Richard Bruton (Dublin North Central, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank Senators Averil Power and Jillian van Turnhout for tabling the motion which I am happy to support. It is an important contribution to a debate on how we raise living standards and approach many issues in the industrial relations sphere. I take issue with one thing Senator Averil Power said. She gave the impression, maybe not intentionally, that most of the new jobs are low paid jobs. That is not true. We have 105,000 extra people at work in the past three years, 91% of those are full-time jobs. Part-time working is in decline. Part-time working overall fell by 14,500 in the past two years. More significant than that is the fact that part-time underemployed, in other words people who were working part-time but were not happy to work under part-time, has reduced by 41,000 in the past two years, down 26%. Much of the involuntary part-time working is in significant decline. Long-term unemployment has come down 40% in the past three years, down 61,000. We are making an impact on imbedded poverty in many of these areas.

I thank Senator Power for paying tribute to the efforts in employment. I believe that creating employment is one of the central anti-poverty measures that we can take. We still have almost 10% unemployment. Statistics show that the risk of being in poverty at work is one-seventh that of those who are out of work. Therefore, getting people back to work is very significant. Of the 105,000 extra jobs, 40,000 have come from Enterprise Ireland and IDA companies, which are high paying employments. Some 8,000 are in education, 10,000 are in professional and scientific, nearly 8,000 are in construction. I accept there is increasing work in tourism. There is no doubt that much of that is on more irregular earnings. That has always been a part of the sector. It is a mixed sector as Senator Averil Power pointed out. There is irregularity in some of its work patterns.

Clearly we are getting growth across the spectrum. It is clear from the social breakdown that every occupation is experiencing employment growth. We must keep employment growth central to our discussion on how we improve society. We want to get more people back at work and people enjoying a higher standard of living. Those are jewel objectives. Given that we have 10% unemployment we have to keep those objectives as part of what we are trying to achieve.

I reject totally the suggestion from Senator David Cullinane, who is not present, that we have done nothing but increase inequality. Those jobs in themselves have greatly reduced the problems of inequality and also some of the direct measures we took by restoring the minimum wage, the JLCs, the registered employment agreements, protecting temporary agency workers, establishing the low pay commission, establishing a study into zero-hour contracts, all of which address practical issues such as the gap in collective bargaining legislation through which a horse and four was driven by the Ryanair decision of the courts. We have been diligent in rebuilding protection for workers and, particularly, for vulnerable workers. In terms of the minimum wage, the Minister of State, Deputy Gerald Nash, will set up a forum later in the year.

The living wage is a concept. It is not a legally binding concept, it is a concept where employers sign up voluntarily to such an approach. It is welcome. Senator Labhrás Ó Murchú said talent is the key to all growth. Employers should be setting out to create an environment where they maximise the potential and protect their workforce because that is the key to growth.

I welcome the approach of presenting dignity, providing development opportunities and improving the living standards of workers. That is something for which we must strive but, as the motion recognised, we have to do it in a balanced way. We have to recognise what is the position of employers. As Senator Averil Power recognised, some employers have gone through an appalling period. Some 81,000 businesses closed during the crash. One has only to think of the life's work that was put into building up those businesses, yet they are gone. We have to strike a balance. Congress is offering a charter and using that in a process of industrial relations development in the coming years is important.

Senator Brian Ó Domhnaill pointed to the UK and its decision today to increase the national minimum wage. It calls it the living wage but it is an increase in the national minimum wage. It is an interesting measure. However, there are also other things that people will want to look at. For example, it is withdrawing many of its social welfare benefits, and student grants. There is a whole shift away from welfare, cutting welfare and increasing the minimum wage. It is an interesting approach and one that people will examine but it has a very definite philosophy. One has to examine the package, not simply the headline.

Across the actual programme, on the wage levels we have done much to protect and restore work. As Senator Hildegarde Naughton said on zero-hour contracts, we have a different provision. We guarantee that if people are on zero-hour contracts they must get at least 25% of the wage or 15 hours. I do not think zero-hour contracts are such a widespread practice in Ireland as elsewhere. The study will throw up some elements that need to be examined as to the pattern of working in some sectors and how we can better protect it. One thing that is different from the UK is that it does not have REAs that can establish decent working standards in sectors where employers are in a position to pay. An REA is sanctioned and collectively endorsed by the Labour Court and signed into an order, making it effectively law, by me as Minister or a future Minister.It is something different and creates a framework which allows the development of living wage concepts. The striking down of them was very damaging in the short term, for example, in the area of procurement, where we were potentially very vulnerable in the absence of an REA, to very low wage conditions in public contracts bids.

