Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move:

That Dáil Éireann

notes:

the growth in employment agencies and the increased use by employers of agency workers, particularly in the construction sector and in the hotel and services sectors;

that increasing numbers of new jobs are considered temporary and are being filled by agency workers;

that agency workers, including vulnerable migrant workers, are being subject to inferior pay and conditions and exploitation;

that agency workers are being used by employers to undercut permanent work forces and drive down and depress wages across the economy, and to sidestep duties that they would have to directly employed workers, including job security, pension entitlements and redundancy entitlements;

that the absence of dedicated statutory protection is facilitating the circumvention of progressive employment legislation including the Protection of Employment (Part-Time Work) Act 2001 and the Protection of Employees (Fixed-Term Work) Act 2003;

the failure of the Government to introduce any domestic legislation on the issue of agency workers; and

the fact that the Government, along with two other states, has been responsible for blocking a proposed EU directive on temporary agency workers since 2002;

recognises:

the principle of equal treatment;

that without legislation which ensures that agency workers are subject to the same terms as directly employed workers, employers will always be tempted to cut corners on terms and conditions and casualisation and exploitation will take hold;

that the trade union movement is correct in asserting that legislating for equal rights for agency workers is a vital anti-exploitation measure; and

that further delays in introducing such legislation will be detrimental for individual workers and for employment conditions in general;

calls on the Government to:

immediately introduce legislation to protect the equal rights of agency workers, compared to their permanent counterparts, whereby employment agency workers would be subject to a collective agreement specifying terms and conditions of employment including, but not limited to:

specifying a maximum period beyond which the worker must become a direct employee;

providing for equal pay and entitlements with directly employed workers performing the same or similar work or work of equal value; and

ensuring the right of workers employed by agencies to trade union representation; and

support the introduction of an EU directive on temporary agency workers.

I am pleased to propose this important motion in my name and on behalf of my Labour Party colleagues and Deputy Morgan and his colleagues in Sinn Féin. I propose to share time with Deputy Morgan.

John O'Donoghue (Kerry South, Ceann Comhairle)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is agreed.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the outset of this important debate, I wish to express in the strongest possible terms the opposition of the Labour Party to exploitation and discrimination in the workplace, against any employee, whether full-time or part-time, contract or agency. We deplore the situation where a section of our workforce, namely agency workers, has not been afforded the same level of protection in our employment laws, from the perspective of job security, access to sick pay and pension entitlements or to other non-pay benefits, that are considered the norm for comparable employees working in the same industry.

The founding ethos of my party was to promulgate, espouse and acknowledge the principle of equality. The Labour Party, along with Sinn Féin, is tonight focusing on the plight and treatment of agency workers, including vulnerable migrant workers, who are being subjected to inferior pay and conditions and naked exploitation. I am proud to say that my party was founded by Connolly and Larkin with an ethos of promulgating, espousing and acknowledging the principle of equality. The motion I have moved supports and underpins the principle of equal treatment for all workers. It calls on the Government to protect the rights of agency workers and to support the introduction of the long-promised EU directive on temporary agency workers.

Trade unions across the EU have for many years been engaged in an ongoing campaign for equal pay, conditions and status for all "atypical" workers. They have achieved considerable success throughout the Union. Unbelievably, our Government and by extension our country is laggard in the important area of employment standards and conditions. Agency work increasingly means discrimination in the workplace, poorer pay and denial of sick, holiday and overtime pay. It is often used by employers as a means of avoiding many of their responsibilities. The vast majority of EU member states have dealt with this problem — the use by employers of agency workers as a means of paying lower wages and introducing lower standards — by implementing laws which provide for equality of treatment of agency workers and comparable staff. Most member states' laws are based on the "non-discrimination principle", which means that agency workers must receive the same terms and conditions as comparable permanent employees in the user enterprise.

Agency workers in Belgium must be paid the same wages, and be given the same terms and conditions, as permanent workers in the user enterprise. Spanish law was modified in 1999 to ensure parity of pay with that provided for in the collective agreement of the sector to which the agency worker is assigned. The law in Portugal has established parity of pay and conditions with permanent workers. In Greece, an agency worker's pay must not be lower than that set under the relevant collective agreement within the employment agency. The equal wages clause in the Netherlands can be varied, but only by a collective agreement with the permanent agency. The pay of an agency worker in France is linked to the amount of money a post-probationary permanent employee with the same qualifications would earn in that post. French agency workers are also eligible for an end of assignment payment equal to 10% of the gross pay earned during the assignment, as well as compensation equivalent to a further 10% in lieu of paid holidays, to which they are not entitled. French employment law also provides for a compulsory levy of 2% of payroll costs for training. Since 2004, agencies in Germany have been obliged to guarantee their workers the same pay and collective conditions as permanent staff in the user enterprise unless a collective agreement is made to the contrary.

The Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher, might suggest that I have confined myself to references to "old" member states. However, action has also been taken in countries which joined the EU in more recent times. Laws guaranteeing equal pay and treatment for agency workers have been introduced in the majority of post-2004 member states, including Poland, Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Slovenia. A trawl across the EU shows that the United Kingdom, Hungary and, shamefully, Ireland are the only member states which have not respected the non-discrimination principle by legislating for equal pay and conditions between agency workers and comparable employees in the user enterprise. Hungary introduced a definition of "employee leasing" in its labour law in 2001. It clarified the contractual position and obligations of all parties but stopped short of imposing an equal pay principle. Many member states have gone further by reinforcing the equal treatment, or non-discrimination, principle with additional measures to ensure that agency workers are used for bona fide reasons. Seven member states have defined in law specific reasons for which an employer may have recourse to agency workers. Five member states limit the duration of agency work and four member states set limits to the sector and occupation usage.

In Spain, agency work is prohibited in certain sectors, including the public service and for "dangerous" work. Legislation was introduced in Poland in 2003 to provide for a maximum agency employment period of an aggregate of 12 months over a period of 36 consecutive months. The maximum permitted duration of the use of agency workers is connected to the reasons for use in Poland and Belgium. In Portugal, if the justification for the use of agency workers is the temporary substitution of permanent workers, the duration of that use must correspond to the duration of the justifying cause. In Greece, a user company may not employ agency workers for a total period of over eight months. If that period is exceeded, the contract between the agency worker is automatically transformed into an open-ended "contract of indefinite duration" between the agency worker and the client firm. Neither the objective nor the outcome of agency working in France can be to fill a post in the client company for a "lengthy period". In any case, the maximum duration is 18 months, including renewals. In Slovenia, agency workers cannot be used by the user firm "continuously", or to replace striking workers, or if there have been collective redundancies in the past three years, or in other cases determined by sectoral agreements. An agency in the Czech Republic may assign an employee to the same user for a maximum of 12 months, unless the employee requests a longer period. Collective agreements in Sweden are concluded with agencies' representative organisations by sector. Collective agreements typically provide that 75% of the full monthly salary must be paid regardless of whether the agency workers engage in work. The Swedish white collar agency agreement provides for 80% of the normal weekly wage.

Numerous EU member states have addressed this issue in one way or another, but Ireland is lagging behind. The Minister of State may refer to Ireland's body of employment protection legislation, but it is not working. The Government's wishy-washy amendment is of no use. I am not interested in mealy-mouthed speeches from the Minister of State's colleagues. We should not engage in tokenism in this debate. Tomorrow night, the Labour Party and Sinn Féin will give every Member of this House an opportunity to march through the lobbies — it will be time to put up or shut up. We will no longer tolerate Deputies who are all things to all people in their constituencies but do not express the views of workers when they get an opportunity to make decisions on important matters in the Dáil, to which they have been elected by their constituents. The problems to which I refer are being encountered in every county in Ireland. It is no excuse to say that difficulties are not happening.

Those involved in the trade union movement know that a great deal of sympathy has been expressed for the plight of Irish and migrant workers. However, I remind the Minister of State that sympathy does not buy the tea. We will give Deputies an opportunity to make their views known when the House divides tomorrow night. We do not want any nice token speeches from Members on the Government side. The amendment that has been tabled is as wishy-washy as any amendment I have ever seen. Perhaps the Government is playing for time, but we will continue to hound it until this matter is resolved. We will not accept professions of closet socialism from Deputies who act in a manner that is the antithesis of socialism. Fundamentally, socialism is about equality of treatment and parity of esteem when it comes to wages and ancillary benefits. The response of this House to tonight's motion is being watched extremely carefully not just by one corner of the trade union movement, but across the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and similar bodies. I remind the Minister of State that all his colleagues on the Government side are being given an opportunity to set the record straight.

