the meat processing, dairy and horticulture sectors. Additionally, it proposes that a worker without a permit could access the WRC adjudication process, that permit holders could change employer within the first 12 months in cases of exploitation or abuse and that employees without a valid permission would have access to the Social Insurance Fund for payment of compensation secured in the civil courts in the event the employer becomes insolvent.

The Government shares the view of the Bill on some of the issues raised and has already put in place measures to address them. However, other elements proposed would undermine the legislative framework and are not workable. For these reasons, the Government will oppose the Private Members' Bill. Although we agree with the principles of what the Deputies are trying to achieve, we believe most of these aims are already met in legislation.

In the first instance, I should clarify the limitations of the employment permits legislative framework. The employment permits system is designed to facilitate the entry of appropriately skilled non-EEA nationals to fill genuine skills and labour shortages in the short to medium term in circumstances where there are no suitably qualified Irish or EEA nationals available to undertake the work. We have looked for evidence to prove shortages are genuine in all of the different cases we have responded to over the last year, not only in the food production business, in light of the changes to the permit scheme. The reach of this Bill therefore extends beyond the remit of the Employment Permits Acts to encompass also that of the Workplace Relations Act 2015, the Protection of Employees (Employers’ Insolvency) Act 1984 and the upcoming Statutory Sick Leave Bill 2021.

I will set out a section-by-section consideration of the various aspects in the order they appear in the Bill to help to facilitate the conversation. I am conscious more Deputies will speak after me and we can tease through aspects of the Bill then.

Section 1 of the proposed legislation seeks to grant a worker, without a valid work permit, access to the Workplace Relations Commission, WRC, adjudication process, provided they have taken reasonable steps to obtain a valid permit. There are a couple of issues here that I ask everyone to consider. Without question, all employees deserve fair treatment, and that goes without saying. Where employees comply with the legislation by having valid employment permits, they have exactly the same protections under Irish employment law as any other workers in the State. Indeed, many of the criteria associated with the employment permits system are aimed at ensuring migrant employees are treated in line with Irish labour laws. The legislation ensures these rights are protected. The Workplace Relations Commission has powers of enforcement under the Employment Permits Acts, and its investigation and enforcement powers work to discourage abuses of the employment permits system by unscrupulous employers.

I must emphasise that non-EEA nationals are required by law to hold a valid work permit or a visa allowing them to work in the State. I think that point is accepted by most people as well. People who do not hold one of these permissions are not entitled to enter into contracts of employment in the State. Therefore, legally, they are not entitled to seek redress from the WRC. The proposal set out in this proposed legislation, while well-intentioned, could be seen to undermine the rationale underpinning our work permit framework. It is recognised throughout Europe as a strong system and one we wish to protect. New legislation is coming through the Houses to alter it. The general scheme of the employment permits (consolidation and amendment) Bill 2019 has been undergoing pre-legislative scrutiny in committee for a long time, and I hope it will come back to me soon so that we can continue to work on it. The proposed legislation will make some positive changes to the current legislation and allow for important changes.

I recognise the Bill under discussion makes a distinction for employees who have taken reasonable steps to get an employment permit. We fully accept some workers may find themselves in this position through no fault of their own. For that very reason, the current legislation already provides that a person who has not acquired a right to work but who has taken reasonable steps to do so may seek redress from the civil courts, in accordance with section 2B of the Employment Permits Acts.

Section 2 would allow workers on general employment permits the right to change employer within the first year of employment here. The Government is absolutely in agreement that, where such workers are subjected to abusive or exploitative conditions, they should be able to apply for a new permit without facing the threat of losing their right to work here. In general, the current legislation requires that the employee remains with the employer for a period of 12 months. This is, on one hand, to protect employers by giving them a reasonable expectation the employee will remain with them for a reasonable period. This is a balanced approach, given the recruitment costs involved for employers, while not unduly binding the foreign national to the employer. However, under the current legislation an employment permit holder may still, if necessary, change employer within the first 12 months. This is an option in cases of redundancy or in circumstances which, although unforeseen at the time of application, have fundamentally changed the employment relationship, for example, the introduction of terms and conditions which were not originally provided for in the contract of employment. This would include exploitative or abusive practices, as referred to in this Bill. We have a team in our Department that will analyse such situations and that is open to doing so if the Deputies have any cases in this regard they may wish to bring to the attention of that team. In addition, permit holders may change employer at any stage where they are on their second or subsequent employment in the State, subject to all relevant and appropriate criteria for the permit type being sought.

