asked the Minister for Labour if he has abandoned plans for the reform of industrial relations; and, if not, the reason various deadlines he has set for the introduction of reform of industrial relations legislation have not been met.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Industrial Relations Reform.
1.
I would like to assure the Deputy that there is no question of the proposals for the reform of industrial relations being abandoned. A Bill to give effect to the proposals is being finalised at present and I hope to introduce it in the Dáil in the near future.
Would the Minister admit that in replies to similar questions in this House last year he promised that the Bill would be enacted before Christmas 1988?
I will not admit to that, Deputy, but I will admit there have been some delays and I take full responsibility for them. It is true that there have been a number of draftings of the Bill, which is a complex one, and that the delay is much longer than I would have wished, but I hope we will have it before we reach the next Question Time.
I can assure you, a Cheann Comhairle, that the Minister promised during Question Time that the Bill would be enacted prior to Christmas 1988. What is more he subsequently promised during another Question Time that it would be enacted before Easter. In his reply today the Minister does not give any date by which legislation will be introduced or enacted. Can he now give us a date when this industrial relations legislation will be introduced?
As I said, I hoped we would have had this Bill earlier this year. However, due to unforeseen circumstances there were delays. I was in touch with the Attorney General's Office in recent days and he is doing his best to have the Bill completed. I hope to have it some time this month.
May I ask the Minister——
Perhaps a final question, Deputy.
——to what extent does he consider that the reform of industrial relations can play a part in employment creation?
That is a separate question.
There are questions down on that subject.
That question is very similar to one down in the Deputy's name.
There are questions tabled in respect of that matter.
2.
asked the Minister for Labour the present stage of the proposals for reform of labour legislation affecting part-time workers, in view of the fact that the social partners have given their views on this and a seminar was held on the topic in May 1989.
14.
asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the Government's policy in relation to the extension of full protective legislation to part-time workers; if any legislative measures are planned; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 2 and 14 together.
The House will be aware that I have reviewed the issue of legislative protection for part-time workers in consultation with the social partners. I share the concern expressed by Deputies that something must be done about the exclusion of a substantial number of regular part-time employees, generally those working fewer than 18 hours per week from the benefits of a range of labour laws. My proposals for legislative reform are now at an advanced stage and I hope to have a Bill ready for introduction to the Oireachtas in the new year.
The last figure I saw indicated that there were more than 60,000 part-time workers in the workforce. Does the Minister propose to take any specific action to tackle discrimination against women who are the victims of this trend and who are denied the protection in legislation that the Minister is well aware of?
The figure is now a little higher. At the last count there were about 72,000, which is the 1988 figure.
Registered parttimers?
Yes and slightly over 60 per cent are women. As I said previously, they are not protected by key legislation which covers unfair dismissals, redundancy and holidays. I intend to see that they will be fully covered by the proposals brought before the House.
Could the Minister be more specific and tell us when he intends to bring forward legislation to tackle this problem?
As the Deputy is aware, in the early part of the summer a number of conferences and discussions on this topic took place to bring the diverging views of both the Federated Union of Employers, as they were then, and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions together. I do not think it is possible to get an equal view in this area but those discussions were certainly useful. Further discussions were held quite recently. I have circulated my proposals through the normal system within Government Departments. Next year I will have proposals but at this stage I do not want to be more precise.
In his reply the Minister said that he hopes to introduce legislation early next year.
Next year.
Not early next year? We want to be absolutely clear about this, given the reply he gave to the last question. Can he tell us if it is his intention to place an onus on both employer and employee to register in any proposed legislation?
I will certainly look at that aspect. I am aware that debates have been held in the past on it. One of the things that has been highlighted in the debate is that it suits many people to work part-time. If we do not give people who work part-time legislative benefits there will be an attraction, I hope only to some, to stay outside the system. We should seek to ensure that there will not be two codes where, first, full-time workers are well covered under proper regulations of employment and, second, part-time workers are not covered by the system. It is my view, as I have stated publicly on a number of occasions, including at the conference between the FUE and the ICTU, that the present system militates against people playing it straight. That is one of the considerations which will have to be taken into account.
May I ask the Minister——
I want to call on other Deputies. Deputy Garland has been offering for some time.
Does the Minister realise that there is a tremendous demand for work sharing and that this is one of the ways our level of unemployment can be reduced, from the present figure of 230,000? Would the Minister give this matter serious consideration?
I will. Proposals have been made with regard to work sharing. If part-time workers are given proper fringe benefits and proper statutory benefits rather than the numbers of part-time workers decreasing, we will see this area of employment growing. Regardless of what anybody says, it will grow anyway and I want to ensure that it grows in an ordered and regulated way.
The Minister indicated that the estimated number of registered part-time employees is 73,000. Does he have any figure for the estimated number of unregistered part-time employees?
I do not.
Are the Department trying to estimate the number outside the system?
There are various estimates of that figure. The official position is that there should be nobody outside the system and people should be registered.
Deputy O'Sullivan has been offering for some time.
Would the Minister consider putting in a clause in any proposed legislation to the effect that the number of part-time workers in any place of employment should be pro rata to the number of people employed on a permanent basis? At present all the supermarket chains, without exception, are able to provide cheap food simply because they use cheap labour and are able to avoid paying proper benefits to their part-time employees. Does he not think that there should be a ratio of one part-time worker per ten permanent employees in any situation?
I would not disagree with the Deputy, but the last time I answered that question in the positive I had two delegations from the two largest supermarkets in the country saying that they would rather be left alone. There should be a ratio, but in some employment — I think this point has to be taken into account — it is not always possible. I am not referring specifically to the supermarket area. The Deputy knows the problem extends beyond supermarkets, to fast foods and other areas. In some seasonal jobs it is not practical to do that. In most cases part-time jobs are in the minority.
One can differentiate between part-time and seasonal work.
They come within the same category.
There is a deliberate policy by some companies to employ the majority of their staff on a part-time basis. As a result we will never get a reduction in the number of people unemployed. We will not make significant inroads in the unemployment figures unless we tackle this problem and the Minister is prepared to tackle it head on regardless of how many deputations he has. The whole area of part-time work is being abused. The fast food sector is notorious. In addition people are being paid on a flat rate when they work past midnight. I think we have gone backwards.
We must proceed by way of questions. I must dissuade Members from making speeches.
Does the Minister propose to take any action to regularise the situation where a great many women are being forced to work outside the protection of such legislation as is there by the manner in which the Employment Equality Directive was implemented — in other words women must stay below earnings of £50 or else their husbands lose roughly a commensurate amount if they earn more than £50 per week. In a situation where women are being forced into the workforce by unemployment, it is disgraceful that their husbands suffer a reduction in their unemployment benefit or assistance by virtue of this ceiling of £50 on their wife's earnings. Does the Minister intend to take any action to regularise this?
The Deputy is bringing in new matter.
It is a social welfare matter. We are endeavouring to cover by legislative means all those in part-time work, and those not covered by legislation at present.