Dáil Éireann debate -
Wednesday, 24 Feb 1954

Vol. 144 No. 7

Private Members' Business. - Agricultural Wages Act, 1936—Motion.

Mr. Desmond

I move:—

That Dáil Éireann is of the opinion that proposals for legislation should be introduced to amend the Agricultural Wages Act, 1936, so as to provide that the ordinary members of committees of agricultural wages areas and of the Agricultural Wages Board who are to be regarded as persons representative of agricultural employees shall be appointed by the Minister from a panel constituted of persons nominated thereto by trade unions representative of agricultural workers; that each county shall constitute a separate agricultural wages district; that a quorum for the Agricultural Wages Board shall consist of one-third of the members of the board and that the board may determine questions by a simple majority vote; and, finally, that every agricultural employee whose employment comes within the provisions of the Act, or any statutory Order made under the Act, shall be supplied by his employer with a printed statement of the rate of wages, and conditions of employment applicable to him, such statements to be on sale in appropriate form in all post offices.

In suggesting that proposals for legislation should be introduced to amend the Agricultural Wages Act, 1936, we realise and appreciate the advantages which accrued from that Act in the past. It was introduced at a time when it was vitally necessary to provide legislation giving effect to certain improvements in the lot of the worker in rural Ireland. Many years have passed and, no matter how well-intentioned a Minister or a Government may be, as time goes on there are bound to be certain flaws. It is our duty when such flaws are discovered to suggest the manner in which these flaws should be remedied.

Firstly, in relation to the appointment of representatives of the agricultural workers themselves, we suggest that the ordinary worker should have representation on the board. In order to implement that, we suggest that the Minister appoint such representatives from a panel submitted by a trade union organisation responsible for looking after the interests of the workers in question. The Minister may say that the trade union organisation as it exists is not at the moment representative of every county; the organisation may not be of such a high level that the Minister would be satisfied to accept such representation in relation to every county. On that, we are quite prepared to agree that such appointments will not be made until the Minister is satisfied that such trade union representation is available.

Looking back on the experiences of the past in relation to the selection of representatives on the main board and on the regional boards it is possible to find some criticism of the nominees placed on these boards for the purpose of representing the workers. Our concern is to ensure that the workers will at all times be satisfied beyond all doubt that the men who purport to represent them are genuinely doing so and are not just individuals foisted on the workers.

Instead of having regional boards, we are of the opinion that separate boards or units should be established in each county. We all know that conditions vary from county to county. It is for that reason that we think it would be more than desirable to have separate units in each county. At the present moment a regional board meets in Limerick and that board embraces, as well as Limerick, Kerry, Cork and Clare. I think it would imbraces prove the Act considerably if it were amended in such a way as to provide separate units within the counties themselves. It may be argued that that would make for more expensive administration but I hold that, in dealing with a measure which so vitally affects the welfare of the rural community, we ought not to consider the possible expense incurred but rather the ultimate benefits which will be conferred.

Thirdly, we hold that every employer should have available at the disposal of his employee the statutory Orders issued from time to time. Cases arise in which employees are not familiar with the scales of wages in operation in particular areas. They may not be familiar with the reductons that an employer is entitled to make in the case of a man living indoor or of the allowance in respect of gardens, etc. Very often disputes arise because of ignorance of the regulations. If this information were readily available, both the employer and the employee would be aware of the regulations and conditions and there would be no ground for subsequent complaint. Unfortunately, there are employers who will take advantage of the men working under them. The result of that can been seen in the number of visits that the inspectors of the Agricultural Wages Board have to make. I give credit to those inspectors for attending to their duties in a most satisfactory manner considering the large areas over which they have to operate. On the other hand, there are cases where the culprit may be the employee and not the employer. I have known a specific instance where a certain man who was quite prepared to work for a particular farmer did not succeed in finding employment because another man—and sometimes the other man may be a neighbour—went to the farmer and suggested that he would work for less than the fixed rate. Human nature being what it is, I suppose if the employer thinks he can get away with it we cannot blame him for employing a man who is prepared to work at a lower rate. But, of course, according to the law as it stands, the farmer has no protection afterwards by saying that the employee was quite prepared to work at the lower rate.

