Vol. 300 No. 14
I welcome to the House the Minister of State at the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Deputy Emer Higgins. Before we commence, I remind Senators that a Senator may speak only once on Report Stage, except the proposer of an amendment, who may reply to discussion on the amendment. Each amendment must be seconded.
Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are related and may be discussed together. Is that agreed? Agreed.
I am delighted to have the opportunity to once again present the Employment Permits Bill for the consideration of Seanad Éireann. Since the Committee Stage debate on the Bill, a minor technical amendment relating to the alphabetical order of section 2 was identified and I present the amendment to Members.
I note the resubmission of a small number of Opposition amendments to the Bill, which we will discuss. I thank Members for their input to the Bill and the overall support for its overarching principles and objectives.
Amendments Nos. 1 and 2 are to facilitate a minor technical amendment to the interpretations section, which moves the definition of "seasonally recurrent employment" to its appropriate place in the alphabetical list.
Before I put the question, I welcome to the Visitor's Gallery our guests from the school of law at Duquesne University, Pennsylvania. They are welcome to Seanad Éireann and Leinster House. We hope they are having a good time in the Houses of the Oireachtas and in Ireland. They are very welcome. I hope they enjoy their day.
Amendment No. 3 is in the name of Senators Higgins, Ruane, Black and Flynn. It arises out of committee proceedings. Senator Higgins will need a seconder.
I move amendment No. 3:
In page 12, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“Report on seasonal work
3. The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas reviewing the conditions and wages of workers holding a permit for seasonal work.”.
I second the amendment.
I note that in her amendments, the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins, offers a definition of "seasonally recurrent employment". I know the amendments are to move that definition. It is an aspect of the Bill that we have concerns about. It is important that we do not see a pattern of abuse of seasonal work permits where workers are left in a situation of constant precarity and insecurity. I emphasise that employment is more than just a source of income. It is the basis on which people build their lives. It is the space in which they form relationships and community ties. It is a key, main opportunity for social integration for migrants. It is the basis on which people access housing and it is difficult to access housing in the State. We do not want a situation where persons have insecure contracts which stop them from accessing their rights and from building secure livelihoods. That is why this amendment will ask that there be a report specifically examining the conditions and wages of workers who hold permits for seasonal work.
The policy has to be understood in the context of these factors. I refer to an RTÉ report which has said that of 2.7 million people in employment, 20% are non-Irish nationals, yet there is inequality in terms of accessing secure contracts. When people are more vulnerable in the sense of being dependent on a work permit that may not be secure, they are often vulnerable in the dynamic they have with their employer. We work quite hard to try to ensure that people have secure contracts and rights. If, every few months, someone has to re-enter and reapply, we are almost the point where a person is dependent on the good wishes of an employer to hire them again and again. That can create a troubling power dynamic.
IHREC and the ESRI report monitoring decent work identified key dimensions, namely access to work, adequate warnings, employee voice, security and stability of voice, equality of opportunity and treatment in employment, and health and safety. Those are the key factors to consider when we look at the workplace. I would suggest they should be examined when we look at how these seasonal work permits are panning out and what the impacts are on employee voice, in particular, the security and stability of work and equality of opportunity. In terms of the ESRI's study, Wages and Working Conditions of Non-nationals in Ireland - the term should of course be non-Irish nationals - we know that migrants are more likely to end up in situations of shift work with shorter job tenures, and tend to earn 18% to 20% less. These are issues to be addressed. The European Social Charter has been really clear on the right to just conditions of work, safe working conditions and the right to fair remuneration. I also note that the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination is very clear on ensuring there is just and equal treatment in the workplace for all.
I am asking the Minister of State to examine this issue carefully, to look at how it is panning out and to ensure that we do not create a tool for inequality in the workplace, and that we do not treat human beings as if they are simply a tap we can turn on and off rather than the people who are helping us to build a nation collectively. This is really important. On the seasonal piece, we have seen how it has been exploited and abused in other parts of the world such as California in respect of the exploitation of seasonal workers. I am hoping the Bill will become an opportunity for positive conditions and positive enforcement of terms and conditions. I urge the Minister of State to accept my amendment or, if she cannot do so, to indicate that she will be providing a report and coming back to us in this House.
