David Cullinane (Sinn Fein)

I move amendment No.16:

In page 20, lines 32 and 33, to delete "but does not include" and substitute "including".

The provision this amendment deals with is the exclusion of pay or time-off in lieu of public holidays, compensation for Sunday working, payment in lieu of notice and payment referable to redundancy from the definition of remuneration. The effect of this proposed legislation would be to end the Sunday premium rates. I have had a number of discussions with trade unions on this and there is a lot of upset within the movement that Sunday premium rates are now being struck down as part of this Bill. We must remind ourselves that we are talking here about some of the lowest-paid workers in this State. We are privileged to earn very generous salaries in this House but we are dealing here with people who are often on the minimum wage or a little above it. They are on agreed rates but are earning an awful lot less than Members of this House. Many such workers work on Sundays because the extra money they get bumps up their salary to some sort of an acceptable level. In many cases, they do not have a choice but must work on Sunday because of the types of industries they are in, the retail sector being the obvious example.

The Minister might make the point that because of the Organisation of Working Time Act, there is some level of protection in place with regard to Sunday working time. While there is a provision in that Act, it is not prescriptive. It does not set out what a person is entitled to but merely states that he or she is entitled to some level of compensation, which could be time in lieu, time and a quarter, time and a half, or whatever is agreed. Under the previous system, workers in very vulnerable sectors had double-time for Sunday. That will now be removed. This represents an attack on some of the lowest wage earners in the State.

Every time the Government takes a euro from the pocket of these low-paid workers, it is taking directly from the local economy. We can see the effects of that in the Exchequer returns released recently which showed a flat-lining in our domestic economy. All of that is happening because of decisions being made which result in people with low levels of pay having their pay reduced. A report from the Irish League of Credit Unions showed that many families have had their disposable income reduced drastically and over half had less than €100 per month in disposable income. I ask the Minister to put himself in the shoes of some of those low-paid workers who were availing of Sunday premium time, who will find that the premium is removed and they will have no idea what will be in its place - it may be time in lieu, it may be time and a quarter or they may not get any extra money. They are going to lose what amounts to a significant amount of money. This will create more pressure for their families. It will push more people into poverty and make it more difficult for workers to look after their children and pay their bills. That is why I am at pains to point out that we are not talking about high-paid workers when we are discussing Sunday premium rates. We are talking about some of the lowest-paid workers in this State, which is why we will be pressing this amendment.

We have difficulties with some of the contents of this Bill. A lot of it is sensible, in terms of reforming the JLC system, to bring it into 21st century Ireland and make it fit for purpose. We do not have a difficulty with that. However, we have a major difficulty with the Minister's intention to remove the Sunday premium. There is no doubt whatsoever that this is being done at the behest of some employer organisations, under the guise of making Ireland more competitive. I do not believe that is the case. I mentioned the report of the Independent Review of Employment Regulation Orders and Registered Employment Agreement Wage Setting Mechanisms, known as the Duffy-Walsh report. Most of that report's recommendations were dismissed by Government but the authors were not able to make any connection between removing these kinds of entitlements and new jobs being created. I do not believe that this will create one single new job. It is a sop to some employers and it does not deal with the real problems businesses face. Fine Gael promised it would deal with issues such rates and upward-only rents. These are the issues the Government should focus on to protect small businesses rather than going after low-income workers, taking money from them, limiting the wages they can earn and providing relief for employers in this way. That is not going to do anything for businesses. It is interesting that the very people whose wages will be cut are the ones business people depend on to shop and make sure their businesses thrive. The whole thing is counter-productive.

I await the Minister's response but we have had this debate for a long time now. This is something which has been signalled by the Minister's party for some time and it is despicable that the Government would again go after some of the lowest-paid workers in this State. It is utterly wrong and for that reason, I will be pressing the amendment.