Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent) | Oireachtas source

I move amendment No. 1:

In page 25, between lines 27 and 28, to insert the following:

“Further provision with respect to employees

558S.A rescue plan for an eligible company shall not contain provision that provides for either or both of the following— (a) a reduction in the number of employees after the date from which the rescue plan would come into effect under section 558ZB or 558ZE, as the case may be, unless this has been done by agreement with employees and their recognised trade union, save in the case of voluntary redundancy, and

(b) a failure to honour a collective agreement.”.

The amendment is important. It concerns cases where a rescue plan is put in place. One of the reasons we support rescue plans being put in place is we recognise that small and micro companies are an important part of our community and social fabric. Indeed, small and micro companies have played a vital role for many communities throughout the challenges of the past year and a half. I am in favour of us rescuing and seeking to support them. One of the reasons those companies are so important is they are employers. In small and micro companies, there is a company owner and then company employees. The employees are part of the fabric of the community and society. They play a crucial role. Their livelihoods feed into the well-being of society and the community as a whole.

We are supporting small and micro companies because we want to support their employees. In that context, this is a positive amendment, which I hope the Minister of State will consider. The amendment seeks to ensure that any conversation about a rescue process is not just with the owners of a business. It seeks to ensure that such conversations reflect positive dialogue with the employees of a business. I am sure other Members cite examples of when employees have stepped up to help or save a company they work for.It is appropriate and important that their stake and voice in this is recognised. That is why the amendment, which was first proposed by Deputy O'Reilly in the Dáil, is important. I was struck by how constructive it is and that is why I have tabled it in this House which has a very good record of supporting workers' rights legislation right across the floor. The amendment suggests that a rescue plan for an eligible company shall not contain provisions that provide for a reduction in the number of employees unless this is being done with the agreement of the employees and their recognised trade union, except in the case of voluntary redundancy. The other aspect of the amendment is that a rescue plan should not be an excuse to fail to honour a collective agreement. It is when times are most difficult that measures like a collective agreement or dialogue between employees and employers are most needed. It is not an excuse to abandon the principles of dialogue and working together. Those are the times when proper collective agreements that envisage scenarios of potential redundancy and look to how that can be done in a good and ethical way are centre stage. It is when it comes to the question of whether there is a need to downsize the number of employees that dialogue with workers and their representatives is most important.

I hope the Minister of State will accept the amendment. It is very much in tune with the Bill but it brings a very important voice into the rescue process.