Phil Hogan
Question:66 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his plans to review competition law here; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37999/05]
Priority Questions.
Proposed Legislation.
The Government, at its meeting this morning, approved the text of the competition amendment Bill 2005. This will strengthen the Competition Act. I plan to publish the text as soon as practicable allowing for the fact that the Bill must now be printed. It will repeal the groceries order and amend the Competition Act to prohibit resale price maintenance, unfair discrimination and so-called hello money in the grocery trade. I hope that the legislation will be enacted as soon as possible.
The Competition Act is one of the most modern competition statutes in the world and it has been working very well in the relatively short time since its enactment in 2002. The Act introduced many improvements in the law and the way in which it is applied. For example, the system for regulating mergers and takeovers in the economy was made more open and transparent, with reasoned determinations being published in respect of each case notified to the Competition Authority. This change has proved to be very successful.
The independence and powers of the authority were substantially increased under the 2002 Act and its resources have also been enhanced since. A second mergers division was established earlier this year and the Government has committed to making further funding available to the authority in 2006 for the purpose of strengthening its cartels division.
While I have no immediate plans for a formal review, my Department continues to monitor the operation of the Act on an ongoing basis in conjunction with the Competition Authority.
I thank the Minister for his reply and I welcome Cabinet approval for the changes he wishes to make. I look forward to their introduction in due course. Given that the Competition Authority does not have a chairman, its anti-cartel division does not have a head and another member of the authority, Mr. Hennebry, resigned recently, a departmental official is needed for a quorum so that the authority can make decisions. That does not indicate the Minister has ensured a well resourced body and I ask him to do something about this. Did the Minister watch the "Prime Time Investigates" television programme last night about car dealerships and, if so, has he an opinion on it?
The resources of the Competition Authority will be increased under next year's Estimates and the cartels division will be expanded. I met the former chairman of the authority late in the summer prior to him securing a new position in Britain. He was entitled to do that and we will go through the normal processes to find a replacement. However, he indicated the need for the authority to concentrate on cartels in the economy and he suggested that an important initiative I could take would be to secure additional funding in next year's Estimates to create a new division in addition to what is in place to pursue anti-competitive cartels that do not give the consumer a fair deal.
I do not want to comment on current cases and a file has been submitted to the Director of Public Prosecutions by the authority regarding the subject matter of last evening's programme. We are endeavouring to eliminate the practices highlighted in the programme and it is one of the reasons the Government sanctioned an amendment to the competition Bill relating to the groceries order. The order, in so far as it set a minimum price so that one could not sell below the net invoice price, inadvertently incentivised price fixing, which has no place in the economy and which the House should not attempt to protect or shelter.
It is interesting that the Minister takes his view from the chairman of the consumer strategy group, who indicated in her submission to him last July that if the groceries order was abolished, the price of food products would reduce by 9%. However, she has revised that to a reduction of 3%. Circumstances can change in a few months following a decision.
The Minister did not reply to the question whether he had been briefed on the contents of last night's programme by the Competition Authority, but I am sure he was. When was the authority first informed about an anti-competitive cartel and alleged collusion in the motor trade and what did it do about it?
The bottom line is the Competition Authority is independent.
It is, but the Minister of the day is briefed by its officials.
The Minister of the day does not engage with the authority in respect of specific investigations and so forth, nor would it be appropriate to do so.
He or she is briefed.
We must be careful about how such investigations are progressed. The matter is with the Director of Public Prosecutions.
The decision to abolish the groceries order was based on analysis undertaken by departmental officials and clear conclusions that it was an anti-competitive measure, which has no place in the modern economy. That was the motivating factor behind the decision to abolish the order. I never got into the guessing game about how much prices would reduce but the order kept prices artificially high. The Competition Act 2002 enhanced the independence of the Competition Authority and the powers and penalties that can be applied regarding transgressions of competition law.
National Minimum Wage.
Brendan Howlin
Question:67 Mr. Howlin asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the number of inspections carried out by the labour inspectorate of his Department to ensure payment of the national minimum wage in 2004 and to date in 2005; if his attention has been drawn to the concerns expressed by labour inspectors that they do not have adequate resources to police the national minimum wage; if his attention has further been drawn to calls by trade unions for additional resources to enable the labour inspectorate to deal with exploitation of non-national workers, particularly in the construction industry; the steps he is taking to address this issue; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37973/05]
In 2004, labour inspectors undertook 462 inspections under the National Minimum Wage Act 2000. So far this year the inspectorate has undertaken 407 inspections under the legislation. Rights commissioners of the Labour Relations Commission, a body independent of my Department, also hear complaints concerning breaches of the National Minimum Wage Act 2000.
