I will call on the Deputies who tabled questions to the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment in the order in which they submitted their questions to my office.
Private Notice Questions.
Job Losses.
Brendan Howlin
Question:Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the action he will take arising from the plan by Irish Ferries to seek the redundancy of 543 Irish staff with a view to replacing them by lower paid workers from abroad, especially in view of the consequences for labour relations in general and social partnership in particular; the total potential cost to the Exchequer of the proposed redundancy package; if he has sought legal advice on the matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
John Perry
Question:Mr. Perry asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the action he will take arising from the plan by Irish Ferries to seek the redundancy of 543 Irish staff with a view to replacing them by lower-paid workers from abroad; the cost to the Exchequer of the proposed redundancy package; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Seán Crowe
Question:Mr. Crowe asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if he will address the situation of staff in Irish Ferries forced into taking so-called voluntary redundancy as was allowed to happen in Aer Lingus, lest management now see this as a legitimate tactic; and if he will send a clear signal that this type of behaviour is unacceptable.
I propose to take the questions together.
The House is well aware of speculation surrounding affairs at Irish Ferries and, in particular, the intolerable consequences upon the staff thereof who, against a background of threats to their livelihood, are being asked to take very important decisions from their perspective. Issues which arise for Irish Ferries and their staff must be addressed internally within the organisation, and such is the legal requirement regarding most other sectors of employment under the Protection of Employment Act 1977, although seafarers are excluded from it. This issue has not arisen in isolation and, no doubt, has a background. It must be resolved within the organisation itself, albeit with the assistance of the State's industrial relations machinery.
Ireland's access to overseas markets is vital, and companies such as Irish Ferries have benefited from our economic growth. They have also benefited from the stability of the Irish industrial relations framework. Accordingly, it is in the interests of all parties that a resolution be reached in the matter. I understand that the national implementation body met yesterday evening to consider the situation in Irish Ferries and that issues remain under its consideration.
I also understand that the Labour Court has been in touch with both parties, and I strongly urge them to engage with it with a view to seeking a resolution. We are all aware that the legal framework of the employees concerned is dictated by the laws of the state in which the ship is registered. Accordingly, Irish registered ships remain subject to the provisions of Irish law regardless of where the ship is.
Primary responsibility for the sector rests with the Minister and Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources. The Minister of State has already stated that he considers the measures announced extreme and that the implementation of the proposed redundancies would have grave consequences for Irish seafarer employment, given Irish Ferries' position as the largest employer of Irish seafarers. He expressed his hope that the company would delay implementation of its plan until recent proposals concerning State aid guidelines for the sector have been considered by the Government.
The Department has sought preliminary legal advice from the Office of the Attorney General on whether a statutory redundancy situation will exist in Irish Ferries. As no direct communication has been received in the Department regarding what exactly the company intends from a statutory redundancy perspective, it will not be possible for the Office of the Attorney General to provide definitive advice at this stage. I repeat the Government's position on the current Irish Ferries situation, which was given by the Taoiseach to this House yesterday, namely, that in an Irish labour context the action is sharp practice and totally unacceptable.
Part of the question referred to the cost. Since we do not have the figures, it is difficult to give it. However, I have indicative figures. If a statutory redundancy situation were established at Irish Ferries — no note has been received in the Department in that regard — and 500 workers with 20 years' service, each earning €600 a week, were made redundant, the gross cost of such statutory redundancy would be 500 x 600 x 20 x 2 x 1, which is €12,000,500. That is two weeks' pay per year of service, plus a bonus week.
I thank the Ceann Comhairle for allowing the Private Notice Questions.
After the Taoiseach's strong comments in response to Deputy Rabbitte yesterday, we know how the Government feels about this. What will it do specifically? He strongly urges the company to comply with normal industrial relations practices. Has either the Taoiseach or the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment sought a meeting with the management of Irish Ferries? Does the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, intend to seek a meeting with the management to convey in no uncertain terms that the view of the Government and this House is that its behaviour is sharp practice, unacceptable and a mortal blow to the concept of social partnership?
Has the Minister of State, who has special responsibility within his Department for labour affairs, conveyed the view directly to IBEC, as the parent organisation involved, that the concept of social partnership will be damaged severely if this proposal by a maverick company is allowed to be implemented? Has he had any discussions with his colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, in regard to the safety aspects of this matter? The job done already by this company on the MV Normandy has ensured the normal maintenance carried out up to now by Rosslare Ship Repairs is no longer being done. That company has folded and the vulnerable employees working for less than the minimum wage are not only crewing the ship but carrying out routine maintenance. Is the Minister of State as concerned as I about the health and safety aspect, as well as all the other issues involved in this desperate set of proposals?
