George Lawlor (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I move: "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

It is a privilege to be able to bring this vital Bill before the House on Second Stage. We have a chance today to make clear our commitment to standing up for the most fundamental of rights, the right to bargain collectively for better conditions, pay and a fairer workplace. This is also an opportunity to protect a long-standing successful institution by righting a wrong. Joint labour committees, JLCs, and their precursors have been an important pillar of collective bargaining in this country for over a century. Due to legal proceedings a decade ago, their very viability stands at risk. An employer's veto over the operation of JLCs undermines their purpose. That is what we are left with following that legal case.

The Bill would provide a fix and in doing so would protect this important part of our industrial relations framework for the future. By enacting a simple backstop allowing the Labour Court to step in where there is a refusal to engage with a JLC, we can not only protect the rights of every worker to collective bargaining but ensure that the express will of the Oireachtas can no longer be subverted.

As we debate this Bill today, it is important that we be cognisant of the wider landscape of collective bargaining in Ireland in 2025. Sadly, Ireland's voluntarist system marks us as outliers in the industrialised western world. The weak legal protections we provide to workers with regard to collective bargaining allow employers to simply refuse to engage with trade unions or workers. Of course, that is not just bad for those workers; it is bad for our whole society. The economic, social and environmental benefits of collective bargaining have long been clear.. When employers deny employees the chance to bargain collectively, they are not just denying the rights of those workers in particular; they are actively holding our country back and suppressing wages across whole sectors.

Ireland has a particularly low rate of collective bargaining coverage. Just 34% of our workers currently benefit from collective bargaining arrangements, compared with an EU average of 56%. We know the EU directive on adequate minimum wages calls on member states with low coverage to lay out their path to 80% and that the Government is soon to unveil an action plan to that effect. When that action plan comes, it must be ambitious and clear and do what it says on the tin, namely, contain real and measurable actions.

The Bill before us represents one simple action we must take by ensuring that JLCs can once again function as they were always intended to. We can take a big step towards ending the race to the bottom that we see far too often in far too many industries. Well over 100 years ago, it was the Government in London that recognised that across Britain and Ireland there were too many workers in industries that were subject to chronically low pay and poor conditions. Those industries typically had very poor or, indeed, non-existent trade union representation.

That reality led to the genesis of the trade board system, which aimed to guarantee minimum standards and conditions across those industries by providing a form of collective bargaining to the workers in those under-unionised sectors. These trade boards took the form of bargaining bodies, including representatives of employers and workers. They were empowered to set binding minimum wages and conditions across a particular sector. That system proved to be durable and was further refined with the Industrial Relations Act 1946.

That Act saw the trade boards become JLCs. Their members would be appointed by the Labour Court after the Minister had established that a particular sector had inadequate machinery to effectively regulate pay and conditions. It was an effective way to make sure that workers in sectors with low levels of representation benefited from collective bargaining and were able to negotiate for better wages and conditions. However, it relied on certain assumptions.

Whether it was the somewhat unlikely figure of Winston Churchill in 1909 or Seán Lemass in 1946, the originators of the law that underpinned the first trade boards, and then the JLCs, clearly understood that these were bodies aimed at providing the opportunity for bargaining in the sectors with the lowest levels of representation and some of the worst conditions. They clearly understood these as operating across industry and sectors and with the involvement of employers and workers. However, what they clearly did not have in mind was an employer's veto.

How could the system ever have got off the ground if it would all collapse where the employers refuse to tog out? That is, unfortunately, what we have been left with after the legal proceedings brought a decade ago by the Irish Hotels Federation when the then Minister aimed to reconstitute a JLC in the hotel sector. In preparing to oppose the Irish Hotels Federation case, the State effectively conceded that in the absence of employer's representation, the JLC could not be constituted and, furthermore, that the decision to take part in negotiations under a JLC framework was voluntary.