In this motion we are not approaching the matter in any critical manner in so far as the Act has been in operation as a whole. But we do believe, as many people of rural Ireland believe, that there are certain flaws that could have been and should by now have been removed. That is the main purpose of the motion. We are putting these points before the Minister and I would be anxious for the Minister to say whether he is prepared to have this legislation passed in 1936 amended with a view to making the improvements which are necessary. If that is done, it will be an advantage to these people in rural Ireland. We all complain at times about the emigration from rural Ireland. If we want to stem that emigration from those areas and make people satisfied to work on the land, we should give them proper conditions. By doing that we will help to make these workers in rural Ireland prosperous and also bring prosperity to the farmer, which is so much needed at present.

Mr. Keyes

I formally second the motion.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Walsh)

I must oppose this motion. The Deputy has suggested that we should have wages boards representative of the counties. That is impossible from every point of view. You have counties, portions of which are in close proximity to large cities, where naturally the wages paid in the districts adjacent to the city must be and should be much higher than those in the remoter areas. That has been happening in many counties. In portions of County Kilkenny, for instance, higher wages are paid in districts adjacent to the City of Waterford than in the remainder of the county. Then you have other counties where the same position does not obtain. As a matter of fact, you have four or five counties grouped in different sections where you have different wages being paid.

The suggestion is being made in this motion that representatives of the workers and of the employers should be selected from organisations. There are 27 farmers' organisations in this country. To which of these is the Minister to go for a representative? Is he to select one particular organisation and ask them to give him nominees for the Agricultural Wages Board? I think it would be impossible. If you had an organisation embracing the 27 which was responsible for the employers throughout the country, there might be no difficulty in doing that. On the other hand, you have no organisation representing all the rural workers in this country. You have the Federation of Rural Workers here in Dublin and portions of Wicklow, Meath and Kildare. The total number in that organisation is 487 out of 100,000 rural workers. Is it suggested that I must go to the Federation of Rural Workers to get nominees to represent the rural workers of this country? That is what Deputy Desmond is asking for in this motion.

Mr. Desmond

It is not. You should not make statements which are false.

Mr. Walsh

I am quoting from returns which have been given this year to the Department of Industry and Commerce and that is the number given. I am taking these statistics. What other figures can I take? In February, 1953, that is this time last year, that was the registered membership. I suppose the statistics for this year will show in or about the same number. But the suggestion is that I should ask the Federation of Rural Workers to nominate people to go on the Agricultural Wages Board. Even assuming that we did ask organisations responsible for the employers and for the employees, the Agricultural Wages Board does not fix a minimum wage for the country. It fixes a wage which in many parts of the country is not recognised as the minimum wage. In fact, farmers are paying far in excess of the wages fixed by the Agricultural Wages Board.

The Deputy has mentioned that there are a number of agricultural workers who are not getting the wages fixed by the Agricultural Wages Board. I doubt that. I have no evidence of it and no knowledge of it. If there are people who are getting a lesser wage than that fixed by the Agricultural Wages Board, they have the means at their disposal to report that. There are inspectors appointed by the Agricultural Wages Board who pay visits periodically down the country and who are at the disposal of the workers at any time if they are written to and who will go and make inquiries. If a complaint is substantiated, the employer is taken to court, and he has to pay the arrears and is fined.

Then again the Agricultural Wages Board have made provision for the man who, for some reason or another, is unable to command even the wages fixed by the board. An exemption order is given in such a case whereby the man is permitted to work for less. We have many cases of that kind throughout the country. There are many men who are not capable of earning the same wages as other men and provision is made for these cases under the Agricultural Wages Act of 1936.

If, as I said, we had two organisations in the country, one representative of the workers and the other representative of employers, there would not be any difficulty. I doubt if there would then be any reason whatever for the Agricultural Wages Board. They could fix these matters between themselves as representatives of the workers and the employers. But, as that is not the case, it is necessary to have the Agricultural Wages Board. As a matter of fact, representations were made to me during the year from agricultural organisations to have nominees recommended by them and also by the workers put on the board. These nominees were put on. In fact, I think at the present time there are two representatives of the Federation of Rural Workers on it. One, actually, is the secretary of the Federation of Rural Workers. There is also a representative of the agricultural organisation in Dublin.