I thank the Senator. This amendment would require a report to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas within 12 months of the passing of the Bill, reviewing the conditions and wages of workers holding a seasonal employment permit. As I noted on Committee Stage, while I appreciate and understand the concerns of Senators, I will not be accepting this amendment. I will outline the reasons. We are planning to ensure the rights of seasonal employment permit holders are upheld. That is the thrust of what the Senator has said here today. There is full commitment around that. My Department plans to introduce a rights-based pilot scheme in 2025 which will be designed with the aim of ensuring stringent protection for seasonal migrant workers. The pilot scheme will initially only be made available to the horticultural sector and will be restricted to a small number of employers and workers, so it can be thoroughly assessed afterwards. As I previously indicated, additional resources have been provided to the Workplace Relations Commission for the purposes of inspections relating to seasonal employment permits. The findings of any such inspections as well as the outcome of the broader assessment of the pilot will provide my Department with the necessary information to assess the scheme, particularly in relation to the protection of rights for seasonal employment permit holders. The Senator outlined three big factors in terms of employee voice, equality of opportunity and security and stabilisation of workers. They are things we can also look at in the interests of openness and transparency. For that reason, I fully intend that the outcome of this evaluation will be published and made available on my Department's website.
I wish to speak to the amendment as well. When this Bill was going through pre-legislative scrutiny, there was serious concern within the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment about the introduction of seasonal permits. The record has not been good in this country regarding a number of employers and migrant work permits. We have a labour inspectorate that remains short-staffed at the moment. I know there are efforts there to try to beef it up, but the reality remains that we do not have sufficient boots on the ground to ensure abuses can be stamped out. It is important to reiterate our very deep-seated concerns about the introduction of this permit. Nonetheless, we have lost the debate. The Government is pressing ahead with the permit. In that instance, it is really important that we have this report. When the assessment the Minister of State spoke about, is undertaken, will she seek to ensure very specific and severe penalties are put in place for any future breaches of the seasonal employment permit because it is open to all sorts of abuses? We know, by their nature, that those who come into horticulture or into other seasonal work in this country are very isolated in terms of language and their interactions with the rest of the community. There are very serious concerns about the exploitation we may see with the introduction of this permit. We need to see very specific and severe penalties for any future breaches of this. We are supportive of the overall Bill and want to see this pass, notwithstanding that this particular introduction is greatly alarming to us and indeed to many across the trade union movement.
I welcome the chance to speak to this amendment because I missed the opportunity to oppose sections 10 and 11 on Committee Stage. As has been mentioned, the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment has gone into significant detail here. The committee discussed this with experts in the area and with the Department and produced a report which relayed its concerns about the introduction of seasonal employment permits. Sinn Féin believes there is not sufficient evidence to support the introduction of this type of permit. We are further concerned there will be an increased risk of exploitation of the workers who would be employed under these permits. They will not be in the State long enough to learn or become acquainted with their rights. However, they will be here long enough to be exploited. That is a grave concern we have. The introduction of these permits will create a class of worker who will be the most vulnerable within the labour market. The creation of seasonal work permits to address supposed difficulties in certain sectors, regardless of whether that is the intention, could potentially facilitate the circumvention of improving pay and conditions. The reason trade unions, migrant rights organisations and others are concerned about and oppose these permits is that workers will be here for exactly long enough to be exploited but not long enough to be organised and then they will be gone.
In Europe, we have seen evidence that such permits facilitate this exploitation. We know most employers do not engage in awful practices such as exploiting their workers, and I want the record to reflect that, but there are some who do. This matter should not be downplayed or diminished. The fact is that the 2023 WRC annual report shows that 47% of all WRC investigations found breaches of employment law. That is astonishing. If there are employers who are ready to break employment law for Irish workers and workers domiciled in the State, they will waste no time exploiting workers who will only be here for a short period. I welcome this amendment. I would have opposed sections 10 and 11 if I had the opportunity on Committee Stage, but regrettably I missed that chance. We cannot support the Bill because of these permits. That is our position.