We are examining the issue of unfair hours, to which we will return when the study is finished. All sides have recognised that we have moved significantly to introduce a balanced measure on collective bargaining and there is something in it for everybody. It gives employers more certainty and workers, in cases in which an employer does not recognise workers' right to collective bargaining, the opportunity to go to the Labour Court to have realistic conditions provided by order, if the employer is not providing a comparable rate of pay or conditions to those in similar types of employment elsewhere, unionised or non-unionised. It also protects workers from victimisation in the workplace, which was one of the issues raised. It is balanced legislation.

Respect for people at work is one of the goals we have been trying to achieve. The reforms we have brought through in the Workplace Relations Bill bring together the five disparate bodies engaged to try to have a more streamlined process for dealing with workers' complaints. Much of the problem was due to long delays, multiple channels of application and the fact that it had become very legalistic. As Senator Marie Moloney said, employers were coming in with an army of lawyers. These factors made it more inaccessible and we are trying to simplify it to have a quicker turnaround.

On the issue of public procurement, in the Workplace Relations Commission we made it easier in that if the National Employment Rights Authority, NERA, was pursuing cases, one could go not just to the employer but also to the subcontractors in a public procurement contract if they were not honouring the terms of an REA. We are moving towards having more social clauses in contracts. A number have been built into contracts. The Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform, Deputy Brendan Howlin, has been keen on this and they have been included in school programmes, Grangegorman programmes and so on. They have had the dual effect of ensuring people who have been unemployed are given an opportunity and building in a certain proportion of apprenticeships.

As a community, we must set an objective in the coming years of returning to full employment. As Senator Gerard P. Craughwell said, people need to have the dignity of a job to go to, as it gets lives back on track. One estimate is that 200,000 people need to get their lives back on track through a concerted effort to achieve a national objective of full employment. It is not a soft or easy road but will demand many changes in how we do public policy, not least in education. If we put our hands on our hearts and ask whether the education system is equipping young people with modern skills, there are weaknesses and we need to make changes. If we want to equip the next generation with the skills they will need to cope in a globally competitive environment, we need to do better and introduce changes.

Setting a target of full employment would force us to iron out issues that might stand in our way, of which there are many. We need to engage in this important debate. We need people's living standards to rise, not by imposing obligations with which the system cannot comply but by way of a virtuous circle, by success and innovation in the workplace, leading to higher living standards and improvements in employment. We have the opportunity to create such a virtuous circle. There have been moments in our history when we have had the opportunity to create such a virtuous circle and keep steady in how we manage our affairs in order that the circle can fulfil its potential. The opportunity has come our way again and we must seize it. While we are starting from a difficult position, with many people still out of work, we have the opportunity to seize it if we take the right approach.

I thank the Senator for proposing the motion which is very constructive in this environment. Talent will be the key. Ireland will win by the way it orchestrates talent, builds new businesses and an innovative environment and fosters workplaces that allow people to fulfil their potential. That is how we will be able to deliver the services we want and have money back in communities. We have embarked, for the first time, on our regional enterprise strategy. It is a genuine, bottom-up strategy. We are sitting down with all players, involving our agencies, getting the best ideas, having competitive calls and giving people the chance to reshape their regions. That is the way we must go. This has been a very good debate. We must ensure we grow a strong economy that can provide full employment. That would give us the avenue to do so much in other areas.

Because we have been successful in getting people back to work in recent years, as we approach the budget there are resources to address the damage suffered in parts of our system. While Senator Gerard P. Craughwell is right to say there may have been problems with the terms and conditions under which SNAs were employed, it is a major change to be able to write a cheque and say we will have 610 extra special needs assistants in place in schools by September. The Minister for Education and Skills, Deputy Jan O’Sullivan, has addressed the issue and is seeking more continuity and workflow. That is included in the decision she has recommended to the Government, which has been approved.

I thank the House for arranging this debate. We will return to the issue again and again and can progressively build on the agenda set out.