Deputy Howlin has raised several issues. I am glad the four Deputies have chosen to put down these questions because it is an extremely important issue which should be debated in the House.
Members are aware it has not been the practice here for a Government representative to make a direct approach to a company in regard to issues such as this. The voluntarist approach has served us well. There is a considerable amount of labour relations machinery, including the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court. We always urge parties in dispute to take their grievances to these bodies in the first instance. There are good reasons for this, not least that it is likely to be the most successful approach. As Members are aware, one party in this seems to embrace that process much more than the other. However, the national implementation body has been involved and some matters are still under consideration at that level.
I agree with Deputy Howlin that this proposal is most damaging and, like him, I worry about its implications for social partnership. With regard to the role of IBEC, it is difficult for any Member to find fault with bodies or individuals who make representations. We do it all the time and it is a matter for IBEC in its judgment as to how it chooses to represent its members.
Has the Minister of State met IBEC representatives directly to convey his view of the matter?
IBEC has not enhanced its reputation in this matter but it is for that organisation to decide the approach it should take.
I answered questions yesterday in regard to the role of the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher. I pointed out that when these ships are docked in Irish ports, regardless of the flag of convenience issue, it is open to the Irish authorities to check them for health and safety requirements. This has been done in the past in regard to MV Normandy. However, I was not aware at that stage of the points raised by Deputy Howlin today and I undertake to raise them with the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher.
The Farrell Grant Sparks report highlighted the clear warning sign given when Irish Ferries first brought up the issue of additional tax breaks some years ago. Moreover, the privatisation of the Normandy route which serves Cherbourg and Roscoff was another clear indicator that what is happening now was inevitable. Why did the Government not act in regard to the PRSI exemptions which ended in 2003, in respect of which the Minister is attempting to obtain agreement in Europe?
Despite major State investment, including the allocation of €51 million for the National Maritime College of Ireland in Ringaskiddy, County Cork, there was no emphasis on safeguarding jobs for seafarers. There was another clear warning sign from the Irish Maritime Development Office which received the sector's existing State aids and recommended their implementation. Why did the Government do nothing before now and why has it allowed Irish Ferries to make this outrageous announcement regarding compulsory redundancies?
The issues raised by Deputy Perry were addressed to some extent by the Taoiseach yesterday. He is correct that there has been substantial investment by the State in terms of training seafarers and other matters. It is reasonable to say this action was flagged by previous events in regard to the MV Normandy. However, we do not serve anybody’s interests by pretending we have control over issues when this is not the case. We do not have control over situations where vessels are flying flags of convenience. This is a weakness which may need to be addressed at European or even international level and it makes tackling this issue somewhat difficult in some of its aspects.
The exemptions Deputy Perry mentioned and the other tax breaks were introduced before my time and I cannot account for what has happened in the past. I face a major challenge in trying to ensure what we do in the present and in the future addresses what is an outrageous attack on Irish workers.
The point I make in regard to the PRSI exemptions is that the EU will agree to them because it is the standard practice in other territorial waters. If the PRSI exemptions were in place, the actions now taken by Irish Ferries would not have arisen. It seems the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, knew of this situation 18 months ago but failed to act. The result is that seafarers, Irish people educated here, are being forced out of work. This is not an issue that arose years ago, this is an immediate problem and it is affecting people now. The Minister of State has said he is now seeking derogation for Irish Ferries until permission is forthcoming from the EU for the PRSI exemption. Why has the Minister waited until now to seek permission from the EU? That is the problem.
The current situation at Irish Ferries arises against a background of the company being quite profitable. It would have been difficult to predict that this issue would arise at this time, notwithstanding the point Deputy Perry made that issues had already arisen in regard to the MV Normandy. I am not entirely clear in regard to the implications of the PRSI exemptions, nor am I clear that the outcome Deputy Perry outlines would be automatic were the derogation in place at this stage. We await legal advice on a number of issues, not least the important one of statutory redundancy. I will report to the House as soon as I have that information.
I thank the Minister of State for attending to answer our questions on this critical issue. I welcome the Taoiseach's comments yesterday in regard to sharp practice. A situation where a chief executive who earns €14,617 a week and has a personal fortune of €20 million invested in his company can tell workers to leave and that he will replace them with employees who might be paid €1 per week is an utter disgrace. It is absolute gangsterism.
I ask the Deputy to be prudent in his use of language to avoid making allegations against people who may be identified.
We should call a spade a spade.
There is a long-standing tradition in this House that we do not make allegations against named persons or those who may be recognisable.
These facts are on the record.