The legal proceedings were struck out and the case ended before it reached the court. Those legal proceedings cast a long shadow. We are now left in a situation far removed from what the original drafters of the trade board or JLC system envisaged. We are left with an employer's veto and, with that, the reality that powerful employers can simply sidestep and ignore what should be a crucial pillar of our industrial relations infrastructure and a crucial tool for underpaid and under-represented workers to get a place around the table to negotiate for a better deal. We are all the worse off for it.

In some sectors, like security and childcare, JLCs have continued to work well. We have seen their results in legally binding employment regulation orders, setting fair floors for wages and working conditions. They have helped to root out rogue operators and stop unfair competition based on low pay where a bad employer is undercut by a worse one. The hotel sector is a case in point. In this and other sectors, employers are actively boycotting the JLC process, undermining this keystone of our industrial relations system and depriving their employees of their right to collective bargaining.

The Irish Hotels Federation years-long boycott has left workers in the hotel sector without a voice at the table. That is a travesty for those workers and it is bad for the sector's good employers that want to play a fair game. Boycotts like that leave us with a race to the bottom. That is why I believe the Bill is so vital. It would enact new provisions on the constitution of JLCs. These will apply in a case where the Labour Court seeks to consult an organisation of employers or workers but is met with refusal to engage on the appointment of members to a JLCs. When facing such an impasse, the court will then be able to appoint the people it views as representative of the interests of the relevant employers or workers.

The key purpose is to emphasise that while the members appointed will be representative of the interests of the employer or workers' side, they need not necessarily be their representatives. That crucial distinction would make clear that there can be no veto on the employer's or worker's side.

The court would review the membership of the committee from time to time to ensure it continued to be representative. If the court was satisfied it was not possible to appoint such representatives to a JLC and that the employers or workers concerned were operating in a way aimed at ensuring effective regulation of pay and conditions could not take place, the Bill would allow the court to make its own proposals for an employment regulation order. Those proposals would need to take into account the legitimate financial and commercial interests of the employers in the sector, the desirability of fair and sustainable minimum rates of pay appropriate to the sector and the general level of wages in comparable sectors.

When the court has finished those proposals, it would then forward them to the Minister, who would deal with them just as though they were the proposals of a JLC. Thus, the unfortunate loophole that has emerged since the Irish Hotels Federation legal proceedings would be closed. Under this Bill, employers would no longer be able to veto the establishment of a JLC simply by refusing to play ball. Of course, we would all hope the backstop powers given to the court by this Bill could be used sparingly and employers would engage with the JLC process in the correct spirit. We must be clear, however, that where they fail to do so, we would step in to ensure the workers in those underrepresented and often underpaid sectors that need JLCs the most get their shot at a fair deal. Without this Bill, JLCs will be forever hamstrung. We will lose a crucial pillar of our industrial relations framework and will fall yet further behind our neighbours on workers' rights.

In October 2022, the high-level group on collective bargaining, which included IBEC and ICTU, published its final report. It made it clear that the robustness and effectiveness of this statutory mechanism had been impacted by employer disengagement in relation to the operation of the JLC system in several sectors. The time has never been more urgent to stand up for collective bargaining. The Government has delayed and dithered too long. We cannot sit on our hands any longer while too many workers are left voiceless in the face of low pay and poor conditions. The Government has promised an action plan, as it is required to deliver under the terms of the EU's directive. That is very much welcome. Today, however, the Government has the opportunity to take real, decisive action by backing this Bill. I will come clean and say it: there is nothing radical in this Bill. We are not asking for any major overhaul of the industrial relations system here. All we are asking for is a simple, common sense step that will make a real difference. It is a step that will restore the original intent of the Oireachtas from when joint labour committees were first legislated for back in 1946. It is a step that will give so many workers across the country the seat at the table they deserve. It is a step that would benefit all of us. I urge colleagues across the House to stand up for collective bargaining and workers across the country by supporting this Bill. Go raibh míle maith agat.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Lawlor for moving his Bill. I do appreciate the concern he has around this issue, and it is laudable. I stand before Members to debate a Private Members’ Bill that proposes to amend provisions governing the operation and constitution of joint labour committees. This Bill seeks to address situations where employers or workers fail to engage in consultation with the Labour Court, by granting the Labour Court additional powers to appoint members to the JLC whom it considers representative of either side’s interests, without requiring them to necessarily be employers' or workers’ representatives. It also provides for a scenario where such appointments are not practicable that the Court will formulate its own employment regulation order.