There are at present five groups of wage districts and the groupings are:— (1) Counties Cavan, Donegal, Leitrim, Monaghan and Sligo; (2) Counties Galway, Longford, Mayo, Offaly, Roscommon and Westmeath; (3) Dublin (including the County Borough of Dublin), Kildare, Laois, Louth, Meath and Wicklow; (4) Counties Clare, Cork (including the County Borough of Cork), Kerry, Limerick (including the County Borough of Limerick) and Tipperary (N.R.); (5) Counties Carlow, Kilkenny, Tipperary (S.R.), Waterford and Wexford. The chairman of the wages board at present is also chairman of the area committees and the build-up of these committees is that you have from each wage district representatives coming there together, holding their meetings and making recommendations to the Wages Board. The Wages Board consists of representatives of workers and farmers, with independent, or what are known as neutral, members and they come to a decision by a majority vote. As a matter of fact, I understand their last decision was by majority vote. That is one of the things that Deputy Desmond has been asking for so that what he is looking for is in existence already.

He mentioned, in the course of his speech, that copies of the Orders should be sent, I take it, to every farmer in the country and that he, in turn, must present it to the agricultural worker when he comes into his employment. I cannot see any necessity for that. Every agricultural worker is capable of reading a paper and of reading the announcements made with regard to wages for particular districts at specified periods of the year. There is no difficulty in knowing what the wages are and I never heard any criticism of that method until this motion was put down. From that point of view I do not think that Statutory Orders obliging farmers to present these Orders to their workers is going to help in any way. Anybody who has any connection with agriculture knows what the agricultural wages are to-day. I am opposing this motion on the ground that there is no necessity for it at the present time. There is no justification for the argument put forward that we should have either farmers' organisations or workers' organisations representatives and I certainly am not going to be recruiting sergeants for either one or the other.

Mr. Keyes

This motion deals with a very important and vital portion of our national life. It aims at making more secure the position of the agricultural worker, at making agricultural workers more happy and contented and so preventing their eyes turning to the cities to which, we regret, they have drifted in such large numbers in recent years. Anything that will tend to arrest the movement in that direction is in the national interest. We have had already too great an exodus from rural districts to the cities and towns. The establishment of the Wages Board was a step in the right direction but the operation of the system, I believe, requires some tightening up. We do know that there is a reluctance by a majority of the farmers throughout the country to co-operate in the working of any such body as the Wages Board. They strongly resent any interference by the State to regulate the relations obtaining between the employer and the employee. They hold that the conditions of agricultural workers are completely different from those of industrial workers and city workers and that it is entirely wrong on the part of the State to come between them to adjust questions such as holidays and conditions of employment generally. Recent legislation in that respect has been strongly resented by the farmers. These farmers say: "We always dealt decently with our workers; we gave them a fair crack of the whip."

I hold that in any industry the standard of wages and the conditions of employment generally obtaining should be made known to the workers. In the cities, in engineering or building, contractors must know the rates of wages paid by rival contractors. I think it is equally necessary that in country districts a wages standard should be established and be generally recognised. It is suggested that that could be done in a simplified way by having a leaflet available which would inform workers and the public generally the rates which a farmer is obliged to pay in accordance with the decisions arrived at by the Wages Board. There is at the moment a wide diversity of opinion in regard to this matter and many people are in a fog about it. I am sure the Minister himself has got representations from time to time from his own area and inquiries to know what the rates applicable to that area were. In certain areas, inspectors were appointed and their services were availed of very widely, but they were removed before they could be of very much assistance. That has happened in my own district. Now workers are obliged to have recourse to their Deputies to get in touch with the Agricultural Wages Board in Dublin, hoping to get some information on the point.

I think that leaflets could be made available in which the conditions which should obtain in each district would be clearly set down so as to ensure that one farmer would not be getting away with a different rate of wages as against his neighbour who is also employing men. That has been going on in some areas. I do not mind if one farmer outbids his neighbour and pays more than the standard rate. We cannot stop his doing that but I must say that is the exception rather than the rule.

