Results 7,741-7,760 of 20,831 for speaker:David Norris

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: That is fine. I thank the Minister.

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: Could the Acting Chairman give me those numbers again?

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 83: In page 41, line 4, to delete “otherwise than in public” and substitute the following:“in public save: (a) where the Adjudication Officer considers it appropriate to hear the matter otherwise than in public; or (b) where both of the parties agree that it shall be heard in private”.I see that amendment No. 98 is a Government amendment....

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I thank the Minister who stated it was unnecessary, fussy or unnecessarily complicated. However, the amendment does not appear to be unnecessarily complicated. It would simply provide that hearings be held in public except where the adjudication officer considered it appropriate to hear it in private or when both parties consented. If both parties consent, where is the disagreement? It is...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: The Minister is stating he is doing what he has been instructed to do under European Community legislation. That is fair enough and I have no problem with it. However, where both parties consent to the proceedings being heard in public, that appears to be perfectly reasonable.

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I wondered when that cliché would emerge.

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 84: In page 41, line 8, after “section” to insert the following:“and shall keep a register of all decisions available for inspection for such fee as shall be determined by the Minister”.This is about keeping a register. While it is useful to provide for publication on the Internet, every single decision may not be published for whatever...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I refer to the reason Senator Gerard P. Craughwell and I seek to delete this proposal and point out again that the proposed section 42(11)(a)(iv) states "any other person, if the adjudication officer so permits". That is where we would have included a specified person. It is not up to the adjudication officer to have this discretion. I do not agree that he or she should have the discretion...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: The Minister has not really answered my point that it is the right of a complainant to appoint the person he or she regards as being most suitable to represent him or her in such a process. It states very clearly "any other person if the adjudication officer so permits". That is where we proposed inserting the words "specified person". It is not appropriate for the adjudication officer to...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I would be grateful if the Minister would do so. The principle is that it is up to the complainant to decide who should represent him or her. A person is hardly going to employ some sort of a dingbat, but I am talking about somebody who might have a difficulty in reading or writing, or a language difficulty or lack familiarity with the culture, etc. I would be grateful if the Minister...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: If the complainant is comfortable with a person representing him or her, who is the adjudication officer to quibble with this and second guess the complainant? The representative may be there to act as an assistant, a support, a crutch or an adviser and if the complainant believes he or she is the most appropriate person for the job, that is the case. I look forward to the Minister coming...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: Perhaps there might be a deletion of the reference to the adjudication officer permitting the appointment. Alternatively, I would appreciate an explanation of the circumstances where an adjudication officer could make such a determination. I am sure there will be very few such circumstances and I cannot think of any in which it would be appropriate for an adjudication officer to say a...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: Why can amendment No. 86 not be moved? Is it because it depends on the previous amendment?

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 88: In page 41, line 27, after "appropriate" to insert the following:"without prejudice to the forgoing the Minister may in consultation with the Chairman of the Labour Court make such regulations relating to representatives of a complainant or a respondent to include the terms of engagement but not limited to contingency fees or percentage fees, evidence of indemnity...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 93: In page 41, between lines 36 and 37, to insert the following:“(15) In the event of a party issuing a complaint under section 4 of the Data Protection Act 1988 (as amended) and the other party failing to provide any documentation in whole or in part which the party who failed to supply such documentation subsequently wishes to rely on in any case before an...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: The Bill would leave a black hole. There is nothing that would prevent it, or say it is an incorrect or bad practice or that the adjudication officer should take a certain line. It is manifestly unfair and wrong for one side to conceal information and then spring it on a person at a later date. Even if it leads to an adjournment to allow the other side to become conversant with the facts,...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: On foot of the advice the Minister receives, if it is of a certain nature, he might consider introducing a more nuanced amendment on Report Stage.

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: I move amendment No. 100: In page 44, between lines 6 and 7, to insert the following:"(12) The Labour Court may remit a case to a different adjudication officer on such terms as the Labour Court shall determine to include directing an adjudicating officer to rehear the case applying the law to the facts as determined by the Labour Court.". The amendment addresses a situation where there is a...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: It is not that we are looking for a rehearing of the entire case de novo. It is where the facts that were established were uncontested and agreed. While both parties consent and agree as to the facts, there is a misapplication of the law. The law is imperfectly administered and it is on a technical point of law that a matter would be referred back to have the law appropriately and...

Seanad: Workplace Relations Bill 2014: Committee Stage (Resumed) (25 Feb 2015)

David Norris: Surely, it will interpret labour law as part of its function. I am instancing a case where the facts are established and not arguable and there is no necessity to rehearse them once again. They have been presented to the court and are agreed by both parties.