Skip to main content
Normal View

Labour Court Recommendations

Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 10 March 2015

Tuesday, 10 March 2015

Questions (251)

Seán Ó Fearghaíl

Question:

251. Deputy Seán Ó Fearghaíl asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if an education review office is proposed for the manned security industry; if the membership of the joint labour committee, dealing with this issue, will be identified; the nature of any representations that he has had on this matter; if he considers the time right for the re-introduction of an education review office in the sector; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10468/15]

View answer

Written answers (Question to Jobs)

I assume the Deputy’s question relates to the current proposal for an Employment Regulation Order (ERO) for the Security sector. In January 2014, Orders were signed to effect recommendations of the Labour Court Review of the Joint Labour Committee System (JLC), including that relating to the continuation of a JLC in the Security Sector. Subsequently the Labour Court appointed members to that JLC. Before the members were appointed, the Labour Court consulted with IBEC, ICTU and the two employer bodies most associated with the security sector – the National Union of Security Employers (NUSE) and the Irish Security Industry Association (ISIA) who all nominated representatives for membership of the JLC. Having considered the names put forward by those organisations the current members of the JLC were appointed on 12 May 2014.

Employer Representatives

Nominated by

Bill Brown

NUSE

Brian Doyle

NUSE

Noel Fitzpatrick

NUSE

Alan Durnan

ISIA

John O’Donoghue

ISIA

Jim Dolan

ISIA

Employee Representatives

Nominated by

Gary Smith

ICTU

Ed Kenny

ICTU

Peadar Nolan

ICTU

Ian Black

ICTU

Tony Prior

ICTU

Christy Waters

ICTU

The Chairperson and Independent Member (and Chairperson in the absence of the Chair) are Anna Perry and Michael Keegan respectively, who are Industrial Relations Officers with the Labour Relations Commission.

The Court, both from its own knowledge and from a review of the Annual Report of the Private Security Authority, decided on the composition of the Committee.

I understand that the employer bodies represented on the Committee employ approximately 11,500 of the 14,700 employees that work in the sector and the employee representatives on the Committee represent approximately 5,500 of those employed in the sector. In this regard, it should be borne in mind that one of the purposes in general of the Employment Regulation Orders is to give protection to employees who are not otherwise represented.

In formulating possible proposals that might form the basis of an Order, the Security JLC is obliged to consider the criteria as set out in Section 42 of the Industrial Relations Act 1946, as amended, in formulating the proposals, and the Committee's consideration of these criteria is encapsulated in the Report of the Chairman which will accompany the proposals, if any, when they are submitted to the Labour Court.

Notice of the making of the proposals was published in the Legal Notices sections of three national daily newspapers, the Irish Times, Irish Independent and Examiner. They were also published on the Workplace Relations website. Submissions on the proposals were sought from interested parties.

If, after consideration of any submissions received, the Committee adopts the proposals it will submit them to the Labour Court for consideration. If the Court decides they should be adopted it will forward a copy of the proposals to the Minister, who, if it is considered appropriate to do so, will make an Order giving effect to them.

Representations have been received from a number of employers in the Security sector expressing concern at the proposals under consideration at the moment for an ERO governing terms and conditions of workers in that sector. Those employers have had an opportunity to raise their concerns directly with the JLC during the consultation process.

JLCs and the Labour Court are independent of the Minister in the carrying out of their respective functions. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate for the Minister to intervene in a process that is governed by statute.

Top
Share