I wish to call a quorum.
Estimates 1979. - Vote 42: Labour (Resumed).
Debate resumed on the following motion:
That a sum not exceeding £33,710,000 be granted to defray the charge which will come in course of payment during the year ending on the 31st day of December, 1979 for the salaries and expenses of the Office of the Minister for Labour, including certain services administered by that Office, and for payment of certain grants-in-aid.
—(Minister for Labour.)
It is a little odd that the Deputy wishes to have a quorum considering there was not one Member of the Fine Gael Party present at Question Time.
There were not many Fianna Fáil Members present either. It is the Government's job to keep a House——
Not a Question Time.
There were a number of questions down from Fianna Fáil Members.
Notice taken that 20 Members were not present; House counted and 20 Members being present,
I appreciate the comments of those who contributed and wish to refer to some of the points raised. I may not cover all the points but Deputies can rest assured that any points made will be pursued and examined further.
Deputy Horgan asked what proportion of trainees get permanent jobs after completing AnCO training courses. The proportion of trainees on regular AnCO courses is 72 per cent within three months of completion of the courses. It shows a very substantial improvement over the position that pertained two years ago. It is an added indicator of the improvement in the economic climate and the employment situation that exists at present. Of the 911 AnCO sponsored first-year apprentices trained, 724 were placed in continuing apprenticeship, a placement rate of almost 80 per cent, which shows a vast improvement on the position that existed.
Some Opposition Deputies were trying to make capital out of mythical figures that they seemed to possess. Another barometer of the success and effectiveness of the Government's economic and employment policies is that the figures of net passenger movements into and out of the country indicate a turn around from a net outflow in the 12 months November 1976 to October 1977 to a net inflow in the following 12 months from November 1977 to October 1978. I wish to emphasise the importance of that. We have returned to a position where more people are coming back to Ireland than are leaving it. It is a worth-while barometer and is one that speaks for itself.
Deputy Mitchell asked what safeguards exist against false redundancy claims. The principal safeguard is the self-policing nature of the scheme. This arises from the fact that an employer must foot a substantial percentage of each redundancy lump sum.
I did not use the word "false". I will take another opportunity to say what I really meant.
The Deputy did not mean to use the word false?
I did not use it. What I said was that jobs are being declared redundant which are more viable than some of the jobs we are creating.
Is that why the Deputy called a quorum?
The Minister is in possession.
I did not mean to interrupt the Minister.
The Deputy did use the word but the Deputy pulled so many words out of his head last week——
Check the record.
——he was anxious to get headlines for the fact that he use the word "false" in his speech. The question he asked was what safeguards exist against false redundancy claims——
Quote the record.
The Minister should continue with his speech and have the record checked later if necessary.
The principal safeguard against such claims is the self-policing nature of the scheme. This arises from the fact that an employer must foot a substantial percentage of each redundancy lump sum. Furthermore, on each redundancy certificate the employer must complete a statutory declaration of the truth of the matter stated.
Deputy Desmond asked a pertinent question on the change in status of the NMS and on the need to consult the staff and their unions. As the House is aware, the Green Paper envisaged a considerable expansion of functions for the National Manpower Service and the introduction of changes to equip it to fulfil its wider role. The examination of the operation of the NMS is being made to enable it to provide the most efficient possible occupational guidance and job placement service. I have already considered the option of reconstituting the NMS as a State body. After meeting representatives of staff associations concerned and after much deliberation I decided that the NMS should be retained within the Department of Labour. This decision has been conveyed to the staff associations concerned and at the same time it has been indicated that the future status of the NMS will be considered as part of the examination to be undertaken regarding the reorganisation of my Department on the lines of the recommendations of the Public Service Organisation Review Group.
I appreciate the staff's interest and concern about the future status of the NMS and I intend having full discussions with all staff interests before making any changes in the organisational structure. I should like to reiterate my tribute to the substantially increased staff, the staff I have had the opportunity of augmenting by quite a number since I was appointed Minister. They have handled an increased workload effectively and well, have made an increased number of placements and have attracted a greater use of their services by the public. They have also succeeded in updating their services and are deserving of the compliments and tributes of the House. I should like to add that in relation to my area, with the help of the NMS and the development that is taking place in the Cork area, the unemployment figure at that exchange at the beginning of May 1978 was 4,400 while the figure at the beginning of May, 1979, was 3,300. That is another barometer of the progress that has been made and an indication of the efforts of the NMS.