A total of 19 employment regulation orders, drawn up through the joint labour committee system, regulate statutory minimum rates of pay and conditions of employment for workers employed in the various sectors where these apply. Ensuring compliance with the minimum pay amounts, terms and conditions forms a major element of the work of the inspectorate. The Government is aware of the concern expressed by public representatives, trade unions representing employees and others close to the issues, with regard to the abuse of vulnerable workers by a small minority of unscrupulous employers.
The labour inspectorate is responsible for monitoring certain employment conditions for all categories of workers in Ireland, including immigrant workers. The inspectorate operates without differentiation according to worker nationality, as statutory employment rights and protections apply to immigrant workers in the same manner as they do to native workers. Inspectors pursue allegations of worker mistreatment and when evidence of non-compliance with the relevant employment rights legislation is found, the inspectorate seeks redress for the individuals concerned and, if appropriate, a prosecution is initiated.
Following the Minister's announcement earlier this year, 31 inspector posts have been sanctioned for the inspectorate. This represents almost a doubling of personnel in the past 12 months and it is indicative of a determination to ensure compliance with employment rights legislation. Following a recent selection process, the labour inspectorate has its full complement of 31 inspectors. When the full complement of officers is fully operational, it will concentrate on employment sectors that have traditionally required considerable attention from the inspectorate. These include the services sectors covered by employment regulation orders such as hospitality, cleaning and agricultural and construction work. Many migrant workers are employed in these sectors. I urge anyone who has specific evidence of the mistreatment of workers to furnish all the relevant details and related materials to the inspectorate with a view to pursuing the matter.
Does the Minister of State accept the total number of inspections carried out this year will amount to little more than half the number carried out in 2002? Will he confirm that 31 labour inspectors are in place? I refer to the enforcement of sectoral agreements, to which the Minister of State referred, which is a serious issue animating many workers. More and more complaints are being made to Members about people being paid the minimum wage in workplaces covered by sectoral agreements. How many cases have been brought to the Minister of State's attention? If he does not have the figure, perhaps he will revert to me on it. Is he concerned that the perception that the minimum wage is an acceptable wage has an impact on the wages paid in a range of employments, particularly in the construction and meat industries? What are his proposals to ensure sectoral agreements, which are legally binding, are enforced? Where such agreements do not exist, workers should be protected by law. Has he plans to introduce legislation in this regard?
A significant number of labour inspections were carried out following the introduction of the national minimum wage to ensure employers were aware of its existence and of the necessity for compliance. There has been less of an emphasis in this regard in recent times because people are aware of the provisions of that Act.
Difficulties were experienced in filling the 31 labour inspection posts. Two separate competitions had to be run because a sufficient number of people did not apply. The posts have been filled and training, which is important, is being undertaken.
How many inspectors are in place today?
Some 31 have been appointed.
How many are working today?
I am not certain their training has finished. The Deputy will understand there is little point in appointing people without giving them the necessary training.
Absolutely, I just want to know how many are actually on the job.
All 31 posts were filled in mid-October or early-November and a further training element was to be completed after that date. I can revert to the Deputy with the detail, but the inspection programme is under way.
With regard to sectoral agreement, as with the minimum wage one of the requirements for the inspectorate is that the specific matter be brought to its attention. Equally important, direct evidence must be made available to it. One of the difficulties is that the evidence must stand up in court if prosecutions are initiated. In general, emphasis has been placed in the first instance on seeking redress for workers, sometimes very successfully.
Deputies should be aware that while the Gama investigation amounted to just one investigation, it took up a significant amount of labour inspectorate time. People may compare the number of inspections from year to year, but it is important to bear in mind the significant difference between the quality and amount of work required in the case of some inspections. I will revert to the Deputy with regard to the specific cases raised by him as I do not have the information with me.
Deputy Howlin asked about the impact of the minimum wage from the perspective of employees. I was quite surprised, having introduced the last round of the minimum wage, at the significant level of negative comment from certain groups. It was unwarranted and I was surprised at the extent of it. I assure the Deputy we intend to ensure that sectoral agreements and the minimum wage are in force, but this is dependent on getting evidence.