The EU directive on temporary agency work has the stated objective of providing the minimum level of protection for temporary agency workers. The Union proposes to establish the principle of non-discrimination of working conditions, including pay, between temporary agency workers and comparable workers in the user undertaking as soon as the temporary agency worker has completed six weeks work in the same user undertaking. Is that the reason Ireland is lagging behind? Is the Government afraid to bring forward and sign up to the legislation? The Government should forget about the other countries.

Shame on Britain with a Labour government that has not implemented this. I salute Andrew Miller and colleague MPs in the labour movement who over the next week will try to bring forward a motion similar to ours in the House of Commons. Many Labour MPs must find a solid home on the Conservative benches.

If the Labour Party were part of Government, this is the first issue we would tackle and the first Bill we would put through. We would not worry about other matters that currently take priority in Government time. This is where we would come from. This is what we were founded for in Clonmel and this is why we were with the workers in 1913 to ensure the principle of parity and equal treatment would be put on the Statute Book.

This directive has been subject to amendments, but why should we have to wait until it is agreed before Ireland can legislate for the equal treatment principle? What is going on in Government? The vast majority of other EU states have implemented laws giving effect to the equal treatment principle. The equal treatment-non-discrimination principle applies in Ireland in respect of fixed-term and part-time workers. What is required, therefore, is the development of legal provisions that would provide that agency workers would be guaranteed equal treatment and be protected from less favourable treatment than other workers in the user undertaking.

It is against the background of a downturn in the economy that we in the Labour Party feel there is a particular obligation on all of us to ensure adequate measures are in place to prevent the exploitation of low paid and vulnerable workers, especially those employed through agencies. Temporary staff employed through agencies are particularly open to exploitation as they generally have little or no job security or access to sick pay and pensions or other non-paid benefit. The Minister should not doubt there is a growing anger among workers at the failure of the Government to enact domestic legislation to protect agency workers, and particularly at the Government's ongoing decision to block the enactment of the draft temporary agency workers' directive, which would provide protection for workers across all member states.

The directive was approved by the members of the European Parliament in November 2002 but has been blocked at the Council of Employment Ministers for more than five years. Sadly, this blockage has been led by both Ireland and Britain. There is no excuse for the Minister or the Government continuing to block this key directive, unless they want to continue to turn a blind eye to the exploitation of vulnerable workers. I hope this motion will put pressure on the Government parties to reverse their position and recognise as a fundamental human right the principle of equal treatment. In addition, we would like to ensure the right of workers employed by agencies to become members of trade unions, and to be afforded the right of trade union representation, that the circumstances in which agency workers would be employed would be restricted and that a maximum period would be specified beyond which the worker must become a direct employee.

Sight should not be lost of the fact that the exploitation of agency workers not only causes significant problems for the workers concerned, which is extremely serious, but also poses a significant threat to the rest of the workforce whose pay and conditions of employment will be undermined unless such exploitation is brought to an end. This is why I salute the trade union movement, and in particular SIPTU and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, who are determined to campaign for as long as it takes to secure the right to equal treatment for all employees, full-time or part-time, permanent or temporary, direct or agency. The majority of workers from EU states coming to Ireland are recruited by agencies as temporary workers. Without the protection of employment legislation, they can be, and are being, exploited by greedy employers. I was contacted about 50 workers let go in Galway, some of whom were informed by text message and others by telephone. I thought we had left 1913 behind. Are we entering a new era where workers can be thrown on the scrapheap at the drop of a hat? The labour movement will not stand for that and that is why we will champion the cause.

Irish workers are being displaced by this artificially created pool of cheap labour. A number of my colleagues have alluded to the Government adopting a somewhat hypocritical position regarding these goings on. On the one hand, it is publicly espousing social partnership as the way forward for the economy, while, on the other, it has been to the forefront of a small minority of four of the 27 member states of the EU that have opposed the draft directive, which would greatly enhance workers' rights in Ireland.

The directive is essential legislation if a level playing field is to be created for workers and for decent employers. It would set down under EU law a series of minimum rights for all temporary workers in Europe such as the right to access the host company's social services, the right to in-house health and safety training and the right to access permanent positions. It would ensure rogue employers would not be able to use the lack of legal protection for agency workers to circumvent employment protection by replacing permanent staff with such workers. It would also protect responsible employment agencies, which also need to be protected from unfair competition on the part of other operations.

Recently, the general president of SIPTU, Jack O'Connor, indicated there would be no further social partnership agreements unless the abuse of agency workers ends and their right to equal treatment with other workers is enshrined in law. The union has been to the forefront in organising a series of meetings around the country, as part of its campaign to obtain a better deal for agency workers. The Labour Party agrees with the president who indicated that the current situation is unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue. He has asserted that we currently have a deplorable rented labour system, in which vulnerable people have no employment rights in practical terms and that the nearest parallel to the present phenomenon that affects tens of thousands of workers in Ireland is slavery. The president of SIPTU is dealing with this issue, with Patricia King and other officials on the ground. This is real, not pie in the sky. They can back up this assertion with facts.

SIPTU has acknowledged the existence of quite legitimate employment agencies functioning to facilitate the ebb and flow of business in various sectors of the economy, but some agencies are ratcheting down the security and equality of employment rights for everyone who works in Ireland. Sometimes this phenomenon is defended on the rather spurious grounds of protecting flexibility and meeting the competitiveness challenge. As Mr. O'Connor has said, this does nothing of the sort. The reverse is the case because it defers the day when we have to face up to the urgent need to up-skill about a half a million workers in our economy.

At our conference on 17 November 2007, I indicated, on behalf of the Labour Party, our view that the Government's opposition to the draft European directive in this area is totally misplaced and that the Government should immediately review its position. I referred to the Irish Ferries dispute and the GAMA construction scandal. I saluted the trade union movement on the strong stand it took, which mobilised mass public support and enabled a satisfactory solution for the workers involved. One must concur with the objective to establish a "threshold of decency" in employment standards for all workers in Ireland. The Government refers to the terms of the Towards 2016 agreement regulating employment agencies and agency workers, but my fear is that, while these measures are welcome, they represent moves which are of a cosmetic nature in so far as they are more procedural than substantive.

In view of the Government's continued opposition to the draft EU directive, the Labour Party's view is that new legislation is required to ensure that recruitment agencies are not used to circumvent equality provisions of employment and agency workers are not treated as second-class citizens. We must ensure that we do not end up with a two-tier workforce, where one set of workers have fewer rights, less protection and are paid less than others doing the same work. We gave a solemn commitment at the Labour Party conference to the wider labour movement that we would draft a Bill to provide agency workers with the same terms and conditions of employment enjoyed by full-time employees. We are ready to fulfil that commitment and will lay a Bill before the House in the next few weeks. We will challenge the Government to put up or shut up and, having drafted the Bill, we will ask the Government to take it in its time. We will co-operate in every way, as I have no doubt will the rest of the House, to ensure such legislation is put on the Statute Book in the shortest time.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Penrose for sharing time. I second the motion, the purpose of which is to stem the rising tide of exploitation resulting from the failure to legislate for the principle of equal treatment for agency workers. This joint motion, tabled by Sinn Féin and the Labour Party, demands that the abuse of agency workers should be ended and that their rights to equal treatment with other workers be enshrined in law.

Not only are agency workers being denied rights and entitlements, such as sick pay, holiday pay, overtime and rates of pay equivalent to permanent staff, but increasing numbers of new jobs are temporary and filled by agency workers. The employment of agency workers is resulting in the displacement of directly employed workers. The absence of legislation providing for the principle of equal treatment for agency workers means they are being used by employers to drive down wages and sidestep duties to directly employed workers. If this issue is not addressed, we risk returning to casual labour reminiscent of the 19th or early 20th century. Agency workers are little better off than the labourers of that era. In practical terms, vulnerable agency workers have effectively no employment rights. That is a scandal.

