Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I would like to say I was shocked, but I probably was not, at the remarks of the Minister of State indicating a belief that workers are going to accept that the past two years did not happen. They are not prepared to accept that. They have had the experience of not just working remotely, but working well remotely. They want that experience to inform the legislation, which it clearly does not. Nobody is going to stand in here and say the legislation is perfect or indeed adequate. Deputy Troy was very quick to emphasise that it is a draft at the moment, and of course it is. The word "draft" was used over and over again following the reaction of not only workers but also their representatives and politicians to the proposals which in effect amount to a charter for refusal to grant the right to work from home. The Minister of State can nod his head all he likes but I know what it is. I have read it. I have seen the reaction from workers and their representatives. They have read it too. They also have the experience of the past two years which the Minister of State and his Department are at pains to point out will not inform the legislation. It should of course inform the legislation because that has been their experience.

It is more than 20 years since I, as a shop steward, lodged the first claim for what we called "teleworking" at the time. We did not call it e-working, remote working or anything like that. We called it "teleworking". That was refused by the employer on the grounds that it did not suit the business, etc. That same workplace, some 20 years later, has now transferred in its entirety to remote working. Not only did it improve productivity, which it did, but it also improved the lives of the people who were working there, which has a consequent improvement in terms of productivity and how they are getting their business done. It was a really positive experience. Like many workers, they were not just surprised when they saw the legislation as published - they were angry because it falls far short of what they had expected.

I should have said at the start I want to thank the Deputies who have introduced this motion. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State is not opposing it. We all know that is not the same thing as supporting it. Saying you do not have an objection to something is not the same thing as saying you are actually going to do it. The report produced by the Tánaiste showed very clearly that workers want a hybrid model and that is their preferred mode for future working. Patricia King of ICTU said at the committee that the legislation will be judged on whether workers have confidence that it compels employers to be fair, reasonable and consistent in their considerations, and it does not. Therefore it requires substantial changes.

The reasons that the Tánaiste published in the draft Bill do not strike the necessary balance. It is not just that it is not in favour of workers - the balance is all in favour of employers. As someone with a considerable amount of experience in the trade union movement and a small amount of experience in politics I am not a bit surprised, coming from this Government, that this Bill is what we got. However, to dress this legislation up as a right that a worker can have and then to make sure to stitch in all the clauses to ensure that a worker can never access that right is actually quite cynical. To be honest with the Minister of State, workers see through that. They see what is going on here. They also see that they have successfully worked for two years remotely and they want to be able to do that again.

I will refer briefly to the right to disconnect and legislation that I introduced. I thank Gareth Murphy and the Financial Services Union for all of their work on this. They have been leading the charge. We know that in recent times the lines between work and personal time have been eroded. Some of that is due to technology but that is not an excuse. It may be a reason but it is not an excuse for it to happen. We know that the State is playing catch-up in terms of workers' rights and it is an extremely important workers' right to have the right to disconnect. People cannot be always on. For their own well-being and work-life balance, it is absolutely essential that the right to disconnect is given and granted to workers so that they have a legal right to switch off and a legal right to their personal time.

See this speech in context