With regard to legislation that might protect sectoral agreements, does the Minister of State accept there is a growing view that the minimum wage is an acceptable wage for certain classes of industry? Is this a concern where a higher wage has been negotiated and should be acceptable?
A group of workers from Comerama, County Kilkenny, are currently outside this House. Will the Minister meet that group of workers? Is he aware of the commitment given by the Tánaiste, the former Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, to that group of workers with regard to their rights? Will that firm agreement be delivered or welshed on?
With regard to sectoral agreements, the Deputy and the House are aware that a review of the joint labour committee is under way. It is clear there is less need for some of the sectoral agreements than previously. There are some sectors in which I would like to see new JLCs introduced, specifically for domestic workers and workers in some areas of the health sector. This is under consideration but has not been completed. I do not accept that the national minimum wage is or could be perceived as an alternative to the JLC and sectoral rates. That would not be acceptable.
The Comerama issue has been raised on the Adjournment previously. The Leas-Cheann Comhairle, Deputies Hogan and McGuinness and others-——
I thought I might slip it in.
One could not escape the attention of the Kilkenny Deputies on the matter.
We are happy to get help from the Wexford Deputy on the matter.
People are well aware that the issue arises from the date on which the increase in redundancy payments came into effect. On all occasions they come into effect at a particular time. No matter the date, some sectors win and some lose out.
The Tánaiste gave them a commitment.
Job Protection.
Arthur Morgan
Question:68 Mr. Morgan asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his Department’s strategy to prevent the displacement of workers and their replacement with lower paid workers who are subjected to exploitative terms and conditions. [37971/05]
Ireland already has a comprehensive body of employment rights legislation which has among its objectives the protection of employees against arbitrary behaviour by employers. It also has wider aims such as provision for the safety and health of workers and the fostering of labour market harmony by promoting policies that minimise conflict and maximise fairness.
Specific areas covered by legislation include working time, payment of wages, holidays, national minimum wage, unfair dismissal, redundancy payments, protection of young persons and transfer of undertakings. In general, Irish legislation mirrors the broader EU social protection framework in this area.
Usually, one would expect the composition of a workforce to reflect the broad population of the local catchment area, provided appropriate personnel are available for the specific vacancies arising. However, it should be borne in mind that as far as Ireland is concerned, there is now an EU labour market and nationals of other member states have the same right and freedom to come and work in Ireland as do Irish nationals. Accordingly, employers can choose to hire such workers without regard to nationality. It is important that this be appreciated.
Concerns with regard to the protection of workers' jobs, pay and conditions of employment, to which the Deputy referred, raise complex legal and policy issues. New challenges are constantly posed by population movement, by the changing structure of the economy, by new work practices and by growing international economic integration. In recent years, our economy has adapted very successfully to these challenges and the continued situation of virtual full employment is evidence of this.
As Deputies know, the Government has already communicated its intention to engage fully and effectively in the process of devising policies and measures which would protect employment standards and arrest a race to the bottom in terms of employment practices. I am confident that a successful response to these issues can be found for our economy, where the exceptional legal and other characteristics of the marine sector do not apply. They are best found within the context of a social partnership agreement which continues the stability and progressive modernisation of our labour force and employment practices in order to sustain jobs and living standards.
I view with great concern the potential social implications of the displacement of workers on established conditions in favour of those willing to do the same jobs on much poorer conditions. The Taoiseach is on record as stating that we want to see greater productivity and enhanced competitiveness based on new products and services, upskilling of staff, new work practices and technological innovation. We do not want to see people building competitive advantage based on poor wages, casualisation of labour, low health and safety standards or other poor compliance practices. Not only is it wrong, it is simply not sustainable.
While recognising the exceptional situation that has recently arisen in the maritime sector, it is important to remember that the full panoply of Irish employment law and social protection still applies to persons employed in Ireland, regardless of nationality. This body of law is, and will continue to be, enforced by my Department.
The bland phrases "hire workers without regard to their nationality", "view with great concern" and "the Taoiseach would like to see" are not the answer I hoped to get. I was hoping the Minister would give a crystal clear assurance that the Government is opposed to displacement. The Minister said that workers will be hired without regard to their nationality, but that is not what is happening. I have a communication from a constituent who applied for a job as a mushroom picker, but was told that only foreign nationals need apply. Can the Minister give me an unambiguous reply stating that he rejects the drive by certain employers and economists to make this State a low wage economy on the back of exploitation? That is the way we are heading and I would appreciate clarity on the issue.