Despite repeated commitments made to the trade union movement in the course of partnership negotiations, the Government is not living up to its responsibilities to protect workers' rights. The unions have had to fight aggressively for improvements such as the recent increases in the number of labour inspectors. They are now being forced to fight on this issue. It is not good enough for the Government to tell us it intends to bring forward legislation in the future. In the fight to stop exploitation every day counts. The implications of any further delay in dealing with this issue cannot be overstated. It is time for the Government to fulfil its obligation to protect decent work standards for all workers.

The absence of adequate legislation to protect agency workers is like a cancer in the Irish labour market. If it is not addressed exploitation will spread aggressively and invasively through all workplaces and sectors. Already its effects are evident in construction, hotel and services, retail, logistics, red meat processing and mushroom farming. Further delays in introducing the legislation we demand will be detrimental for individual workers and employment conditions, as well as grossly unfair to good employers who are put at such a competitive disadvantage that they are forced to compete in a disgraceful race to the bottom.

We should not have to deal with this issue because it should have been resolved long ago. Most other members of the European Union, including the majority of new member states, have introduced laws to deal with the problem of employers using agency work as a means to pay less and introduce lower standards through legislation providing for equality of employment between agency workers and comparable permanent staff. Many member states further reinforce the equal treatment and non-discrimination principle with additional measures to ensure that agency work is used for genuine reasons. Not only has the Government failed to introduce domestic legislation on this issue, it has shamefully played a pivotal role in blocking an EU directive on temporary agency workers. It is time for the Government to stop stalling on domestic legislation and to drop its opposition to the proposed EU directive.

Caoimhghín Ó Caoláin (Cavan-Monaghan, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Hear, hear.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Last week, I attended a public meeting on agency workers in Waterford. At that meeting SIPTU's general president, Jack O'Connor, described the defining characteristic of this issue as silence. He was correct; this issue has not received enough media attention and some workers are unaware of the threats looming over their current terms and conditions of employment. People need to be crystal clear about the inevitable consequence of failing to deal with this issue. The campaign by the trade union movement is putting it on the agenda. By tabling this joint Sinn Féin-Labour motion we hope to give further momentum to that campaign by ensuring this Government gets the message that workers simply will not stand by and allow their rights and standards of employment to be eroded.

It is important to understand how this situation came about. While employment agencies have a legitimate function in various sectors of the economy and can play an important role in meeting the short-term needs of certain employers, the phenomenon which has developed in recent years is entirely different. In a study of the problem published in 2002, the European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and Working Conditions identified temporary agency work as the most rapidly growing form of atypical employment in the 1990s, spurring most decent states with social consciences which had not already done so to introduce legislation to provide for the principle of equal treatment.

A loophole in our employment rights regime is being exploited with dire consequences for all workers. The figures are astonishing. We now have 520 agencies for a population of 4 million people. What started off as an innocuous form of temporary labour between permanent jobs or to cover maternity leave has mutated into something far more sinister. While temporary agency workers have some minimal legal protection, such as minimum wages, this is totally inadequate and far from a guaranteed right to equal treatment with the directly employed workforce, the pay and conditions of whom are generally significantly above the minimum. The deficiencies in legislation covering the employment of agency workers has been grasped by certain employers keen to avoid normal obligations to their workers. There have even been cases whereby companies have established agencies to employ all their staff. These employers have realised they can use agency workers as a source of cheap labour. In what other scenario could one employ two groups of workers side by side and pay one group less money than another while making them work longer hours, denying them holidays, sacking them when they are sick and denying them redundancy packages? This is what agency workers are subject to every day.

It is unacceptable that the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment has failed to publish data on the number of placements for temporary workers since 1999. Regardless of whether this is intentional, it is difficult to get a picture of exactly how many workers are being employed in this manner. It is also difficult to establish numbers because of the ambiguity surrounding whether the user company or the agency actually employs the worker. What cannot be denied is that the number of agency workers is growing and that their increased use is linked to the avoidance of ordinary employer obligations in regard to workers' rights and entitlements.

Every Member of the Dáil will be familiar with cases of exploitation of agency workers and undercutting and displacement of existing workers as a result of the employment of agency workers. While the Government fails to acknowledge the extent of the problems that have developed as a result of its inaction, I have no doubt that Government backbenchers will be able to outline many cases from constituencies across the State.

I would like to highlight a number of cases that have recently come to my attention. The use of agency workers to depress wages and conditions of employment has particularly taken hold in the construction sector. It is now the case that few workers can find employment in the construction sector without joining an agency. Developers and contractors have hit upon a loophole that allows them to ride roughshod over workers' rights and the Government is allowing them get away with it. Tonight we are joined in the Gallery by a number of men who were recently fired from a local authority-owned site in Kildare by a construction firm that has refused to employ PAYE workers since last year. The site is populated by agency workers and the men were fired for refusing to become self-employed C2 and C45 workers and for refusing to waive their trade union membership.

Last week, I met a Kilkenny man who works in the construction sector. He had many experiences of ill-treatment and discrimination, the most startling of which was that for years he was paid a construction sector grade D wage for a job which should have been paid at the higher grade A rate based on his skills. The differential of €2 an hour every hour of every day went to the agency which employed him. When a union eventually intervened and managed to ensure he received the appropriate wage, he did not receive a cent in back money from the agency that had literally been robbing him for the entire period.

The use of agency workers also has implications in terms of health and safety. The latter is one of the reasons agency work is prohibited in Spain as being dangerous. At a recent meeting in Waterford organised as part of the trade campaign for equal rights for agency workers, those present were shown video footage of Polish workers using a guillotine to cut marble. The workers in question were not using any protective gear because their employer refused to provide it. The men's hands were continually under the guillotine and a SIPTU official recalled how he met men who had lost fingers doing the job. Those men worked Saturdays and Sundays for a flat rate and were accommodated in cramped, dirty and unsafe conditions. They had no choice in where they lived. The message from their employer was clear — "If you leave my accommodation, you leave my employment."

Lest anyone think that the employment of agency workers is restricted to one industry, it should be known that agencies are being used in almost every sector. I know a young woman who, straight from college, went to an agency seeking clerical work. She was placed in a well-known IT firm as a receptionist. She discovered within a short period that her directly employed co-workers, some of whom had fewer responsibilities than she, received better pay, had better holiday entitlements and were treated to much better conditions overall. She had no contact with the agency except to receive her payslip each week. The woman was expected to carry out far more duties by the company where she was placed than the agency had employed her to do and when, after a number of years, she asked her workplace management why they would not make her permanent, she was informed that they did not want to employ her on foot of overhead or budgetary reasons. We all know the reasons the company would not employ her directly. The worst aspect of this case is that the woman did not even know she was being exploited. She had never even heard the term "agency worker" in the context we are using it in this debate.

The situation is similar for the many non-national workers who become trapped in agencies. They do not know their rights and are not familiar with the labour laws in this State. The Government is doing little or nothing to protect them.

Excuses made by Ministers in the past for the failure to legislate for equal rights of agency workers simply do not stand up. Claims have been made about a potential loss of competitiveness that would result from cracking down on the exploitative use of agency workers. No excuse can be made that would justify the exploitation of vulnerable workers. Every state in Europe which ranks ahead of us in terms of competitiveness has some form of protective legislation. It is also important to note that there has been no evidence of any negative effect on labour market flexibility in those states which have such legislation. A successful economy cannot be based on a race to the bottom in respect of workers' rights and wages because there will always be lower-wage developing economies which can undercut their more developed counterparts. While the Minister for Finance acknowledged this in the past, it is deeply disappointing that competitiveness is still being offered as a spurious excuse for the failure of the Government to protect decent working standards. The Government must accept that while there can be flexibility when it comes to drawing up an employee's contract, there cannot be flexibility as regards his or her fundamental rights and entitlements.

In respect of the call for the reduction in the waiting time before agency workers receive their entitlements, the trade union movement has made proposals which would see the period before such workers receive direct recognition reduced from six weeks to four. Sinn Féin strongly supports this call. My party would go so far as to say that we should debate whether there should be pay parity from the initial date of employment, with other entitlements coming into play after the four-week period.

