Seanad debates

Wednesday, 21 March 2007

Protection of Employment (Exceptional Collective Redundancies and Related Matters) Bill 2007: Second Stage

 

8:00 pm

Photo of Tony KilleenTony Killeen (Clare, Fianna Fail)

It is in a particularly healthy state, which is the way we like it to be. The Senator's point about local authority members was well made and I am pleased that is the case onthis occasion. It is not always the case, as he knows.

Senator McDowell also referred to the Irish Ferries case and the need for reform. He was somewhat unhappy with the three year time limit. It is fair to say that, in many respects, people will have to wait to see how this operates in terms of whether it is able to address the difficulties it is designed to address. The Minister has the power to extend it for a period of time. The Senator made the point that the social partners have a very strong say in regard to it. They have put a considerable amount of work into the preparation of this Bill as have the officials in the Department. A very difficult job has been done in a very short period of time. In the circumstances, this is probably the appropriate way to deal with it.

Senator McDowell also referred to the situation of a 66 year old. I am very pleased we have been able to take the opportunity on this occasion to rectify that. The Senator referred to the clarification of exceptional collective redundancy being defined as "a dismissal". He raised the question of whether that was automatically an unfair dismissal. He referred to section 9(3) of the Bill as it affects section 7 of the Unfair Dismissals Act 1977 in that if a dismissal which is the subject of a claim under the Unfair Dismissals Acts has already been the subject of a determination of the Labour Court that it is an exceptional collective redundancy, then in a separate process, if a rights commissioner of the Employment Appeals Tribunal finds that it is also an unfair dismissal for the purpose of the Unfair Dismissal Act and if the remedy is compensation rather than re-engagement or re-employment, then an employee with fewer than 20 years' service will be eligible for up to four years' salary in compensation. An employee with more than 20 years' service will be eligible for up to five years' compensation. Also in these situations, the employee will not be required to show mitigation of loss. The only reductions which can be made to the compensation award are where the amounts have been paid in redundancy or severance by the employer. These agreements were also agreed in Towards 2016.

It is a very substantial improvement in the situation as it pertains. It is up to a rights commissioner of the Employment Appeals Tribunal to decide if the dismissal is unfair. There are potentially two processes in addressing the question Senator McDowell asked.

Senator Hanafin spoke eloquently about the value of social partnership and I thank him for the points he made in that regard. I am sure Senator White is very pleased about section 15. She has campaigned very strongly in this regard. I would not have dared come into the House with this Bill without that provision. I very much agree with her that we need people to stay working much longer in the current economic climate and that in justice, we should make provision for people to remain at work if they are able and willing to do so.

I thank the Acting Chairman and the Senators for their co-operation.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.