asked the Minister for Labour if the review of the Unfair Dismissals Act which was initiated by the previous Government has yet been completed; if he intends to introduce amending legislation; and if so, if it will include a provision that a person's private life, outside of the place of employment cannot be used as grounds for dismissal: and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977.
8.
I am at present studying the outcome of the review of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, referred to by the Deputy. When this examination is concluded, I shall indicate what measures, if any, I propose to take in this area.
The previous Minister indicated that he had hoped to have this review completed by early 1986. The last reply I received was on 3 December 1985 and the Minister at that time indicated that he had hoped to have the review completed by early 1986. Presumably, the new legislation would then have been brought before us. Can the Minister indicate what is delaying the review, whether the review has been completed or whether it is a question of the formulation of legislation? Can he also indicate whether he intends to include a provision which will not allow dismissal for reasons of religious belief or political allegiance and that these will be specifically excluded in any new legislation he brings forward?
What the Deputy has said is correct. A review has been going on for sometime, parts of which have been completed. The officials of the Department and the previous Minister endeavoured as far as possible to examine the areas which were causing difficulty in order to get some agreement. There has to be a consensus. The main issues are well outlined in the reviews undertaken to date. I would like to see this review reaching completion. This is not easy as there are many difficulties as regards the legislation. Many employers perceive this legislation as creating major difficulties and disincentives to taking on people. The previous Minister and outside interests have carried out a number of reviews to prove that that is not the case. The advice I have received is that we should bring forward a document to try to convince people that there are certain initiatives which could be taken in protective legislation to improve the information flow. It is my intention that during the summer the results of a number of reviews, which have been carried out both inside and outside the Department, will be brought forward in a booklet and we will seek agreement as regards what amendments should be made. To bring forward amendments that would create further difficulties for employers would not lead to any progress. It would be a further disincentive to employing people and would not help the people we are trying to assist. We should be trying to create jobs. I do not wish to do anything which will be seen to be negative. To answer the Deputy's question, I will shortly bring forward not new legislation initially but a document which reviews the present legislation.
While I accept that the Minister must try as far as possible to gain a consensus, surely he will agree that it is this House which formulates legislation? There have been widespread demands for reform of this legislation to prevent unfair dismissal on the grounds of one's private life, religious or political beliefs. Can the Minister indicate whether he is thinking along those lines and whether he will be including that kind of recommendation either in the discussion document he is producing or in the final legislation he may intend to bring in? Can he also tell me if there is a proposal to reverse the situation whereby of the people who succeed in bringing a successful case for unfair dismissal the number who succeed in being re-employed by their employer is very small and the compensation they receive in many cases in no way compensates them for the loss of their jobs?
I thank the Deputy for his support. At least we are making some progress in bringing forward the booklet. The type of case the Deputy mentioned was debated in this House last year and there were a number of questions tabled on the subject. The conclusion reached, following examination within the Department and the seeking of legal advice which was accepted by the last Minister, was that because of the fact that it would not be legally possible to provide for all eventualities in legislation, the problem was simply not amenable to solution by way of amendment to the 1977 Act. The result of that, in effect, is that the type of case to which the Deputy is referring continues to be decided by the Employment Appeals Tribunal or the courts on the basis of their judgment or the employer's overall reasonableness in dismissing an employee.
Has the Minister any views on what the appropriate period is to qualify for the protection of the Act? Is he happy with the present 12 months or would he see that being shortened? Secondly, is he aware of the suggestion that different criteria should apply to employers of different sizes, in other words, that more rigid obligations would apply to larger employers and, by extension, less rigid to smaller employers? Does he see any merit in that suggestion?
Regarding the reduction of the service requirement for qualification which is at present one year, I have a view that that should be shortened. There were different periods put forward in some of the reviews. ICTU's request was for 26 weeks. If possible, that is the period I should like to see. It would be a more favourable one on the basis that employees normally serve a 26 week probation. Again, that is one of the matters under review for the obtaining of ideas. As to whether there should be some scaling, some of the difficulties with which the previous Minister had to deal were brought on by lack of that. We are asking small employers who are open to difficult market positions to confront the same kind of legislation as larger employers who can have all the expertise available to them. This is a question on which we might get more progress and more agreement if there were scales.
As the Minister has stated that he intends to publish a booklet on a review of the Unfair Dismissals Act, could he give some idea of the timescale he sees before legislation is introduced following on that booklet?
Reviews of this Act have been going on and have been fairly well in the final stage since the autumn of 1984 and nothing has happened since. This question does not just refer to the Unfair Dismissals Act but to some of the legislation where the preception is that it is prohibitive to try to employ people. It concerns examination of the different legislation under that area. In the booklet I shall seek broad views. Deputies, including myself, have been asking questions during the past few years. Everybody interested is not aware of what should be done. Rather than having disagreement on legislation which has been brought forward, we should seek prior agreement. Then perhaps we can get legislation. Following the issue of the various reviews and the debate on the subject, it will be next year before we will see legislation.