John Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank the Minister of State, Deputy Sean Sherlock, for attending. I wish to bring to his attention the issue of the takeover of The Fáilte Bar in Dublin Airport earlier this year and the impact on the ten former members of staff. I am very conscious that this is an ongoing issue and is somewhat sensitive. There are already proceedings under way with the Labour Relations Commission. Therefore, I wish to focus on the role of the Dublin Airport Authority in this matter. I am mainly concerned for the workers, many of whom I have met and live in my constituency. There is also a bigger issue, namely, the Dublin Airport Authority's involvement in contracts in the airport.

The Minister of State may be aware that the operation of the bar was taken over earlier this year by a company called SSP and that it subsequently closed. The bar then reopened under a new name, The Angel's Share, with expanded food service. Essentially, the former staff were told to apply for new positions in the new bar. Those who successfully completed an assessment were to be given new job titles, with significantly changed terms and conditions. Not all were offered new jobs and there are currently redundancy proceedings under way. Three workers out of the ten are on a month's trial on their old pay rates. However, it is not yet clear what rates they will be offered when the trial period ends later this month. The pay per hour for the new positions in the bar is €9.60, whereas some of the bar staff in the old bar, The Fáilte Bar, were earning €17 and over per hour. This is a significant change in the pay rate offered for the same job.

I fear that what happened to the workers in the airport, where a large number of service sector staff work, could happen elsewhere if a similar changeover took place. I appreciate that passenger numbers have declined and that businesses are adjusting to this, but I do not believe a change of operator and new job titles should essentially mean these kinds of changes to pay rates.

There is a possibility that what happened to the ten workers will happen to other airport workers if the responsibility for the operation of other bars or services is transferred. This is an issue the Dublin Airport Authority needs to consider seriously. It is not enough for the authority simply to handle tenders and not have an interest in the rights of workers in the airport. I ask the Minister of State to raise this with the Dublin Airport Authority and the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, in particular. Workers in the service sector already have precarious job conditions and many must work unsociable hours, as we know. At the very least, the workers deserve respect, but they also deserve the support of the Dublin Airport Authority when circumstances such as those in question arise.

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

I thank the Deputy for raising this matter. I understand the issues involved concern the outcome of a tendering process for the running of a bar in Terminal 1 of Dublin Airport. The Dublin Airport Authority has confirmed that the tender process for the outlets in question was conducted through the Official Journal of the European Union's system for public procurement and was fully compliant with all guidelines. The tender documentation for the outlets in question stated that transfer of undertakings legislation may apply and advised potential tenderers to seek advice on such legislation.

The restructuring currently under way at a number of outlets is a matter for the operators in question. I am not privy to the details of transfer or the parties involved. One cannot but have sympathy for those involved in this dispute. Without fudging the issue and in seeking to give an honest answer to the Deputy, I must suggest firmly that industrial relations machinery needs to come into play on this issue. I hope both sides will agree to a process in which such machinery can be utilised to come to a resolution that is satisfactory to both.

I have to hand a very detailed response on the rights of employees in regard to transfers of undertakings but I do not believe it is necessary to read it out. However, I strongly support the idea that labour relations machinery should be utilised in this instance. I would be very surprised if there has not already been a move in that regard.

John Lyons (Dublin North West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate the Minister of State's honesty and his not reading the extended response he was asked to read to me. Both he and I understand the circumstances at hand. No laws have been broken, which we respect. Every i has been dotted and every t crossed but a sense of natural justice has gone completely out the window. This issue needs to be monitored. Dublin Airport is a significant employer in north Dublin; it is one of the largest. There are many in the neighbourhood who rely on income from it. The staff to whom I refer have worked most unsociable hours so we can get aeroplanes when we want to get them. Essentially, they have been told through a legitimate process that they can work for the bar but at half the pay they received previously. This matter needs to be addressed.

I understand we are constrained by the legislation and that there are processes to deal with this matter. However, no law has been broken. I ask the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, who has responsibility for the Dublin Airport Authority, and the Minister of State, Deputy Sherlock, to raise this matter with the Dublin Airport Authority in order that it will, at least, acknowledge that there is a system in the airport, albeit a very transparent one, that has resulted in a very unfavourable outcome for workers who have given years of service, ten in some cases. To be told one's pay is to be reduced from €17 to €9.60 is just not fair, especially when one has a family.

I am very sensitive to the fact there are ongoing discussions. That said, that seven out of the ten workers who were working for the company in question before the transfer did not pass the test to do pretty much the same job is telling. Coincidentally, the staff happened to be at the higher end of the pay scale before the transfer. This says something about the morality of the company. It is using the legislation in place as a type of smokescreen. While it has broken no laws, it has used the legislation to create a sense that it has made a fair decision.

As far as I know, these jobs for which staff were told to reapply were also advertised in the public domain, quoting that no experience was necessary. There is something not right.

I reiterate that I respect the Minister of State's response. I appreciate that he did not read out the response given to him.

I urge the Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport, Deputy Varadkar, who has responsibility for the DAA, to raise this directly with the DAA because this may open the valve for what could become a €9.60 job for everybody who works in the airport in the foreseeable future.

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

I agree with everything Deputy Lyons has said. Let us be frank and honest about it. The issue at hand here is one of corporate social responsibility, a term we bandy around from time to time and can use quite easily. If there is a transfer of undertakings here, as Deputy Lyons stated, it says something about the morality of the company. There is a strong sense here of an obligation on the part of SPP, where it has taken over a facility in what is, effectively, a State entity, to ensure the rights of the workers are vindicated or at least that there is a recognition of the experience of the existing staff who go into the new undertakings.

In this instance, though we recognise that no law has been broken, there is a certain corporate social responsibility. I hope that common sense will prevail and that the extensive machinery of the State in labour relations could be applied in this instance.

It is important that these issues are raised on the floor of this House also. It sends a signal back to these entities that these matters are being looked at by Government and that there is a consciousness in this House of the issues Deputy Lyons raises.