Committee on Finance. - Offices (Conditions of Employment) Bill, 1957—Committee Stage.
SECTION 1.
I move amendment No. 1:—
In sub-section (1), page 3, lines 11 and 12, to delete "Offices (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1957" and substitute "Office Premises Act, 1957".
The purpose of the first amendment is to change the name of the Bill. It was introduced as the Offices (Conditions of Employment) Bill. I think it is an unsuitable name because we have had other Acts relating to conditions of employment and these Acts refer to matters like hours of work rather than the physical conditions under which labour is performed. I believe if we maintain the original name it may be confusing. Because of that and the similarity of the names of earlier Acts I propose to change it to the Office Premises Act, 1957, which is, I think, a far more suitable and precise definition.
Amendment agreed to.
Section. as amended, agreed to.
Section 2 agreed to.
SECTION 3.
Amendment No. 2 not moved.
I move amendment No. 3:—
In sub-section (3), before paragraph (d) to insert the following new paragraph:—
(d) to a shop to which the Shops (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1938 (No. 4 of 1938), applies.
This amendment and amendment No. 10 are linked; one is consequential on the other. There was a point of difficulty as to the desirability of bringing within this Office Premises Bill people employed on clerical work in shops. The best way of resolving that difficulty is to make all shop workers, whether employed on sales duties or office duties, come within the scope of the Shops Act which was passed some years ago. That Act relates to physical conditions of employment in shops and covers things like ventilation, facilities for rest and all the other matters to which this Bill relates. The effect of this amendment, with No. 10, is to take clerical workers outside the scope of this Bill and bring them for the first time within the scope of the Shops Act. That will prevent any overlapping or any difficulty in determining if a particular employee in a shop comes under one Act or another.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 4 to 7, inclusive, agreed to.
Amendment No. 4 not moved.
Sections 8 to 10 inclusive agreed to.
SECTION 11.
I move amendment No. 5:—
In sub-section (1), page 6, line 3, to add to the sub-section: "and for preventing harmful draughts".
This is one of the amendments suggested by the Trade Union Congress. Possibly the Bill as originally introduced covered the point raised in the amendment, but it is better to have the matter made clear and that is why I move this amendment.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 12.
I move amendment No. 6:—
In sub-section (4), page 6, line 20, to add to the sub-section "or the reasonable use of protective or translucent screens".
The purpose of this amendment is to provide explicitly — it is implicitly in the Bill but it is better to have it explicitly as well — that nothing in the section will prohibit the reasonable use of protective wire mesh screens on windows or the use of such devices as Venetian blinds. It is one of the amendments suggested by the Association of Chambers of Commerce and seems to me to be desirable.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Section 13 agreed to.
SECTION 14.
I move amendment No. 7:—
In sub-section (2), page 6, lines 43 and 44, to delete "the occupier to render the room suitable or to obtain other premises" and substitute "the room to be rendered suitable or enabling the occupier to obtain other premises and the authority shall serve a copy of the certificate and notice of any suspension thereof on the occupier and the owner".
Amendments Nos. 7 and 8 are consequential. As the section stands, an enforcing authority who certifies that a room in which clerks are employed is unsuitable for clerical work is obliged to inform the occupier of the decision but not obliged to inform the owner of the premises. The purpose of the amendment is to provide that the owner will also be told that the room is unsuitable and on his being so informed to give him the right, which he would not otherwise have had, of appeal to the court against the decision. It appears to be a desirable amendment and was suggested by the Association of Chambers of Commerce of Ireland. The owner might be quite seriously affected by the decision of the enforcing authority and would have no appeal and the occupier might not choose to appeal.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 8:—
In sub-section (3), page 6, line 45, before "is" to insert "or owner".
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 9:—
In sub-section (3), paragraph (c), page 7, line 2, to delete "the occupier" and substitute "the occupier, the owner".
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 15.
I move amendment No. 10:—
In page 7, lines 5 and 6, to delete "provided they do not exceed five in number,".
This is the amendment to which I referred earlier relating to clerical workers in shops.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Section 16 agreed to.
SECTION 17.
I move amendment No. 11:—
Before Section 17, but in Part III, to insert the following new section:—
17. (1) All floors, steps, stairs, lifts, passages and gangways shall be of sound construction and properly maintained.
(2) For every staircase in a building or affording a means of exit from a building, a substantial handrail shall be provided and maintained, which, if the staircase has an open side, shall be on that side, and, in the case of a staircase having two open sides, or in the case of a staircase which, owing to the nature of the construction thereof or the condition of the surface of the steps or other special circumstances, is especially liable to cause accidents, such a handrail shall be provided and maintained on both sides. Any open side of a staircase shall also be guarded by the provision and maintenance of a lower rail or other effective means.
