Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 28 Jun 1944

Vol. 94 No. 8

Supplementary Estimates, 1944-45. - Vote 59—Unemployment Insurance and Unemployment Assistance.

I move:

That a supplementary sum not exceeding £10 be granted to defray the Charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending 31st March, 1945, for salaries and expenses in connection with unemployment insurance and employment exchanges (including contributions to the Unemployment Fund), unemployment assistance, the special register of agricultural and turf workers, and insurance against intermittent unemployment for certain services in connection with food allowances (9 Edw. 7, c. 7); 10 and 11 Geo. 5, c. 30; 11 Geo. 5, c. 1; 11 and 12 Geo. 5, c. 15; 12 Geo. 5, c. 7; No. 17 of 1923; Nos. 26 and 59 of 1924; No. 21 of 1926; No. 33 of 1930; Nos. 44 and 46 of 1933; No. 38 of 1935; No. 2 of 1938; No. 28 of 1939; No. 4 of 1940; No. 3 of 1941; No. 7 of 1942; and No. 20 of 1943) and for expenses in connection with the provision of labour for harvest work.

Deputies are aware that anxiety has been expressed from some districts concerning the possibility of a shortage of local labour for the saving of the harvest. For the purpose of endeavouring to provide for the requirements of farmers in districts where the shortage of local labour for harvest work may arise, we propose to introduce a scheme designed to arrange for the temporary supply of labour for harvest work to these districts from the congested areas of north-west, west and south-west where men, who are not required for harvest work in their own districts, may be available. The possibility of transferring labour for temporary agricultural employment from one district to another depends upon the provision of travelling expenses, the prospect of employment at remunerative rates and the availability of local lodging accommodation. The purpose of the scheme is to provide these facilities for workers travelling for harvest work from State funds. It was for the purpose of enabling those funds to be provided that this Supplementary Estimate was required.

It is proposed that men who are transferred for employment from congested areas to districts where there may be a shortage of local labour for agricultural work will be paid, out of State funds, free rail or bus fares from their homes to the places where they are going to take employment; that, in addition, they will be given an expenses allowance of 5/- for the journey; that while they are employed at the harvest work they will receive from State funds a board and lodging allowance of 4/- per day; and that, subject to their completion of their contract of employment, they will also be given free rail or bus travel to their homes, plus an allowance for out-of-pocket expenses of 5/-. It is proposed that farmers who employ these temporary workers under this scheme for harvest work, must guarantee to them a minimum rate of wages of 1/2 per hour worked, and 1/6 per hour worked in excess of 54 hours a week. They must also make arrangements to provide them with suitable board and lodging, for which the workers concerned will pay a moderate charge. They are, as I have mentioned, being allowed 4/- per day from State funds, for the purpose of helping to defray their board and lodging expenses.

A scheme of this kind, which is largely experimental and the full effects of which it is impossible to foresee, depends for its success upon the fullest co-operation of the farmers and the workers. It is contemplated that farmers who require men under the scheme for their harvest work, over and above the workers that are available to them locally, should notify their requirements as early as possible, so that arrangements may be made to approach the men, residing in the congested districts, who may be willing to undertake the work.

Forms of application for workers under the scheme will be available, on application, from the tillage inspector or tillage supervisor, from the employment exchanges or branch employment offices and at post offices. It is contemplated that a farmer who requires labour under the scheme would state on an application form the number of men he will require, in addition to those obtainable locally, and the periods for which he will require them. He must undertake, when completing the form, to employ the number of workers specified by him who are sent to him under the scheme. He must undertake also to pay at least the minimum rate of wages prescribed and must guarantee that suitable board and lodging will be available at a moderate charge.

When the needs of the farmers for men, in the areas where local labour is scarce, are thus made known, arrangements will be made to allocate to them men from those areas which broadly correspond with the congested districts of the west, north-west and south-west, whose services are not required for harvest work in their own districts.

Men from those areas will be asked to co-operate in the scheme by notifying their desire to participate to the nearest local offices of the Department of Industry and Commerce. On receipt of notification from men willing to make themselves available for employment under the scheme, a register of such men will be formed and from that register the requirements of the farmers needing help will be supplied. It is intended that every possible step will be taken to ensure that only good harvest workers will be sent to employment under the scheme; but it will, of course, be appreciated that the local officers of the Department of Industry and Commerce may have difficulty in determining the suitability of workers and that no guarantee can be given in the matter.

The success of the scheme will depend on the publicity given to it, as well as on the co-operation of the farmers and workers concerned. If this Estimate is passed, arrangements will be made to publicise the scheme as early as possible, for the purpose of bringing to the farmers of the districts in which a shortage of local labour is anticipated the possibility of securing workers under this scheme and for the purpose of bringing to the attention of the workers in congested districts the facilities that are available in connection with employment of this kind. It is impossible to estimate with any accuracy the number of workers who may be dealt with under the scheme, and the estimate has been based on the assumption that 2,000 workers will be employed under it and will, therefore, require to be recouped their travelling expenses and to receive also the proposed contribution to their board and lodging expenses.