There is always the fear that employers, particularly those in the construction sector where jobs can be short lived, can hire somebody for six weeks and then let them go. Such employers have found loopholes to allow exploitation before. They will seek them again. Sinn Féin firmly believes that a person doing the same work as somebody else should be entitled to the same payment from the outset. We do not have an apartheid system in this State, or at least we should not have one. We cannot, without deep shame, put two workers beside each other and treat them differently for the sake of saving a few bob.

What this motion seeks and what the trade union movement is demanding is the immediate introduction of legislation to provide that agency workers should be guaranteed equal pay and treatment and be protected from being less favourably treated than other workers in the user undertaking. Such legislation needs to specify a maximum period for which agency workers would be employed and also a maximum period beyond which such workers must become direct employees.

It is also important that the right of workers employed by agencies to trade union representation be protected. The status of the employer needs to be clearly established in law so that — unlike current ambiguous system — agencies' responsibilities are spelled out. In addition, the inclusion in such legislation of occupational restrictions similar to those introduced in other states, where the use of agency workers for certain occupations is excluded on health and safety grounds, should be considered.

If employers can continue to employ agency workers and treat them as they do at present, we will continue to see the erosion of workers' rights across the entire economy. Agency workers will be used to depress wages in every sector and to destabilise job security for every worker in the State. The exploitation spreads. It is spreading even as we debate this matter.

Sinn Féin is committed to fighting for legislation that delivers equal rights for agency workers. We will work with the trade unions, the Labour Party and others to ensure that the Government introduces legislation without further delay. We also want to see this issue addressed in the North. Sinn Féin tabled a motion at the Northern Ireland Assembly demanding equal treatment for agency workers. That motion received all-party support. Those of us concerned about the future of workers' rights must unite in this demand. All Members who want to see exploitation stamped out must support the motion.

This is a crucial issue for working people, particularly in the context of their terms and conditions. It is important to all workers, whether they be agency or permanent, immigrant or Irish. The cancer of exploitation to which I refer will drive the race to the bottom.

This morning, Louth County Council unanimously passed a motion, tabled by my colleague, Councillor Jim Loughran, which supports the thrust of the motion before the House. I hope all local authorities will do likewise. The trade union movement will continue to drive the campaign on this issue. That campaign will have the support of Sinn Féin and the Labour Party.

Legislation relating to the minimum wage is insufficient to resolve this matter. There are concerns that said minimum wage will form the basis of any new legislation which might be introduced. Craftsmen and craftswomen, tradesmen and tradeswomen are entitled to considerably more than the minimum wage. Long-term agreements have been established between the trade union movement and employers and these cannot be eroded. There can be no going back. This issue must be dealt with. Workers and their representatives will win this battle.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move amendment No. 1:

To delete all words after "Dáil Éireann" and substitute the following:

notes:

that this Government is committed to ensuring that Ireland's comprehensive body of employment rights legislation applies to migrant workers including foreign agency workers in exactly the same way as it applies to Irish workers e.g. national minimum wage, organisation of working time, unfair dismissals minimum notice, etc.;

that a range of measures to support employment standards have been put in place arising from commitments agreed in Towards 2016 including:

that the Protection of Employment (Exceptional Collective Redundancies and Related Matters) Act 2007 has been enacted;

that the National Employment Rights Authority has been established and has commenced operations with significant management resources and will have a full complement of 90 labour inspectors, including ten with specific foreign language skills;

that the flexibility of the labour market is important for job creation, and competitive enterprises require adaptability in work organisation to meet the needs arising for seasonal work and that the capacity to source workers on a flexible basis is of considerable value to successful companies;

that the Government is committed to full engagement with the social partners in developing its policies on labour market regulation;

that concerns have been expressed about the potential abuse of the employment rights of certain foreign agency workers who may be vulnerable to exploitation and abuse;

that the EU Presidency was unable to establish a degree of consensus in support of the specific proposals put forward in December 2007 and that there was no vote taken on the proposals, that the Government will continue to work within the EU to find solutions on outstanding matters; and

that the Government is fully committed to the early delivery of further primary legislation aimed at enhanced compliance and enforcement of employment rights generally including legislation to regulate the operation of employment agencies and a statutory Code of Practice for employment agencies.

I wish to share time with the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Micheál Martin. As Minister of State responsible for labour affairs, I am glad to have the opportunity of debating the important issue of temporary agency workers. There has been much public comment about this issue in recent times.

Before getting into the detail of the issues, I wish to place on record that the Government is deeply committed to decent standards of employment. Any objective analysis of the Government's record, and that of the previous Governments led by our Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, will show that over the last ten years or so, significant and substantial measures have been taken to underpin employment standards which have surpassed that of any other administration.

An extensive range of employment rights has been extended to cover the protection of working conditions of temporary workers, including agency workers, in the past decade. I am speaking here about core standards and employment rights which workers can vindicate. Furthermore, this period has also seen the introduction of the national minimum wage, a ground-breaking measure that for the first time secured a wage floor for workers.

Developments have included improvements across a wide spectrum of conditions of employment, from daily to weekly rest periods as well as annual and public holiday entitlements which are a feature of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. There has also been comprehensive legislative measures to protect temporary workers employed under fixed-term contracts and in respect of part-time work.

Fundamentally, section 20 of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001, which transposed into Irish legislation the EU directive on posting of workers, provides that employee protection legislation applies to migrant workers in the same way as to Irish nationals. These include agency workers assigned by an overseas agency, as employer, to work under the control and direction of an end-user enterprise in Ireland who may obtain the benefits and protection of Irish labour law.

Agency workers also fall within the ambit of protection under employment equality legislation with its focus on non-discrimination.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not a fact.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In addition, the Government have delivered a further range of measures in support of improved and enhanced employment standards arising from commitments agreed in Towards 2016. The Protection of Employment (Exceptional Collective Redundances and Related Matters) Act 2007 has been enacted and the National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, has been established. It has commenced operations with significant management resources, and it will have a full complement of 90 labour inspectors, including ten with specific foreign language skills.

I would like to provide some context to today's debate by endeavouring to correctly site issues of concern which are an aspect of this debate. I propose to outline some key features and attributes of the temporary agency sector, including the main activities of the employment agency sector and the nature of employment and contractual arrangements in the sector.

Tentative data suggests temporary agency working comprises a relatively small subset of our total employment, perhaps as low as 2%. Agency workers operate across the full spectrum of our economy and are beyond the two sectors which are the focus of the Private Members' motion, which focuses solely on the construction and hotel sectors. Many sectors where temporary or agency workers are employed are in higher-paid parts of the economy where recruitment agencies successfully match and place workers in highly skilled jobs. These include finance, accountancy, information and computer technology and pharmaceuticals, where pay and conditions of employment are not an issue.

The matters before this House primarily concern the supply by an employment agency, as employer, of a temporary agency worker who is assigned to work under the control of an end-user enterprise. The discussion over temporary workers is at its most acute in the case of temporary agency workers, as this form of employment is uniquely differentiated and complicated by the triangular nature of the relationship between the worker, agency and end user.

The kernel of the matters under discussion relate to the potential exploitation of foreign agency workers in terms of their pay and conditions of employment compared to Irish nationals in the same sector of employment. Core concerns relate to employment agencies as employers who operate outside the State and assign workers to this jurisdiction. These concerns relate to the potential use of foreign agency workers — who would be better protected as permanent employees — by employers to circumnavigate the employment rights of such agency workers, or to allow employers evade their responsibilities.

Despite frequent assertions to the contrary, Ireland's comprehensive body of employment rights legislation provides that employee protection applies to migrant workers and agency workers in Ireland who have entered into a contract of employment that provides for him or her being employed in the State, or who works in the State under a contract of employment. I should be clear that this means irrespective of nationality or place of residence, such persons have the same rights under employment rights legislation as Irish employees. As I have already indicated, we vested migrant workers with the same rights as can be vindicated by Irish employees. This was acknowledged by SIPTU, which has included a full listing of such employment right entitlements in an information leaflet on agency workers from June 2007.

Our legislative framework is backed up with effective and strong new supports, where all workers, including migrant workers and foreign agency workers, can vindicate their rights with the dispute settlement machinery of the State. Again, under commitments in Towards 2016, we have committed to and delivered on core elements, including a major upgrading of resources in the labour inspectorate, having given it a decentralised and regional structure.