After careful consideration, the Government will oppose this Bill for several compelling reasons, and I will set these out. I will also share the Government’s broader plans to strengthen support for collective bargaining in Ireland over the coming years. The programme for Government sets out a clear commitment to publish an action plan on the promotion of collective bargaining by the end of 2025. This initiative will be in line with the EU directive on adequate minimum wages. The directive is before the Court of Justice of the European Union, but Ireland has reaffirmed its strong commitment to workers’ rights by proceeding with the development of this action plan, regardless of the outcome of that ruling.

As outlined in the directive, the action plan will establish a clear timeline and concrete measures to progressively increase the rate of collective bargaining coverage. The process will have full respect for the autonomy of the social partners and ensure ongoing engagement with all relevant stakeholders. Officials in my Department are actively working with the social partners in shaping the content and overall direction of the action plan. Moreover, a public consultation was held from April to May of this year to gather broad input on its content. The Government believes that introducing major legislative changes at this early stage risks undermining the integrity of the consultative process. The action plan is intended to be comprehensive, identifying both legislative and non-legislative measures that can enhance collective bargaining while promoting competitiveness, supporting productivity and ensuring a level playing field for all employers and workers. Any sort of premature legislative intervention at this stage will be a disruption to the balanced, inclusive approach this Government has always been committed to.

Deputy Lawlor, in his proposal, highlights the challenge posed when the employer side exercises a veto, potentially stalling progress on setting rates of pay and conditions of employment for employees in certain sectors. On this point, I acknowledge that a very similar proposal was made by the LEEF high-level working group on collective bargaining in 2022. The LEEF report recommended that decision-making powers would be transferred from the JLCs to the Labour Court in an instance where parties from the employer and-or employee sides will not engage in the JLC process. The LEEF report then recommended that the Labour Court, after giving the social partners an opportunity to engage, make a recommendation to the Minister to adopt an employment regulation order for new pay rates and terms and conditions in the sector.

My Department’s analysis of this LEEF proposal indicates that implementing this proposal would require significant legislative reform. It would fundamentally alter the role of the JLCs, moving them away from forums of voluntary and independent collective bargaining and into something quite different. Moreover, it also raises complex questions regarding the type of evidence that would be required by the Labour Court to justify such a recommendation. It would also have to be considered how this process would differ from the existing sectoral employment order mechanism, which already allows substantially representative unions or employer bodies to initiate a review. It has been the consistent policy of successive Governments to promote collective bargaining through both legislation and the development of an institutional framework supporting a voluntary system of industrial relations premised upon freedom of contract and freedom of association. Ireland’s long-standing voluntarist system has served us well over the decades, helping to contribute to industrial peace and stability. It has also enhanced Ireland’s attractiveness as a major investment location and led to a co-operative environment for resolving disputes.

The Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015 defines "collective bargaining" as comprising voluntary engagements or negotiations with the object of reaching agreement regarding working conditions or terms of employment, or non-employment, of workers. The freedom of association and the right to organise and bargain collectively are also guaranteed in a number of international instruments that the State has ratified and is, therefore, bound to uphold under international law. For example, Article 6 of the European Social Charter provides a right to bargain collectively that is to be promoted through joint consultation between workers and employers. The EU Charter of Fundamental Rights also explicitly guarantees a right to collective bargaining and action by affirming that both employers and workers have the right to negotiate collective agreements and to take collective decisions to protect their interests.

