Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 22 May 2013
25. Deputy John Halligan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation when he will deal with the situation whereby the Employment Appeals Tribunal and Labour Court recommendations may be ignored or avoided by employers, in some cases by changing the names of the company; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [24469/13]
View answerThe enforcement of Employment Appeals Tribunal (EAT) determinations and Labour Court rulings under employment legislation are a matter for the courts. In cases other than those covered by the Payment of Wages Act, the Enforcement Services Unit of the National Employment Rights Authority (NERA) has some capacity to have a determination of the EAT enforced through the civil courts.
In general, where an award has been made in favour of an employee, the employer has six weeks in which to comply. If the employer fails to do so within this period, the employee, or the employee’s trade union, may make an application to the Circuit Court for an order directing the employer to comply with the determination. Where an employee is not in a position to do so the matter can be referred to NERA Enforcement Services Unit, which may, in certain circumstances, make an application to the Courts for an order on his/her behalf.
In deciding whether or not to intervene in the Minister’s name, NERA has regard to the amount of the award, the potential for achieving a favourable outcome for the claimant and the scale of the costs likely to be incurred in doing so. The enforcement of a Circuit Court order in these circumstances is the responsibility of the relevant County Sheriff.
Where an employer is legally insolvent and where a determination has been made by the EAT or an appeal to the Labour Court is in favour of employees, employees are entitled to seek redress from the State through the Insolvency Payments Scheme.
The Companies Acts make provision that a change of name shall not affect any rights or obligations of the company, or render defective any legal proceedings by or against the company, and any legal proceedings which might have been continued or commenced against it by its former name may be continued or commenced against it by its new name. In effect, it is a continuance of the same company with the same registration number as before the name change.
As you may be aware, I have commenced a root and branch reform of the State’s existing Workplace Relations Services with the objective of establishing a world-class Workplace Relations Service. I propose to establish a two-tier Workplace Relations structure. This will involve two statutorily independent bodies replacing the current five. We will have a new single body of first instance to be called the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) and a separate appeals body, which will effectively be an expanded Labour Court. Work has commenced on the drafting of a Workplace Relations Bill to give effect to the new two-tier structure.
I believe that for a workplace relations system to have credibility it must be supported by proportionate, effective and efficient compliance and enforcement measures. The current system of enforcement of employment rights awards is cumbersome, expensive and not fit for purpose. For this reason, I am proposing to make provision in the Workplace Relations Bill for a range of enhanced compliance measures, including the use of Compliance Notices, Fixed Charge Notices and a new mechanism for enforcing awards of the WRC Adjudicators and Labour Court Determinations. I am confident that the introduction of these these measures will provide for more proportionate, efficient and effective enforcement of employment law.