Deputies Desmond and Horgan referred to the exploitation of young persons which occurs in some services sectors and asked about the enforcement of the protective legislation. Since the Protection of Young Persons (Employment) Act came into force Department inspectors, in the course of inspections for the enforcement of general labour legislation have, as a matter of routine, checked on the implementation of this Act. In the majority of routine inspections no breaches of the Act were reported, a factor being that in many cases no young persons were employed. Special inspections have been carried out in premises not subject to routine inspection and, in addition, a considerable number have been made following complaints received by my Department. The Department also receive close co-operation from the various schools attendance officers who report on children under the school-leaving age of 15 who are in full-time employment. Cases which come to the attention of the NMS are also reported to the inspectorate. Employers in these cases normally arrange to let the children go at once but it is true to say that any specific detailed complaint will be fully investigated by the inspectors. I appreciate that some complaints are made in areas of small service industries scattered throughout the country in small villages and towns.
Deputy Desmond also asked about the experience of the new provision in the Redundancy Payments Act, 1979 about time off to look for alternative employment and asked if I would monitor its outcome. I can assure the Deputy that I am interested in the operation of that Act. As I stated, that section was an innovation in the Act. It is early days yet and the Act has not been long enough in force to provide information on how the provision is working.
Mention was made of the transfer of the co-ordinating role relating to the recommendations of the Commission on the Status of Women from my Department to the Minister for Economic Planning and Development. Deputy Desmond inferred from this that responsibility for maternity leave legislation was also being transferred. I should like to correct his misunderstanding in relation to that point. In fact, I replied to questions from Deputies O'Leary and Ryan about maternity leave proposals that day and indicated to them that progress was being made.
I was also asked about the off-shore safety legislation. I should like to state that it is my wish and anxiety that this safety measure be initiated urgently. I should like to state for the information of the House, that there are legal problems related to jurisdiction and to the Law of the Sea Conference which has not yet concluded. I should like to assure the House that my concern is genuine and earnest to see that legislation is introduced as soon as the legal difficulties are eliminated.
On the question of the acquired rights directive, I have indicated in my introduction that discussions are taking place with the ICTU and the FUE on the proposed legislation which will take the form of regulations under the Act dealing with the European Communities. Deputy Deasy sought information—I should like to state that Deputy Deasy made some very reasoned comments —on the extra assistance proposed for the emigrants advisory committee. The Government have decided to make funds available towards the cost of employing social workers at Irish centres in Britain. The Advisory Committee on Emigrant Services will examine the needs of the various centres and will make recommendations regarding the most appropriate deployment of the social workers to be recruited.
Deputy Deasy also raised the question of profit-sharing in industry and the possibility of operating profit sharing schemes. He suggested that that should be explored. I should like to tell the Deputy that financial participation of employees is one of the subjects I intend to cover in the proposed discussion document on worker participation. I hope this will stimulate debate among the social partners on possible initiatives in this area. It is my hope that that document will be ready at an early date.
Deputy Horgan referred to the published statistics showing that the average hours worked in certain industries were just below one hour of the legal maxima and he suggested that such individuals were breaking the law. Generally speaking, the Conditions of Employment Act, 1936 provides for a normal working week for industrial workers of 48 hours, plus 12 hours weekly unlicensed overtime making a total of 60 hours. The Shops (Conditions of Employment Act), 1938, in so far as it applies to hotel workers provides for a 56-hour normal week plus 10 hours unlicensed overtime giving a total of 66 hours. However, industrial statistics for September 1978, produced by the CSO, showed that the highest average weekly number of industrial hours in any industry were 52.6. That was the malting industry and, as I indicated, it is proposed to amend those Acts, to reduce the normal working week. If Deputy Horgan gives me details of the specific case he referred to I will pursue it for him.
That is being done.
Deputy Horgan said that the failure to pick up redundancy pay on one occasion might cancel the entitlement. A person who is drawing weekly payment and who becomes ill would normally go on disability benefit and would not lose entitlement to weekly payments which are aggregated with social welfare payments. I will see that the case he referred to is processed and I hope we can have it sorted out to the Deputy's satisfaction.
Deputy Deasy compared the employment maintenance scheme, at the rate of £5 per week, with the £20 payable under the British TES scheme. The amount of money available for our scheme for the financial year 1978 was £5 million. It was the first time such a scheme was introduced in our first budget and it was greatly appreciated as being of assistance in maintaining employment in some of the industries which had gone through a pretty traumatic time. In areas of high intensive employment, some of the industries were very grateful for the assistance. I am satisfied it helped to maintain employment on those sectors. For 1979, as the House is aware, the figure is £8 million, which permits a maximum of £5 per week in respect of the total payrolls of the eligible firms. The British temporary employment subsidy provides £20 a week for a portion of the work force who would otherwise become redundant. The EEC Commission insisted that from 1 April 1978 the TES for the footwear, clothing and textile industries be restricted to not more than 70 per cent of the work force of a particular firm for six months and 50 per cent for a further six months, at the longest. Therefore, the last British temporary employment subsidy payment must end at 31 March 1980.