The WRC and the Labour Court are both independent statutory offices under the aegis of the Department of Enterprise, Tourism and Employment. They are central pillars of Ireland's industrial relations and employment rights frameworks and play crucial roles in maintaining industrial harmony and resolving workplace disputes in Ireland. They provide impartial mechanisms for resolving disputes and only intervene when voluntary efforts have reached an impasse. In particular, the role of the Labour Court is to act as a court of last resort, making recommendations where all other avenues have been exhausted. Likewise, the WRC intervenes only in exceptional circumstances and at all times, ensuring that the autonomy of the social partners is not compromised.

I believe that a strong and well-functioning collective bargaining system supports productivity and fair wages, especially in low-paid sectors. To give one example, the 2024 SEO for the construction sector came into effect on 1 August and will introduce higher rates of pay for craft and general construction workers. Their pay increased by 3.4% in August 2025 and will increase again by 3.2% in August 2026. The sectoral employment order process is a statutory wage-setting mechanism provided for in the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2015 and based on the principles of collective bargaining.

In addition, this year a new employment regulation order came into effect covering workers in the security sector, and a new ERO will come into effect for the contract cleaning sector in October 2025. These agreements demonstrate how effective the joint labour committee scheme can be when representatives of employees and employers voluntarily negotiate together to identify a mutually beneficial agreement.

Turning once again to the legislative proposals raised by Deputy Lawlor, I must express concern about the significant administrative burden that would be placed on the Labour Court and the WRC if these proposals were introduced. If the Labour Court were to assume decision-making powers in the absence of engagement from either side, several issues would arise. First of all, the risk of litigation would be high as employers may challenge the validity of orders made without proper consultation. There is also the risk that any employment regulation orders that lack sectoral buy-in or proper consultation from any particular industry representative or employees may be ignored or contested. This would effectively undermine the core functions of the Labour Court and WRC as they begin to face increased volumes of contested cases. Such proposals could erode the voluntary nature of our industrial relations scheme, replacing it with a more adversarial and less effective model.

This Government has upheld workers' rights through a comprehensive suite of employment legislation. Our laws in this area are kept under review to reflect both national and international developments, including at European Union, Court of Justice and International Labour Organization levels. Some recent employment law developments include the introduction of statutory sick leave, the right to request remote work, protections for workers' tips and gratuities, and the recent substantial increases in the national minimum wage. This year will also see further progression with the introduction of a new seasonal employment permit, the introduction of an automatic pension enrolment system and the expansion of the gender pay gap regime. These demonstrate the Government's continuing commitment to a safe working environment, fair treatment and fair wages for the lowest paid workers in our economy.

Johnny Guirke (Meath West, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

In Sinn Féin, we stand in solidarity with workers across all sectors who, through their hard work, keep our economy moving. Far too often, though, workers face insecure pay, unstable conditions, and a bargaining environment that favours the few over the many. That needs to change.

I thank Labour for bringing this Bill forward and I want to give my strong support to ensuring robust, fair and enforceable collective bargaining for every worker. Central to this effort are joint labour committees that set legally binding employment conditions and rates of pay for workers in sectors such as childcare, cleaning, security and hospitality. When joint labour committees function effectively, they raise standards, protect workers' rights and provide a level playing field for employers who commit to fair labour practices.

The current situation is troubling. In some industries, the formation and operation of joint labour committees hinge on the willingness of employer bodies to engage in consultation. Where those bodies refuse or fail to participate, the joint labour committees process can stall, giving a de facto veto power to those who would rather race to the bottom than invest in decent pay and safe, regulated working conditions. That is not acceptable in today's modern economy when so many workers are dealing with the ongoing cost-of-living crisis.

The Bill seeks to address this by empowering the Labour Court to appoint employer or worker representatives to a joint labour committee when the relevant organisations fail or refuse to engage. In practical terms, this means no more breakdowns in communication due to a single party's veto and the balance of power is realigned to ensure workers' voices are heard.