NERA is processing the last of its appointments to bring it to a full complement and when completed the resources of the labour inspectorate will have trebled to 90 inspectors, including ten with specialist language skills. NERA is now playing a very active, vital and substantive role in tackling potential abuses and will respond to breaches of employment rights legislation by seeking redress in the first instance and, where appropriate, prosecution. In this regard, as I have stated in my recent replies on this matter to this House, I urge anyone who has evidence of the mistreatment of agency workers to furnish all the relevant details and any related materials to the inspectorate with a view to pursuing the matter.

Employment rights, employment protection and concerns about the operation of some employment agencies was the subject of consideration at the most recent partnership discussions. This is in recognition of the need to review current legislation in this area, the Employment Agency Act 1971, which is now more than 30 years in place. During this period our employment market has been transformed, with substantial annual economic growth, which has fuelled a demand from employers for migrant workers to meet the needs of the manufacturing and services sectors of our economy.

Employment agencies have responded by developing their services to meet the needs of employers and potential employees. The Government accepts arrangements put in place several decades ago, under the 1971 Act, to regulate a much quieter and far less complex labour and recruitment market, need to be overhauled to meet the demands of a much larger and rapidly-changing employment environment.

We have seen the emergence of new forms of recruitment and employment that can pose problems in terms of customer protection and quality control. Recognising this, an initial review of the sector resulted in the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment issuing a White Paper in June 2005 on the review of the Employment Agency Act 1971. The White Paper took account of a range of submissions received as part of a consultation process, including submissions from Irish Congress of Trade Unions, IBEC, the National Recruitment Federation and the Immigrant Council of Ireland.

The main problems reflected in the review related to agencies as employers rather than agencies as "matchmakers". In the main, they concerned agencies based outside the State but placing workers in this jurisdiction. It was acknowledged that any attempt to enforce an extra-territorial dimension in a statutory licensing framework would present a challenge, and it remains a challenge, not least in the context of obligations under the Single Market.

Subsequently, issues arising in this debate became subsumed into the broader social partnership discussions in early 2006 and formed part of the Government's commitments under Towards 2016. In this context, my colleague the Minister, Deputy Martin, and I are currently considering the final elements of proposals for the draft scheme of a Bill to regulate the employment agency sector. It will be presented for consideration by the Government very shortly, with a view to having the Bill drafted by the Parliamentary Counsel.

The Bill as drafted will reflect the commitment in Towards 2016 to a licensing system where, to be licensed, employment agencies will be required to comply with the terms of a statutory code of practice which will set out the practices and standards which employment agencies would be expected to follow. It is envisaged that a monitoring and advisory committee will advise on the code of practice and on other matters related to this sector of our economy. This committee would include representatives of the social partners. Other elements in the Bill are being finalised with a view to further strengthening and enhancing the effective enforcement of the employment rights of agency workers.

In the course of consultations on the proposed Bill, other matters were raised which were not agreed under Towards 2016, including pay parity from the commencement of employment. There have been strong assertions from trade unions that agency workers are being used increasingly to undermine basic labour standards and are precipitating a race to the bottom. However, the Department has not been provided with nor has it been able to find specific evidence supporting such assertions. I urge anybody with any information to bring it in.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are in the Gallery.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Deputy should bring them in.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister and Minister of State meet them after the debate, at 8.30 p.m.?

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I urge anybody to contact NERA and give details to have such matters investigated.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Allow the Minister of State to continue.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is a very important issue and everybody has a duty to bring forward any information they possess.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Long before the debate.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They should bring it to NERA's attention.

Similarly, it has been alleged that Ireland is one of only three EU member states which has failed to legislate for equal treatment for agency workers in terms of pay and conditions of employment. However, the position is far more complex than that portrayed. For example, in those member states where legislation is complemented by collective agreements, deviation from the equal wage clause in legislation may be permitted.

There is also wide variation in the nature and extent of wider employment rights and working conditions available to agency workers in collective agreements, such as in the case of statutory sick pay and pension rights. In addition, in some member states various restrictions and prohibitions are in place in which agency working is excluded from whole sectors of economic activity. This also reduces opportunities for agency workers.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It reduces opportunities in that they are nearly slaves.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The regulation of temporary work has been a contentious issue at European level for over a quarter of a century since the European Commission first placed proposals on the table in 1982.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is because Fianna Fáil has been blocking it.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The transformation of the product and labour markets since then has only intensified debate about how best to balance, on the one hand, employment creation and flexibility with employment protection and security on the other. Thus, trade unions' fears are that temporary workers would suffer lower pay and benefits than regular workers. Employers contest this and point to the value of temporary work to certain groups in society and to the potential benefits which temporary work and agency work provide as a stepping stone to employment for certain persons as well as the competitive advantages offered to employers. The above forms the background and situates the debate and discussions on the proposed EU directive on temporary agency work.

In the context of these European Union negotiations on the proposed directive, Ireland will continue to adopt a constructive approach in these discussions.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Obstructive.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

However, Ireland considers that the proposal for consideration, as currently drafted, is somewhat unbalanced. We have concerns about exemptions, or derogations, which would be to the benefit or advantage of some member states and not others. The European Foundation's recent report on EU temporary agency working confirms that, in those member states where equal pay legislation is complemented by collective agreements, deviation from the equal pay clause in legislation may be permitted. In this regard, Ireland has, with other member states, indicated that if permanent derogations through collective agreements are to be allowed, then other means providing for derogations should also be allowed in those member states without legally enforceable collective agreements.

In particular, Ireland considers that the proposed six-week maximum derogation from equal treatment provided for in the draft directive in respect of short duration temporary agency assignments is too short. This is particularly so in comparison to the derogation available to those member states with collective agreements which can and do deviate from equal treatment in pay levels and in the areas of wider working and employment conditions. Deputy Penrose referred to many countries that have collective agreements which deviate from pay parity. This should be borne in mind.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We should support the EU directive.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The shorter period on offer could damage future job creation prospects and could deter the legitimate use of temporary agency working which would be to the detriment of our economy.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Nobody is against that.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is particularly the case as agency work can provide, in certain circumstances, a useful stepping stone for some persons to enter the labour market. The opportunities available to agency workers in Ireland should not be reduced as a result of any new arrangements. Any directive in this area ideally would provide a balance between, on the one hand, employment creation and flexibility and employment protection and security on the other. The Government will continue to adopt a constructive approach to these discussions at EU level.

Ireland supports the three objectives that the original proposal sought to address — to protect temporary workers; to recognise that temporary employment agencies exercise a legitimate role in the labour market and provide a suitable framework for the creation of jobs; and to review prohibitions and remove unwarranted restrictions.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about pay? Is pay included in the directive?

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

At the very least, provision might be made to take account of the tradition of social dialogue which applies in various countries, including Ireland, as recognised in the arrangements for national reform partnerships in the implementation of the Lisbon strategy. In this way, the different traditions and practices at national level can be fully recognised and respected.

The Portuguese Presidency considered that there would be added value in working on a simultaneous and integrated solution on two sensitive dossiers, the temporary agency work directive and the organisation of working time directive, given previous difficulties in finding solutions on each legislative proposal in isolation. In the event, however, the Portuguese Presidency was unable to progress these dossiers to a successful conclusion at Council and concluded that the best option was to postpone a final decision on these matters.

This decision had regard to the nature of the discussion at Council on these proposals, to the range of outstanding difficulties and to the clear desire of member states to reach a consensus rather than seek to push matters to a divisive and perhaps damaging vote. The outcome is disappointing given the history of these two dossiers and the hopes raised in advance of our discussions.

We adopted a consistent and constructive approach in the discussions at Council. We fully supported the Portuguese Presidency in its efforts to fashion an overall compromise solution by way of an integrated approach to these two sensitive dossiers, for the benefit of all EU member states. As regards the proposed directive on the organisation of working time, the proposal from the Portuguese Presidency represented a significant effort at finding a compromise solution and one which Ireland could support.

On the proposed directive on temporary agency work, I was clear and unequivocal in explaining our position at Council when I indicated that we fully supported the thrust of the objectives of the proposed directive. I also indicated that any such instrument must be balanced and be to the benefit of all parties concerned — employees and enterprises alike.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister of State did not support it on pay.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I remind the Deputy that I was the one in the room, not him.

Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I have the report of the permanent representation which says otherwise.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I informed my ministerial colleagues, however, that I was concerned that the latest proposals on the table did not contain all the necessary elements of balance. Thus, permitted exemptions provided for in the proposed directive would be to the advantage, or benefit, of some member states and not others. This would be the case for those member states where equal pay legislation is complemented by collective agreements and where deviation from the equal pay clause in legislation may be permitted. This would not work for member states with different legal and industrial relations frameworks.

I indicated to Ministers that Ireland considered that the exemption proposed for short duration temporary agency assignments was too short and did not provide the required flexibility. It could damage future job creation prospects and deter the use of a legitimate form of employment, which would be to the detriment of our economy and agency workers.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That explains why the Government objected to it for the past five years.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is the Minister of State's excuse.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Regrettably, having identified the remaining issues of concern to various member states, the Presidency decided not to pursue the search for a solution at the Council. Ireland was fully prepared to assist in trying to resolve outstanding issues at the Council rather than postpone addressing these.

In its Council declaration, the Portuguese Presidency urged forthcoming presidencies, together with the European Commission, to proceed with efforts to achieve a positive and final outcome on both directives, based on the integrated approach, which received positive support as a way forward.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Blame the Portuguese.

Billy Kelleher (Cork North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This represents the best means of obtaining the necessary overall balance in Community legal instruments of this nature. The Government will continue to be constructive in its approach to further negotiations on these two legislative instruments.

I am confident that the Government's position on the proposed EU directive has been consistent with its commitments under social partnership and I look forward to the discussions in this House of the forthcoming legislation on regulation of employment agencies.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is nothing new there.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the opportunity to discuss issues raised in the motion and the Government amendment and the improvements the Government has made, and is preparing, to improve the protection framework for workers. We have made considerable improvements over the past decade, many of them geared towards addressing new challenges in the labour market in a changing world of work and working relationships.

New forms of employment have posed new challenges for Governments in Ireland and across the globe. For decades we have tried to build up a high-quality social protection framework, with clearly defined relationships and responsibilities for workers and their employers. This framework contains transparent and easily accessible routes for redress when there has been a breakdown in employment relationships.

Some of the areas of concern to be addressed in the course of this evening's debate are also being addressed in other EU member states, some of which are now considering whether to introduce a minimum wage. The minimum wage was introduced in Ireland in April 2000 and is the second highest in Europe. We are often berated for having a high minimum wage and it is regrettable that in debates such as this our substantial progress on workers' rights is not acknowledged. If it was, the debate would be more balanced and there would be less of the rhetoric that comes to dominate debates of this kind.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are concerned that the minimum wage will become the only wage.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am amazed that there is no national minimum wage in Germany but the country is split wide open on the issue.

James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the ambulance workers in Longford?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Germany is contemplating introducing it on a sectoral basis. That is an issue on which we can hold our heads up and it gives lie to the presentation that this Government ignores the rights of workers on the lower end of the pay scale or that it wilfully tolerates the widespread abuse and neglect of workers. That is simply not the case and it should not be used as an argument in this debate.

James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What about the 30,000 FÁS workers the Minister has let down?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Ireland has participated in recent years in discussions in international organisations, such as the International Labour Organisation, to clarify employment relationships in a rapidly changing and mobile world. These discussions have focused on difficulties in identifying employers in certain circumstances and in addressing so-called triangular relationships, involving an employee, an agency and an end-user company.

While Irish legislation tries to reflect and deal with current realities, there is always a need to step back and consider if improvements are possible without becoming so rigidly bureaucratic as to damage employment prospects, especially for those attempting to get into employment for the first time or after a period out of the labour market.

I make no apology for stating that this debate is in the context of both employment policy and employment creation policy and there must be balance in respect of how to make progress on this issue. Members should not become overly complacent in respect of employment creation in the economy. While we have enjoyed a great decade during which our employment creation record was superior to that of almost all our European counterparts, that is no reason to set everything aside as we contemplate new policies and approaches and deal with new challenges. There must be a balance of approach when trying to get it right. That is the point outlined by my colleague, the Minister of State, Deputy Billy Kelleher. It is about the balance and how we approach——

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no balance at present. The position is skewed in respect of agency workers.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——getting the right model in the end.

In considering issues in respect of employment agencies, one should bear in mind that a number of them offer a wide range of services.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept that.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I believe Deputy Morgan has accepted that some provide what is primarily a matching service, whereby they provide an introductory service between employees and employers, with the cost to be paid by the employer, not the employee. Others provide a service by deploying their own employees, sometimes from overseas, to an end-user company whereby the agency remains the employer with legal liability for the application of Irish employment legislation to those workers. Many agencies supply both types of services.

The placement function performed by an employment agency tends not to be a cause for complaint in respect of compliance with employment rights. In such cases there is not much room for confusion as to roles and responsibilities. However, I accept there is a greater capacity for lack of clarity regarding legal relationships and related responsibilities when agencies deploy their own personnel to work for a limited period to an end-user company.

I reiterate the point made by the Minister of State, Deputy Billy Kelleher, that agency workers comprise approximately 2% of the workforce. That percentage in no way understates that——

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is approximately 40,000 workers.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——exploitation is unacceptable to the Government. My point is——

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Will the Minister publish the figures in this respect?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The figures to which I have just alluded are Central Statistics Office figures from 2005. Members may be aware that the Central Statistics Office has included a number of questions about agency workers in the current module of the quarterly national household survey and the results will be available in May.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is taking a long time.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This will give all the social partners a better picture in respect of how many persons are employed by agencies, the sectors in which they are active, where they are from and whether the practice of agency working is growing.

The phenomenon of agency working is not new and has been a key feature of sectors such as nursing for many years where the availability of agency personnel has provided an element of much-needed flexibility. This phenomenon has also been witnessed in the broad information technology sector in recent years. Workers in these sectors in general are relatively well paid and are highly mobile. Agency working suits their lifestyle and allows the flexibility of which they wish to avail. I experienced this phenomenon as Minister for Health and Children for many years whereby people left almost permanent employment and opted for the agency route because it suited their individual needs.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Members accept that. They know about flexibility but they want to hear about security.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government accepts fully that this is not always the case in respect of other sectors.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister refers to flexibility, but what about security?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I reiterate that agency workers, regardless of nationality, together with workers posted by their employer from overseas to work temporarily in Ireland have the same rights under Irish employment rights legislation as Irish employees. Workers in the categories mentioned also are able to take complaints to the labour inspectorate and to have their cases heard by the State's dispute resolution machinery, as represented by bodies such as the rights commissioner service, the Labour Court and the Employment Appeals Tribunal. It is important that this framework for investigation and dispute resolution, which has won broad public acceptance and support over the years, is used effectively.

I reiterate the point made by the Minister of State, Deputy Kelleher, that Members who have specific complaints should bring them to the National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, when they receive them and not before or after that debate. They should pass them on immediately to the National Employment Rights Authority. I contacted the authority again this afternoon which, together with the Employment Appeals Tribunal, stated that agency working per se as a sector does not feature to the degree about which one hears——

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

They are frightened.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

—— in the context of specific complaints to those established bodies.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There is no legislative framework.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

That is not acceptable.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I will not argue with Members.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What does the Minister know?

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Members, please.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am not arguing with Members, I simply make the point that Members should go to the agencies that are charged with responsibility for enforcing and achieving compliance with Irish labour law. They want to acquire such specific information to pursue such matters.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The practices are legal at present.

Joe Costello (Dublin Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should get the inspectorate out there..

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There appears to be a general impression that agency workers are mainly from overseas and are mainly poorly paid. One of the problems in addressing issues that arise in this area is the lack of hard data. I trust the work being undertaken by the CSO will help to inform and clarify some of the issues in this respect. It is too broad a generalisation to equate agency workers with migrant workers. This society and economy are becoming more complex. Nevertheless, the unprecedented expansion of the economy over the past decade clearly has provided opportunities for exploitation, particularly in the case of those newly arrived in the country who are not aware of their very extensive employment rights. Combating such abuses requires action from Government agencies, which will be forthcoming, and other representative groups in broader society.

