Skip to main content
Normal View

Dáil Éireann debate -
Tuesday, 6 Apr 1993

Vol. 429 No. 3

Written Answers. - Unemployment Benefits.

Question:

100 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Social Welfare his views on whether the extra condition of loss of employment applied to part-time workers who claim unemployment benefit from 4 January 1993 is counterproductive to employment incentive and social justice, particularly as applied to married women working outside the home; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Section 6 of the Social Welfare (Miscellaneous Social Insurance Provisions) (No. 2) Regulations, 1992 (S.I. No. 448/92) provided that a part-time worker who claims unemployment benefit must suffer a substantial loss of employment before he can qualify for benefit. These regulations came into effect on 4 January, 1993. In practice this meant that a part-time worker whose normal working week was four days or more would have to lose two days of insurable employment in order to qualify. In the case of a working week consisting of less than four days, the loss required was one day of insurable employment. These arrangements were improved by amending regulations which I made on 23 March 1993 reducing the "2-day" rule to 1 day. I will keep the situation under review.

Most part-time workers have only recently become eligible for benefit as a result of my decision to extend insurance to all employees earning £25 or more per week, as and from April 1991. Any part-time worker who takes up employment at £25 or more per week is now entitled to the full range of benefits, including pensions. I am satisfied that, as a result, most part-time workers now have a greater incentive to take up work.

Question:

101 Mr. Byrne asked the Minister for Social Welfare his views on whether there is an inequity in the situation whereby part-time workers earning £60 or more per week pay a Class A contribution, but yet must have an average earning of £70 per week to qualify for the full benefits deriving from a Class A contribution; the proposals, if any, he has to redress the situation for such persons earning between £60 per week and £70 per week; and if he will make a statement on the matter.

Employees earning £25 or more per week are generally covered by Class A social insurance, and can qualify for the full range of benefits, including pensions. In the case of people earning less than £70 per week some benefits are paid at reduced rates. Such reduced rates are necessary because the income threshold for social insurance is at a relatively low level. It would not make sense to pay the full rate of short term benefits, currently £53 per week for a single person, to someone whose earnings are as low as £25 per week; such a person would have a strong incentive to give up work and claim benefit instead. The threshold of £70 was chosen to ensure that a single person would have an entitlement to the full rate of £53 per week only in circumstances where the incentive to work is maintained.

The PRSI exemption for low-paid workers is a separate feature of the social insurance system. People whose earnings in a particular week are under £60 do not have to pay the employee's social insurance contribution. However, the employer still has to pay the full employer's share, and the employee retains entitlement to social insurance benefits.

The two thresholds are therefore very different in nature, and the existence of two separate thresholds for different purposes is not, in itself, inequitable. Of course, any change in either threshold would have financial consequences in terms of either loss of contributions or additional expenditure on benefits. Such changes could be considered only in a budgetary context.
Top
Share