Credible collective bargaining is the backbone of fair work. It reduces the race to the bottom, where pay and working conditions are undercut in pursuit of cost cutting, and it strengthens the social contract between workers and the businesses that rely on their labour. It provides certainty for employers who compete on quality and reliability, not just on cheapest bids.

We must also recognise the broader context; the need for legislatively protected collective bargaining has never been greater. The Minister, Deputy Burke, is expected to make an announcement in the near future and workers and unions are hoping it is a step in the right direction for collective bargaining, a pledge he signed before the general election.

A strong, enforceable framework gives workers a seat at the table, ensures that pay and conditions reflect the true value of their labour, and helps create stable, productive workplaces with fewer turnovers of staff. It also signals to the economy and to international partners that Ireland is serious about fair working standards. We want to empower and support workers, and rebalance the power dynamics that govern industrial relations.

Recently, SIPTU wrote to three Ministers calling for their urgent intervention to ensure the reappointment under warranty of a Labour Court deputy chairman and warned that failure to do so would seriously diminish that body's effectiveness and likely lead to a greater number of industrial disputes. I am urging the Minister of State to stop turning away from workers and their rights and ensure protections are always in place for workers. Turning a blind eye to these services will affect thousands of workers across the country who will be denied the right to a prompt resolution of their personal workplace issues under employment law.

Strengthening joint labour committees is a commitment to fair pay, decent working conditions and a more resilient economy. It can also create a safe working environment and protect workers from corporate manslaughter and dangerous working conditions.

Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

This debate comes at a rather important time. Yesterday, in the audiovisual room, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions had its Respect at Work campaign. One point that it raised that struck me is that we are still in this position, in 2025, where we have a constitutional right to join a trade union but we have no legislative right to collective bargaining or to halt union busting, which undermines the rights of workers.

The joint labour committee process was created to address this problem by setting out minimum pay and conditions where workers were poorly organised and vulnerable. Historically, the JLCs were seen as protectors of poorly organised sectors, but instead of advancing real collective bargaining rights, the Government seems happy to hide behind a volunteerist JLC system, holding a carrot-and-stick approach to workers rather than legislating for genuine collective bargaining or transposing the EU directive on adequate minimum wages and legislating to remove the effective employers' veto within the current JLC system. As these flaws within the system are plain to see, it will currently only work if both representatives from employers and trade unions come to the table in good faith.

For example, the early years sector is seen as having a successful JLC as the unions manage to get employers' representatives to the table but, because of the volunteerist nature of the process, every employment regulation order has been held up while waiting for employers' bodies to meaningfully engage.

The first EROs only came about with Labour Court intervention. The third wage deal, which was due to take effect on 1 September, still has not been signed into law. Educators are missing out on their pay rises and providers, many acting in good faith, are already paying these rates. It needs to be signed into law as soon as possible. Some €45 million in public funding has been allocated to cover this cost but, because of the delay and the volunteerist nature of the current JLC process, €800,000 of taxpayers’ money goes back into the Exchequer each week instead of reaching the educators and the good providers. This should have been implemented on 1 September.

That is not fair to the workers or to the good employers who have engaged in the JLC system. It makes a mockery of the Government promises to bring respect and to support collective bargaining. That is why this Bill is so essential. It would finally end the employers’ boycott, restore the original intent of the JLC system and make sure that vulnerable low-paid workers get the protection they deserve. This should only be a first step. We also need stronger legislation to deliver real collective bargaining, like that available in most progressive European countries, in line with the EU directive. This would guarantee that workers have a genuine voice in shaping their pay and conditions.

