Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I very much support the Bill. I compliment Senator Nash and the Labour Party on effectively putting forward constructive proposals over recent months. The Competition (Amendment) Act 2017 was recognised by the then Minister, Deputy Mitchell O'Connor, as being positive and she worked with all parties in the House to pass this positive contribution to employment law. A set of measures and Bills have been put forward by the Labour Party, all of which have been carefully drafted. They are thoughtful and, in most cases, they are ready to go, though there is always an openness to amendment on Committee Stage. I also acknowledge Senator Gavan's contribution in this regard because Sinn Féin has put forward proposals and worked with the Labour Party and others on them. There has been a positive dynamic in the House to address employment measures that recognise the contemporary challenges we face in respect of employment, security and the intersection with the social welfare system, which I am more aware of now as a member of the Joint Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection. I acknowledge the arrival of the Minister.

The Bill is important because bogus self-employment is not simply something that causes great loss and difficulty for individuals. Individuals who give what they have in their employment, including their energy and time, find themselves deprived of the life chances that go with a life's work. They never find themselves in a position, for example, where they are secure enough to take out a mortgage and they cannot take out private pensions. They are often denied such pensions because of gaps in their employment. The Minister will be familiar with that. While it is a separate discussion, there is a big concern with the total contributions approach that many people who laboured for years will have large gaps in their pension contributions because of periods of self-employment that were forced on them.This has consequences for individuals in terms of their life chances, security, family and ability to progress. People who are constantly on self-employment contracts do not receive acknowledgement of their work or secure progression in their employment as they do not benefit from payscales and increases in pay in recognition of experience. They do not enjoy the normal aspects of a working life that allow people to build a ladder for themselves and their families.

Bogus self-employment also has negative consequences for wider society. As previous speakers noted, this is a form of tax evasion by certain employers, which hollows out the tax base and undermines the employment relations mechanisms. Sectoral employment orders and joint labour committees, which have been among the most effective means of ensuring employees in certain sectors receive decent pay and conditions, do not apply to the self-employed. The mechanisms and standards introduced for entire sectors and which serve employers, employees and the wider public good are hollowed out when large numbers of individuals working in these sectors are removed from them by being pressed into becoming bogus self-employed.

The Bill is clear in this regard. I was struck by the reference in section 2 providing that an employment relationship exists in respect of any "contract whereby the individual agrees with a person personally to execute any work or service". In these circumstances, self-employed persons and individual contractors do not have an army of fellow employees who they are bringing into a contract. On the contrary, this is a person who is stating he or she is personally executing certain work. The original definition of self-employment used by the Revenue Commissioners made clear that what the self-employed person brings is his or her labour. Adding measures that he or she is expected to bring his or her own uniform and equipment has blurred the line. At the heart of the matter is that a person working is bringing his or her labour to an employment. The idea of a contract being agreed with a "person personally" is very good.

I acknowledge that Senator Noone spoke about circumstances in which complaints are made and in that regard, section 8 deals with disputes. However, as previous speakers noted, few self-employed persons will take a case challenging an employer's classification of him or her as self-employed because the financial and administrative strength is balanced in favour of employers. The Bill proposes not only to deal with disputes but also to have the State assume responsibility for objectively ensuring that standards apply by recognising what a state of employment is.

The Minister knows what the consequences of bogus self-employment are for the social protection system, specifically in respect of those who have gaps in their employment record, not only in terms of pension costs but also in terms of sick pay and families relying on family income supplement payments. The State incurs a significant cost both in social protection costs and revenue foregone.

The Bill should proceed quickly to Committee Stage to give Senators an opportunity to amend it. My colleagues in the Dáil who are members of the Select Committee on Employment Affairs and Social Protection will also amend it when it comes before the committee. We are ready to move forward with the Bill and I commend it to the House.