Joanna Tuffy (Labour)

I move amendment No. 5:

In page 6, to delete lines 14 to 26.

I also proposed this amendment on Committee Stage. My colleagues and I believe the rule that states that blocks of parental leave must be ten weeks apart is inflexible and unnecessary. This amendment proposes to delete section 3(b), which enshrines inflexibility in the legislation by providing that a second period of parental leave cannot be taken unless "not less than 10 weeks have elapsed since the first period of parental leave ended".

Section 3(b)(1B) states that the employer and the employee may agree to a shorter period than ten weeks. As the Bill stands, the onus is on the employer to agree to that. It does not state that the employee has the right to seek leave after a shorter period. The Bill should enshrine flexibility by placing an onus on the employer to state why he or she cannot provide that flexibility.

The Minister of State said on Committee Stage that he could not accept this amendment because it is contrary to the agreement reached by the parental leave working group. As I said on a previous occasion, we should emphasise that our role as legislators is different to that of employers. My proposal is in the interests of employers and would benefit them. I cannot see any reason this amendment should not be accepted. Other amendments can be argued against on the basis of their cost, but such an argument cannot be made in this instance because this amendment does not involve a cost to the State. It would not cost anything to provide for flexibility. It is somewhat arbitrary to state that ten weeks should elapse between periods of parental leave. There is no logical need for such a provision. This section of the Bill should be deleted and the question of parental leave should be a matter for employers and employees to decide. Employees should have the right to ask for flexibility from employers. The onus should be on employers to state that they cannot provide that flexibility.