Clare Daly (Dublin Fingal, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

582. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the implication of recent court decisions in respect of Seetec and Turas Nua deducting payments from persons in receipt of social welfare payments; and the arrangements in place to refund unlawful deductions and to ensure that the practice ceases. [5484/18]

Regina Doherty (Meath East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The primary goal of the Department’s activation services is to move people from unemployment to full-time and sustained employment. All jobseekers are required to engage with the Department’s activation service and this obligation applies irrespective of whether the service is provided by the Department’s own case officers or those advisors employed by external contractors such as the JobPath providers. Failure to engage without good cause may result in the jobseeker’s payment being reduced or temporarily suspended.

Legislation provides that sanctions/penalties in the form of reduced payments may be imposed by a Deciding Officer employed by my department where recipients of jobseeker payments fail, without good cause, to comply with activation measures. Reduced rates are only applied where a jobseeker fails to engage as requested, and following at least two warnings, with the Department’s employment services.

I want to emphasise that personnel employed by the JobPath providers do not apply or recommend the application of a penalty rate of payment. They simply advise my Department if a jobseeker is failing to attend activation meetings. Officials in my Department will then contact the Jobseeker to arrange a meeting to discuss the matter directly with them.

All decisions on the application of reduced rates of payment can only be made by a Deciding Officer of the Department and are based on all the available evidence and the circumstances of each case.

The legislation underpinning the application of reduced rates of payment is provided for in the Social Welfare Act 2010 and the Jobseeker can appeal the Deciding Officer’s decision through the Social Welfare Appeals Office (SWAO).

The recent court proceedings whereby an individual sought leave for judicial review to challenge decisions taken by my Department were refused by the High Court in the judgment delivered on 26th January 2018. I am happy to advise the Deputy that there are no recent court decisions which have implications for the application of penalty rates by my Department. As I have indicated, the JobPath contractor companies have no decision-making role in the application of penalty rates and there is no basis for the suggestion that my Department is making unlawful deductions from Jobseekers' payments.

I trust this clarifies matters for the Deputy.