Vol. 423 No. 2
13 Mr. Cotter asked the Minister for Labour whether he has assessed the impact that a reduction in overtime working would have in opening up employment opportunities in (a) the public sector and (b) the private sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
24 Mr. Carey asked the Minister for Labour if there is an estimate of the number of new jobs which would be created in the public and private sectors if there was a ban or restriction on overtime; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 13 and 24 together.
A study which was undertaken on behalf of my Department and published in 1980 estimated that 51 million hours of overtime had been worked in the production sector between June 1978 and June 1979. A further 21 million hours overtime had been worked in those parts of the services sector covered by the study.
The study suggested that in any reduction of overtime only 30 per cent of the hours would, at most, translate into full time jobs.
In 1986, a study of Worksharing and the Public Sector was published by the Institute of Public Administration. According to that study, the reasons for overtime in the Civil Service ranged from “service outside normal hours” to “providing cover for staff absent on sick or annual leave”.
There is no up-to-date estimate of the number of jobs that might be created in the public and private sectors if overtime were banned or restricted. Arriving at such as estimate presents significant theoretical as well as practical difficulties.
As far as commercial enterprises and the private sector are concerned, it is a matter for management and workers to agree on working-time arrangements through the normal collective bargaining negotiation process, having regard to the basic imperatives of efficiency, productivity and competitiveness while respecting existing legislation on hours of work. Trade unions would also have a role in exploring the possibilities for substituting jobs for overtime at enterprise level.
A draft directive on the organisation of working time has been drawn up by the EC Commission as part of the social action programme for the implementation of the European Social Charter.
The draft directive contains, inter alia, proposals requiring a minimum daily rest period of 11 consecutive hours per 24 hour period and a maximum weekly working time of 48 hours. The proposals will be considered at the Social Affairs Council on 3 December and if adopted will provide an overall framework on working hours and overtime.
Would the Minister not agree that even on the quoted figure he gave of 30 per cent of overtime hours translating into full time employment, the 1979 figures would suggest 80,000 extra jobs in the public sector? Does he not consider that he should give this extra study to see to what extent we can start to realise some of these extra jobs at a time when we are very short of work opportunities for people coming on the labour market?
I can assure the Deputy that this is one of a number of matters which is being considered, discussed and explored in the context of the review of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress. Subcommittees have been set up and it is an issue which will be examined. There is a need to look at every possible avenue to try to deal with the major social problem of unemployment in this country. I believe there is a readiness on behalf of all sides of industry to sit down to see in what way they can examine these issues afresh without perhaps the arguments for and against which were used in the past, given the scale of the problem. The Deputy can be assured that these are issues which will be fully explored in the review of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress.
I am calling Deputy Seán Ryan.
Can we expect to see any ministerial initiative?
Order, I have called Deputy Ryan.
I welcome the commitment in this area by the Minister this afternoon, given the extent of the unemployment problem. I would ask him to extend his commitment beyond the overtime element and, perhaps, to examine work sharing, a shorter working week, early retirement, etc. These are areas we will have to examine to try to generate some jobs. In the context of overtime can the Minister or his other colleagues look at the embargo in the public sector which mitigates against some of these elements being included? Finally, can the Minister give a commitment that he and his Department will give this problem the type of focus required?
My Department's officials are members of the subcommittees which have been set up to review the Programme for Economic and Social Progress and will be putting forward departmental proposals for consideration. I do not think it would be wise to go any further than that. We have achieved much success in this country based on the partnership approach. That is something to which we must remain committed. It is only by that process we can achieve prospective gains in employment as a result of these labour market mechanisms, should agreement be forthcoming on all sides. As I have said, there is a readiness and a realisation on all sides that these are issues we must look at in an innovative and imaginative way. I await the outcome of the discussions which will take place shortly.
Would the Minister not agree that reliance on figures that are now 13 years old — dating even before the parties on this side of the House were in Government — are not very fruitful for deciding the scope for action at present in this area? Can I ask him specifically if he will commit himself to setting a target within the public sector for a reduction in overtime hours in order to create job opportunities for others? That is a sector in which he and his fellow Ministers control many of the obstacles.
The Deputy will appreciate I am not Minister for Finance.
We were hoping for that all the time.
The Deputy could not do any worse.
The general issues raised in the question will be looked at. I would make the point that what can come out of those discussions can only be based on broad agreement on all sides of industry. We must be mindful of the fact that the theoretical attraction must be set against the practical realities of industry and the need to retain competitiveness and high levels of productivity which, in terms of increasing job creation in the short term, will not put the viability of enterprises at risk. We should await the outcome of the discussions and be satisfied at this stage that there is a readiness on all sides of industry to examine this issue afresh.
May I ask the Minister for Labour if any investigation has been carried out to estimate the difference in cost of having somebody working overtime and changing it into a full time job?
The central review committee, in their review of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress, will deal with all those issues in detail.
Would the Minister for Labour, in the context of this review, consult with his colleague, the Minister for Finance, in relation to the Finance Acts as they effect pension funding? The whole area of pensions and more flexibility in regard to part time and additional working hours should be examined. There ought to be greater flexibility for early retirement and subsequent amendments for a greater contribution in the early years so that somebody can build up a fund to allow for greater mobility.
I will take up the matter raised by the Deputy with the Minister for Finance as I feel it is worth pursuing.
Question No. 14, please.
