Seanad debates

Wednesday, 18 February 2004

Equality Bill 2004: Committee Stage.

 

12:00 pm

Photo of Willie O'DeaWillie O'Dea (Limerick East, Fianna Fail)

I cannot disagree with the logic of anything Senator Terry says. I agree with all her sentiments. However, I have been advised that because the proposed amendment is aspirational in character, it would not be appropriate to include it in primary legislation. The Act of 1998 is by definition an Equality Act. The provisions of the earlier gender equality legislation were enhanced and extended by the Act to eight additional discriminatory grounds with the specific provision to enshrine the entitlement to equal remuneration across these grounds, and put in place strong enforcement measures. The Act recognises that by itself, non-discrimination may not provide a sufficient safeguard to protect, for example, the right to equality of people with disabilities. For this reason, specific requirements were imposed on employers under section 16 of the Act to accommodate the needs of people with disabilities in the workplace.

All good law seeks to address real issues in a way which is practicable and effective and without causing unnecessary difficulties. Section 35 of the 1998 Act recognises that there may be some cases in which a disabled employee would be excluded from a particular work arrangement if inflexible provisions are put in place. In such situations, which would arise where an accommodation of the person's special needs would not in itself be sufficient, different rates of pay may be permitted providing they match the output of the person employed. That is just in respect of that particular section. I agree with what the Senator said but it would not be appropriate to include such a provision in what is primary legislation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.