I am sure that all Parties in the House will appreciate the desirability of taking every practicable measure to ensure that no difficulties will arise in saving the harvest by reason of a scarcity of labour, and that we can rely upon their co-operation in endeavouring to ensure that this scheme for the transfer of labour from congested areas for harvest work will be given every chance of success. I again emphasise that the success of the scheme depends on the willing co-operation of both farmers and men concerned. It is particularly important that farmers should not lightly fill in application forms for labour, without appreciating that, when they sign the form, they are entering into a contract to employ the number of workers which they specify, at the rate of wages which I have outlined—1/2 per hour for a 54 hour week, and 1/6 per hour for overtime.

There is a possibility, of course, that difficulties may arise in individual localities. The intention is that those difficulties, should they arise, will be met as well as they can be met by the tillage inspectors, who are being retained in the service of the Department of Agriculture for a longer period than would otherwise be necessary, in order to supervise the administration of this scheme.

Is the 54 hour week part of the contract—that is to say, if a farmer takes a man for part of the period, is he guaranteeing a 54 hour week?

No: he has to guarantee 1/2 per hour's employment, and 1/6 per hour worked in excess of 54.

But the guarantee does not go further than an hourly rate? There is no weekly minimum?

Has the Minister any idea of the particular period for which a farmer would be expected to take a man, before he would be given facilities?

For whatever period he requires the labour. The scheme will operate from August 1st to the end of October; in other words, the State is undertaking to provide this free travelling and lodging allowance only in respect of that three months' period.

Men could be obtained for a week's work or a fortnight's work?

A week, a fortnight, or three weeks.

Did I understand the Minister to say that the scheme will end on October 31st?

I wonder is the Minister wise in that? I think this is not only a desirable but a necessary scheme. Of course it is experimental. I suggest that the Minister ought not to make October 31st a hard and fast rule, because if we were unfortunate enough to run into bad weather, harvesting operations in certain districts would not end then, but might go on until the end of November. That could happen. I would not like the Minister's hands to be tied to a particular date. Deputy Allen and other Deputies will agree that October 31st is somewhat early. Having regard to the great acreage of cereals this year, and the limited amount of machinery available for cutting and threshing, particularly in what is known as the main tillage counties, the work of farmers will extend beyond October 31st. The Minister has fixed the scheme on an hourly basis and, comparatively speaking, is ensuring that the men will get decent remuneration. One difficulty, which I dare say has occurred to the Minister and his advisers, is that at that particular time of the year, except in the case of large farmers, they would not require additional help for long periods. I am afraid that difficulty is going to arise, but it probably will be met by the help of the tillage inspectors, many of whom have now a good grasp of their work and know the districts in which they operate. Another difficulty will be the gap between finishing with one farmer and taking up work with another. If a man gets a week or a fortnight's work on one farm, and if there is a lag of two or three days before going to another farm, that is going to react on the man. Another difficulty concerns lodging. I did not understand from the Minister's statement that it covered points where a farmer would provide board and lodging. That is the most desirable thing that could happen. In that event what would happen to the 4/- a day allowance given to the worker? As far as possible it should be urged on farmers, in their own interests, to make a supreme effort to provide board and lodging as it will be impossible to provide board and lodging elsewhere. In many cases men will be far removed from provincial towns, and even when close to towns, it is not easy for agricultural workers to get board and lodgings now. This scheme is not only desirable but essential, but the points I referred to are ones to which the Minister might give further attention. It would be well to extend the date beyond October 31st and to do everything possible to prevent a lag or waste of time between the transfer from one farm to another.

One point that may create difficulty is that the ordinary farmer will find it difficult to ascertain in advance at what particular time he will require additional labour. It will be very hard for him to state in advance when the corn will be ripe and ready for harvesting and on what week he will require labour. The average farmer may find it difficult to guarantee the wages provided in the scheme for the period beyond that during which he requires the labour. I wonder if there is any solution of that difficulty. I welcome this proposal as a very desirable experiment. It may not work as satisfactorily as the Minister hopes, but it has the goodwill and the approval of all who have considered the position. The Minister can be assured that all sides will co-operate to make it a success.

I agree that it would be desirable to extend the date to November or later because the harvest may not be all gathered in and in certain areas farmers may find a difficulty in getting labour for threshing. I wonder if beet pulling or potato lifting comes under the definition of "harvesting". If so, work could be carried on until a later date than the one mentioned. There are snags in the scheme. As the Minister pointed out, such a scheme cannot work without the goodwill of farmers and workers. That is the key to the problem. I see many difficulties arising if there is not co-operation. If farmers need labour they should not merely employ men on dry days and leave them idle on wet days. This scheme cannot work without goodwill on both sides. The type of farmers who need extra labour are not the ordinary tillage farmers who employ men all the year round. They are non-tillage farmers and many of them have no facilities for boarding and lodging workers. These workers should be advised to bring bicycles to the farms as they may have to travel three or four miles to and from work. Otherwise, the scheme is a good one and deserves the co-operation of all Parties as well as farmers and workers.

