asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will consider abolishing the discrimination which at present exists as between domestic employees and other types of insured workers in regard to payment of unemployment benefit.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Unemployment Benefit.
39.
Since 1966 females in private domestic service are covered for unemployment benefit under the Social Welfare Acts subject to satisfaction of special contribution conditions which are not discriminatory but modify the general scheme of unemployment benefit to meet the needs of this particular class of insured persons.
Females employed in private domestic employment were not required to be insured for unemployment benefit under the former separate unemployment insurance scheme and that position was continued under the comprehensive scheme of social insurance established by the Social Welfare Act, 1952, for the reason that unemployment amongst private domestics was practically unknown. In the circumstances, it was considered to be unnecessary and unfair to require these women to pay contributions for unemployment insurance when it was known that very few of them could qualify for unemployment benefit.
In 1965 the question of extending insurance cover for unemployment benefit to female private domestics was reviewed. It emerged that the absence of such cover was a hardship in the special case of older private domestic workers of long service who, once they became unemployed, could find it difficult, for age and other reasons, to obtain further suitable employment.
Accordingly, provision was made in the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 1966, and relevant regulations extending cover for unemployment benefit to female private domestics at a special reduced rate of contribution and limiting title to payment of benefit to women who had a substantial record of employment as evidenced by the contributions paid over a ten-year period.
Seven years.
Ten. I should mention that female domestics of 65 years and over are not subject to this test and they, therefore, can qualify for unemployment benefit in the ordinary way.
The 1966 legislation constitutes a considerable advance in that it provides cover for unemployment benefit to those older domestics who are most likely to need it, while requiring only a modest increase in the contribution rate in their cases. In the circumstances I do not propose to alter the existing position.
Will the Minister not agree that the difference between the payments made by the persons to whom he is referring, domestics and other female workers, is very small, a matter of about 6d a week, and will he not agree that it is most unfair to prevent those people from getting unemployment benefit if they need it and that the original idea was to provide cheap labour because domestics who could not get unemployment benefit, whether they liked it or not had to work even if they got a very small wage? Surely the Minister will agree that in 1971 it is most unfair to continue preventing those people from getting unemployment benefit if they require it?
Question No. 40.
The Deputy raised this in the House a thousand times.
And, le cúnamh Dé, I will continue to raise it until the Minister changes his mind.
My answer has always been that there is little or no unemployment among this class and that the day has long since come when they are not being taken on at a slave rate.
Of course they are.
They will not work for it.
As long as the Minister prevents them from drawing unemployment benefit there will be the cheap domestics for the people he represents.
Nonsense. No such thing.
The new rich want cheap domestic servants.