Sheila Terry (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I welcome the Minister of State. I raise this issue so that I can learn from the reply. It arises in response to the European Court of Justice's ruling this week that women can be paid less than men on the basis of length of service in a firm, even if they must take time off to bring up children. They also found that length of service is a legitimate criteria by which to award higher pay rates to certain workers.

My initial reaction to the ruling may be wrong — I have been told I may have misinterpreted it. I feel it discriminates against women who take time off to have children. As I stated in the House recently, we have worked hard over the years to improve maternity leave and parental leave for mothers and fathers who wish to take time off to be with their children. This decision will discriminate against mothers or fathers who take time off.

I accept that if a mother chooses to take leave of absence, perhaps for five years, that period minus the legitimate maternity leave to which she is entitled should not be taken into consideration when awarding pay, particularly when this depends on length of service. I am confused in this regard. I have always believed that the principle of equal pay for equal work helped to remove discrimination against women in the workplace. The fact that one has spent a long period working in a job does not necessarily mean that one has gained great experience. I heard recently of a young teacher with very little experience who was able to carry out the duties required when a promotion was offered. The promotion involved additional pay for doing certain jobs after school hours. However, the young teacher did not get the job, while an older teacher did. It was thought that based on length of service he or she was more entitled to it, even though the younger teacher had been doing the work.

I hope the Minister of State will be able to explain to me in plain English the impact of this ruling on Irish workers, particularly women. It should be clarified so that I will understand it and be able to interpret the ruling correctly when we have a debate on this matter in the House.

Frank Fahey (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The real issue behind this court case is the gender pay gap. More than 30 years after the introduction of equal pay legislation, a significant gap between the average pay of men and women remains, not just in Ireland but throughout the European Union. Women in the EU earn 15% less than men and progress has been slow in closing the gender pay gap with men, according to a recent European Commission report.

Twenty years ago, the gender pay gap in Ireland was about 25%, while ten years ago it was still over 20%. The latest statistics show that the gender pay gap is still around 12 to 13%. While significant progress has been made, it remains a cause for concern in an age which fully endorses gender equality.

The Government believes that a multifaceted approach is required to address this complex issue. This is the approach we have taken with a good degree of success, although research has presented us with new challenges. In 2003, Irish research on solutions to the gender pay gap found that increased labour market participation by women was important. It found that while the arrival of children in the family had little impact on the labour market participation of a man, a woman with identical qualifications and experience would typically have nine years less labour market participation by the age of 47.

These findings led to a series of policy recommendations by a working group, the most important of which were that the Government should continue to develop child care services; that the national minimum wage should be reviewed regularly; and that there is a need for better maternity and parental leave. We have made considerable progress on these key recommendations which has, no doubt, contributed to the reduction in our gender pay gap to just over 12%.

In the year 2000, Ireland was far behind the rest of Europe in the development of child care services. However, as the House will be aware, we have made up on that considerably. Over 41,000 new centre-based child care places have been created in the past seven years.

The issue of affordability of child care is a key topic. All parents in Ireland are assisted with the costs of caring for their children through significant increases in child benefit which is now a minimum of €150 per month per child under 18 years of age. We have recently added a special annual payment of €1,000 for each child aged under six years of age. We have also increased paid and unpaid maternity leave to a similar extent. This development has also been complemented by parental, adoptive and carer's leave. It is a major support for women in the labour force who have child care and-or other responsibilities.

Research such as this shows that the gender pay gap is every bit as complicated as we all believe. If we are to bring it right down to parity, policy makers and social partners need to look at the many different influences through education policy, employment practices, social supports and career development. We also need to find a multifaceted response which will enable us to achieve the goal of parity.

The Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform is in contact with the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Finance about the implications of the judgment of the European Court of Justice in the Cadman case. It is too early to say what the full implications of the case are. However, a preliminary assessment indicates that the judgment does not represent a major change to the case law as was understood up to now. The European Court of Justice has characterised the judgment as containing only a clarification of the case law in thisfield.