Emer Higgins (Dublin Mid West, Fine Gael) | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator for raising this issue. I commend him on the passion he has shown for the provision of advocacy services. The Minister for Social Protection, Deputy Humphreys, acknowledges the value of the important services the National Advocacy Service, NAS, provides to adults with disabilities throughout the country, as the Senator articulated so well. I, too, value them.

The Senator may be aware that the National Advocacy Service was established in 2010, originally as part of the Citizens Information Service. NAS was then established as a service delivery company of the Citizens Information Board and as an independent company, limited by guarantee, and a registered charity in 2014. It is one of the Citizens Information Board’s 22 service delivery companies, with services delivered under a service-level agreement with the Citizens Information Board.In 2023, just last year, NAS attended a WRC conciliation conference with SIPTU over a dispute concerning pay, as the Senator has said. Following this, the dispute was referred to the Labour Court in October and the case was heard in January this year. Neither the Citizens Information Board nor the Department of Social Protection was party to the WRC process and that is because NAS staff members are not employees of the Citizens Information Board or of the Department. They are employees of an independent company that provides important services on behalf of the Citizens Information Board.

SIPTU, on behalf of NAS staff, submitted to the Labour Court that in the period since the establishment of NAS in 2010, there has been a significant divergence between the pay and the other terms and conditions of workers versus those applicable to comparable grades employed in the citizens information services, which are also funded by CIB. The Labour Court felt the claim was well founded and requested that NAS submit a business case to the Citizens Information Board seeking to address divergences in pay with comparable workers in companies under the CIB umbrella. The business case was submitted to the CIB on 10 May 2024 and while the CIB agrees with the Labour Court recommendation regarding addressing divergences that have developed in NAS since 2010, the CIB's review of the business case has identified difficulties with the comparator grades used in the submission. I understand the board of NAS, CIB and the Department of Social Protection have agreed to implement the Labour Court recommendation in order to address pay divergences and to ensure the staff in NAS are paid the same as comparable grades in the citizens information services. However, the Labour Court recommendation did not specify which grades within the Citizens Information Services should be used as benchmark for this purpose. On 24 June, talks led by former Labour Court chair, Kevin Duffy, commenced. The purposes of the talks were to discuss how to implement the Labour Court recommendation in these circumstances and to ensure any pay agreement using Exchequer funds is based on the principle that employees who undertake demonstrable comparable work receive comparable pay.