I would prefer if the Deputy did not go down that road. He should address his questions to the Minister of State.
I will do so. It is critical that the Minister of State, his counterpart in the Depart of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources and the Taoiseach now take action as my colleague, Deputy Howlin, has urged. Will the Government tell Eamon Rothwell and his management team they must withdraw the deadline and engage in no more outrageous and disgraceful intimidation of workers? Will the Government convey this message tonight? The company's behaviour is arbitrary and disgraceful.
Is it the case that the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Noel Dempsey, and the Minister of State at that Department, Deputy Gallagher, have still not received a copy of the Sparks report? This report was compiled by respected consultants who examined the company and asserted that it would remain profitable beyond 2007 because it carries out a vital function for our island nation. Is it not extraordinary that Mr. Rothwell rejected this report before the responsible Minister saw it? Has the Minister seen it yet and what is proposed to be done about it?
The Minister of State says that the matter is not within the Government's control. He implies that the sea is a sort of jungle. This morning, we heard from Scottish trade union leaders that the Scottish Executive has successfully implemented a licensing system for all ferries and other vessels operating out of Scottish ports. To tender for a Scottish route, it is necessary to adhere to Scotland's rules on manning levels, conditions and wages. What is the Government doing about that? Yesterday, the Taoiseach wrung his hands. Can we have a licensing system to ensure that the disgraceful behaviour of the Irish Ferries management is not repeated?
In terms of the reference to the national implementation body and the Labour Court by the Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, where does he expect these events will lead to? What can be done over the next few days?
The document I have before me, which was provided by the International Transport Workers Federation and SIPTU, is a draft EU directive from 2000 concerning ferries. My constituency colleague, Deputy Woods, and the great former Minister of State, Deputy Jacob both dealt with this matter at different stages.
The Deputy should ask a question.
The Minister of State at the Department of Justice, Equality and Law Reform, Deputy Fahey, also dealt with it.
The Deputy should ask a question.
This little directive went all around the houses for five or six years until, finally, the Government dropped it like a hot cake. Workers' organisations throughout Europe worked hard for many years to introduce this directive.
The purpose of a question is to elicit information from the Minister, not to impart information to him.
Will the Minister of State ensure this directive, which states that a ship operating between two EU countries must adhere to the wages and conditions of either, is introduced? What is happening to this matter?
The first question from Deputy Broughan concerns whether management is prepared to withdraw the deadline and the level of pressure which can be applied. It is clear from what has been said by the Taoiseach and the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, that the message has been conveyed in strong terms. One would have to be out of touch not to be aware of what precisely is required.
A meeting has not been sought.
I explained already——
It is Thursday.
——that we have effective labour relations machinery.
There is no convention. Therefore the Government does nothing.
I do not accept that.
A meeting has not been sought with them.
The machinery which has served this country over many years is the appropriate means to deal with this situation. Political intervention in matters of this nature has invariably worsened rather than improved matters.
It is the function of social partnership.
Social partnership——
I ask Deputies Broughan and Howlin to allow the Minister of State to answer without interruption. The two Labour Deputies have received a fair proportion of the 30 minutes allocated for the question. Deputy Crowe has not contributed yet.
I am unaware as to whether the Minister, Deputy Noel Dempsey, or the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, have received copies of the report referred to by Deputy Broughan.
Can the Minister of State try to find out?
I will try to find that out and will revert to Deputy Broughan with the information. The Deputy made the point that part of our defence has been that certain matters are not within our control and it is a jungle out there. I assure him that it is not the intention of the Taoiseach or this Government to wring hands on this matter. I welcome the information concerning the Scottish Executive's licensing of ferries.
Ring up the First Minister, Jack McConnell.
That is one of the possibilities which can be explored, provided we have the time to do so. That will be an important element of this matter.
On what the national implementation body and the Labour Court can do, it is difficult to predict the outcome of this dispute. The week before last, I did not hold great hopes in terms of another dispute but it worked out extraordinarily well. It is fair to say that both bodies have a positive record. It is in everybody's interest that all parties enter the negotiations directly rather than through an intermediary. The sooner that is done, the more likely it will be that the bodies will be successful.
The draft EU directive on ferries has apparently existed since 2000. Over the past year I have become familiar with draft EU directives. It does not surprise me to find that a draft directive is in the works for a considerable period. The good news is that, ultimately these directives ——
Does Ireland support it?
I am not the Minister with that responsibility. I do not know the position but will find out. It is welcome that directives of this nature are under consideration because they invariably enter force with positive impact.
I was about to make suggestions concerning the Scottish Executive and the European trades directive but the Minister of State has addressed these issues.