Passing this Bill is about fairness and dignity at work, and respecting the contribution of workers in sectors too often overlooked. It is disappointing that the Bill is to be opposed. I welcome the commitment to publish the action plan for the promotion of collective bargaining in line with the directive. We know that in the transposition of any EU directive, it can be transposed at the high end or the low end. It is my fervent hope that the Government chooses to transpose at the high end.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank colleagues for raising this. I know they are here on a Thursday evening to raise this matter because they feel passionately about it, and they have raised it in a very articulate and passionate way. Unfortunately, the Minister of State, Deputy Dillon, cannot be here this evening. I have taken copious notes on the issues that all three Deputies have raised in case clarity is needed on anything. However, the position of the Government will still be to oppose it.

George Lawlor (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I appreciate that the Minister of State has been somewhat thrown under the bus on this by her Fine Gael Government colleague.

Niamh Smyth (Cavan-Monaghan, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I would not agree.

George Lawlor (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I never thought I would see the day when I would stand in this august Chamber and say that Winston Churchill appeared to have more affinity and commitment to the workers of Ireland than the Fianna Fáil party and this Government. In 1909, Winston Churchill brought in the trade boards so that underrepresented, undervalued and underpaid workers could be represented by the trade boards. In 1946, this was dealt with by a man who must be spinning in his grave, a man who sat in this Chamber, a man of the Fianna Fáil Party who did so many wonderful things for this country at a time when we needed it most, Seán Lemass. He must be spinning in his grave as he hears that the Government is opposing this long overdue Bill and, in doing so, is effectively supporting powerful employers to ride roughshod over undervalued and underpaid workers in this State.

As I said, I do not think the Minister of State's heart is in the response she gave, to be honest. I do not think that, when reading it, she was committed to what was in that response. As I said, I think she has been thrown under the bus. This is a shocking admission by the Government that it is not going to support underpaid and undervalued workers, and it is going to facilitate powerful employers to veto a structure that was set up in 1946 by Seán Lemass to facilitate workers being represented at JLCs.

The Minister of State spoke about it being adversarial. What is adversarial is when powerful employers refuse to engage in a mechanism that has worked in other sectors. In her response, the Minister of State spoke about the childcare and security sectors, and how they had seen great improvements in their conditions. The reason they saw great improvements in their conditions was because both sides engaged with the JLC process. The Minister of State is sort of arguing against herself, or the piece of paper she is reading from is arguing against itself, by saying that that was great but, God, we cannot allow adversarial situations to come up, and we must avoid any legal proceedings that may take place following a binding agreement that is reached in a JLC in a respectful manner. We could do with Winston back - the British bulldog - to say to Irish workers: “I will represent you”. This Government is clearly not representing workers in areas like the hotel sector.

The Minister of State said it is premature. In 1909 and 1946, mechanisms were introduced into this country, even when we were under British rule and later by Seán Lemass, to ensure that workers in low-paid sectors got their representation. They were not looking for the moon. They were looking for decent, honourable representation. How did the powerful employers get around that? They said they would ignore the whole set-up, employ their legal advisers to tell them what to do, and ignore the whole set-up and not play any role or part in it. Therefore, for the little guy - the man or woman working in a hotel on low pay – the employers can walk all over them.

That is what we are doing. That is what the Government is acceding to by refusing to accept this non-radical, very simple proposal of a Bill to improve the lot of workers and workers’ rights. I urge the Minister of State, Deputy Smyth, to go back to the Fine Gael Minister of State who has thrown her under the bus. I ask her to get him to reflect. I knew when the Minister of State was reading it out that her heart and soul were certainly not in the text that was on that sheet. That is not her style. I urge her to go back to her colleagues in government and ask them to respect the rights of low-paid workers in this country, in a sector that needs it most. I ask her to reflect on the history of the great party that she comes from and on a man who did so much for this country. He wanted to establish mechanisms to support workers’ rights. I ask the Minister of State to reflect on that before the vote next week.

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

In accordance with Standing Order 85(2), the division is postponed until the weekly division time on Wednesday, 1 October 2025.