I think that workers also should have some say in regard to the appointment of the representatives on the board. It may be said that they have to a certain extent at the moment but I think that they should have the right extended to them to select their own representatives because it could be held that they lack confidence in the men appointed by the Minister. If the machinery is to operate to the best advantage, it should have the confidence of the people concerned. So far as I am concerned the only interest I have in the motion is to try to establish conditions which will make our agricultural workers a more happy and contented community and that can only be brought about when they know what their rights and conditions are. The same idea was behind the movement to give them half-holidays and a weekly holiday, seeing that they are an important, if not the most important, section of workers in the community Hitherto their rights have been recognised only in wartime but when war conditions passed the rights of the agricultural worker were allowed to go by default. One unfortunate result of that has been that 22,000 workers left the land in one 12 months up to June last. That does not speak well for existing conditions and anything that can be done to tighten up the regulations and to stop that leakage from the land would be all to the good. I believe that this motion is a move in that direction and that it would not be difficult for the Minister to have it implemented and to give a greater feeling of confidence amongst workers in the rural areas that the machinery of the Agricultural Wages Board would be operated in their interests. I believe that it would be in the best interest of the country if the Minister were to accept the motion.

Mr. Desmond

I am sorry to say that this is not the first time in discussions here that the Minister for Agriculture has found it convenient for his own ends to twist a motion completely out of its context to suit the occasion. The Minister came in here this evening— unfortunately he was late in coming in —and had the blatant audacity to try to read something into the motion that is not there at all. I now challenge the Minister to state where we are asking for representatives from trade unions for the farmers?

Mr. Walsh

If you did not ask for it, it was at the back of your mind.

Mr. Desmond

It is not in it and the Minister dare not try to suggest that it is. I fully appreciate the fact that there are many organisations representing the farming community. I fully appreciate also that it would not be easy or perhaps possible to arrange through the various organisations who would represent them. It is because we know these facts that we had not any such suggestion in this motion.

Why is it that the Minister comes in here, and to help himself in his arguments against this motion, tries to damn it from the outset without even considering it by trying to suggest that there is something in it which is not. He said, and, of course, took pride in saying, that quite recently majority rule prevailed. The Minister was cute enough to put such emphasis on the fact that majority rule prevailed, but he knows—I will give him credit for that—that in the Act of 1936, there is a provision where majority rule may not prevail through the chairmanship. There is provision whereby the chairman appointed by the Minister can be just a mouthpiece of the Minister and that is one of the reasons we are suggesting that it should be amended if possible.

We may put up suggestions here in an orderly fashion but the Minister, as he did in connection with some other proposals including the question of the half-holiday, wants to adopt an attitude of dividing the House in bitterness and rancour. He mentioned the question of Statutory Orders. We did not ask in this motion—I am sorry to say that I have had to conclude that the Minister did not read the motion—for such Statutory Orders to be sent to every farmer. If the Minister had gone to the trouble of reading the motion he would see that we asked that such information be made available by putting it in every local post office. What is wrong with that? Who is going to suggest that we are asking to have it sent to every man or to use the Minister's words "to every farmer and farm-worker"? We are asking that that information be made available, because we know that it is not available in post offices in rural Ireland. The Minister himself states that every farm worker is conversant with these wages, but I could ask a farmer in Cork what they are and he could not answer me—much less the farm worker. The Minister will say they are published in the papers. They are: once or possibly twice in two years when an increase is given and that is the only time such information is published in the national Press. It means apparently that every farm worker and employer is expected to cut out from the local newspaper this advertisement, find a piece of cardboard and paste it on, and hold it until the next wage increase comes around. I am amazed at the Minister, coming from a rural area trying to put over something like that which he knows is completely untrue.

I mentioned the question of trade unionism. Perhaps it may be best for me to forgive him for his statement in that respect. He was not here when I mentioned it. I am not saying he should have been here. We all have our own difficulties in getting here at times, but I made my statement here when the Tánaiste of the present Government was sitting in the benches opposite. I asked that the procedure be such that the men be represented by the representatives of the trade union when the Minister was satisfied that a trade union existed in the particular county. What is wrong with that? Is the Minister afraid of trade unionism for the farm workers? Is it as he stated in the course of the debate that he does not think either the farmers or the workers should have unions?

Mr. Walsh

I do not think I said that.

Mr. Desmond

The farmers and the workers apparently must be the playthings of the politicians. They must not have their own protection associations.

