Katherine Zappone (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I have a number of amendments tabled and I will take them one by one. As the Minister of State is aware, I have welcomed the legislation and I acknowledge his innovation in this area. The amendments I have tabled aim to ensure the Low Pay Commission delivers on its mission as designed. The Minister of State referred to several issues in his Second Stage speech, including references to making work pay, balancing fair and sustainable pay rates and yet allowing employers to continue to create quality jobs. He also said that the low-paid would share in the economic recovery. To achieve that end, the commission needs to consider all the relevant factors when making its recommendations. Many of my amendments highlight that other factors ought to be considered before making any recommendations while others should be considered subsequent to putting forward the proposals.

I and Senator van Turnhout have tabled amendment No. 7. The Bill refers to the need for "job creation" but we propose that this be amended to refer to the need for "quality job creation". It amounts to adding the word "quality". As it stands, the reference in the Bill to the need for job creation could be interpreted to imply a potential trade-off between job creation and fair wages and I am concerned about embedding that assumption into the legislation. Fair wages should never be sacrificed for the creation of jobs that are exploitative and unsustainable. This would be counter-productive to the social and economic goals of the legislation. I expect the Minister of State shares these views, regardless of whether he shares them in terms of this amendment. This is why I am suggesting the wording should be changed to read the need for "quality job creation". It is to ensure this assumption becomes explicit within the context of the legislation.

Amendment No. 9 proposes to add certain text. This section has to do with what the commission should have regard to when making a recommendation to the Minister. Several measures have been included in the Bill but we suggest more should be included, including a reference to the cost of living. This is a really important amendment to me and I hope the Minister of State will consider accepting it. It is essential that the commission would be expected to consider the cost of living as experienced by workers when making its recommendations regarding the minimum rate of pay. The question of adequacy of income from employment is central to the issue and should be given more weight in the legislation. I note that in the Bill, as it stands, the proposed section 10C(3)(g) stipulates that the commission should consider the likely effect of its proposal on the cost of living, but this means the commission is not being asked to consider how the cost of living impacts on the minimum wage. The commission should consider this as it thinks about how it ought to influence the establishment of the minimum wage. As it stands in the Bill, if the Government sets the minimum wage at another level, it may not take cognisance of what impact it would have on the cost of living and I do not believe that is sufficient. This amendment, which has been endorsed by the National Women's Council of Ireland, is essential to ensure the cost of living is considered prior to making recommendations.

Amendment No. 10 seeks to ensure the commission would have regard to equality and gender equality. Senator Reilly referred to this already in her comments. This has to do with promoting equality and gender equality. As the Minister of State is aware, low pay affects women especially. Over 60% of workers on low pay are women and predominantly female employment sectors, such as hospitality and retail, have been at the forefront of the aggressive casualisation of the labour market through zero-hour contracts - I realise the Minister of State is looking at that in another context - and the erosion of sustainable and secure employment earnings. As a result, the gender pay gap is widening. How can we intentionally narrow that gap - I presume that is a policy objective of the Government - if is not explicitly targeted in our legislation? The crisis of low pay is alarmingly gendered. It is crucial, therefore, that the Low Pay Commission reflects a strong gender perspective in its analysis and recommendation, but I do not see that in the Bill as it stands. The amendment proposes that the Low Pay Commission would be mandated to consider gender equality and other equality factors when making its recommendation. Another point in favour of the amendment is that it could be considered appropriate in light of the new positive-duty obligation on public bodies to ensure a regard for promoting equality and human rights in all their work.

Amendment No. 11 proposes to add the text "in-work poverty levels". Again, Senator Reilly referred to this idea in her contribution.Should the commission have regard to in-work poverty levels before it makes recommendations on a change to the minimum wage? It must be recognised that there is a serious issue of in-work poverty in Ireland. In 2014, 16% of those living below the poverty line were in employment, which is unacceptable. Work needs to pay, as the Minister of State said in his opening remarks, and those who work should not need to rely on continual State support to supplement their income from employment. Again, I know that is an objective the Minister of State would share. The Low Pay Commission will have the capacity and expertise to advise the Minister on best practice to ensure work pays adequately, and that is why I propose we include in the Bill the consideration of in-work poverty before the commission makes recommendations.

Amendment No. 12 refers to the social and economic impact of minimum wage levels and provides that the associated cost or benefit to the State be taken into consideration by the commission. This would allow the commission to make a more comprehensive analysis of the costs and benefits to the Exchequer associated with higher or lower wage levels. Again, as the Minister of State is aware, there is a considerable cost to the Exchequer from low pay. It results in reduced tax revenues and increased social protection spending through payments like the family income supplement, for example. As we know, a growing number of workers qualify for FIS, and while is it an important payment which provides essential income support to families on low pay, it comes at a considerable cost to the State. Essentially, it is often assumed that wage increases must wait for the economic recovery. However, economic growth occurs because of wage increases, especially in the lower income brackets, as spending is more likely to stimulate local growth. I ask the Minister of State to consider including these considerations in the Bill.

The last amendment in this grouping provides that the commission would consider the likely effect of the proposed order. I have argued that many issues should be looked at in the process of shaping any proposal on the minimum wage level. Once the proposal has been formulated, the commission should then look at the potential impact of that proposal, examining what would happen down the line if changes were made. We are arguing that additional considerations should be added to the list of components already in the Bill in terms of generating a proposal.