Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

It is good to see the Minister of State and I thank him for coming to the House. European works councils play an important role in the information and consultation of employees of multinational companies across borders. It is a very important function, underpinned by an EU directive. The directive on European works councils compels member states to put in place adequate administrative or judicial procedures in order that workers and company management can enforce all the rights and obligations deriving from the directive, but Ireland's legislation has not properly transposed the EU directive, leading to problems and issues that have been highlighted time and again.

On foot of a complaint made by SIPTU, the European Commission "has identified a number of shortcomings in Irish legislation, which fails to guarantee the right of workers' representatives, the Special Negotiating Body (a body of workers' representatives) or the European Works Council to go to a national court over disputes related to breaches of the rights and obligations under this Directive". As the Minister of State knows, this has not just appeared out of the blue. The Government was warned by the European Commission and for years, Sinn Féin Deputies and I have been calling on the Tánaiste to update the legislation governing European works councils to benefit workers and to comply with European Union law, while my party colleague Chris MacManus MEP has been working tirelessly on this matter in the European Parliament. The Brussels European Employee Relations Group, BEERG, wrote to the Minister of State's Government in 2020 and even outlined a solution prepared by Mr. Kevin Duffy, barrister and former chairman of the Labour Court. SIPTU also warned the Government about its concerns but it was ignored as well. The Government has refused to act and it has now been issued with a letter of formal notice under Article 258 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union.

As I said, this came about because SIPTU felt there was no other option but to make a complaint to the Commission because the Government had refused to act. My colleague, Denis Sheridan, from SIPTU had been in contact with the Minister of State's Department on a number of occasions and got nothing positive back when he highlighted these issues. Indeed, I have to highlight the Minister of State's own statement of just three months ago, in March of this year when, in a written reply to a parliamentary question, he stated, "My Department are satisfied that the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act, 1996 as amended fully and correctly transposes Directive 2009/38/EC into national law."I would like the Minister of State to explain that statement. To be frank, the dogs in the street knew the way the Government had transposed this law was not correct. This is something that has been highlighted for years and years. I believe it also highlights a political bias in the Department the Minister of State represents in terms of workers' rights. Anything that even touches the idea of collective bargaining is resisted on every occasion.

The good news is that at last week's meeting of the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, BEERG outlined once again the proposals from Mr. Kevin Duffy, which are very straightforward. This group believes the appropriate model of legislation should be based on the Employees (Provision of Information and Consultation) Act 2006. As the Minister of State knows, this Act provides that where a dispute arises it is first referred to the Workplace Relations Commission for mediation. If mediation is not successful the dispute is then referred to the Labour Court for a recommendation and, if the recommendation fails to solve the dispute, either party can ask the court for a binding determination. The Minister of State has a roadmap to fix this, which was highlighted by the enterprise committee's meeting just last week. This approach is seen as fitting with the well-established Irish model of industrial relations, namely, direct talks between the parties followed by mediation and, if necessary, followed by the involvement of the Labour Court.

I have some simple questions for the Minister of State. Will he explain that statement he made in March? What is now the response from this Government? What will it do now? Will this Government act to amend the legislation or is Ireland set to face massive fines from the European Union?

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank the Senator for the opportunity to provide an update on the position regarding a letter of formal notice that was adopted by the European Commission on 19 May 2022. The case concerns European works councils and the transposition of the Transnational Information and Consultation of Employees Act 1996. The 1996 Act provides for the establishment of a European works council, or other mechanisms, in community-scale undertakings and community-scale groups of undertakings for the purposes of informing and consulting employees. Community-scale undertakings are large multinationals with at least 1,000 employees across the member states and at least 150 employees in each of at least two member states.

The complaint alleges that rights under EU Directive 2009/38/EC cannot be effectively enforced in Ireland. It suggests a lack of access to justice for special negotiating bodies and European works councils, and the absence of certain dispute resolution mechanisms concerning exercise of these rights. My Department is engaging with the European Commission on foot of the complaint alleging nonconformity of Irish legislation with the directive. Department officials have also sought legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General and will engage further with the European Commission once this advice has been received.

Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

On a personal level, I kind of feel sorry for the Minister of State because in all my time doing Commencement matters this is the shortest answer I have ever seen. In effect, he has no answer for me, which is extraordinary in circumstances where this has been highlighted for years by SIPTU. I will again reference Mr. Denis Sheridan, my colleague from SIPTU, who stated, "As a consequence of the inadequate transposition of the Directive, the new Irish law made it attractive for multi-national companies to move their legal base to Ireland, in order to avoid meeting their obligations under EU law." The point is this issue is being watched all over Europe. The enterprise committee meeting last week had a huge audience of trade unionists and employers' groups watching to see when the Government will actually take action. From the answer the Minister of State has been handed to read out today, it is very clear the Department still has nothing to say.

I will give the Minister of State one final opportunity. Will he please explain his reply in March when he, in effect, said there is nothing to see here and there is no problem with how we have transposed this directive? The Minister of State is wrong. The EU Commission has clearly said he is wrong. He should at least own up to that and tell us what he will do.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The question as set out asked me what departmental processes are involved in this. The Department's involvement with the EU Commission is a process and that is exactly what I have updated the House on.

To be very clear again, the Department's position is that the provisions of the 1996 Act, as amended, meet the requirements of the directive. That is our opinion as a Government and a Department.

Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Still.

Damien English (Meath West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There is currently no evidence to support an assertion that the rights afforded to special negotiating bodies and European works councils under the statutory provisions mean there is a lack of access to justice or an absence of dispute resolution mechanisms concerning their rights. However, we will engage with the European Union, as we do. Departmental officials will continue to engage with the European Commission on this matter. Should any amendments to the procedures be deemed necessary as a result of this engagement, they will be effected as quickly as possible. That is the process we are involved in.

We will respond to the Commission by 15 July. The Senator asked me for a timeline. That is the timeline and legal process we are involved in. It is as far as I can go today. Naturally, after our initial response to the Commission, if there are further questions or issues to be addressed, we will also do that and we will engage in a satisfactory manner. That is the process we are involved in and it is important we see it out.

Paul Gavan (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is an extraordinary statement.