Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I welcome the Minister of State. I warmly commend the Labour Party on tabling the motion. It is very important. This is the type of emergency measure we should be seeing. I have seen a lot of other things we are told are urgent moving through the House, sometimes questionably. This is the type of thing that is urgent. It relates directly to the Covid-19 circumstance and it also addresses a long-standing massive gap in Ireland's labour legislation.

I am incredibly disappointed by the Government's amendment. There is absolutely nothing in the motion that should not be accepted. In fact, this is not even a Bill that the Government is seeking to postpone. The Labour Party motion simply asks that consultation be expedited. Does the Government not agree with expediting this issue and recognising it as urgent? It seems extraordinary because there is absolutely nothing in the three reasonable points with which to disagree and nothing that ties the Government's hands on any consultation process. In fact, it encourages a consultation process. It is extraordinarily disappointing.

I am particularly disappointed with the last line of the Government's amendment, which points to the nub of the issue. We heard in the Dáil that the Government simply wants to delay this so we can really work on statutory sick pay and get it right, but the very last line of the amendment states the Government should consider other options for change that might be available and might not make it difficult for employers to remain viable. This is stating the Government does not want to introduce statutory sick pay and is looking to do something else instead. This is what is in the Government's amendment. I will strongly oppose it. The Government is looking at alternatives to statutory sick pay.

Just so we know, others have listed that in Belgium workers are entitled to 30 days' sick leave at 100%, in Finland it is nine days, and in the Netherlands there are two years of sick leave at 70%. There are five other countries that do not have a statutory entitlement but, in fact, these countries have collective agreements. These are countries such as Denmark which have even stronger entitlements to sick leave. They do not have statutory entitlement because they do not need it because they have proper recognition of collective bargaining and union rights.

With regard to why we need this to be statutory and no alternative will do, I will quote from an interview on "Prime Time" on RTÉ with the director of, AA Euro Group, one of the main agencies that provide staff. He stated the agency did not pay sick pay and that the legal requirement for employers in the private sector in Ireland is that they do not have to pay sick pay. He said it would come down to an agency directive, and if the factories were paying sick pay, by all means the agency would do exactly the same thing because it would be able to charge for it. He also stated it is a legislative issue for the Government. He stated that if there were a level playing field in legislation, they would all be in the same boat and would definitely pay sick pay if that were the case. This is the meat industry telling us it will only do this if it is required to do so.Let us be clear and not have meat barons and other companies hiding behind the small and micro business owner that we have heard about. We must protect small and micro businesses and we have mechanisms to do so. The Labour Party motion explicitly provides for a series of easy to access, targeted supports to employers who can demonstrate inability to pay sick leave. They are addressing that. The inability-to-pay mechanism is one we have to ensure there should never be a case where a business goes under because it is not able to pay a statutory entitlement for a period. The inability-to-pay mechanism is one of the measures we already have because we recognise that businesses go through hard times. We help businesses when they are struggling or when they are in ill health and we hope that they will recover. The least we could do is to do the same for the workers. If we are giving the many and lengthy supports to business we have discussed in this House, we must also show that we value and care for workers. We have heard about them being essential workers.

There have been two very negative signals this week, one being the frankly pathetic increase of 10 cent in the minimum wage at a time when we know 23% of Irish workers are in the low-paid bracket, 40% of workers are in insecure work, and according to the 2017 figures, 44% are at risk of poverty if they were not getting social transfers. That is the level of economic vulnerability and poverty that we have among workers in Ireland and we have chosen not to increase the minimum wage, not to include adequacy as a key factor in the minimum wage and now we are saying sick pay is not a concern when we know it is a major factor for insecure workers.

We know many of the meat barons were on the rich list last year. Farmers were protesting outside one meat factory because although it had made a profit of €3 million it would not give a decent payment to farmers. Let us not have these people hiding behind the small businesses. The State is the main customer of the companies providing early years education, so the State can make sick pay a provision for those doing that most essential work that was even required at the height of the crisis.

I will conclude by coming back to Dr. Ronan Glynn, who as deputy CMO affirmed that whatever measures need to be in place should be put in place to ensure that workers who are sick can afford not to attend work. I respectfully suggest that the Minister for Business, Enterprise and Innovation would be wise to listen to the fact that he can put social measures in place. Rather than asking NPHET to change its scientific information and to change the real facts in terms of medical, health and scientific facts around a virus, on which it can only report to us, it cannot change the facts. Instead, for example, he can take action on those measures if he is as concerned with poverty as he claims. He could take action on issues of poverty which are within his remit, for example, addressing a decent increase in the minimum wage, actual measures which would mean people are not in fear regarding their employment. We do not even have sick pay for one day. I accept that once a person goes to a doctor perhaps he or she can get the Covid illness benefit. I commend the Government on bringing in the illness benefit early. Other countries were slower to recognise the need to introduce it. However, people do not have a day off to go to the doctor. That is the problem right now. That is how urgent this is. If one waits two, three or four days before one can take a day off to go to the doctor, one may have been spreading the virus during that time. This is dangerous. Sick pay is not a gift to workers; it is not a perk, it is effectively dangerous not to have it.

I strongly commend the Labour Party on this motion. I am pleased we are continuing the tradition. Senator Gavan and others in the Independent Group have a strong tradition in this House of strong, good measures and co-operation on workers' rights which I hope we can continue. It is not too late. I urge the Minister of State, Deputy English, to withdraw the amendment and perhaps consider accepting the motion. Nothing ties his hands. The Minister of State can decide what expediting might mean. He can provide measures to employers and simply look to the force majeureprovision in the Parental Leave Act, which is different regarding parental leave.