Others have articulated the kinds of concerns we have and again, while I appreciate that the Minister of State indicated that there will be an analysis, there are certain other factors that are needed in that analysis. The question of wages needs to be part of it, so that we are not simply looking at analysis that addresses abuses but that we are also looking at the situation of the conditions and the wages, and where the wages pan out in terms of the wider national picture of wages.
It is also really important to look at it sectorally because we know the argument for this kind of permit has been made on the basis of a few specific sectors. What we need to watch for is to see if this kind of permit then spreads and is used in many others because then we are moving towards a problem. A good idea can take a very long time to get moving but bad ideas can happen rapidly. We saw, for example, the case of zero-hour contracts. They were used in certain industries and suddenly they became the norm. Suddenly we saw zero-hour contracts being used right across the hospitality sector, for example. Instead, in Ireland, the UK and elsewhere, we had to look to the rearguard action against the abuse of a kind of contract. We have seen, for example, in the United States, non-competition clauses, which were originally designed to be for people who were working in industries with very detailed intellectual property and where there is a real jeopardy and danger with regard to the exchange of intellectual property. Suddenly, they were being used by fast food chains to effectively tie their employees. If you stopped working in one fast food chain, it would effectively ensure that you were not able to take employment in any other fast food chain, meaning that it was the only employer in the area that you could access.
These are just examples, and while they are international examples, they are examples of how, if you create a tool that can be abused and used in this way, it will be. Part of examining it is not just examining how it is used but looking to the sectors that are using it. Are these contracts and permits going to actually replace full work permits in some of the sectors that we are looking at now? I am looking forward to and will read with great interest the analysis that the Minister of State will provide and has indicated will be publicly available, which I welcome. While we do need a detailed report, we also need a report that examines what happens in between work. What is the impact of seasonal work permits, for example, on school places for children? If you are a seasonal worker, are your children enrolled in Irish schools? What happens in between? Where does this seasonal piece come in? Which seasons? What is the overlap, and what is the access to education? What is the access with regard to the pension schemes, where we are looking for ever higher requirements? Are you making pension contributions? Are you going to be entitled to social services? We know that access to most social welfare requires two years of continuous engagement with the State. Will those who have seasonal work permits - even if they have them for three, four or five years - not be able to access it, or show a connection to the State when it comes to connecting in with our social protection systems, and crucially, all the other parts of the State that flow from that?
There is a huge amount of questions, not just for employers but for the State, that get opened up when we look at this. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State has indicated that she will be publishing her analysis but I think the content of that analysis may need to be a little bit wider.
We will go from Senator Higgins to the Minister of State, Deputy Higgins. The Minister of State can go ahead.
I thank the Acting Chair. I want to address a couple of concerns that were listed here today. First, with regard to what Senator Higgins said about the zero-hour contracts, I see what she is saying on that but it is a really good testimony to a Member of this Chamber who, as the then Minister for Social Protection, former Deputy Regina Doherty, banned zero-hour contracts, which was a really positive move from an employment rights perspective.
With regard to the seasonal permit holders and how the permits were designed, they really were designed using learnings from international situations. That includes best practice as well as things that did not work. As Senators will be aware, it took over a year since the pre-legislative scrutiny session to ensure that this was published. The reason for that was because we wanted to take our time to make sure we got this right and that we dealt with some of the concerns and potential pitfalls, and that has happened.
With regard to consequences - and I know that was raised here today - consequences of violation of law will be baked into this pilot scheme.
Anyone found to be in breach will be prohibited from accessing seasonal permits again, which is important. I know I said this previously but it was raised by Senator Sherlock. To reiterate, additional resources have rightly been provided to the Workplace Relations Commission for the purposes of inspections for the seasonal permits.
To Senator Warfield, I reiterate that trade unions and the Migrant Rights Centre Ireland will be invited to join the advisory group that will oversee this pilot. That is a welcome measure. I hope this additional information deals with the further concerns outlined.
