Seán Sherlock (Cork East, Labour)

I understand the rationale behind these amendments. The provision as it stands, however, lists the facilities and amenities intended. While the list is not exhaustive, it is not intended that collective facilities and amenities would include remuneration or expenses. There is a danger in introducing one proposed exclusion as to do so would raise other issues that could be equally proposed for exclusion. This type of detail is more appropriate for inclusion in guidance documentation on the Bill in preparation in my Department. For this reason, I do not propose to accept amendment No. 14.

On amendment No. 15, it is not suggested in the legislation nor would it be legally possible under the Bill that an agency worker could contend that there is any employment relationship between the hirer and the worker on the basis that the latter now has an entitlement to use any collective facilities in the same manner as direct employees. The definitions make clear there is a three way relationship and the employer of the agency worker is the employment agency. In that sense, the amendment is unnecessary.