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

Question 118: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the reason the National Employment Rights Authority has not been established on a statutory footing; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [30978/08]

Brian O'Shea (Waterford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 138: To ask the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment when the National Employment Rights Authority will be established on a statutory basis; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [30924/08]

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

I propose to take Questions Nos. 118 and 138 together.

The Employment Law Compliance Bill 2008 is designed to give effect to shared commitments in Part 2 of the ten year framework social partnership agreement, Towards 2016, to greatly increase public confidence in the system of employment law compliance. The establishment of a new, statutory office to secure better compliance with employment law through information and enforcement activities, supported by up to 90 labour inspectors with extensive powers, formed one aspect of these commitments.

Significant progress is being made on delivering the commitments agreed in Towards 2016 and, in this regard, the National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, was established on an interim basis in February 2007, pending drafting and enactment of legislation, to undertake greater levels of employment law compliance activities. The Employment Law Compliance Bill was initiated in this House on 13 March 2008. Part 2 of the Bill provides for the establishment of the National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, on a statutory footing.

The Bill is substantial and quite complex legislation, and in its final form will provide for necessary amendments to over 30 separate existing enactments from 1946 onwards. Since publication of the Bill, work has been continuing including further drafting of provisions, legal clarification of certain issues and preparation of schedules of amendments to existing employment law. In addition, account will also be taken of the views expressed by the social partners in the course of negotiations which led to the transitional agreement under Towards 2016 which was concluded last week. I take this opportunity to congratulate everybody involved — union representatives, employers and officials — in bringing forward that transitional agreement. Any remaining amendments and draft provisions will be the subject of discussion with the Office of the Attorney General and the intention is to have all outstanding work on the Bill quickly completed so it can be enacted as soon as possible.

The National Employment Rights Authority will be established one month after the Employment Law Compliance Bill 2008 is signed into law.

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

If I remember correctly the Minister of State said the Bill was published in March, only six months ago. It appears strange that the Bill, the purpose of which was to establish the agency on a statutory footing, was published six months ago and yet has not been brought before the House for debate. The only explanation that would make sense is that the Bill is essentially a bad one and is flawed and that, among other things, it potentially criminalises employers. In my case, technically as an employer of my personal assistant and administrative assistant, which is the case for all Fine Gael members, I would have to post a notice in my office, on a regular basis, advising them of their rights and their ability to contact NERA etc. That is just one aspect of the Bill.

It appears the Bill, as drafted, was so bad and so objectionable to employers and unions that the Minister of State has not been able to bring it to the House. Will the Bill come before the House before Christmas and, if so, will it be substantially redrafted?

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

Part 2 of the Bill provides for the establishing of the National Employment Rights Authority. That was the Part of the Bill that was published and presented to the House on 13 March 2008. It is complex legislation. We live in an era where social partnership is the bedrock within which much of the discussions take place. There were further discussions in that context in the interim agreement agreed last week between the social partners.

We present a Bill to the House. It is discussed not only by the social partners but by all Members. There will be an opportunity to discuss it on Committee Stage. We want to ensure that when the Bill is enacted it reflects what is required in the context of employment law compliance. It is a complex Bill and there are no quick fix solutions. There has been ongoing involvement, due to the discussions and changes in the context of the social partnership talks that took place recently. For that reason the Bill as presented, in certain areas, needs further changes. I am quite sure that when the Bill is presented and goes through the House it will have the support of all sides. I look forward to a fruitful discussion with Deputies opposite, who I know are very supportive of social partnership and what we were trying to achieve in the context of the challenges ahead. Deputy Varadkar is a wholehearted supporter of that process.

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

I assure the Minister of State the Labour Party is supportive. Let us be clear about that. Why was the Bill published? Why did not the Minister of State await the outcome of the social partnership talks? I appreciate he was under pressure from us all. Every morning the Taoiseach and former Taoiseach got up and replied to questions. Why did the Minister of State rush to the headland when the Bill was nowhere near the finite product? What was the reason for the rush? Given that the Minister of State was aware the social partners disagreed fundamentally with a significant and core element of the Bill, as drafted, at Part 2, why did he present it? Deputy Varadkar said we had better subject this Bill to bureaucratic evaluation as well because it contains many bureaucratic elements. While I support the thrust of the Bill, we need to "red tape" index it. What significant changes will affect Part 2 of the Bill, following the discussions that took place under the social partnership agreement, which was recently concluded successfully?

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

The reason the Bill was published was because a commitment was given in Towards 2016 to publish a Bill and to set up the National Employment Rights Authority on a statutory footing. The most important point to be made is that NERA is operating and has almost a complete complement of labour inspectors. It is enforcing employment rights compliance law which is welcome. It has collected substantial arrears for employees. The primary purpose of the National Employment Rights Authority is to ensure compliance with employment law. The Bill has two parts. Part 2 provides for the establishment of the National Employment Rights Authority on a statutory footing. It is up and running on an interim basis.

Over the coming weeks, much work remains to be done. Discussions are taking place with the Attorney General's office in the context of the most recent agreements arrived at in the social partnership.

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

When will we have the Bill?

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

We will have it quite soon. We are trying to ensure when the Bill is published that it is not rushed with amendments railroaded through the House. We want to have a genuine discussion on it. We are trying to get the Bill right in the first instance, to have broad agreement from the social partners and a good debate in the House. It is very complex but the Government is committed not only under the Towards 2016 agreement but under the interim one arrived at last week.

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

To follow up on that and to connect with the comments made by Deputies Penrose and English on regulation, anyone who has read this very complex Bill, as the Minister of State has described it, will see it will have a significant regulatory impact on employers, yet the process being used for regulatory impact analyses decided that after screening, this Bill did not require a full regulatory impact analysis. That shows how uncommitted the Minister of State is to tackling red tape and regulation. The Minister of State would take this massive Bill which is flawed and complex, as he has admitted, and screen it for a regulatory impact analysis and say it had no regulatory cost and, therefore, did not need a full regulatory impact analysis. How can he stand over that? Will he give a guarantee there will be a full regulatory impact analysis with numbers in it?

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

The purpose of Part 2 of the Bill, as published, was to provide for the establishment of the National Employment Rights Authority on a statutory footing. The employment law is already in place. Employers must comply with the employment law as it exists. This does not amend the employment law which exists in the context of minimum wage, holiday entitlements, EROs and registered employment agreements. Therefore, employers are compelled to comply with existing law. The issue of inspections does not impose a regulatory burden. When the Bill evolves and is finally completed we will ensure any burden on business is minimised. Fundamentally, this Bill is about employment rights, protecting workers, and ensuring they are entitled to their statutory provisions. NERA is working very effectively and its inspectors have joined up operations with Revenue and the Department of Social and Family Affairs. Even though it has not been established on a statutory footing this organisation is working and is out and about. Deputies have occasionally said to me that it is an over-enthusiastic organisation but at the end of the day it is there to ensure that employers comply with the law. It is important also that it is trying to foster a culture of compliance. This is about educating employers, informing them of their various representative organisations such as IBEC and ISME, etc, so that we may achieve a broad compliance culture. It is not all about inspections but concerns education as well as enforcement.