Would the Minister accept that what Irish Ferries is doing is trying to bring us back to the 19th century? In the 19th century workers had to fight hard to achieve an eight-hour day. That was achieved by the 20th century in most states in Europe and in North America. Irish Ferries is trying to bring us back to a situation where the 12-hour day is the norm. Will the Minister tell me whether he is opposed to that type of activity by exploitative employers? In Norway, for example, there is an excellent relationship between employers and workers and the majority of workers, over 90%, are members of trade unions. Norway has a partnership process through which workers and employers create a better and more competitive economy. We should work towards a competitive economy, not the one some exploitative employers are currently trying to achieve.
The Deputy obviously did not hear my reply. I will repeat the key sentence. "We do not want to see people building competitive advantage based on poor wages, casualisation of labour, low health and safety standards or other poor compliance practices." I have made it clear here on several recent occasions that we do not want to see a reduction in living standards. We see the economic development of the country based on securing competitive advantage, upskilling of our employment force, greater qualifications, development of new products and services and greater innovation etc. That is our future. The future is not to be found in policies that would reduce living standards, wages, pay and conditions. This side of the House has, historically, always been to the fore in establishing and asserting workers' rights. We were the architects of social partnership in the country.
Offering cars and everything.
Going right back to the foundation of the party of which I am proud to be a member, it is accepted that we have always had a modern and progressive approach to workers' rights and to the establishment of modern, progressive labour market policies——
And dancing at the crossroads.
We will continue to do that. The record will show what we have done. I have been in discussions with the social partners and I share their concerns. The best way to advance the protection of workers is through social partnership. It offers the best opportunity for all concerned to use that forum as a basis for agreeing whatever new measures are required to ensure a greater degree of compliance with labour law and to examine the modalities of how we do that — we have an open mind on that score — in a wide range of areas to ensure the scenario which the Deputy has outlined does not become a reality.
There are numerous examples throughout the economy, particularly in advanced manufacturing and in other areas, where clearly the opposite has occurred. We are attracting employment that produces higher wages and a better quality of employment in information and communications technologies, software, pharmaceuticals and biopharma. That is the direction in which we want to go in future.
The Minister said: "We do not want to see". That is not as strong as saying he is opposed to the displacement of workers. I would like to hear him state he is opposed to it. There are many things I do not wish to see but I am not necessarily strongly opposed to them. I urge the Minister to give a clear message so that workers can be reassured of the Government's firm commitment that it is opposed to displacement, not just that it does not want to see it.
We have said this. I said it in the House last week.
I urge the Minister to say he is opposed to it. If he says the words, I will go with him.
With all due respect, Sinn Féin will not act as spin doctor for my good self. Let us be very clear about this matter — the Taoiseach was very clear in the House — we are against any reduction in living standards or displacement of workers. That is the bottom line in terms of what has happened.
Industrial Disputes.
Phil Hogan
Question:69 Mr. Hogan asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment his views of the continuing deterioration in industrial relations at Irish Ferries; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [38000/05]
Last week I met the management of Irish Ferries and representatives of SIPTU and the ICTU to convey to them the Government's concerns as to the gravity of the situation and the wider implications of the ongoing dispute. I urged all sides to engage in the Labour Relations Commission process with a view to achieving a resolution to the issues in dispute.
On 4 December 2005 the national implementation body made a series of recommendations to the social partners and the Government regarding the maintenance and protection of employment standards in the labour market. The national implementation body also made the following recommendations in respect of the dispute at Irish Ferries. Irish Ferries should suspend its application to re-register its vessels on the register of Cyprus. The efforts to arrive at an agreement on the terms and conditions of employees who wish to remain in the employment of Irish Ferries should continue and be brought to a conclusion not later than 7 December. The terms and conditions of employees who are recruited to work on these Irish Ferries vessels in future should reflect, inter alia, Irish minimum wage arrangements in the context of the unique nature of the contracts of employment which typically operate in the maritime sector and the competitive pressures faced by the company. In the event that the outcome of this process is that these vessels are not maintained on the Irish register, the terms of any agreement with regard to existing employees and the standards which would apply to employees recruited to work on these Irish Ferries vessels in future should be reflected in an agreement of binding character which would not be vitiated by any subsequent change in the country of registration. The NIB urged the parties, without prejudice to their respective positions, to engage fully with the Labour Relations Commission over the period ending on 7 December with a view to finalising an agreement.
