Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 21 November 2018
66. Deputy James Browne asked the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence if an investigation will be carried out into the physical and psychological effects prolonged working hours are having on soldiers, sailors and aircrews; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48207/18]
View answer81. Deputy Jack Chambers asked the Taoiseach and Minister for Defence the status of the application of Directive 2003/88/EC, the working time directive, to the Defence Forces in compliance with the ruling of the European Court of Justice; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48383/18]
View answerWill an investigation be carried out into the physical and psychological effects of prolonged working hours on soldiers, sailors and aircrew? Will the Minister of State make a statement on the matter?
Are we skipping Questions Nos. 64 and 65?
We are taking Questions Nos. 66 and 81.
We are skipping Questions Nos. 64 and 65.
The Deputy is not present.
The Minister of State should stop wasting time.
Yes.
I never waste time. I propose to take Questions Nos. 66 and 81 together.
The limitations on working time set out in the working time directive are for the purpose of preserving the health and safety of personnel. The Department of Defence and military management are aware of the provisions of the working time directive and have been working closely to progress its implementation. As I have previously informed the House, a Government decision, dated 18 November 2016, approved the drafting of the heads of a Bill to amend the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997. It will remove the blanket exclusions contained in section 3 of the Act. Work is under way in the Department of Defence and the Department of Employment Affairs and Social Protection towards the progression of this decision.
The Department of Defence and the Defence Forces have undertaken significant work in examining the nature of the duties of the Defence Forces and how the working time directive can be applied to the members of the Defence Forces. A review of Defence Forces activities found that a high percentage of the normal everyday work of the Defence Forces appeared to be already in compliance with the directive. Certain activities were identified which might require a derogation, as provided for, from its terms. Other activities, owing to their nature, are unique and will require further consideration and broader consultation. However, I am confident that such measures can be progressed without compromising the health and safety of members of the Defence Forces.
Litigation taken by a member of the Permanent Defence Force in respect of the applicability of certain elements of the working time directive to the Defence Forces was settled in June this year in the High Court having regard to the specific circumstances of that case. Further litigation on the working time directive as it relates to the Defence Forces is pending and it is not appropriate to comment further on it at this point. The Department of Defence is engaging through the conciliation and arbitration process with the Defence Forces representative associations to discuss the application of the working time directive to the Defence Forces.
As we understand it now, some members of the Defence Forces are working three 24 hour duties in a week and can even be called back into work after those shifts are finished. Such situations are becoming commonplace, and at the recent PDFORRA conference, it was stated that all the military services are overstretched due to ever decreasing manpower level. PDFORRA is calling on the Department of Defence to carry out an investigation into the physical and psychological effects such prolonged working hours are having on soldiers, sailors and air crews. This must be a worthwhile call and surely such an investigation could well bolster Defence Forces' cases with the Public Service Pay Commission. Delegates attending the association's annual conference in Castlebar, County Mayo, heard many of those doing 24 hour shifts also face commutes to and from work to start and carry out those long working hours. Speakers expressed concern that many military personnel suffer from sleep deprivation and enormous stress levels. They called it a serious health and safety issue. Will the Minister investigate this situation?
The health and safety of members of the Defence Forces is a priority for me and the military authorities. Many of the activities of the Defence Forces comply with the provisions of the working time directive. As the Deputy will appreciate, implementation of the directive will amount to a fundamental change in working conditions that have been in place for many years. The implementation of the working time directive in the Defence Forces is a complex arrangement that requires considerable thought to ensure that, on the one hand, employers' rights are recognised and, on the other hand, the Defence Forces continue to play the varied roles assigned by Government. Department officials are engaging with military management and are working and engaging with the Defence Forces' representative associations through the conciliation and arbitration process. I do not accept that members are doing three 24 hour duties per week. Members are tasked with doing 24 hour duties. That is the nature of the Defence Forces' organisation, and when members join up, they accept they have to do 24 hour duties. I do not accept that members are doing three 24 hour duties per week.
There are serious issues around health and safety. The Minister of State has a White Paper target of 9,500 recruits despite massive non-compliance with the working time directive and numbers that fall below 9,000. What is the pathway of recruitment? If the Minister of State strives to achieve the White Paper target of 9,500 and compliance with the working time directive, there is a mismatch in respect of the work that can be done. Does the Minister of State need to review the White Paper recruitment target? Should the number be much higher as the Minister of State strives to achieve compliance beyond the working time directive? The Minister of State and maybe everyone involved in this process are not being genuine with people who want to implement the working time directive. The headline number of 9,500 as a target, despite non-compliance, will be a mismatch even if the Minister does achieve compliance. What is the Minister of State doing about the White Paper and achieving compliance?
When the numbers drop, of course there will be more challenges within any organisation. The Defence Forces' organisation is no different. Then we have to prioritise the work. What are the most important pieces of work? Is it sending people overseas, aiding the civil power, aiding the civil authority, or the daily ongoing duties that members of the Defence Forces carry out? I have tasked the military management with doing a gap analysis. I have brought forward a White Paper initiative to examine the gaps within the organisation. We are working on that. I want to get that back as soon as possible. It is important work that has to be carried out. That will help us make decisions on what we can prioritise and what the most important pieces of work are that the Defence Forces have to carry out. That is all about prioritising work that the Defence Forces do daily, weekly and monthly and which comprises sending people overseas. Will we be able to continue to send the numbers overseas that we are sending at the moment?
We know, since the report on the workplace climate in the Defence Forces was published last year, the level of stress that Defence Forces personnel are under. Since then, as the numbers in the Defence Forces have declined, those stress levels can only have increased, especially as the Defence Forces have to work exceptionally long hours on top of that. I understand that there is still no psychiatrist in the Defence Forces. Perhaps the Minister of State can enlighten us on that.
Many of the staff are not only working long hours but are caught in poverty traps. For example, a Defence Forces worker, whose pay is so low that they have to take the family income supplement, cannot get a mortgage. When such a person goes to the county council for a county council mortgage, they are told the family income supplement is not an income but a social welfare support and the council cannot give them a mortgage. When they ask if they can go on the housing list, they are told the family income supplement is an income and they are over the threshold go on the housing list. Some of these soldiers and other Defence Forces personnel are being caught in poverty traps. Will the Minister of State address these matters?
Less than 1% of the personnel in the organisation is on the working family payment. People talk about 70%, 60% and 40% but it is actually less than 1% of the Defence Forces organisation personnel. That includes the Department of Defence and the Defence Forces. I have not come across people who have not been able to get on the housing list. I do not know about people's personal circumstances. The working family payment is there for a reason. It depends on the size of the family and other reasons.
We are trying to recruit a psychiatrist and that is proving difficult. I understand that a proposal is coming to me shortly around that. The Deputy knows, given that he is a spokesperson in this area, that recruitment of psychiatrists is an issue not just for the Defence Forces but for the HSE as well. Members of the Defence Forces and the Chief of Staff reiterated this at a committee meeting last Thursday, and any enlisted personnel or officer personnel receive all the medical mental care and attention from the private market when it is required.