We must move with clarity of purpose and resolution to use effectively the considerable resources now available to avoid and combat such exploitation. The Government does not and will never accept exploitation of workers. It will always work to eradicate and eliminate exploitation and to penalise and punish those who perpetrate such acts. It has demonstrated this through the establishment of the National Employment Rights Authority in consort with the social partners.

However, it also must be recognised that the capacity to source agency workers on a flexible basis is of considerable value to enterprises in a competitive economic environment and to the foreign direct investment sector. When setting up the National Employment Rights Authority, the Government made a highly significant additional investment in the areas of promoting compliance with employment law and in ensuring that in the event of non-compliance there are effective mechanisms for redress and, where appropriate, prosecution. I again ask Members to make available any information or knowledge they may have to those working in this field.

It must be acknowledged that in the integrated global economy which has been evolving in recent years, the availability of flexibility in production and service chains has played a lead role in enabling successful enterprises to respond quickly to consumer demand. It has become vital to respond quickly, for example, to seasonal peaks in demand. This ability to respond quickly and flexibly has also become a key feature when companies investing overseas are trying to assess which locations offer the most promising environment for direct investment. Flexible labour markets are important. If one opts for too much rigidity, it could be at the risk of undermining one's job creation capacity.

James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government is undermining it through its stealth taxes.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

When Ireland was a relatively low-cost environment in manufacturing, we were quite successful in attracting investment at that end of the mobile investment market. However, as the world changed, we were obliged to adapt and develop other points of competitive advantage in the newer international economy and to move up the value chain. A key selling point in the armoury of IDA Ireland has been the evidence that Ireland's work practices are flexible while still reflecting the broad social protection to workers embodied in European Union employment legislation.

Generally, companies in the foreign direct investment sector tend to pay employees well and broader conditions of employment are also attractive. More than 1,000 such companies in the country employ more than 136,000 people in total and more than 50% of the workers concerned have salaries of more than €40,000 per annum. A considerable number of companies in this sector are clear that they need a stable operating environment in which rules and obligations are transparent and predictable.

However, my continuing contacts with this sector have made it clear that the importance of continued flexibility in the labour market to the sector should not be underestimated. Deputies will have seen how some of the larger EU member states lost competitiveness and labour market flexibility in periods of expansion that looked as though they would never end. However, they ended and it has proved extremely difficult for those member states to regain the lost labour market flexibility as those in secure employment are reluctant to agree changes aimed at assisting those in precarious employment or those who are out of work. This has been a feature of other economies. The key challenge in this respect is to find the appropriate balance at any given point in a society's development. In making decisions in the short term, one must bear in mind their long-term consequences.

The Government supports the concept of equal treatment in the area of employment relationships and its record in negotiating and agreeing an appropriate legislative framework to this end is solid. There is no question of employers being able to use the flexibility associated with agency working as a means of avoiding what are accepted as normal obligations in an employer-employee relationship. However, there is a very valid argument regarding both the content of what might constitute equal treatment and the period of employment after which it should become mandatory. While the draft EU directive provides for the effective protection of derogations regarding equal treatment negotiated at social partnership level in various member states, as drafted at present, the balance was not in accordance with Ireland's national needs or perspective. As an aside, Ireland cannot block an EU directive on its own. It is a physical and numerical impossibility.

Arthur Morgan (Louth, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government has Britain and Germany to block it.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should conclude.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

We are not comparing like with like.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister should conclude.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Government was prepared to develop and formulate legislation as agreed in the last social partnership agreement. However, the union side stated, as it is entitled to do, that that was not sufficient. Consequently the Government is prepared, in partnership with the social partners——

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister must conclude.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

——to draft new legislation on an agreed basis to get the balance right.We are prepared to play our part such that Irish companies will have parity of esteem with other EU countries and will not be at a competitive disadvantage to their counterparts on the European mainland.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The Minister can accept our Bill next week. We will solve the problem for him.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I wish to share time with Deputies Clune and Bannon.

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Is that agreed? Agreed.

Leo Varadkar (Dublin West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

On behalf of Fine Gael, I welcome the Sinn Féin-Labour motion, which is timely, has real merit and proposes some valid solutions to the problems that exist. It clearly exposes the Government's failure to honour the commitments it made in the partnership agreement, Towards 2016. Consequently, Fine Gael will be opposing the Government's amendment and supporting the motion. We have one or two reservations, which I will outline later in my contribution.

Research has shown that agency workers are at a major disadvantage compared to directly employed workers in a number of ways. Research conducted in the United Kingdom shows that agencies are paid 68% less, on average, than directly employed staff in similar jobs. They have fewer entitlements and suffer from higher levels of workplace injury across Europe.

In the past, agency work tended to be associated with temporary positions, such as those that arose on foot of maternity leave or unplanned vacancies. In many cases, agency workers tended to be students or workers in the home who were not in full-time employment. Agency work provided flexibility for both workers and employees but the nature of such work has changed significantly in recent years, thereby giving rise to the problems we face today.

In the United Kingdom it is estimated that the percentage of agency workers has increased from 2.6% in 2002 to 5% in 2006. In Ireland, it is estimated that there are approximately 27,000 to 30,000 temporary agency workers. It is likely that this figure is significantly underestimated and it will therefore be interesting to see the results of the quarterly household survey when the question on agency work is included.

Agency work is commonplace in a number of sectors, including construction, retail and hospitality, and food processing in particular. There is no question but that the expansion of agency work has led to a deterioration in conditions and a decrease in pay. In some cases, although not as many as one might be led to believe, it has led to the displacement of directly employed permanent staff. It will be interesting to see what terms and conditions will apply to the employees of Arnotts when it reopens after its redevelopment. When the Burlington Hotel and some other hotels were reopened, it is clear that agency workers replaced the directly employed permanent workforce and were hired under what most would consider to be inferior terms and conditions.

Fine Gael agrees fully with the introduction of legislation to regulate employment agencies properly. This should be the key to this debate. The Employment Agency Act 1971 is clearly insufficient and I understand there have only been approximately 50 inspections of agencies in the past three to four years. This is entirely inadequate. The new legislation has yet to be published. It is indicated in the legislative programme that it is to be published this session, but the session, which has only three weeks remaining, is drawing to a close rapidly. I certainly hope we will see the legislation by the end of the month, as the Taoiseach promised, or, if not, at least before St. Patrick's Day, as the Whip promised. The new legislation should make provision for a new licensing system, a proper code of practice, proper enforcement and, crucially, a requirement that employment agencies be underpinned financially. The latter is not the case at present and this should be of concern to everyone.

We are concerned about agencies that tie their employees to their work in unusual ways, including agencies that provide transport for their employees to and from work, agencies that provide accommodation and expect their employees to use it, or agencies that deduct the cost of accommodation and transport from their workers' pay. Where this occurs, the conditions are worryingly close to those that exist in countries such as China, where employees are expected to live, eat and spend their lives within the factory compound.

While I accept that many agency workers are not immigrants, it is not a coincidence that the countries that have been least enthusiastic in the protection of the rights of agency workers, namely, the United Kingdom and Ireland, are those that have had a significant increase in immigration.

As some Deputies stated, there is no evidence that properly regulated employment agencies or reasonable protection for agency workers has a negative effect on competitiveness or labour market flexibility. The labour markets in The Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden are among the most competitive in Europe and those countries enjoy much higher labour force participation than Ireland, even if one allows for the fact that they have many more women with children in their workforces. The countries have greater protections than are afforded in Ireland. It is open to question as to whether Denmark and Sweden have enshrined the principle of equal treatment in law. It might be appropriate to say they have not but that is a technical point.

The key point to this debate should concern the regulation of agencies and the enforcement of existing laws, which is very poor. Enforcement would achieve much more than any new domestic legislation or EU directive. A very useful booklet produced by SIPTU points out that there are approximately 17 legislative measures applying to agency workers. Therefore, there are extensive protections for agency workers but the reality is that many of them are not aware, or made aware, of their rights. In many cases, the rights are not respected.