Section 3 proposes that employees without a valid permission would have access to the Social Insurance Fund, SIF, for payment of compensation secured in the civil courts in the event the employer becomes insolvent. A payment from the Social Insurance Fund under the insolvency payments scheme requires insurable employment to have existed. It requires employees to have paid into that scheme. That is the rule governing that scheme. The fact is employees working without a valid employment permit are not lawfully employed in the eyes of the State. They cannot be considered to be in insurable employment under social welfare legislation. They therefore are not eligible for payment from the Social Insurance Fund. I think most people will accept that provision. It is the responsibility of everyone involved to ensure employees are appropriately employed in this country. We have dealt with situations where that has been abused by others.

Section 4 makes it a condition for a grant of a permit in certain sectors, such as meat processing, that the employer concerned must have a sick pay scheme for workers. That scheme, as proposed here, would provide at least 70% of workers' wages for a period from four weeks to six months, depending on the illness and if it is an occupational or work-related illness. The Government’s sick leave Bill 2021, sponsored by the Tánaiste, Deputy Varadkar, will ensure every worker, especially lower paid workers, have the security and peace of mind of knowing that if they fall ill and miss work, they will not lose out on a day’s pay. It will encompass full- and part-time employees and no waiting days will apply.

The new employment right will start at three days and will increase incrementally over time so that all employees will eventually be entitled to ten days, or two weeks, of sick pay per year. It is being phased in to help all involved, particularly employers and small businesses especially, to plan ahead and manage the additional costs. We are conscious the measure is coming in at a difficult time for many employers, having just come through the impact of Covid-19. We recognise, however, that it is important to introduce this legislation. The Tánaiste addressed the House on this issue last December and last January and he made clear his intention to have the Sick Leave Bill 2021 in this House this year, because we are one of the few countries in Europe without such a statutory sick pay scheme.

While many employers operate their own schemes, there is no statutory provision for paid sick leave. We are committed to doing that, and that will be debated in these Houses. There may well be different views on the number of days, but we think it is important we recognise the need to strike a balance between having a viable business and one that can also pay sick leave. This Bill, on the other hand, proposes that employers pay up to six months sick pay, which means that costs for employers in certain sectors would be significant. This would be neither fair nor proportionate. I have no doubt the Deputies opposite will argue differently regarding that point, but I think that provision is an excessive ask of businesses, considering the size of business being put forward in this regard as well. While the Government’s sick leave Bill 2021 will cause some additional costs, the scheme is not intended to impose excessive costs on employers or to jeopardise jobs.

We all have a duty to create new jobs and to protect existing jobs while also enhancing the terms and conditions and the entitlements of those jobs. We must get that balance right and it is something we can build on over time. We have given much consideration to the pressures on businesses now, and the design parameters and the incremental approach to be taken over four years recognise this situation. It is intended the legislation will be debated in this House soon and that it will be in play in 2022 as well.

I recognise that many issues are being dealt with in the context of this proposed legislation, but I believe the legislation in place now is strong. New legislation in this regard is also coming through the House, as I said, and I hope we can begin discussing it here in December or January, because it is important for us to make some changes to the system. We must recognise the potential use of technology to reduce the costs involved for everybody with permits.

Many people avail of permits in this country in many sectors. We are very lucky to have so much talent coming in to work with us in those areas. It is important those workers are protected by our employment legislation. They are, and I confirm that. Likewise, regarding Covid-19, those permit holders were entitled to the enhanced benefits in the same way as everyone else, because those workers are treated equally under our labour laws. Those sectors with many permit holders generally performed well. People went into work every week to ensure the rest of us were able to have our shelves stocked and to get to the food as well. I recognise the hard work of the permit holders in that regard. It is a sector our Department will be working closely with, along with the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, to enhance, protect and grow job opportunities and to improve the quality of those jobs as well.

See this speech in context