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

Last week, I organised an AV room briefing on the campaign to reinstate the Murphy Four. The four men are members of the Unite trade union. I invited Deputies and Senators to hear about the appalling treatment and the dismissal of these workers by the engineering and construction company, J. Murphy and Sons Limited, also more commonly known as Murphy International.

Before Christmas 2022, four Unite members working for Murphy International in Limerick were dismissed. That four included one Unite shop steward. Unite believes that the workers were unfairly singled out, victimised and targeted for what was essentially legitimate trade union activity. Our workplaces will never be safe for any worker, as long as workers' representatives are not protected from victimisation. Between them, the men had 50 years of service and my understanding is without a blemish of any record. They had given good and loyal service to that company.

One of the men was not able to travel on the day, but he sent a letter. I will read part of it into the record. He wrote that:

It is hard to put into words how my dismissal has affected me and my family. The whole dismissal process seemed so unfair. Many people took the...exact same action yet only four were dismissed. It is hard to see how this can be justified.

Following my dismissal, I found it very difficult to get social welfare. It was decided that because I had been dismissed, unfairly I would add, that I was not entitled to it. I had to fight a case that went on for months during which time I received no payment despite having paid PRSI my entire adult life. I ended up having to take an appeal...[which was] eventually decided in my favour. I found this whole process so humiliating....

It has been very difficult for me to obtain another job, having been left in my 50s without a reference from my previous employer...

I am now taking a case to the WRC [but] I am told this could take years.

Now, I understand, because I have been on both sides of this, that there is a limit to what the Government can do. I also understand, though, that no Government should stand over treatment like this, not while the same Government is engaged in contracts with the company concerned. These men were dismissed, as the union said, for legitimate trade union activity. They were not organising for the goal of seeking a massive pay increase, but to simply have the recognised rate for the job applied to them, as well as the terms and conditions to go along with that. They did not have those and they were perfectly entitled to seek them. These men, however, now find themselves in a situation where, because they were dismissed, they have struggled to access social welfare payments.

We have seen employers take to the courts to challenge employment regulation orders, EROs. Effectively, what happens is that the increases and terms due to workers just get caught up in a legal process. Meanwhile, in the middle of a cost-of-living crisis, workers cannot access what is the generally agreed rate for their job. Many of these employers know this, and what happened in respect of what we call the Murphy Four was very calculated. The company is exploiting a significant shortfall in the unfair dismissals legislation. It is nearly worth an employer's time to take a chance in this regard because the compensation is so small for a worker in the case of unfair dismissal. It is very hard to prove and the compensation is very small when it is proven.

The impact of this situation on these workers has been phenomenal. My main request today is for the Government to lend its support to the campaign. I do not expect to see any Ministers or Ministers of State taking to picket lines or protests, but this is a company that has major contracts with the State. These workers were not looking for a massive pay rise, and even if they were there is nothing outrageous about doing that, but simply for the application of what is generally accepted to be the pay rate for the job.

See this speech in context