I thank the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs for coming into the House.
In recent times the Government has placed great emphasis on job creation and job retention, including part-time employment. It is strange that at the same time the application of a social welfare regulation is having the opposite effect. The regulation to which I refer is the "substantial loss of employment" rule and the people who are affected by it are some of the most vulnerable in the community. I have set out the position and effects of this regulation on both the employer and employee. I ask the Minister to examine the application of this regulation and to consider it in the same way as its effects on unretained firemen and dockers was considered.
There are many part-time workers in the marts in the west and the application of the "substantial loss of employment" rule has a determintal effect on their income. The position prior to the imposition of this rule and its implementation was that employees such as the 70 members employed in marts by NCF was as follows: from September to the end of December, the peak period, the employees would work two to three days per week. In January they would work one day per week and by May and June they would work one or two days per month. The employees, having paid the required contributions would then receive unemployment benefit for the days on which they did not have work. The first indication of a problem was when the social welfare office began to refuse the employees' claims and insist they had not suffered a substantial loss and that they did not qualify for benefit or qualified only for the weeks in which they worked one or two days. The members appealed the decision with some success, but their position still fell far short of that which existed before the regulation was introduced.
The effect of this regulation is twofold. First, those with no choice but to stay in the job must try to live on a substantially reduced income with no way of improving it, given that most of the members involved are from a farming background and many own small farms which means they will not qualify for FIS or social welfare assistance. Second, workers will have to leave the employment, creating further recruitment problems for the employer, whose case must also be examined.
The mart division of NCF Co-operative operates seven livestock marts with a combined turnover of £38 million. The marts are located in Ballymoate, Westport, Banna, Ballinarobe, Claremorris, Ballyhaunis and Swinford. Arising from a combination of reduced throughput and falling prices, losses were incurred in 1998. NCF employs 20 full-time staff and up to 100 part-time staff during the peak periods of autumn and spring. Some staff work in one mart while others work in a number of them. Almost all live in small towns or rural areas where there is little alternative work. Most are elderly people who have worked in marts since the early 1970s. Accordingly they possess few of the skills needed in today's workplace and would find it difficult to retrain.
Their income pattern has been a combination of the earnings from NCF, which fluctuate throughout the year, peaking in the period September – December, and social welfare for the days when work is not available. In recent months most employees have been seriously affected by the changes in the qualification criteria for social welfare. This has resulted in a serious loss of income for many of them and has caused many others to leave the employment of NCF. The effect of the changes is clearly emerging with staff leaving because they cannot continue if they are denied legitimate access to social welfare benefits. As an employer, NCF cannot be expected to make up the shortfall in incomes with the cattle industry in its present state.
Staff have paid PAYE and PRSI on low earnings and now feel discriminated against. It is ironic that this discrimination and severe interpretation of social welfare legislation has the greatest impact on the lowest earners in the most severely disadvantaged areas of the State.