Deputy White said that AnCO should run courses for the agricultural community. In fact, under the Industrial Training Act of 1967, AnCO is precluded from engaging in such training for agriculture. The Deputies will be aware that several official bodies are responsible for this training and that a new body is being set up. Many AnCO courses are availed of by persons with an agricultural background, which contributes to general agricultural efficiency and output.
Deputy White referred to AnCO lodging allowances, which was the subject of a question from him. These are allowances paid by AnCO in respect of young trainees. He said these were inadequate. This relates, apparently, to block release courses for apprentices, of 8 to 13 weeks' duration. AnCO book the trainees into accommodation with approved landladies—which I think is important. AnCO pay £14 per week to the landlady and the trainee gets his wages, as usual. He is required to pay £4 per week to the landlady. This is effective from 1 January of this year. In my opinion, this is a reasonable arrangement. The lodging allowances rates are reviewed periodically and are fixed by the council of AnCO. There is no dissatisfaction known to AnCO at this time and it appears that these rates compare favourably with other similar rates.
Deputy White said that it would be better to retain the unemployed, rather than to bring workers home from abroad. The proposals to attract emigrants are aimed primarily at highly skilled workers, whose training would take several years. Part of the plan is to eliminate skill shortages altogether, with further training and further education. The need is urgent; the need is immediate. It will take a considerable time to develop a scheme to train the people in the skills in short supply. Filling all these jobs is extremely urgent and the bringing home of our skilled emigrants is justified. We have ample evidence of the shortages of these skills creating blockages in employment for people who could do with the employment.
Deputy White also referred to the local offices of the manpower service. In that context, he referred to recruitment into the armed forces. When the staff of National Manpower are interviewing applicants, with a view to assessing their suitability for employment, it is their practice to tell suitable applicants that there are possibilities of employment in the armed forces. In addition, a series of career information leaflets issued by my Department contains eight separate titles relevant to occupations in the Army, Navy and Air Corps.
In line with the statements issued by the Taoiseach, I regret, as do my colleagues, that the proposals in the national understanding were rejected. The Taoiseach will meet both sides to discuss the position as a result of that decision. We should await the outcome of this meeting before making further comment. In my introductory speech, I said that much effort had been made by all parties concerned in putting forward a reasonable good package and a new concept.
I also made it clear that I had resisted demands made on me for legislation on strikes, pickets and the like. My attitude to these demands is, I repeat, to hope that in this area sanity will prevail and that arrangements voluntarily agreed between employer, employee and union would be supported and allowed to operate. This is what the country wants.
I would ask what would Deputies want done with minorities who refuse to comply with the procedures which have been negotiated on their behalf? Is it arguable that such minority groups should be given in to and agreements made with the unions thrown aside? How long could order last, in collective bargaining, if we were to take such a line? What credibility, what authority, would trade union leaders then have? It is a fact that under the law the actions of such minority groups have the same status, the same protection as actions taken democratically and responsibly by a trade union in pursuance of a claim on behalf of its members. Would the House agree that minority action taken in defiance of the majority will is not democracy at work but rather the opposite? Would the House agree that the cause of democracy is not being advanced by minority actions being given the same standards under the law as are given to actions taken democratically by a trade union? This is a phenomenon which is a dilemma for the Members of this House, who have a responsibility for legislating for the good of the people. The most welcome solution to this would be one which the trade union movement itself would devise. I should be most happy to discuss with ICTU any facilities or give any assistance which might be required to enable them to produce a solution, which is badly needed, particularly in the interests of our young people.
Finally, I would thank again the Deputies who contributed to the debate on the Estimate and say that it is almost double the Estimate of two years ago for the Department, covering all the many important aspects of the Department itself and the agencies under its guidance—the whole wide area of training, youth employment, manpower placement, safety, industrial relations, their very conditions of employment. I had hoped greater interest would have been shown today when there was a second day's debate on this very important subject. I think I should take some of the Opposition to task. One Deputy last week came in very late in the day and told the House that members of my party had boycotted the debate, but I think it is true that they were giving people on the other side of the House plenty of opportunity to speak. Today we were the only people, with one exception, who did show interest. I am not so sure that much of the noise made on the other side of the House had not some relevance to elections rather than to the important Estimate we were discussing.
Vote put and agreed to.