The situation at Irish Ferries has been addressed by all the industrial relations bodies. It is significant that the interested parties are in negotiations facilitated by the Labour Relations Commission. I welcome this development. The work already undertaken by and with the national implementation body, the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission provides a firm basis for resolution. I hope the parties in this process succeed in resolving this dispute quickly and without further disruption to ferry services.
Overall, industrial relations in Ireland are still quite stable. During the first half of this year 1,463 days were lost to industrial disputes, involving just six disputes. In 2004, a total of 20,784 days were lost to industrial disputes, involving 11 disputes during the year — the smallest number of disputes and days lost to strikes in a single year since records began. This downward trend in disputes has resulted in a very stable industrial relations climate.
I thank the Minister for his reply. Obviously he has very little to report to us arising from the past 48 hours of talks at the Labour Relations Commission. I hope some progress will be made by tomorrow. This is imperative in the interests of partnership and industrial relations. I do not think a national day of protest is the way to go as it drags other sectors into the dispute and discommodes commuters and other sectors that have not been the cause of the problem.
Even though the Government was aware this problem was coming down the tracks for a considerable period, in 2004 it opposed the manning directive to give clear pay and conditions for all workers in the maritime sector. The Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher, tried his best to get this issue put back on the agenda this week. Will the Minister indicate how the Government will proceed to get this matter on the agenda and to reverse engines in its policy on this issue?
Will the Minister also indicate if there are any plans to establish a bilateral agreement with Cyprus, the country that has facilitated Irish Ferries in regard to flagging, and if we will be able to get a common position between Ireland, Cyprus, other EU states and third countries on proper pay and conditions for workers?
We must be very clear about this. As the Deputy is aware, the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, has been negotiating in Brussels on the manning directive. A number of other countries also took issue with aspects of the directive at that time. It is not fair to say there was a direct relationship between any of those issues and the action and behaviour of Irish Ferries, nor has the company advanced this as a basic cause for the action it has taken. It has advanced the view that the ultimate motivation for its action is to be found in what it perceives to be its current competitive disadvantage vis-à-vis the international maritime sector. The Government is already on record as not being in agreement with Irish Ferries on its view and in condemning the manner in which it took that action.
We must be careful we do not use other issues as excuses for the kind of fundamental departure that was made in attempting to replace one set of workers with another on a lower scale. I do not wish to say anything that would undermine the talks process within the Labour Relations Commission. The Government is open to taking whatever measures are necessary to facilitate a resolution of this dispute. It will take whatever constructive approach is necessary on a range of issues pertaining to the maritime sector to facilitate a resolution of the dispute. In essence, however, it is a matter for both parties.
Last week I met Irish Ferries, the ICTU and SIPTU on behalf of the Government to convey to them the gravity in which the Government views the situation in terms of not just the Irish Ferries dispute but the wider implications for social partnership and the need and imperative to get back into talks and utilise to the maximum potential the existing industrial relations machinery of the State. We will not be found wanting in terms of assisting that process of resolution.
Has the Minister contemplated any contingency plans to deal with our exporting potential in the event of a long and protracted dispute?
The Minister of State, Deputy Killeen, will meet the Cypriot Minister for labour and social and affairs next Thursday to discuss issues which the Deputy raised. We are obviously concerned about the impact on exports generally in terms of any reduction in capacity. There are no quick fix solutions to this issue but we are keeping the matter under review.
I thought a number of questions were being taken together.
The other question was outside the scope of Priority Questions.
Could they not be taken together?
No, they cannot be taken together.
I thought the Leas-Cheann Comhairle announced they would be taken together and that we were outside the time for Priority Questions. Can I ask a brief supplementary question?
We still have to take Question No. 70.
I thought there was a set time for Priority Questions. Do Standing Orders not specify the allocation of 30 minutes for them?
It is an aspiration.
I must remember that the next time the Leas-Cheann Comhairle quotes Standing Orders at me. They are only an aspiration.
Bullying in the Workplace.