The purpose of the amendment is, firstly, to include lifts with the parts of premises which should be properly constructed and maintained, and, secondly, to require the provision of handrails on stairs. The inclusion of lifts is a logical provision in the section which provides for safe means of access to offices. The existing section leaves details about handrails, and the like, to be fixed by regulations. It seems to me, however, on reconsideration, that specific provision can, and should be, made in the Bill for handrails.
With regard to things like floors, stairs, passages and the like, it does not seem that anything can be added by way of regulation to the provision in the Bill that these shall be of sound construction and properly maintained. Consequently, there is no need to take power to detail the obligations of employers under the Bill, beyond what is normally stated in the section itself.
Amendment agreed to.
Acceptance of this amendment involves the deletion of Section 17.
Section 17 deleted.
SECTION 18.
Amendment No. 12 stands in the names of Deputies Larkin, Corish and Kyne.
I have half a mind to move that amendment myself, in the absence of the Deputies concerned. If the Chair will allow me to speak about the amendment, without its being moved, I should like to say that I have given some thought to the desirability of accepting it. There is no provision in the Bill about fire preventive facilities. There is no provision of that kind in the Factories Acts either. The principal argument against making provision in that regard is that any such provision would have to include arrangements for the regular inspection of appliances, for the keeping of records of inspection, and so on.
Furthermore, it would be difficult, I think, to frame general regulations prescribing standards of fire fighting equipment to be maintained in offices because the standards that would be suitable to any office would be determined by its construction, state of preservation and the general layout of the building. It seems to me that it would be difficult to cover all offices by a general provision. Nevertheless, I do not see that any great difficulty would be created if the amendment were accepted.
The amendment would empower the Minister to make regulations for any class or description of office requiring that provision be made for fire preventive facilities. In so far as it leaves the matter on that basis, and that the Minister would act only after consulting the Advisory Committee, I do not see that there is any harm in the insertion of this amendment in the Bill.
If the amendment were moved, I would accept it, even though I should like it to be understood that I can see quite considerable practical difficulties in dealing with this question of fire-fighting facilities by way of regulations such as are contemplated.
Is it not clear that the Minister himself has used arguments sufficient to demonstrate why the amendment should not be included? The difficulty of inspection and the standardisation of equipment which would have to be installed would militate against the working of the Bill.
There is no such provision in the Factories Acts. Clearly, it is in relation to factories that fire-fighting equipment is most definitely required. We have framed this Bill as far as possible upon the Factories Acts. If the amendment were pressed, I would accept it because it merely gives the Minister power to make regulations which I do not think he would make. On the whole, it would be better to leave it out. It would be anomalous to have this in this Bill and not to have it in the Factories Acts.
Amendment No. 12 not moved.
Section 18 agreed to.
Section 19 to 22 inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 23.
Amendment 13 stands in the names of Deputies Larkin, Corish and Kyne.
I do not think that this amendment is really necessary. There will be an advisory council upon which the trade unions will be represented. That council will have power, on its own initiative, to advise the Minister. I think that gives the trade unions all the facilities they require for having these matters brought to attention.
Amendment No. 13 not moved.
Section 23 agreed to.
SECTION 24
I move amendment No. 14:—
To add to the section the following new sub-section:—
(8) The chairman of the Advisory Council may be paid such remuneration and allowance for expenses as the Minister, with the consent of the Minister for Finance, determines.
The purpose of this amendment is to make permissive provision for the payment of remuneration to the chairman of the Advisory Council. I do not want it to be taken that remuneration will be paid. However, if it should be decided at any time to make some payment to the chairman of the Advisory Council, in the absence of the provision, it might create certain difficulties in so far as it could be argued that the intention of the Oireachtas was not set down in the legislation. The need for this amendment in this Bill arose because of certain arguments between my predecessor and the Minister for Finance in his Government concerning the pay to the chairman of the Advisory Council under the Factories Acts.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 15:—
To add to the section the following new sub-section:—
(9) On the request of the Advisory Council and subject to the consent of the Minister, an inspector who is an officer of the Minister may attend a meeting of the Advisory Council for the purpose of giving any information which the Advisory Council may request for the purpose of discharging its functions.
This amendment is on lines of a similar provision in the Factories Acts. It will be accepted that the Advisory Council should be assisted by having made available to them the benefit of an inspector's special knowledge when considering advising the Minister on questions of making, amending or revoking regulations or in matters of enforcement. The need for this provision was urged by the Conference of Professional and Service Associations. I think they made quite a good ease for it.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 16:—
To add to the section the following new sub-section:—
(10) On the request of the Advisory Council and subject to the consent of a sanitary authority, an officer designated by that sanitary authority may attend a meeting of the Advissory Council for the purpose of giving any information which the Advisory Council may request for the purposes of discharging its functions.