I move amendment No. 4:
In page 12, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“Report on dependent permit holders
3. The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas outlining the labour market access available to spouses of employment permit holders, particularly looking to the gender impact.”.
I second the amendment.
Before I bring Senator Higgins in, I welcome to the Public Gallery the group from Truagh Spirit, who are guests of the Minister, Deputy Humphreys. They are very welcome to Leinster House and Seanad Éireann. I hope they are enjoying their time here.
This amendment provides that within 12 months of the passing of the Act, a report would be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas looking at the labour market access available to spouses of those with employment permits, and particularly the gender impact in the context of that employment.
It is a constant refrain, but when we look to employment permits, it is important we remember that workers are not simply workers or units alone that can be applied to tasks. They are, in fact, members of families and part of society. In many cases, a real concern is when somebody has an employment permit and their spouse - usually, but not exclusively, a wife – can find it very difficult to access employment. This creates its own concerns with regard to, for example, access to financial independence and the social connections that we know come with employment.
If we look to some of the research we have from the ESRI’s 2023 report on wages and working conditions, it highlighted the fact that non-Irish women tend to be doubly disadvantaged. They often earn less and have a gender gap in wages. It also highlighted that the families of migrant workers can be particularly disadvantaged. We also know that some of the unacknowledged care work in our State is more likely to be performed by women and women in households. We are creating a situation whereby, as only one member of a household is able to work and have access to employment, we almost reinforce a gender divide in employment. We do not give opportunities, as I said, for financial independence and the social integration that comes with it, and we also lose out on considerable skills. I know many cases of persons who do not have permits to work in this State but who are resident here because their partners are resident and working here, and who have an extraordinary amount to contribute, including in some of the areas where we really need talented and able people. We have many people who are qualified and able and who could be contributing but are not necessarily given the access they want.
In that regard, it would be useful to have a report and analysis looking at the labour market access availability for spouses of employment permit holders and the gender impact for men and women. That would be useful in developing channels and routes that would allow for families to connect into Ireland in the fullest sense.
As the Senator said, the amendment calls for a report to be laid before the Houses of the Oireachtas outlining the labour market access available to spouses of employment permit holders, particularly looking to the gender impact, which is a very important issue to raise. This is especially the case for economic migrants working in vital roles in our health and social care sectors in particular.
As we discussed on Committee Stage, spousal access to the labour market and family reunification are the policy responsibility of the Department of Justice and, therefore, fall outside the scope of both my Department and this legislation. Nonetheless, ensuring employment permit holders can qualify for family reunification was a real driving force for the recent increases to the minimum salary thresholds for employment permits. Most roles across a broad spectrum of sectors now qualify for family reunification. I am actively working with my colleague, the Minister of State at the Department of Health, Deputy Butler, to ensure that healthcare assistants and home support workers achieve that level as soon as possible.
As I mentioned last week, the Minister for Justice, Deputy McEntee, is also cognisant of the concerns raised today. She recently announced changes to the rules regarding access to the labour market by the spouses and partners of employment permit holders. The wider issue of family reunification waiting periods is currently the subject of an ongoing review by the Department of Justice. I understand that announcements will be made once that review is complete.
While I agree with the Senator on much of this, ultimately, it is not a matter within the policy responsibility of my Department. It therefore falls outside the scope of the Bill. I cannot accept the amendment.
I regret that the Minister of State sees it as outside her scope-----
It is, legislatively.
-----but has indicated a clear understanding of why it is important. I spoke a little about the integration piece as regards financial independence and all those issues, but it is also from the straightforward perspective of family unification. We do not want a situation where one partner has to go abroad to work and has to leave his or her family behind. That is even more of a danger. Ireland has its own history of that in respect of seasonal employment, which brings its own questions and fears. Many in Ireland know the very negative impact of having to travel seasonally to Scotland and other parts of the world had on generations here.
I believe this issue is part of the Minister of State's area and remit. While it might not be seen as part of the Bill, I urge her to actively engage with it. Employment permits are a key element in that architecture around how all families are treated in Ireland. I will monitor the Minister of State's actions with interest. While she may not believe the amendment is appropriate to this legislation, the issue is absolutely part of her remit.