Mr. Walsh

I do not think I said that.

Mr. Desmond

The record will show clearly what was said by the Minister. In his innocence he comes and tells us that he is amazed at the suggestion that workers are underpaid in rural Ireland. If the Minister went to the trouble—and mark you this motion is on the list for two or two and a half years—of making contact with the Agricultural Wages Board he would very easily find out the number of visits paid by the inspectors of that board to every county in this country including County Kilkenny. If the wage rates had been paid why was it necessary to have these visits of inspection? I made it clear here that I gave credit to these inspectors for the amount of work they have done and the amount of time they have been able to give to it, but the first fact that could be seen by the Minister in the records of the Agricultural Wages Board is that these inspectors are fully occupied in going around the various areas under their control and seeing that the appropriate rate is being paid there, and in some cases threatening prosecution.

Mr. Walsh

If the rates are not being paid.

Mr. Desmond

It just proves our case. They have to see that the wage rates are paid.

Mr. Walsh

It proves nothing.

Mr. Gilbride

How many prosecutions had they, I wonder?

An Ceann Comhairle

Deputy Desmond is in possession.

Mr. Desmond

May I say there is no need to waste time on this? It is quite obvious from the sinister fashion in which the Minister treated this motion that he is not interested in trying to improve the lot of the agricultural workers and the farmers, because I believe that prosperity for both is interrelated. I was quite prepared to see any legislation introduced here which would safeguard both the employer and the employee. We moved this motion because of the Minister's attitude, which is reminiscent of a recruiting sergeant—thank God the time of recruiting sergeants is gone and we want to hear no more about it. If the Minister wants to adopt the attitude not of a recruiting sergeant but of a destruction sergeant in keeping the employers and employees divided in rural Ireland, let him and not us take responsibility for it.

Motion put.

The Dáil divided: Tá, 10; Níl, 45.

Tá

• Collins, Seán.
• Corish, Brendan.
• Davin, William.
• Desmond, Daniel.
• Donnellan, Michael.
• Everett, James.
• Keyes, Michael.
• Kyne, Thomas A.
• Norton, William.
• Spring, Dan.

Níl

• Aiken, Frank.
• Allen, Denis.
• Bartley, Gerald.
• Beegan, Patrick.
• Blaney, Neil T.
• Boland, Gerald.
• Brady, Philip A.
• Brady, Seán.
• Brennan, Joseph.
• Breslin, Cormac.
• Briscoe, Robert.
• Buckley, Seán.
• Calleary, Phelim A.
• Carter, Frank.
• Cogan, Patrick.
• Colley, Harry.
• Collins, James J.
• Corry, Martin J.
• Crowley, Honor Mary.
• Crowley, Tadhg.
• Cunningham, Liam.
• Davern, Michael J.
• Derrig, Thomas.
• de Valera, Eamon.
• Fanning, John.
• Flynn, John.
• Flynn, Stephen.
• Hilliard, Michael.
• Kenneally, William.
• Kennedy, Michael J.
• Killilea, Mark.
• Lemass, Seán.
• MacCarthy, Seán.
• McEllistrim, Thomas.
• Maher, Peadar.
• Ó Briain, Donnchadh.
• Ormonde, John.
• O'Sullivan, Ted.
• Rice, Bridget M.
• Ryan, James.
• Ryan, Mary B.
• Sheridan, Michael.
• Smith, Patrick.
• Traynor, Oscar.
• Walsh, Thomas.

Tellers:— Tá: Deputies Corish and Kyne; Níl: Deputies Ó Briain and Killilea.

Motion declared lost.

An Ceann Comhairle

The next motion on the list of Private Deputies' business is No. 4 in the names of Deputies Kyne, Larkin and Desmond.

Mr. Corish

No. 4 is not being moved. In respect to No. 5, the Deputy who is mainly interested in that motion has, as Deputies are probably aware, been suspended from the service of the House for a fortnight. I would, therefore, ask that the House should adjourn now.

An Tánaiste

I agree. I move the adjournment of the Dáil until 3 o'clock to-morrow. There is a question on the Adjournment, I understand.

An Ceann Comhairle

The subject matter of Question No. 40 on to-day's Order Paper is being raised by Deputy Desmond.