Bríd Smith (Dublin South Central, People Before Profit Alliance) | Oireachtas source

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Before I introduce the Bill, I want to say quite openly and publicly that People Before Profit sends its full sympathy and solidarity to the family of the late and great Christy Dignam. If he was alive today, he would fully support this Bill. My experience of him was when he played in a local venue in Ballyfermot in the 1990s. It used to be packed to the gills, full of young people who really got him, and he really got them. He understood young people in working class areas. He was of them, he was part of them, and he fully expressed their experience in life.

Not so long ago, on behalf of the National Homeless and Housing Coalition, which People Before Profit was very much part of, he worked with Senator Frances Black and other musicians like Don Baker to make a song called "We All Fall Down". It was about homelessness, for homeless people, and to be used as a fundraiser for campaigning. We want to thank him for that, and to credit him and his life with being very full and rich in terms of the contribution he made both politically and culturally to Irish society. Ar dheis Dé go raibh a anam dílis.

I want to start, funnily enough, by thanking a member of our staff. Nicole, who works in Deputy Paul Murphy's office, wrote this Bill, ironically because of her direct experience of working for sub-minimum rates. She was a young worker in a Santa's grotto. Santa thought it was okay to pay her 80% of the legal minimum wage, while her colleagues, who did the same work and dealt with the same children, got the full rate of pay. She is not alone in having that experience. According to the Central Statistics Office, CSO, more than 150,000 people are on the minimum wage and 34,000 are on sub-minimum wage rates. Of these, half are on rates determined solely by their age.

They are not apprentices. They are not training, or simply gaining experience. They do not work for fun or for pocket money. They are workers, who do the same work alongside others who work with them. This State passed legislation to say that is okay, based on one's age, to pay one less. If this was any other category of work, we would clearly see it for what it is and it would never be acceptable. It is discrimination and exploitation, and it has to stop. That is why we are bringing this Bill forward today, to try to stop it in the here and now.

There is no case for continuing with these rates. There never was a case for them. In the cost-of-living crisis, at this time of historic highs in energy, rents, mortgages, travel and groceries, the idea that it is okay to pay young people less for doing the same work must stop. It has to be seen for what it is. It is wrong.

When the National Minimum Wage Act 2000 was brought in by the then Minister in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Mary Harney, the reduced rates were justified in the following way. The then Minister said that "all other things being equal, an experienced employee is of more value and more productive than a new entrant or trainee." Is it not an odd way to justify legislation for inequality, by starting one's statement by saying "all things being equal"? For everyone who starts in new employment, and in that sense inexperienced, their age does not really enter into it. When we look at where the majority of young workers on these lower rates are employed, it is mainly in the food, hospitality and retail sectors.

It is simply untrue to say that young workers are of less value or are less productive than a colleague who is two years older than them. It is important that we call this out, and say that at the time, it was a sop to the industry, the hoteliers, restaurants, shopkeepers and perhaps the sector of society the Progressive Democrats and Fianna Fáil looked to for their support. To allow us to continue with the practice of paying young workers less for their labour solely because they are young is not acceptable.

It is notable that no study, review or peer-reviewed research was conducted by the then Minister Mary Harney, the Government or Fianna Fáil at the time to back up the statement that she made, that these workers were of less value or less productive. It was simply stated as a justification to exclude them from the minimal protections of the National Minimum Wage Act.

The 2000 Act is not unique. The treatment and abuse of young people in this country did not end there, and truly, this is not a country for young people. When the recession hit, the Fianna Fáil and Green Party Government cut the jobseekers' payment for the under-25s, a cut that has remainedin situin various guises. Again, it was justified at the time by saying that there was a need to incentivise young people to work and take minimum wage jobs, ironically at a time of mass unemployment. It was also allied to other job activation measures under the guise of the youth guarantee programme, which was aimed at forcing young people to take up jobs or training regardless of their suitability for that job or training.

In reality, the policy of that and previous governments was basically to hound young people out of the country when times were hard. It was to say, "Off you go to Dublin Airport". Cuts to unemployment rates and the so-called labour activation measures are a way to enforce a policy of mass emigration during a recession. The attitude to young people in this country continues to this day with these sub-minimum legal rates of pay.

While the numbers directly on these rates may seem small, it is worth reflecting that 17,000 or so of them at present are not the same thousands that were on it two or three years ago. Since it was introduced in 2000, it is likely that hundreds of thousands of young workers have directly experienced these sub-minimum wage rates.

It is also worth saying that it is not just young people who are affected. We know from trade unions and others about the depressing effect these wages have on others in the sector, like retail and hospitality, where extra hours that may provide more work, or extra hours during holiday time or peak periods, is given to younger staff in order to avoid paying the full, legal minimum rate to those over 20. In these sectors, it is mainly women, migrants and vulnerable groups who dominate employment. There is a high prevalence of part-time and precarious employment in these sectors, making it a steadily exploitative industry.

These rates are used to depress the earnings of vulnerable groups, which should be of great concern to us and a reason to stop it now. We often have a picture of employment in this country as high tech, highly paid, lucrative, very much high quality and a great place to work, but the reality for hundreds of thousands of people is very different. Women comprise the majority of workers in the low-pay sector. Low pay is also allied to precarious employment and, again, Ireland has high percentages of that employment accordingto EUROSTAT's labour force survey. The impact of low pay and precarious work is an issue for all of us and not just those at the receiving end of it. Effectively, it means the State ultimately has to subsidise the prevalence of low pay and precarious working conditions that affect large swathes of the population.

The Bill does not address the systemic problems at the heart of that contradiction. It can deal only with one particularly egregious example of the abuse of workers, but it is worth saying that the reality of workers lives' in 2023, for the majority, is a far cry from the rosy picture presented by this and previous governments. Earlier this year, the Council of Europe found that Ireland is in breach of labour rights obligations and specifically mentioned Ireland's failure to ensure a decent standard of living for young workers on minimum wage. It also highlighted excessive restrictions on the right to strike and access to trade union recognition. We brought this Bill forward to highlight one form of clear abuse of workers' rights, but a system of abuse right across many categories of employment is at play throughout this country. We do not have the right to trade union recognition, we have far fewer rights and benefits than most other European states when it comes to paid holidays, annual leave, maternity and paternity leave, sick leave and other social wage benefits, and we have seen a war waged on the right to retire at a decent age and the right to a decent pension.

We in People Before Profit believe all these issues and struggles are linked. They are very much linked to a system that, for example, has allowed Debenhams and Clerys workers to be abused and dismissed, a prevalence of low pay and precarious employment and, at the same time, a system that says it is okay to pay young workers less than those they work alongside for doing exactly the same work. We are not saying the minimum wage is an ambition or standard to be achieved. In fact, we believe we need to move rapidly towards a living wage and increase the benefits all workers can earn in terms of what is called a social wage. However, that is the minimum and because it is legally the minimum, it is time to stop the discrimination and abuse it allows of young people.

See this speech in context