I move amendment No. 5:
In page 12, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“Report on workers’ rights
3. The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas reviewing the terms, conditions and remuneration afforded to workers holding regular permits and seasonal permits broken down by sectoral employment.”.
I second the amendment.
This amendment also concerns a report. It asks for a report on workers' rights. I touched on some of the logic and thinking behind this in my previous commentary on seasonal work. The report would look at "the terms, conditions and remuneration afforded to workers holding regular permits and seasonal permits broken down by sectoral employment". I wish to highlight the issue of examining what the terms and conditions are for those with regular permits and those with seasonal permits, in order to have that comparator, a piece that looks comparatively at that situation and, crucially, a breakdown by sector. As I highlighted, and I make no apologies for doing so, the hospitality sector was one of the first to jump on board with poor practices in terms of insecure hours contracts in the country. We know there have been concerns about other practices, such as false self-employment and other areas. Some of the gig economy companies and even the construction sector have led the way in that.
A comparative analysis that looks at regular permits and seasonal permits broken down by sector will allow us to identify when we have a trend within a sector and flag it at an early stage before it spreads and becomes a poor practice across many sectors. This allows us to ensure we have a robust system and that we are not coming in after the fact when significant damage has been done but to keep ahead of these.
We know some people will seek to exploit loopholes and then there will be exploitation of loopholes that will become standardised. That then becomes the business advice and what everyone else does. We need to be early in identifying patterns and taking remedial action. I urge the Minister of State to consider having that comparative analysis early, within 12 months. I know we will not have this Oireachtas for another 12 months, but I urge her to schedule it or start it even before then because it is the kind of thing that will allow us to make informed decisions in the next Oireachtas.
I appreciate the Senator's outlining her concerns regarding workers' rights. I am not in a position to accept this amendment because it seeks a report reviewing the terms, conditions and remunerations afforded to employment holders to be laid before both Houses of the Oireachtas. As I outlined on Committee Stage, conducting a review of this type of activity will be administratively highly burdensome and require a huge amount of time and resources to be dedicated to this. While I appreciate it is a really important area and something we need to get right, it would require an undue amount of resources to be put into it.
I take workers' rights very seriously and, in particular, the rights of potentially vulnerable migrant workers. That is something we need to look at. My officials can and do instruct the Workplace Relations Commission to undertake inspections to ensure that migrant workers' terms and conditions are being upheld in line with their contracts of employment and permits. As I said already today, there are really serious consequences for breaches of employment permit legislation, including the revocation of employment permits and prosecution of the employer. Penalties including fines and imprisonment are set out in legislation. To ensure the welfare of migrant workers, when an employer seeks to renew an employment permit, checks are made to ensure that the permit holder has been paid and has been treated in accordance with the terms and conditions set out in their employment contract and as per the original permit application. A permit renewal can be refused where discrepancies are discovered.
The Bill will further protect migrant workers from unfair treatment with the new change-of-employer option. This allows workers to move to a new employer after a prescribed period, planned to be nine months, without the need to apply for a new permit. This flexibility and transferability will strengthen the employment rights of migrant workers.
The Senator had specific concerns about the replacement of permanent staff by migrant workers. The purpose of the employment permit system is to assist economic growth by facilitating the filling of key skills gaps which cannot be filled using domestic or EEA labour markets. Maintaining the State's commitment to the EU community-preferred principle means that employers wishing to access the employment permit system must demonstrate that at least 50% of their staff are either from Ireland or another EEA country. If any employee - an employment permit holder or otherwise - experiences a breach of their employment rights, they should make a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission. Ireland has really strong employment rights legislation. That is why I would encourage all workers with any concerns to exercise their rights in this regard.
The Senator specifically spoke about a comparative analysis so that we could see trends ahead of schedule and perhaps act accordingly. That is something I will discuss with her afterwards because it has considerable merit.
Given Ireland's robust employment rights framework that protects employment permit holders as well as Irish and EEA workers, I do not intend to accept the amendment.