The applicable Acts include the Adoptive Leave Act, the Carer's Leave Act, the Employment Agency Act, the Employment Equality Act, the Industrial Relations Act, the Maternity Protection (Amendment) Act, the Minimum Notice and Terms of Employment Acts, the National Minimum Wage Act, the Organisation of Working Time Act, the Parental Leave Act, the Payment of Wages Act, the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act, the Protection of Employment Act, the Redundancy Payments Acts, the Safety, Health and Welfare at Work Act, the Terms of Employment (Information) Acts and the Unfair Dismissals Acts.

If we regulate agencies properly and ensure they are reputable, and ensure agency workers are aware of their rights, we will probably achieve more than we would with new legislation or EU directives.

It is fair to state that any reasonable person would support the principle of equal treatment, but the key issue concerns its definition, application and the timing of its application. It is important to recognise that employees should receive additional benefits and just remuneration with time and service. The package of terms and conditions an employer agrees with permanent employees should be reflective of the ongoing commitment that the employer is entitled to assume on the part of those employees who have made a long-term commitment to that employer. As there is no expectation or entitlement of such an ongoing commitment from agency workers or temporary workers, it seems reasonable that an automatic right should not apply. What should apply is a period after which the same rights should be enforced. Where a genuine temporary vacancy arises in an office, it is not unreasonable to afford better pay, conditions and pension rights to the person who normally holds the position and wants to retain it after his or her temporary absence than to the person who is employed temporarily. The difficulty arises where temporary positions actually become long term and the agency employee is occupying what should be a permanent position.

Probably uniquely among Members of this House, I, as a medical doctor, am signed up with an employment agency. I receive texts all the time asking me whether I want to do a weekend shift in Crumlin Hospital, for example. Every now and again, €1,000 is suggested as the pay and I do not feel too exploited by it. I know many nurses, as opposed to nurses' aides or care assistants, who have left their jobs to take up agency work because the pay is much better.

In many ways the best argument to be made for better pay for nurses is that the free market, which operates through the agencies, shows that nurses should be paid much more because they are paid more as agency workers than they would be paid if they were employees of the HSE.

We join Sinn Féin and Labour Party Members in condemning the Government's failure to honour the commitments it made under Towards 2016. We call on the Government to immediately introduce legislation to regulate employment agencies, to introduce domestic legislation allowing agency employees to be covered by registered employment agreements, REAs, and, crucially, to properly enforce existing laws. We also affirm our support for a common EU directive that would protect agency workers while ensuring competitiveness and crucial to such a directive must be the setting of a reasonable time limit after which agency work becomes permanent work.

Willie Penrose (Longford-Westmeath, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I intervene to welcome to Deputy Ned O'Keeffe whom I know supports this motion.

Deirdre Clune (Cork South Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This is an important debate. I recognise and am supportive of the need for flexibility in the workplace and the need to ensure employers are free to bring in workers on the basis of need, whether it be to meet a seasonal demand or satisfy customer demand. Nobody doubts the need for that flexibility in the marketplace. However, some agency workers are being exploited, of that there is no doubt. We hear much anecdotal evidence of that. I read recently in the media of the position of workers in Irish Ferries, although that is not directly related to employment in this country. The position of the Gama workers was another example of such exploitation. I accept what the Minister said regarding the National Employment Rights Authority and I have spoken to those in the authority. If employees have concerns and issues need to be brought to the authority's attention, that should be done. When the authority expands its inspectorate to the promised 90, hopefully, it will be more effective.

When I began work, agency or contract workers were better paid than permanent workers because they took a risk. They did not have holiday leave built into their pay nor did they have security of employment. In the case of some agency workers, the position has reversed. I agree with what Deputy Varadkar said about the many nurses who have left the HSE because they can get better terms and conditions through the agencies. Other health professionals have also left the public health system. In the construction industry many architects, engineers and quantity surveyors have also moved to agency work. It is those with low skills, the unskilled and primarily migrant workers who are being exploited; they are being offered accommodation by employment agencies. They are not fully aware of their rights, perhaps because they have moved to another country and have a difficulty with the language. That is the area on which we need to concentrate.

As to the number of people concerned, I heard many figures mentioned tonight and I read in SIPTU's documentation that probably 30,000 workers are employed in the Republic of Ireland through 520 employment agencies. I am not saying all those agencies are exploiting workers but it is an area on which we need to concentrate and we need to introduce legislation to regulate employment agencies. There has been a proliferation of such agencies recently and coming from behind in terms of the need to regulate is a dangerous position. We need to be more proactive in that regard.

I look forward to the introduction of Government's legislation in this area and to another debate on this matter when hopefully I will have more time to contribute. When one reads the background to position of workers in Irish Ferries, who allegedly are paid €4 an hour, confined to the ship at all times and employed by an agency that is registered in Cyprus, no one can condone those conditions. We have a minimum wage and legislation in place to protect workers' rights but not everybody is protected by it. The emphasis in the approach should be on the regulation of agencies and the work time and contract time for which employees can be engaged. Many issues were raised by Members and I join my colleagues in supporting the motion. It is timely, important and there is much concern about this issue. I hope the Government will move to introduce the necessary legislation in this area.

James Bannon (Longford-Westmeath, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Taking Longford-Westhmeath as a microcosm of the country, it is in no way surprising that as Ireland's economic competitiveness has fallen 17 points since the Minister, Deputy Martin, who has just left the Chamber, came to office, the standardised unemployment rate now stands at 4.9% countrywide, the highest level in seven years and is predicted to rise to a nine year high by the end of this year. Speaking from the perspective of coming from a rural constituency, the direct impact on jobs is most keenly felt in the construction and farming sectors, with farmers being driven out of industry at an unprecedented rate. During recent years Longford-Westmeath has seen overall job losses of almost 150 people at the Lakeland Group, which followed a direct result of the Government's failure to maintain adequate price structure for our farmers. A similar position pertained in respect of Glanbia in Rooskey. We also saw cattle markets in Edgeworthstown, Mullingar and Moate and other enterprises close and several other enterprises threatened in the midlands area.

Every day in Ireland six farmers leave the land, driven out through excessive bureaucracy and red tape imposed by the Government. There are also the stealth taxes and the failure of the Minister for Agriculture, Fisheries and Food to provide guaranteed markets for what they produce. The EU's intervention recently forced the Minister to finally ban Brazilian beef in light of the incidence of foot and mouth disease and lack of traceability of animals. This had serious repercussions on the farming industry and on jobs here. The way the Minister behaved had a serious impact on jobs in a meat plant in Ballymahon in my county council electoral area.

To increase employment opportunities in the farming sector and to retain workers on the land, the Government must provide the best possible educational opportunities for young farmers as this is the key to giving Irish agriculture a competitive edge. The midland counties are starved of infrastructural investment with a shameful and inexplicable underspend in the BMW funding. Strangely this money finds it way back into the Exchequer each year and the Government fails year in year out to meet its obligations to provide essential infrastructure for the development of our country.

Longford-Westmeath, although perfectly situated in the centre of the country with equal access to the east and the west, is losing out on major international investment due to the state of its infrastructure to the detriment of economic development. The counties are getting less than their fair share of State-assisted jobs — it is less than 3%. Employment can be created in this constituency by attracting new industry to Longford-Westmeath, creating off-farm and rural employment opportunities and the provision of additional funding to encourage our indigenous industries, advancing the decentralisation programme, which was promised with great fanfare a number of years ago. Fewer than 1,800 jobs have been delivered. We have in no way met our targets with regard to the 53 locations where decentralisation was promised.

During the Celtic tiger years thousands of untrained workers were drawn into the construction industry, but their future has been dismissed by a Government faced with repercussions of its shameful mismanagement of the economy. Some 93,000 houses were built in 2006 and that number was halved with only 46,000 built this year, as the big freeze in the economy begins to hit home. The most vulnerable group in the construction sector are the estimated 30,000 FÁS supported apprentices in the construction-related trades, particularly those in the so-called "wet" trades such as painters, bricklayers, plumbers, carpenters and plasterers who are highly vulnerable to the housing downturn.

The Government lacks an industrial strategy of lower taxes and high skills. It deserves to be strongly criticised in this regard. I compliment the Labour Party on tabling this motion. Any sensible member of the Opposition, not the hypocritical ones who were here last week, would support this motion. It gives me pleasure to do so.