Where will the matter leave workers in other industries? Last week, Aer Lingus workers talked about having been pushed out of jobs. Is the Minister of State concerned about the precedent that will be set if the matter is allowed come to pass? Other company executives will explore similar methods of increasing profits. Where does that leave the minimum wage or workers' basic rights? People are being forced out of their jobs. They are being bullied. The reality of this so called redundancy package is that peoples' arms are twisted and they are made to leave their jobs. What can be done? The Minister of State has talked about looking at this and that, which will not be of much use to workers contemplating their future. Will the Government introduce legislation to prevent this precedent being followed by other companies?
On the basis of the information available to me, there is no danger this precedent would cause effects in the manner outlined by Deputy Crowe. The difficulties that have arisen concern vessels operating under non-Irish flags. In the circumstances outlined by the Deputy, the workers clearly operate under the terms and conditions of Irish labour legislation. The dangers outlined will not automatically arise from the attempt by Irish Ferries to displace its staff. However, it is useful to be warned that a constituency is pursuing this agenda. I am satisfied that the machinery of the State in terms of legislation and support mechanisms would be strong enough to deal with this situation were it within Irish jurisdiction. The minimum wage, which was increased this year, is sometimes found not to be paid. We eventually manage to track down offenders. A system exists to redress breaches of the rights enshrined in our legislation.
In terms of redundancy, a slightly different situation obtains. We are awaiting detailed legal advice and no redundancies have as yet been notified. In a situation where workers were thrown out of their jobs because a factory was closing, the State would be obliged to move quickly to look after those workers and ensure their rights are honoured. That is not the case in this matter. I do not view as an automatic right that a company in this situation would be able to come with a begging bowl to the State.
The Minister of State said his legal opinion may be that these redundancies will not be liable to further redundancy payments that would ordinarily apply if a company is closing. If that is the route to be taken will he outline further the real consequences for the workers involved and the whole proposal from the company? What would that lead to given that he has signalled that may be the way he will proceed? If this is, as we see it, a race to the bottom in terms of replacing current working conditions and staff with those from economies of lower pay demands and conditions how are similar occurrences to be restricted from happening across a whole range of different Irish industries and businesses?
Given the generosity of redundancies and the precedent set with regard to payments has the Government stated categorically that it will not pay it because it would set an unbelievable precedent? Will the Minister of State agree it was a major mistake not to have renegotiated the derogation for PRSI? The derogation would have meant 20% of taxation which would have made the jobs more sustainable. Is it a mistake that we are only now raising it with the EU?
I call Deputy Howlin for a brief contribution of not more than 30 seconds.
In the past hour I have received a telephone call from a very distraught Irish Ferries worker in anguish about what he has to do between now and Sunday. Will the Minister of State stand up and say he will this evening make contact with Mr. Eamon Rothwell and ask that the deadline be moved back at least a week to allow——
In fairness to the Minister——
This is only my second interjection.
Deputy, I have to conclude in two minutes.
If the Chair had listened to my constituent he would give me those 30 seconds simply to ask the Minister of State if he would make that call and ask Mr. Rothwell to allow at least another week for people to see if the machinery of the State can address this critical issue.
In regard to Deputy Eamon Ryan's question on redundancy, as I said previously I do not have detailed legal advice at this stage. My understanding is that redundancies occur in a situation where the job has finished. It would seem that it is stretching it considerably to suggest a redundancy occurs where one worker is displaced and replaced by another. However, we have learned here and elsewhere that it is prudent to await legal advice. We are all aware of situations where people have run off to the courts and have succeeded in getting decisions one would have hoped they may not have got. There is reason to try to ensure that would not arise.
In regard to the race to the bottom, so far as other jobs are within the jurisdiction of the State there are considerably stronger safeguards, although I cannot say there are cast iron safeguards. I concede there are developments across a range of areas that concern me.
What about standards?
Deputy Broughan, allow the Minister of State to conclude. He has only one minute.
Deputy Perry asked about derogation. That is a matter on which I do not have much information but I will pursue it and come back to the Deputy on it.
I thank the Minister of State.
The question raised by Deputy Howlin is the nub of the matter. These are real people in the Deputy's constituency or wherever.
They are all over the country.
Any of us in that position would be frightened at the prospect of trying to make a choice in the absence of quality information in a case where one has no confidence in the management of the company. I can see that is the position.
It is quite immoral.
The only undertaking I can give to the Deputy is that anything that can be done in terms of trying to ensure the deadline is moved back, as the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, has been trying to do, and that the debate is positioned in an entirely different way, will be done. Frankly, I do not think a telephone call from me would be the most appropriate or effective means but any means available to us will be used.