I thank the Minister of State for indicating she is happy to engage subsequently on the question of the trends. There is a problem with relying solely on the Workplace Relations Commission inspections. Those inspections can address the individual instances and highlight them. Of course, individual instances of the breach may be captured and responded to. I welcome the Minister of State's indication of serious measures to be taken for such breaches, but we are not necessarily talking about the breaches.
Sometimes we are talking about the pattern. In many cases, it may not be the case that the terms and conditions have been breached; it may be the case that the terms and conditions of an employment contract are completely legal but very poor. We are moving towards a pattern of poor practice and a deterioration in terms and conditions. The latter may be legal but they are deteriorating.
That is where certain sectoral analysis comes in. For example, we worked hard at one point to have joint labour committees introduced. The idea was that we were trying to raise the bar on a sector-by-sector basis and improve standards. I give credit to the Government because, for instance, progress has been made in areas such as childcare and there has been an attempt to raise the bar in terms of standards in the sector.
The concern is to ensure that in the context of seasonal and regular permit holders, we monitor the comparative in order to ensure that seasonal permits or the threat of moving to them are not used to drive down standards and terms and conditions for workers in a sector. All of that might be legal, but the focus must be on the pattern. When we identify the pattern, we must identify whether workers' terms and conditions and their remuneration are improving in line with inflation and the cost of everything or whether they are deteriorating. Regardless of whether that deterioration is legal, it is certainly not the policy intent of the Minister of State, the Government or any of us in the Oireachtas. That is why it is so important to ensure that the patterns are monitored. It is not a case of looking at breaches of the rules; we must look at the impact of new laws in order that we can identify whether some of them have had an inadvertently negative impact.
I will press the amendment, but I look forward to engaging with the Minister of State on the question of trends. It is something to be considered. While monitoring every case may be onerous, I do not believe that it is too onerous to identify cross-sections. For example, the Department or some of the many research bodies to which the Government has access should have the capacity to sample the conditions of regular and seasonal permit holders across a number of key and relevant sectors.
The number of permits annually is 66,000. The reality is, therefore, that it would absolutely be onerous for us to be have to carry out inspections and checks in each individual case.
That is not what I meant. I referred to identifying the patters.
The Senator cannot contribute again.
I appreciate that, but the only way to identify patterns is to analyse it. Sixty-six thousand is a huge volume. Monitoring those cases would be a significant body of work for my Department to undertake.
In the context of the joint labour committees and the idea of raising the bar on a sector-by-sector basis, I fully appreciate this. Earlier today, I signed an order for new pay rates for the contract cleaning sector. We raised the minimum salary threshold for permit holders as well. This is to ensure that they are not exploited and can earn enough to make a decent life for themselves and their families. On that basis, I am comfortable and confident as to the provisions in the legislation.
I move amendment No. 6:
In page 12, between lines 28 and 29, to insert the following:
“Report on right to unionise
3. The Minister shall, within 12 months of the passing of this Act, lay a report before both Houses of the Oireachtas outlining measures taken to ensure that workers holding both regular and seasonal permits have a right to organise and to collective bargaining in their respective sectors, as well as the number of workers holding regular and seasonal permits who have joined unions.".
I second the amendment.
I appreciate that to monitor every permit might be onerous but in taking a cross-section, patterns can be identified. Without looking at all of the aspects, if a sample of permits within different sectors were taken, we could identify some of the patterns. Because it is a comparative exercise, we would not have to compare all the permits. If, for example, a pattern is identified by looking at 100 permits, then perhaps we might look at expanding the exercise. By looking at 100 permits, however, we should be able to identify a pattern.
This is probably one of the more important amendments. When we talk about terms and conditions of employment, the pressure applied collectively by workers is the most important and powerful tool available, in effect. In many cases, it drives other tools, including us as Oireachtas Members, as well as others, to act. I refer to workers and their representatives using their voice to talk about what is and is not acceptable, what is and is not adequate and the parameters in terms of how they wish to be treated in their employment. Joining a union is one of the most important things workers can do. This is the case not only in respect of the terms and conditions of their own employment but also in respect of the terms, conditions and remuneration for employment across a whole sector. Indeed, in respect of the terms and conditions, remuneration and treatment of workers generally in the country, joining a union is one of the most important things workers can do.
