Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 27 November 2018
63. Deputy Joan Burton asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform when he plans to address the status of community employment supervisors and make provision for their payments as per the Labour Court recommendation of 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [49206/18]
View answer73. Deputy Jonathan O'Brien asked the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the status of community employment supervisors and provision of their payments under a Labour Court recommendation of 2008; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [48989/18]
View answerHas the Minister found a mechanism to resolve the situation for community employment, CE, supervisors, the Labour Court recommendation on their pensions and so on? I am conscious that the recommendation was made before the crash. We are now in a period of restoration. Many proposals have been put forward. What progress has the Minister made to give effect to restoration proposals?
I propose to take Questions Nos. 63 and 73 together.
As Deputies will be aware this issue relates to a claim by community employment supervisors and assistant supervisors who have been seeking, through their union representatives, the allocation of Exchequer funding to implement a 2008 Labour Court recommendation relating to the provision of a pension scheme.
This matter was the subject of discussion at the community sector high level forum which was reconvened to examine certain issues pertaining to the community employment sector and in particular to ensure that the matter was fully examined having regard to costs and precedent. A detailed scoping exercise was carried out by my Department in 2017 in order to comprehensively examine and assess the full potential implications of the issues under consideration. The scoping exercise clearly illustrated the significant issues at play here, with a potential cost to the State of between €188 million per annum and €347 million depending on the size of the sector, in respect of funding to enable a pension contribution in State-funded community and voluntary sectors. This excludes any provision for immediate ex gratia lump sum payment of pension as sought, which could, depending on the size of the sector, entail a further Exchequer cost of up to €318 million.
It continues to be the position that State organisations are not the employer of the particular employees concerned and that it is not for the State to provide funding for such pension schemes. The employees in question are, or were, employees of private companies notwithstanding the fact that the companies concerned are, or were, in receipt of State funding.
Community employment is an absolutely vital part of the social employment-social enterprise structure of this country. There are more than 1,000 CE supervisors. They give really valuable and important services to communities in urban and rural areas, particularly in areas of disadvantage. I am sure the Minister would agree that the people involved in community employment as supervisors and assistant supervisors have given a very good service to the State. Various detailed proposals have been put forward which would address this issue. The cost is not enormous and these people have given service. More importantly, the community service model which is so vital to our social infrastructure is in serious danger of simply disappearing because there is not a proper structure for resolving an issue like this.
The Minister is having a kind of King Canute moment. The economy is in recovery yet he is holding up his hands and saying in terms of legitimate areas such as the Defence Forces and community employment supervisors that he is not able to do anything. We have a process of restoration at the moment and that should be applied to the CE supervisors.
I will not add to what Deputy Burton has said but I contend that these workers are providing a fundamental public service. Everyone recognises that and they are funded by the public purse. For that reason alone, the Labour Court recommendation on them should be implemented. This is a Labour Court recommendation and failure to implement that by the Government undermines the court.
I will provide a running total of the cost of the different demands and needs being articulated to me this afternoon. We are now at approximately €918 million. The one-off payment for the CE schemes would cost €318 million, with an additional one year cost of a minimum of €180 million; there is €300 million that I updated Deputy O'Brien on in respect of the nursing issue and a further €120 million of the cost of meeting the need in respect of professional development hours. Far from having a King Canute moment I am having a déjà vu moment where our economy is doing well in the face of many different risks and different social needs. Both Deputies who have spoken on this matter know that collective agreements matter in that they allow us to manage the value of the issue in respect of competing demands. They know that if I was to meet any of the needs the Deputy refers to it would trigger a whole other set of demands that the Exchequer cannot meet without compromising other commitments we have either to taxpayers or to citizens who depend on services. That is why I am adopting my stance on these matters. Far from trying to undermine the role of our public servants or the people who work in community employment organisations, I am simply looking to make sure we are in a position to be able to continue to meet affordable wage needs in the future.
Deputy Donohoe's reputation is that he is the Minister who dipped down the back of the sofa and found something between €750 million and €1 billion, notwithstanding the information that was given to the Committee on Budgetary Oversight. He lashed out the money. Not alone did that happen, but at the Fine Gael Ard-Fheis last week, the Taoiseach was offering tax cuts to everyone, in particular the very well off. We were presented with a Supplementary Estimate earlier of €20 million for the Pope's visit to the Phoenix Park. I say to the Minister, "Come on." He has lashed out the money here, there and everywhere to favoured particular projects. However, he has not been able to do it for public and affordable housing and he has not done it for the Army. He has not bothered to address seriously in his response community employment in respect of which there is a Labour Court recommendation.
Did the scoping exercise carried out last year come up with any other proposal bar looking simply at how much it would cost to implement the Labour Court recommendation? If any other organisation or private entity ignored such a recommendation, the Minister would be critical, as would I. I have added the figures. If one includes the ex gratia payments, it would come to €854 million. As such, the Minister is probably a bit short in his own figures.
We might compare figures afterwards and see what is the gap. Either way, it is a large figure. No other issues were identified in the process with the community employment sector regarding the scoping of the costs of different options to address the matter. I outlined in my reply to the Deputy what work the forum did and the costs relating to it.
Regarding Deputy Burton's comments, I answered the question on community employment and I said I recognised the value of what people in the sector do and the contribution they make. The Deputy offered a description of me lashing out money but let us look at what that is for. It is additional money to provide social housing this year, to deal with homeless services and to maintain health services. I am sorry the Deputy has such a view on making money available to organise the visit of the Pope, who is a Head of State, to our country. It was about trying to ensure the event could go well and safely in recognition of how many people would participate in it.
We have a public sector wage agreement that is not even a year old and I am committed to maintaining it.
