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

I join with others in congratulating the Ireland women's soccer team. Very clearly, they have come an awful long way in the past five years since their meeting in Liberty Hall. It is a testament to the value of trade union action and collective action, which speaks to the heart of this motion.

I thank the Deputies for bringing it forward and giving us the opportunity to have this important debate.

The people working in homeless services, health and social care services and child and family services, though the Minister says they are not public servants, are providing a service to the public on behalf of the State. Just because it is via a service-level agreement does not mean it is not a public service. Technically, they are not public servants but many of them had their pay cut when public servants had their pay cut. When the funding was reduced, the cuts involved were passed on to these workers.

The Deputies bringing forward the motion will not be unaware of their role in that. I am glad we have the opportunity to interrogate it because at the time when the cuts were being passed on, I was representing those workers in some instances. I welcome the men and women in the Gallery and anyone listening. When we went to the Labour Court and did exactly as the Minister said by saying we were not public servants, we were sitting across the table from people who could not make a decision. The fact the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform is not here is illustrative of that. You take your case to the court and have two thirds of the decision-making team sitting there. It is a tactic and it was done repeatedly. The people in the room might offer all the tea and sympathy in the world. The Minister gave it: they do great work; pat on the back - all of that. When it comes to fronting up with money to resolve this or a process by which their rights can be vindicated, that is wholly absent. They end up with a situation whereby they are sitting in a room and half the time the employer is agreeing with them and saying that if he or she had the shekels, he or she would definitely provide a pay increase. The employer is nearly making the case for you to the chairperson of the court or the adjudicator. They are saying they cannot keep staff and are haemorrhaging staff to the public service because they cannot keep pace and the funding is not keeping pace because those cuts were passed on to workers.

It is unfair, as I am sure the Minister will acknowledge and as the Deputies bringing forward the motion are not unaware, on the one hand to say:

We'll consider you as public servants some of the time and we'll hold you to a high standard - and rightly so - and a similar standard to the rest of the public service - and rightly so - but when it comes to pay restoration, well, you're not technically public servants, lads, so, you know, we're terrible sorry but there's nothing we can do.

That is unfair. I welcome the mention in the motion of a process by which these workers can negotiate because there is nothing more frustrating than being an active trade union member. I have said on the floor of the Dáil many times that the best way to secure decent treatment and fair wages at work is to join and be active in a union. These people do that. They are active trade union members but when they go to what should be a negotiating forum, they sit across the table from two thirds of a team. Maybe the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is there and the employer is there, but the Department of Health is not there; or maybe the Department of Health and the employer are there, but the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform is not. They need a proper forum to negotiate their terms and conditions. What has happened them until now is not fair.

The cuts were passed on and some of them were given an awful choice in 2012 or 2013 when they were told their funding would be cut. The employer was looking at me and saying that the other option was to cut services to people. Will the Minister cast his mind back? It was slash-and-burn austerity all over the place. The people who depend on the services delivered by these men and women were at the business end of that austerity. Employers were faced with the choice of cutting pay, cutting hours or cutting services. No wonder they cannot compete with the public service. They are losing personnel day after day. It is not fair.

I welcome the motion. It is not good enough that the Minister will say he will not oppose it. He should support it, actively engage with that forum and give these people a chance to vindicate their rights at work.

See this speech in context