When this legislation passes, I would like to see a report put before the Houses of the Oireachtas outlining measures to ensure that workers holding regular and seasonal permits have a right to organise and collectively bargain in their respective sectors. This question of the right to collective bargaining is something that has been raised repeatedly here in Ireland. It is almost an anomaly that we do not have it enshrined as strongly as we should in legislation. Having a right for workers to organise and collectively bargain within their respective sectors is going to be very important.
We do not want to have a situation where those who have employment permits, especially those who may have seasonal employment permits, will somehow fall outside the space of having the right to organise and unionise and there being the same encouragement or support for them to do so. These are people who may be particularly vulnerable because the power dynamic with their employers may be different than is the case with other workers. This right to unionise and collectively bargain is something I have always pushed for. For many years, there was a tax relief for those who joined a union in this State. This relief was removed, however, whereas the tax relief for joining a business association remained. Employers, therefore, get tax relief for joining a business association that represents their interests, but there is no longer a tax relief for workers who join a union to represent them.
It was unfortunate that this tax relief for joining a union was removed because of the economic benefit derived from it by workers. It was also unfortunate, however, because it removed an important message the State used to send out that joining a union is good; that it was a good thing for all of us when people are unionised, have a strong voice and can collectively represent themselves in the workplace; and that this leads to better practices and outcomes for everyone. Given that unionisation is a good thing and is a social good as well as good for the individual, I think we should have a report undertaken to examine how these new permit systems are mapping onto the membership of unions.
This report would consider what measures could be taken to ensure that employers and workers are aware of the rights that exist for workers in terms of organising and collective bargaining and have access to exercise these rights. It would also provide an analysis of the number of workers on regular and seasonal permits who have joined unions compared to, for example, the main body of workers in a workplace and their level of union membership. This would ensure that we do not create, or find ourselves with, a tier of workers who not only have a slightly less secure status in terms of their employment but also have more restricted access to collective representation.
I thank Senator Higgins for bringing forward this proposed amendment. We discussed this issue on Committee Stage and, as a result, I have now instructed my officials to implement a proposal around referencing the right to join a union in the employment rights information already provided to employment permit holders. I thank those Senators who engaged with me in recent weeks in relation to this matter. There has been a good and positive outcome in this regard. From now on, my officials will be looking to implement a reference to the right to join a union in the employment rights information provided to everyone who gets the right to hold an employment permit.
Specific to the seasonal employment permit, I reiterate that the trade unions and the migrants council of Ireland will be invited to join the oversight advisory group, which is very good collaboration. Under the Constitution all employees already have the right to form associations and trade unions irrespective of whether or not they are economic migrants. I do not believe publishing a report on this issue is warranted. Therefore, I will not accept the amendment.
I welcome the membership on the oversight body. It will be an invaluable resource. I will still press the amendment but I do welcome this. The oversight body will be very useful to the Minister to ensure and monitor standards. I welcome the confirmation of the right to association and to form a union. However, Ireland still needs to strengthen its legislation in respect of the right to collective bargaining, which is slightly different from the right to form a trade union. The right to collective bargaining in the workplace is something that needs to be reinforced. I thank the Minister of State.
I move amendment No. 7:
In page 20, to delete lines 13 to 39, to delete pages 21, 22 and 23.
I second the amendment.
Will the Minister of State comment on whether she will support the amendment?
The amendment seeks to delete Chapter 3 of the Bill, which include sections 10 and 11 which deal with approved seasonal employers. Section 10 provides for the application procedures for employers who wish to become approved seasonal employers. Section 11 provides ministerial power to consider an application from an employer to become an approved seasonal employer and outlines the reasons for refusal that may be taken into account. It is an integral part of the Bill and I will not accept the amendment.
That is fine.
Amendments Nos. 8 and 9 have been ruled out of order.
When is it proposed to take Fifth Stage?
Now.
Is that agreed? Agreed.
