Mary White (Carlow-Kilkenny, Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am grateful for the opportunity to raise this matter of importance, namely, the need for the Government to ensure the amendment to the working time directive does not impact negatively on opportunities for women in the labour market. It is very important we have a say in the scrutiny of EU legislation. The working time directive has served as very important legislation in recent years. It established a framework in which workers have been protected against excessive working hours and wage exploitation. There has been much progress in recent years in Ireland and throughout Europe in increasing opportunities for women to enter the workforce and remain in the labour market, to share to a greater extent with men domestic and family responsibilities, and to achieve parity of pay and opportunity among genders. Much of the country's progressive legislation in providing increased opportunities for women has come from Europe, which is important to acknowledge.

However, the draft amendment to the working time directive agreed by the Commission last month could result in a move back in time rather than forwards. I urge the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment to do all she can to have the current proposals reviewed in three particular areas.

The draft directive allows for an opt-out clause on setting the working week at 48 hours. If the opt-out is retained and availed of in Ireland, it will have a disproportionate affect on women. If employers are allowed to force employees to work more than 48 hours in an average working week, it will mean women more than men will have to reconsider their positions in employment, given their traditional role as carers in the home which often makes many women reluctant to work long hours outside the home. Moreover, with the flexibility proposed for the health care sector, the imposition of long hours in the caring professions could deter many women from remaining in employment in what are often female dominated sectors.

The second item of concern relates to the length of the working week. In the initial proposal for amending the directive, the maximum reference period for calculating the average maximum working week of 48 hours was four months. The proposal to extend this reference period to 12 months through collective bargaining or other legal protections, along with the proposed opt-out clause, could mean that 12 and not four months becomes the norm.

If irregular and unpredictable working hours become the norm for part-time and full-time workers, as might well happen following this proposal, many women could find themselves in an impossible position as they try to secure and retain work schedules which are incompatible with child care support, one of the key determinants of many mothers' ability to enter the labour market.

I seek the Minister's views on the "on-call time" proposal. My understanding is that this proposal would allow for inactive periods at work, such as time when a person is on-call or certain travelling time, to be treated either as working time or as rest time. It is possible that such a provision could exacerbate the current gender gaps in terms of choice for women and men in the labour market. On-call time must be counted as real working time so that women and men can be given the best possible chance of being designated full-time.

I ask the Minister to remember that the draft directive promotes the reconciliation of work and family life. If this directive is really to support work and the position of women within the workforce, then the issues of opt-outs, reference periods and on-call time need to be seriously re-examined.

Seán Haughey (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The consolidated EU directive on working time, which has been transposed into domestic legislation, represents a key instrument on working hours. In that respect, it is a very important achievement which has established standards in the areas of health and safety for workers. These core standards embody periods of daily and weekly rest, breaks, annual leave, maximum weekly working time, night work, shift work and patterns of work.

Since 2005, the European Union has considered and discussed a review of this key legislation. The European Commission began this process with a draft set of proposals, to which the European Parliament proposed amendments during its first reading. Subsequently, the European Commission's amended proposals, which had regard to the outcome of the first reading by the European Parliament, were the subject of detailed consideration at the European Council.

Agreement was reached in June 2008 on this long-standing sensitive legislative instrument under the Slovenian Presidency, when Ministers agreed by majority vote a common position on the proposed amended working time directive. The agreement reached on 9 June provides for transposition of the amending working time directive into national legislation within three years of its adoption. The common position agreed in June on this long-standing draft reflects a delicate and balanced compromise, reached after consideration at the European Council under more than six EU Presidencies.

With regard to the individual opt-out for workers working more than the average 48 hours per week, the amending directive provides for new built-in safeguards and limitations, stricter reference periods and review and evaluation clauses. These will act as further constraints against working unlimited and irregular working hours, which are to the detriment of the heath and safety of workers concerned. Under the amended proposal, a distinction is made between active and inactive periods of on-call time at the work place. The common position makes no change to active on-call time, but would allow inactive periods to be treated either as working time or rest time, according to national law or collective agreement.

The proposed amending directive is gender neutral, applying in equal measure to men and women. In its transposition of the original EU directive, Ireland did not avail of the opt-out nor have we any plans to do so. The outcome of the political agreement reached at the European Council represents a delicate balance aimed at achieving a compromise solution to this outstanding sensitive dossier. The Government has no reason to believe that the revised directive represents a negative outcome that poses a matter of particular concern to the position of women in the work force. We must now await the outcome of the second reading in the European Parliament, as outlined under the co-decision procedure.