asked the Minister for Labour if his attention has been drawn to the practice of many employers of setting upper age limits for job applications at a relatively low level; to the fact that this practice discriminates against many women who are trying to return to the workplace; and if he intends to take any steps to control such a situation.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Job Applicants Age Limits.
3.
I am aware that many employers do set low upper age limits for recruitment to employment and that this causes difficulties for some older workers, including women, who wish to return to the labour market.
While the employment equality legislation does not cover discrimination on grounds of age it has been established from cases taken under the Employment Equality Act, 1977, that age limits in relation to employment may, in certain circumstances, constitute indirect discrimination on the grounds of marital status.
In some circumstances valid considerations such as job requirements and pension rights may be involved.
I have no plans for specific legislation on this matter as I am not convinced that legislation is appropriate.
In relation to the Civil Service the Minister for Finance has promised to have the question of the application of upper age limits for recruitment examined in the context of an ongoing review of Civil Service recruitment policy which is being carried out by his Department.
Finally, FAS, in its training and work experience programmes, pays special attention to the problems of older workers and includes specific measures to assist older women in their return to the labout market.
I am dismayed and disappointed by the Minister's response. The Minister suggests that there are no plans to amend the legislation, but would he agree that the basic problem, particularly in the public sector is that grounding Act of 1949, which makes it obligatory to impose arbitrary low upper age limits on recruitment; in some instances the limit is 27 years. Does that not require to be addressed by amending legislation if nothing else?
There are a number of issues in this question. There are two major reasons why employers and employees would rather that things stay as they are: first in relation to pension rights, there are major difficulties if people have not got their full years' service pension contributions in assessing what they should receive at retirement; second, in relation to promotional outlets, if one recruits at any age — and you can argue about what age you should stop recruiting — it militates against people who come in at a young age. For example in the Civil Service, the local authorities or any area of the public service if people come in at age 20 and others come in at age 30 or 35, it takes up the promotional positions that would have been available. This argument has gone on for years and quite frankly I can see both sides of the argument. I can see that people who were in a job would be at a grave disadvantage if people come in at a later stage. On the other hand, while we do not have any proposals for legislative action, FÁS operate an extensive programme to try to get people into the workplace. The "start your own business" course and other courses which bring women, in particular, back into the work place have been very succesful. We have been pursuing those courses with great success in the past few years.
With regard to FÁS, which the Minister has referred to on two occasions, would he not agree that there is a huge contradiction in the FÁS programmes of getting people back to work, in particular women who for family or other reasons have come out of the work force and who now find that they are militated against particularly in the public sector because of a statutory requirement. Is the Minister aware of a particular incident, which may have been drawn to his attention on my behalf through the Minister for Social Welfare, where a woman aged 36 who had worked for the local authority for the past 18 months now finds when the position is advertised that she is automatically excluded from applying for that job and must go back on the dole.
It happens all the time.
Surely there is a major contradiction between the two positions which the Minister should recognise and take action on.
As I said in reply to the question, the Minister for Finance has said that he will look at the position and see what he can do in the Civil Service, but I think the two questions I raised have to be taken into account, that is pensions and the career structure. FÁS pay particular attention to the needs of older unemployed women by providing courses for women on re-entry to the labour force. The training in that area is aimed specifically at adult women who have had periods of interruption in their career. I know that Deputy Barnes has spoken at length on this subject on other occasions. The courses fall within the alternate programme category and women accounted for 67 per cent of participants in this category last year. In all about 2,000 participated in the return to work course which was very successful.
In some areas where they could seek work, people are debarred for the reasons I have stated earlier. However it is not something that we can simply change because there are great objections from staff apart altogether from the employment and pension difficulties that arise.
Deputy McCartan rose.
The Minister is right in saying that pensions are a factor, but is he not aware that his colleague, the Minister for Social Welfare, has promised over the past three years a pension scheme to deal with the inter-transferability of pensions, which is a great stifler of labour mobility. This is causing not only women but men to be told that they are too old for employment at 35 years of age. Would the Minister, first, undertake to press on his colleague, the Minister for Social Welfare, the urgency of a pensions Bill to deal with the inter-transferability of pension rights; second, would the Minister accept that another factor contributing to the problem raised by Deputy McCartan is that people of 35 years tend to be married and have children? Under the social welfare code they are paid for each of those children but they are not recognised for unemployment benefit purposes and there is no tax allowance for them. Employers find it difficult to pay married people with children sufficient gross pay so that they will at least have the same net take-home pay as those on social welfare. This point needs attention.
I am concerned about the lack of progress we are making at Question Time today. We have been on questions from some 20 minutes and we have not as yet disposed of three questions. I must insist on brevity and relevance from now on. I want to call Deputy Barnes and conclude this question.
May I ask——
No, I am proceeding to another question after that.
The national pensions plan has not been promised for just the past three years, I think there was a Green Paper on it in the mid-seventies. There is a need for this plan. With regard to the question Deputy McCartan raised, the difficulty arises when a person's career is interrupted. It is not transferability which is the problem; it is the fact that they do not have pension arrangements. It is not simply a national pensions scheme which will resolve this problem. However, in regard to labour market mobility I believe a national pensions scheme will help in due course.
I want to call Deputy Barnes.
What about the old——
Order, please.
Is the Minister aware of the frustration of many women who have the benefit of the return to work course, which we all welcome, after the investment of FÁS and their own investment to build a continuing career because the exclusion Deputy McCartan referred to actively works against them? Therefore, there seems to be waste on all levels. Is the Minister also aware that the European Parliament Committee on Women's Rights have recommended in their report entitled "The Reintegration Of Women Into The Work Force" that not alone should upper age limits be removed but that the Structural Funds should be used to ensure that women receive the benefit. There is a tremendous gap between what is happening at European level and here and surely we have to narrow this gap between now and 1992?
The FÁS success rate is over 50 per cent and on courses which help people to start back at work the success rate is good. It is a very successful course and I am speaking from having met and presented certificates to the women involved in the courses over a number of years.
It leads to huge anomalies like the one I instanced. If they are placed in a job they are excluded automatically——
Not from the labour market but from certain jobs. I do not want to have to repeat this point again. There may be anomalies but the number of anomalies created in the promotional structures within the public sector — if we were to allow anyone of any age in — would be far greater, and I am discounting it and we will see what we can do. Breaking up the structure in any part of the public service and having no upper age limit on people being recruited would create massive difficulties.
I want to refer to the question raised by Deputy Barnes. With regard to the Employment Equality Act, while the age bar has not been in existence successful cases have been taken on the basis of marital status. This is perhaps moving in line with some of the developments in Europe. A successful case was taken in one of the health boards not too long ago. To remove the bar altogether is not something we can do by legislative means.