Paudge Connolly
Question:70 Mr. Connolly asked the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the steps he proposes to take to address the serious problem of bullying in the workplace; his proposals to introduce new legislation to implement the recommendations of the expert advisory group on workplace bullying; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [37972/05]
In August 2004, my predecessor, Deputy Fahey, established a widely representative expert advisory group on workplace bullying, the terms of reference of which were to advise and report on the effectiveness of measures concerning the prevention of workplace bullying, the identification of improvements in procedures and how to address the contribution made by bullying to the incidence of workplace stress. I launched the group's report on 17 August 2005, a copy of which is available free of charge on my Department's website, www.entemp.ie. The principles laid down by the group in its report will underpin future consideration of the issue by the Government, as anything less is not acceptable in a fair, safe and equitable workplace.
The key recommendation of the expert advisory group is that legislation be brought forward to deal with workplace bullying. This legislation should apply to all employees in the workforce, irrespective of employment status. Following publication of the report I sought and obtained the views of the social partners on this matter. In September, as part of the follow up consultation process, my Department used the national newspapers and my Department's website to seek the views of interested parties on how best the recommendations of the group might be implemented and received 15 submissions.
My Department is currently implementing the group's recommendation to conduct a follow up survey on workplace bullying, which will be similar to the survey conducted for the last report on this subject published in 2001, in order to obtain an up-to-date picture of the incidence of the workplace bullying. The tender process for the award of a contract to conduct the survey is nearly complete. I expect the successful tenderer to start the survey in January 2006 and to complete it within as short a timescale as possible. I intend to publish the results of the survey and to bring it to Government along with the views of the social partners and other interested parties for decision.
I thank the Minister of State for his answer. References to bullying conjure images of the intimidation that takes place in school yards, events from which we mature and move on. However, I am sure the Minister of State will agree that bullying can be subtle and difficult to quantify in terms of hard evidence. Does he agree that bullying is a serious problem in workplaces? A SIPTU survey indicated that 87% of workers were aware of bullying. I am not sure whether we need more surveys to prove that bullying exists because it is an issue that concerns all grade of workers. It not only affects children in school yards but also blue and white collar workers on factory floors, in the health and public services and at departmental levels.
Some of us may be fortunate enough to be able to request and receive a transfer out of a bullying environment but the bully often remains. Many cannot transfer and must stay in their positions to endure further torture. Does the Minister of State equate bullying with anti-social behaviour? He should consider imposing ASBOs on perpetrators.
He referred to the expert group's report on workplace bullying, which called for strong action by the State. What action is being proposed by the Department and how soon will it take place? What will be done to take care of company directors, senior managers in the public service and workers across the entire sphere? Has the Department examined the experience of Sweden, which has a clear framework of legal guidelines for dealing with bullying behaviour and ensuring dignity at work. Will management agree that bullying can have a severe effect on productivity within the workplace, lead to increases in sick leave and stress levels and cause workplaces to become dysfunctional?
For some, the thought of going to work is a cause of additional stress. They watch the time until they can leave, whether that involves days, weeks or years. They are in environments from which they cannot escape and urgent action should be taken to help them.
I concur with Deputy Connolly that this is a serious issue. It is important to remember the principles that arose from the group's report, which stated that workplace bullying is unacceptable in all circumstances, that management is responsible for ensuring that such behaviour is not tolerated and that incidents of bullying should be adequately addressed and brought to a fair and conclusive resolution in a timely manner. The expert group recommended legislation on that basis.
The reasons for updating the survey are simple. The 2001 report suggested that 16% of people in the workplace were at some time subjected to bullying and it is important to establish whether the perception that bullying is on the increase is correct. The qualitative issues which arise in terms of bullying must also be established.
The Deputy is correct in noting that this matter can beset all grades. It is a mistake to assume that all incidents of bullying involve management or senior staff bullying others at a lower grade. In fact, bullying often occurs within the same grade and apparently there are occasional instances of harassment by lower grades of more senior staff. Complex issues are, therefore, at play. It undoubtedly has a negative impact on productivity and gives rise to problems for industry in terms of sick leave and related areas.
Will the Minister of State agree that when victims report incidents of bullying, this can lead to further harassment? An urgent need exists for some form of policy which will outline harassment and intimidation at work. Victims are often caught in a trap because they cannot report or fear incurring further bullying.
The finding of the report is that additional work needs to be done, the most important of which is the introduction of legislation. With a view to bringing this forward, I have consulted the social partners and received 15 submissions. I hope to be in a position, following the findings of the survey, to bring proposals to Government.