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

I sincerely thank Deputy Joan Collins not just for this legislation, but for the work she does in general on workers' rights, her group and her staff because it is very obvious from reading the legislation that not just a lot of work went into writing it but a lot of consultation went into formulating it. This is very practical legislation that is intended to make a real and meaningful difference to the lives of working people, which is incredibly important.

It also fits very neatly with the EU directive and I am genuinely mystified as to why the Government cannot see fit to support it. I have heard the reasons given by the Minister of State, but he will forgive me if I say I am not quite convinced by them.

He mentioned that there is no evidence this proposal will enhance workers' rights. Let us imagine I present him now with evidence that it will enhance workers' rights, which is what I am about to do. If I do so, would he then be in a position to reverse his opinion?

I refer to a letter we received from the Mandate trade union. It states the union, which represents almost 30,000 workers in the retail, bar and administrative sectors, had noticed a marked increase in employers using deductions at source as a union-busting tool. This is direct evidence from Mandate, which represents 30,000 workers in the private sector, that it is aware that employers are using deductions at source as a union-busting tool. Logically, then, anything that combats that union-busting tool is good for workers. To be fair, the Minister of State has put his own bona fides on the record on more than one occasion regarding his view of trade unions. We know it is a good thing that workers are in trade unions. In fact, we know, and I do not think there is any dispute about this, that this is something that enhances workers' rights. The trade unions say this legislation will help to combat union busting. They refer to it as a tool to be used against union busting that will enhance workers' rights. The Minister of State is saying there is no evidence this proposed measure would enhance worker's rights, but there is. It absolutely will do so because workers do need this protection at work. Enough evidence has been presented for the Minister of State to reflect on his position and, I hope, maybe change it regarding this legislation.

We do not know when auto-enrolment for pension contributions is going to be in place. Perhaps the Government will enlighten us. It is the same kind of administration that goes into processing deductions at source for subscriptions. The Government is gung ho about the introduction of pension auto-enrolment and is telling us it is on course. Of course, this new requirement will be an additional administrative burden, but not a huge one. I have been at briefings where the Government's representatives have been very anxious to play down the administrative burden this measure will have for businesses. It is extremely important that the burden is managed, etc., and that businesses can cope with the additional administrative burden. This proposal, though, is the same. The same systems would be used.

Deputy Collins is not asking businesses to go out and invest in new software, reinvent any wheels or set up an entirely new department or anything like that. This proposal is simply concerned with the use of administrative tools that are in place, except this time they would be used to ensure trade union subscription deductions are taken and remitted in a timely manner. Where such systems are in place to take deductions at source, it works fairly seamlessly when these deductions are remitted in a timely manner. I know this because I used to work in a trade union. When they are not given in such a timely manner and are withheld, that can represent a catastrophic threat to trade unions. This proposed legislation would ensure that the capacity to use the deductions at source method would remain because it is a decent way to collect union subscriptions, while removing the capacity for this approach to be used, to quote Mandate, "as a union-busting tool".

This is a good thing. It does not force anyone to join a trade union. We could debate all day whether that is a good thing. My view is that the best place for people is in a union, when they want to be in and active in one and not forced or compelled to be there. This proposal, however, does not force companies to recognise a trade union; it simply obliges them to collect the subscriptions. They do not have to engage in collective bargaining. There is nothing like that in the proposed legislation. It simply guarantees that trade union subscriptions will be taken and remitted to the union in a timely manner. I genuinely do not see what the resistance to this is. As I said, the introduction of pension auto-enrolment is going to place exactly the same burden on businesses, and I doubt if any Minister will come into this Chamber, or any similar forum, to argue auto-enrolment will be too burdensome on businesses. The Government will not do that because it knows it is simply not the case and that every effort will be made to minimise the burden. Equally, of course, every effort would be made to minimise the burden in this context as well if this legislation were to be passed.

This is one element of what I believe workers need. This is my opinion and that of Sinn Féin: workers need a legislative right to organise. This must include access to the workplace for trade union officials for the purposes of organising health and safety inspections, workplace rights inspections, etc. It must also include facilities time and the provision of information to people on their first day in work, not just about their rights at work but also concerning how to access the relevant trade union, encouraging people to use the trade union connect website and to avail of the information there. The right to organise is essential for workers and this proposed legislation is a part of it. It is not all of it, and all of it certainly will not be delivered by the EU adequate minimum wages directive. Work will be required on behalf of unions and employers. An intervention from Government will also be required, but this intervention will not come from this Government. However, a Sinn Féin-led Government will introduce the right to organise for workers and ensure they can vindicate their rights at work through membership of a trade union.

I circle back to the Minister of State's comments regarding there being no evidence this legislation will enhance workers' rights. I respectfully suggest the required evidence, to which I referred, has been provided by Mandate. In its letter to us, the union referred to victimisation as having become widespread and having impacted more than 1,000 of its members. The Minister of State is aware of this next point, but I will say it again just for completeness. These are some of the lowest-paid and most vulnerable workers in the system. They are retail and front-line workers. They are the workers we were all clapping for during Covid-19. They were front-line workers then, but they appear to have disappeared out of the headlines since. When Mandate, however, is telling us this situation could have impacted more than 1,000 of its members, this is the evidence that stopping this type of practice will represent an enhancement of workers' rights.

The evidence, therefore, does exist that this proposed measure will enhance workers' rights. Even at this late stage, I encourage the Minister of State to change his position and to support this legislation. If he has concerns about aspects of it, then he should use the wonderful system of committees, debates, amendments, etc., that we have here to bring forward any changes he may believe are required. The evidence that this proposed legislation will improve workers' rights has been presented. I believe it will improve workers' rights and I encourage the Government to support it.

See this speech in context