Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

51. To ask the Minister for Social Protection if he will ensure people on zero-hour contracts who some weeks work the required 19 hours per week to qualify for family income supplement, FIS, are granted FIS for those weeks; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [2772/17]

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We have an unacceptably high level of low-paid workers, the second highest in the OECD. That is bad enough. The Minister's failure to do anything about low-hour contracts compounds it. What makes it even worse is that people who are on low-hour contracts and might be entitled to FIS often cannot get it, given that employers will not fill out the Part 8 form. The lone parents group, Single Parents Acting for the Rights of Kids, SPARK, has asked the Minister to get rid of the form and allow for other ways for workers on low-hour contracts to prove they were working and fit the criteria for FIS payments. I am asking the Minister again.

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

FIS is an in-work support which provides an income top-up for employees on low earnings who have children. FIS is designed to prevent in-work poverty for low-paid workers with child dependants and to offer a financial incentive to take up employment. In excess of 57,000 families with more than 127,000 children are in receipt of FIS. The estimated spend on FIS this year is approximately €422 million. To qualify for FIS, a person must be engaged in insurable employment which is expected to last for at least three months and be working for a minimum of 38 hours per fortnight or 19 hours per week. Any combination that reaches 38 hours over a fortnight is acceptable. A couple may combine their hours of employment to meet the qualification criteria. The applicant must also have at least one qualified child who normally resides with or is supported by him or her. The average family income must be below a specified amount, which varies according to the number of qualified children in the family.

For low income workers with less than the minimum hours of employment for FIS and working on a casual basis up to and including three days per week, the jobseeker’s allowance scheme provides in-work income support through daily disregards and tapered withdrawal of payments. Individuals on jobseeker’s benefit can also work up to three days per week. For each day they work, there is a proportionate reduction in their jobseeker’s benefit payment.

If a person cannot meet the 19 hours FIS threshold or if his or her hours vary significantly from week to week, the Department offers a number of other schemes that can provide income support that can be combined with earnings from employment, subject to each individual’s circumstances. These can include disability allowance, carer’s allowance, the one-parent family payment, jobseeker’s transitional payment and the part-time job incentive scheme. Combined, the Department provides an extensive system of social welfare support which facilitate recipients taking up some employment while maintaining their social welfare payments.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The Minister's answer does not address the issue I raised. As SPARK made clear to the Minister at the meeting of the Oireachtas Joint Committee on Social Protection, many employers of employees on low-hour contracts will not sign these forms. People have come to my clinic to make the same point. The forms require employers to indicate that somebody works a minimum of 19 hours per week. Low-hour contract employers should be banned. However, given that the Minister will not ban them, they will not fill in a form in which they commit to employing people for 19 hours per week. Consequently, people who are entitled to FIS and who desperately need it given that they are on low-hour contracts and on low pay, cannot get FIS. The Minister needs to do away with the Part 8 form and allow for another mechanism by which these workers can demonstrate that they fit the criteria of working the hours required.

The three-month rule is a problem. Given the precarious nature of their employment, many of these workers will not necessarily fit into the rule. The jobseeker's allowance payment available to people who work three days does nothing for workers on low-hour contracts who work four or five days but might work only four hours per day. They cannot get jobseeker's allowance and, if their employers will not fill out the form, they cannot get FIS. The problem must be addressed for the sake of low-paid workers, many of them women, who need income support.

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

I was not aware the Deputy was going to raise a particular issue around the Part 8 form and it was not in his original question. Accordingly, I am not in a position to answer directly today. However, we are obviously going to need some sort of mechanism to find out how many hours somebody worked. That is the basis to the payment. The Deputy suggested we replace the Part 8 form. With what does he suggest we replace it? We need some mechanism to find out how many hours someone worked and what he or she earned.

I got agreement at Cabinet today on beginning the public consultation for the new working family payment. As the Deputy knows, the programme for Government commits to the introduction of a working family payment to reduce child poverty and ensure families are not better off on welfare than in work. There are several ways in which we support working families with the cost of living such as child benefit, the increase for the dependent child and, of course, family income supplement, FIS. There is also the development of this new payment, which could be an additional payment to these or one to replace all of these, and is an opportunity to reform the whole system.

We need to have that information, however. I do not believe getting rid of the form would assist us in getting the information we are not getting.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It would. If employers are not willing to fill it out, then people entitled to the payment are not able to get it. There are other ways in which employees could prove entitlement, such as the use of payslips and so on, which would allow them to demonstrate they have been working. There is a three-month or more requirement. The Minister could have the option for it to be weekly, fortnightly or monthly assessed, where employers might be more willing. For example, an employer could state the person worked for a week for the required 19 hours or for the required hours in a month, because they might be reluctant to commit themselves for the year. Of course, that is a separate issue as employers should not have people on these low-hour precarious contracts.

Given the Minister has not banned these practices, there should be some mechanism which allows employees to prove in another way that they fit the criteria. Alternatively, we could change the assessment to allow it to be done on a weekly, fortnightly or monthly basis, where the employer might be more willing to sign the form stating this person worked the required hours over a period.

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

I will certainly take that into consideration as part of any changes we are going to make. Like I said, however, I am not entirely clear as to why an employer would refuse to fill out this form. Expenditure on FIS in 2000 was €39 million. It went up to €186 million in 2010 and will probably hit €413 million in 2016. This has been a significant expansion in the number of families in receipt of FIS. My concern is the reverse, namely, that employers know FIS exists and believe they can get away with paying less than they should because the social protection system will top it up. It seems to be strange, therefore, that employers would refuse to sign this form.

Richard Boyd Barrett (Dún Laoghaire, People Before Profit Alliance)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That abuse goes on.

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

That is a big issue and that abuse needs to be stamped out.