Vol. 388 No. 3
asked the Minister for Labour if, following his consultations with the FUE and the ICTU, he will be introducing amending legislation to provide for the extension of statutory minimum notice, holidays, maternity and redundancy provisions currently applicable to those employees working specified number of hours, to all part-time employees on a pro rata basis.
20.
asked the Minister for Labour the progress which has been made in the consultations with both sides of industry regarding extended rights for part-time workers which he indicated in Dáil Éireann on 2 November, 1988 was under way; when he will introduce legislation in this area; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 9 and 20 together.
I have not concluded my discussions with the ICTU and the FUE on the part-time work issue and I do not wish to prejudice the outcome of those deliberations by issuing progress reports or by anticipating what might emerge from the consultative process, other than to say that it is my hope that the proposals which I will eventually put forward will strike a balance between the needs of employers and of regular part-time employees.
When does the Minister hope to hold these talks with the interested parties?
I have had a number of meetings already and I hope to conclude the talks in the next few months. It is only fair to say there are still fairly major differences of opinion and that these will remain. The FUE would not wish to see any radical alterations in the present structures for part-time workers and the Deputy will know the ICTU are anxious that there will be pro rata entitlements for part-time workers. I have to give consideration to both of those views and come to a balance. I have said previously in this House that because there is a major change in the structures of work — the number of part-time workers has grown from just over 40,000 ten years ago to over 60,000 now, which is effectively just over 5 per cent of the workforce — there is a need to give more protection to people working in the part-time category for under 18 hours, but a balance must be struck on that. Surveys have shown that the highest proportion of part-time workers are females, that up to 46 per cent of those are in part-time employment because that is what suits their family circumstances. Against that there are people who are permanently part-time workers, who have no entitlements to holidays, maternity leave or redundancy payments and have no redress in the case of unfair dismissal. That seems unfair, so I am trying to edge both sides towards a consensus. I would be very glad to be able to deal with the issue tomorrow but, to be realistic, it will take another few months to get to the stage of a set of proposals which I can bring before this House.
I cannot accept that 46 per cent of the working population would choose part-time work. I think it is through necessity rather than anything else that they are forced to do so in many cases. I can well understand the attitude of the FUE because at present lack of proper protective legislation for the worker is in favour of the employer. The whole thing is being exploited to a frightful degree.
Ceist le do thoil, a Theachta.
Practically 50 per cent of the population is working on only a part-time basis, the implication there being that 46 per cent who are employed are not contributing in any major degree——
I am anxious to facilitate the Deputy but we must proceed by way of supplementary question.
That is a supplementary question. In view of the fact that we are approaching 1992 I would like to ask the Minister if part-time workers in Europe enjoy far better conditions and greater protection than is the case here, if so, what he intends to do about it and how soon he will do something about it.
There are some greater benefits in Europe. The percentage of people in part-time employment is far greater in all other member states. I know the figure is growing here and I agree with the purport of the Deputy's question that we have to make those changes. I do not believe it is possible — this is where the difficulty arises — to bring every part-time worker within the net in terms of the various pieces of legislation. You have to find some definition that provides a basis for people who are regular part-time workers as opposed to part-time work, and try to bring them within the net. I am seeking to get agreement on that. There are cost factors in this. It is not just a matter of me bringing legislation before the House. There is an employer's cost to it. There is an employee's disadvantage in cost also. There are fears among some employees that they may not continue to have employment. I do not take too much cognisance of that because I think it is an excuse used by some unscrupulous employers who abuse this privilege but in the social welfare code there will be major changes to be made on foot of the legislation I will be bringing in. Such issues are what will delay us in coming to a conclusion.
