Aodhán Ó Ríordáin (Dublin North Central, Labour) | Oireachtas source

I appreciate the motivation of Senators in tabling the amendments. It is fair enough, and these issues should be examined in detail when dealing with legislation of this nature. I have no difficulty with this whatever. The section deals with compliance with an attachment order. The employer is required to comply with the order but is not liable for non-compliance during the first ten days. This is to allow for a situation where the person served with the order is not the person's employer, in which case the person concerned is required to notify the court accordingly. Provision is also made in subsection (4) for a situation where the debtor changes employment. Subsection (5) provides that the lapse of an order under subsection (4) does not prevent it remaining in force for other purposes.

With regard to employer and employee relations, employees are protected by unfair dismissal legislation and other employment law. The Attorney General has advised that unfair dismissal issues are already covered in Irish law and protections are adequate to deal with any issues which might arise regarding any attempt to discriminate against somebody solely on the basis of being the subject of an attachment of earnings order or, as the Senators mentioned, the possibility that a perspective employer might not employ someone because he or she is subject to an attachment of earnings order. We will monitor the situation very closely because we appreciate the statements made by Senators. Should any difficulties of this nature emerge we will take action to ensure it does not continue. It is important to say attachment of earnings orders are common in other countries such as the UK, including Northern Ireland, and Australia. Irish employers are already required to implement attachment of earnings orders for family maintenance and recovery of social protection overpayments. This is not necessarily new ground.