This amendment is consequential. The previous amendment gives the committee access to the Minister's inspectors and the second gives access to the inspectors of the sanitary authorities.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 24, as amended, agreed to.
SECTION 25.
Amendment No. 17 not moved.
I would not accept the amendment, if it were moved. I would not go on record as assuming that the sanitary authorities would not obey the law in their own offices.
Amendment No. 18 not moved.
Section agreed to.
Section 26 agreed to.
SECTION 27.
I move amendment No. 19:—
In sub-section (1), page 10, lines 29 and 30, to delete "(or, in the case of a sanitary authority, any other officer to whom it is empowered to assign duties)" and substitute "or any other suitable person".
The purpose of this amendment is to provide for cases where an enforcing authority has no qualified fire officer on the staff. Under Section 14, an enforcing authority may prohibit the use of a room for clerical work on various grounds, including inadequate means of escape in case of fire. The amendment will enable an enforcing authority to call in a suitable person to undertake this type of inspection. The enforcing authority would then be fortified by the report of an expert, if the occupier or owner appealed to the courts against the closing of a room on the grounds of a fire hazard. This amendment was suggested by the Department of Local Government.
Apparently everyone has suggested it.
Amendment agreed to.
Amendment No. 20 not moved.
May I say on amendment No. 20 that the idea of an annual report to be submitted to the Oireachtas is quite sound, but in this case where the bulk of the work will be done by a multitude of sanitary authorities around the country the prospect of getting a report compiled in any reasonable time and presented in a way that would be of any value would be so remote that I do not think we should attempt it?
Section 27, as amended, agreed to.
Sections 28 to 34, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 35.
I move amendment No. 21:—
In page 13, line 41, to delete "floors, passages, stairs" and substitute "floors, steps, stairs, lifts, passages, gangways".
This is consequential on No. 11.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 35, as amended, agreed to.
Section 36 agreed to.
SECTION 37.
I move amendment No. 22:—
Before Section 37 to insert the following new section:—
37.—Where the occupier or owner of an office is charged with an offence under this Act it shall be a good defence for him to prove that he used all diligence to enforce the execution of the relevant provision of this Act or regulation or order made thereunder.
The existing section provides that an owner or occupier charged with an offence may make the plea that he has used all due diligence to comply with the law and may bring before the court the person whom he alleges to be the actual offender. That is the provision in the corresponding section of the Factories Act. I have come to the conclusion, however, that the procedure is inappropriate in the case of offices, especially so in the light of the rather simple provisions of the Bill. The proposed new section merely states that the plea of due diligence shall be a good defence. Of course the State may, on its own initiative, take proceedings against a person other than the owner or occupier if it is thought an action lies.
Acceptance of this amendment involves deletion of Section 37 of the Bill.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 37 deleted.
Sections 38 to 41, inclusive, agreed to.
SECTION 42.
I move amendment No. 23:—
In sub-section (1), paragraph (a), page 15, lines 22 and 23, to delete "or by leaving it at, or posting it to" and substitute "or by sending it by registered post to".
The purpose of this amendment is to remove the provision that a document may be served on a person by merely leaving it at his residence and to provide that service of documents by post must be by prepaid registered post. This is one of the amendments suggested by the Associated Chambers of Commerce.
Amendment agreed to.
Section 42, as amended, agreed to.
Section 43 agreed to.
SECTION 44.
I move amendment. No. 24:—
In page 16, line 9, to add to the section: "on such terms, having regard to the provisions of such lease, as the court considers just and equitable".
This is another amendment suggested by the Associated Chambers of Commerce. The section, as it stands, empowers the Circuit Court to determine a lease on application where there is a dispute between the owner and the occupier about the apportionment between them of the cost of alterations required to comply with the law. The purpose of the amendment is to give the court discretionary power to attach conditions to a determination of the lease.
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Section 45 agreed to.
SECTION 46.
I move amendment No. 25:—
In sub-section (1), page 16, to delete all words from and including "and" in line 18 to the end of the sub-section.
Amendments Nos. 25 and 26 are really covering the same point. These were sections taken from the Factories Act and incorporated in this Bill, but they seem to be completely irrelevant to office premises and it is proposed to delete them.
Amendment agreed to.
I move amendment No. 26:—
To delete sub-section (2).
Amendment agreed to.
Section, as amended, agreed to.
Section 47 agreed to.
Schedule and Title agreed to.
Bill reported with amendments.
Report Stage ordered for Wednesday, 30th October, 1957.
