I thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me the opportunity to raise this matter on the Adjournment this evening. I do this because of my very grave concern for the workforce in Kilrush who were asked over a year ago to take holidays while their factory was being refurbished. The end result was that they lost their jobs and there is very little hope of them getting employment as things stand at the moment. Those redundant workers are owed over £32,000 in lieu of notice. That money has been raised to the status of preferential credit in the final divide up of whatever assets become available.
The situation is pretty bleak because the factory in Kilrush is owned by SFADCo and was only leased to the company. The only other assets for auction are the machinery and the house in Kilkee. This house was sold for £50,000 but the entitlement to the proceeds from the sale is the subject of litigation. It is not clear yet if that money will become available because the house was in the joint names of the directors. It is estimated that if the machinery is sold it may realise £40,000 or it may realise a lot less. This leaves the workforce in Kilrush in a very bad position. Nearly £250,000 is owed and less than £100,000 will become available. The workers are not likely to get the £32,000 owed to them but only the percentage in accordance with the company law which governs receivership. It is most unsatisfactory that we still have a situation like this.
I ask the Minister for Labour to examine the situation very seriously, particularly to examine the Protection of Employees Bill which has been circulated. This Bill will govern insolvencies arising as and from 22 October 1983. It is designed to protect employees' inter ests in regard to pay in the event of their employer becoming insolvent. It will also implement the EEC Council Directive 80/987/EEC which came into effect on the same date and which confers certain rights on employees in insolvent situations. I ask the Government to be magnanimous enough to put that date back to 6 April 1983 rather than the suggested date of 22 October 1983. It is unfortunate that we wait until it is imperative to implement EEC directives before we do so. We should be a step ahead and have them implemented far in advance of the date on which we have to implement them.
Fóir Teoranta have a considerable amount of money involved in the company. This money was advanced to the Kilrush company in three separate rescue attempts, the last of which took place early in 1983. This assistance was provided on the understanding that the UK directors would invest a further £50,000 equity in the business but this additional funding has not materialised. The owners requested Fóir Teoranta to appoint a receiver in April 1983. They went ahead and appointed a receiver. They maintain they did more than justified in trying to help the company but that there was little option but to appoint a receiver in the end. The unions recognised this. The receiver has made great efforts to secure a takeover but that has been unsuccessful. He was in contact with 27 companies and actively negotiated with 11 of them. Very serious negotiations were conducted with three companies and at one stage people were very optimistic that there would be a successful takeover. That did not materialise. There is very little employment in the manufacturing industry in that area of County Clare. This workforce see very little hope of securing the money they are legally entitled to. Everybody feels that the receiver did a very good job in trying to sell the company as a viable trading entity, but in view of the apparent lack of interest in pottery at the moment it seems that an auction of the assets is the only option open to the receiver. It is recognised that the workers have a legitimate right to the minimum notice payment. The receiver decided on the minimum notice money in accordance with current solvency law. Fóir Teoranta stressed they would have no part to play in such a decision. Minimum notice payments are traditionally ranked very poor in insolvency situations. I am sure the Minister recognises this.
The seriousness of the situation cannot be overstated. Many of the workforce have worked for over 20 years in the pottery industry in Kilrush. They have acquired very specialised and definite skills and they now see very little opportunity to redirect that skill into some new project in the pottery field in Kilrush. It is unfortunate that they now find themselves in this situation and that they cannot secure the money they are justly entitled to and which they have worked extremely hard for over the past 20 years. The Government have a duty to thoroughly examine the situation in cases like this. I ask them to be gracious enough to revert the date to 6 April 1983. That would be a justifiable date because it is the beginning of the financial year, it would make matters quite easy administratively and there should not be any great difficulties. I am primarily motivated because of the situation in which the Kilrush workforce find themselves in. I am sure it is not just confined to the Kilrush workforce but that the same situation relates to many other unfortunate people who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own over the past few years and who are in a similar situation.
