Vol. 420 No. 7
10 Mrs. T. Ahearn asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the number of redundancies notified to his Department in January, 1991 and January, 1992 and the average for each month in 1991 and 1992; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
33 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Labour if he will give details of the number of redundancies notified to his Department for the first four months of 1992; the way in which these figures compare to the previous year; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 10 and 33 together.
The number of redundancies notified to my Department in January 1992 was 1,537, compared with 1,169 in January 1991. The average monthly figure for notifications in the first four months of 1992 is 1,604, compared with an average of 1,390 per month for the year 1991.
The total number of redundancies notified to my Department in the first four months of 1992 was 6,414, compared with 5,829 in the corresponding period in 1991.
The total number of redundancies notified in the first four months of this year represents an increase of some 10 per cent on the figure for the corresponding period last year. It should be noted, however, that this year's figures have been inflated to some extent by the large scale redundancies arising from the closure of the United Meat Packers plants throughout the country and the liquidation of Dublin Cargo Handling Limited.
The number of redundancies reflects the rise in unemployment. We must all accept that the prospect of redundancy is an enormous problem for anyone who is employed. Is the Minister satisfied that redundancy payments are sufficient for people who suddenly lose their jobs? Do his Department or the Government have any plans to introduce retraining schemes for people who are made redundant? We should be doing everything we can to find long term employment for people who are suddenly made redundant. If we do not take positive steps to provide retraining for people who are made redundant our unemployment level will continue to rise.
We have to assess whether the myriad of training schemes being operated at present meet the needs of people who are unemployed and those who are seeking jobs. It is my job as Minister for Labour to ensure that we consistently evaluate these schemes both from the point of retraining and their value for first time job seekers. With regard to redundancies, we have developed a redundancy payments system and a statutory redundancy fund. These provide a safety net for employers and industries which go into liquidation. I am not saying this system is adequate or otherwise, but it provides a safety net. We compare reasonably favourably with our competitors in this regard.
Does the Minister not think it is a particular cause for concern that the rate of redundancy is, to use his figure, approximately 10 per cent higher than the figure for the corresponding months last year having regard to the general conviction that Irish industry is in good shape to face up to what we thought, at least until yesterday, would be Single Market conditions? Is he putting anything in place to deal with this issue of job retention as distinct from job creation? There is a necessity for us to look at why we are still shedding jobs at an accelerating rate as compared to the corresponding months last year. Finally, may I ask him if his reference to the figures being inflated by UMP and the liquidation of Dublin Cargo Handling Limited means that his Department consider the former employees of Dublin Cargo Handling Limited to have been formally made redundant?
With regard to the Deputy's final question, that is a matter for the employer and the employees in that company. With regard to the redundancy figures, I would point out that rationalisation has taken place in the meat processing industry. For example, we are all well aware of the well publicised collapse of the Halal company in recent months. This is a factor which has to be taken into account when comparing the figures with those for the first four months of the previous year. I agree that the retention of jobs is just as important as the creation of new jobs. The Task Force on Employment have provided us with much interesting data which seem to suggest that our percentage of linkage in terms of supplying multinational companies here is only approximately 27 per cent. Therefore, there should be great room for improvement in the entire linkage programme. While this programme has been promoted by the IDA for some years, it has not had the degree of success which the Deputy or I would expect.
Question No. 11.
A Cheann Comhairle——
A brief question, Deputy.
The Minister adduced the liquidation of Dublin Cargo Handling Limited as a cause for the unexpectedly high figures. When I asked him if he considered these employees to have been made redundant he said it was a matter for the employers and the unions. Which is it? Are the employees redundant, or is this issue still alive as between the employers and the union?
They have been included in the redundancy figure I have given. The figure for Dublin Cargo Handling Limited is included in the increase of 10 per cent in the figure for the corresponding four months for the previous year.
Has any claim been made against——
Let us make progress on other questions.
May I raise a question in regard to redundancies?
I will allow the Deputy a brief question. I have dwelt over long on this question.
I believe I am entitled to ask a supplementary question on this issue. Would the Minister not agree that while the redundancy payments Act has served workers well we have now reached the stage where jobs are being shed under this legislation and profitable companies are making people redundant? I accept it is only proper that a company which is no longer viable should be able to avail of the redundancy payments Act, but companies which are making a profit——
The Deputy is making a statement.
——are now shedding jobs to increase profitability. Does the Minister not agree that it is time to have another look at this legislation?
There is a combination of reasons for the level of redundancy in our economy — for example, the global recession, continuing rationalisation, a loss of markets and a fall in demand, particularly in the computer and meat processing sectors. It should be noted that the 1992 figure includes a considerable number of redundancies which were notified in the meat processing sector. It is too early at this stage to predict with any confidence the likely figure for total notified redundancies in 1992. It is on that basis that I gave my answer.
That does no answer my question.
If the Deputy is seeking additional information he should put down a separate question.