With regard to the period in which the scheme will operate there will be no insuperable difficulty in having it extended if it should appear necessary that an extension was desirable. The Minister for Agriculture was of opinion that the period to October 31 would suffice. It will be appreciated that it is merely intended to provide under this scheme labour over and above local labour available to meet the peak need as it were of the harvest season. If, however, because of weather conditions or other circumstances, there is a necessity to extend the scheme, the matter can be considered. The organisation of the supply of labour to meet the needs of a group of farmers in a locality will be one of the main functions of the tillage inspectors, who will be in charge of the actual administration of the scheme. They will endeavour to ensure that there will be no gap in the movements of workers, and that, as the labour needs of one farmer are met, the workers concerned will move to meet the needs of another farmer. There may be difficulty in ensuring perfect arrangements in every district. That will be a matter which will have the personal attention of the inspectors.

It will, of course, be open to a farmer, and I agree with Deputy Morrissey that it is desirable, to provide the board and lodging for the workers concerned in their own buildings. It is not intended, however, that they should provide the board and lodging free of charge. The 4/- per day is a State contribution towards the cost of the worker's board and lodging, and if the farmer provides the board and lodging for the worker then the farmer can make whatever reasonable charge is appropriate for the service. The worker is being put in the position that he will have his board and lodging provided more or less free by the State, and that the whole of the amount that he earns for his work will be available for him. Difficulties will undoubtedly arise in some areas in providing suitable lodging accommodation, and that is one of the problems which have to be faced in connection with any scheme of this kind. So far as the scheme is concerned, the obligation is put upon the farmer who is employing the labourer to ensure that there is suitable lodging available, but we can undertake to give to the farmers the active co-operation of the tillage inspectors in helping them to locate suitable houses in which lodging can be procured.

I appreciate that farmers may have difficulty in determining the exact date upon which their labour needs will exceed the local labour supply, but in circumstances such as we have to deal with here they will have to make the best estimate they can, and if it does mean that they have men in their employment a day or a few days earlier than they would require them, because of the fact that they have to be drawn from long distances, that is only a small part of the problem which they have to face. It is to help these farmers to face the problem of saving their crops when they know there is not sufficient local labour available that the scheme is required.

All forms of agricultural work come under the scheme. It is a matter for the farmer to decide whether he wants a worker under the scheme. He knows what he contracts to do if he takes a worker under the scheme. He must provide board and lodging for him and pay the minimum rates prescribed in the scheme. It is assumed that farmers, therefore, will avail of workers under the scheme only to the extent that local labour is not available; but for any agricultural purpose for which he may require labour he is entitled to get workers under the scheme.

One moment, please.

Does the Deputy wish to ask a question?

Yes. In regard to the 4/- a day allowance, suppose a farmer is able to provide accommodation at a local cottage, is it the labourer who will collect that 4/- to pay the cottier?

Who will be responsible for the payment?

The State pays the worker the 4/-.

I know, but what I want to be clear on is this: supposing I take a group of workers under the scheme, and that I provide accommodation at a local cottage, I am responsible to the owner of the cottage. Who is responsible for paying the money? Is it I who will have to pay, or the worker?

The worker.

What happens if the worker walks away without paying?

That is a matter that there is machinery to deal with.

That is the point.

It is the worker's debt.

It is the worker's debt.

If the worker comes from 30 to 40 miles away and walks away without paying the cottier, I have made the arrangements for him, and must be responsible to the cottier.

I am sure that is a matter capable of adjustment.

The other most important angle from the worker's point of view is that he should be an experienced harvest worker. I realise that it is very hard to guarantee that, but would the Minister issue special instructions to the managers of the employment exchanges or whomever else will be dealing with this——

Certainly.

——to ensure that they will have to state on some form their qualifications?

They will be men who have experience in agricultural work. Some will be good and some bad. Human nature is the same west of the Shannon as it is east of the Shannon, and many of these people from congested districts will not have experience in the handling of agricultural machinery to the extent that workers east of the Shannon might have. Nevertheless they are, I think, likely to be of very considerable help to the farmers who secure them.

Will the Minister say whether these temporary workers will be insured under the Workmen's Compensation Act, and who will insure them? Will the Government insure them?

The employer is responsible.

Will he be bound to insure them?

The employer is responsible for compensation under the Workmen's Compensation Act. It is a matter for the employer whether he insures against that risk or not.

That is the point. If he does not insure, and if a man is severely injured, and the man who employed him is found to be unable to pay compensation, what then?

That is a very big issue which we have discussed in the past and which, I submit, does not arise on this Vote.

The workers and their families ought to be protected.

Deputy Byrne knows nothing about rural conditions. Every farmer is bound to insure.

He is not bound to insure.

He is not legally bound.

Would the Minister consider that as far as practicable the men should be released for work in the localities where their homes are situated so as to get over the lodging difficulty?

That is not the scheme at all. The scheme is to bring men from Donegal, Mayo and West Kerry to work in Kildare and midland areas where there is a scarcity of agricultural labour.

Vote put and agreed to.
Top
Share