Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 25 April 2024
3. Deputy Donnchadh Ó Laoghaire asked the Minister for Social Protection the steps she and her Department are taking to ensure workers in citizens information companies are provided with a pay increase, given the length of time since their last pay increase; and if she will provide the funding to ensure this happens [18468/24]
View answerMore than tens of thousands of people rely on the citizens information service. It is a vitally important, high-quality service. To ensure it remains a high-quality service, we need to ensure quality staff are attracted to it. The pay has not changed for those in the citizens information service in 16 years, since 2008. That is an absolutely extraordinary amount of time considering the extent of inflation over that period. The starting salary is less than €30,000. This is a serious problem that has been attempted to be addressed for some time. I hope to hear the Minister's response as to how she will address it.
I also value the important work carried out by employees of the citizens information service, or CIS. I acknowledge the role they play in providing people with free, quality and independent information, advice and advocacy services throughout the country. It is important to point out that employees of the CIS are not employees of my Department nor are they public servants. They are employees of independent companies that provide important services on behalf of the Citizens Information Board, CIB, which are delivered under a service level agreement between the companies and CIB. CIB itself is funded via an Estimate agreed as part of the annual budget process.
Last summer, a funding request for an 11% pay increase for employees of the citizens information service 2024 was submitted to my Department. This followed a non-binding Workplace Relations Commission process that involved SIPTU and the citizens information service employers group. However, there was no involvement of CIB in the Workplace Relations Commission process, nor was my Department aware of this pay request or its scale in advance. Given the scale of the increase, it is important that all relevant parties were involved in this process from an early stage. The Citizens Information Board has informed my Department that SIPTU and the citizens information service employers group attended a further WRC process in February where the matter was referred to the Labour Court, a date for which has recently been set for 14 June. This process is ongoing and my Department is monitoring the situation closely. If a request for an increased budget provision is formally submitted to my Department following the process, my officials will consider it carefully and engage with colleagues in the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform with a view to determining if a Supplementary Estimate can be provided.
I may take some comfort from that to a small extent. I do not think it helps that there is such a baroque structure here. These are companies but they are not for profit and they are funded exclusively through the public purse. There is the Minister, the Citizens Information Board and then the citizens information service. I do not know why this is the case. Leaving that aside, it is important to put on the record what this means practically. The pay has not changed in 16 years. The starting salary is less than €30,000. Recruitment campaigns to the service have not been successful in recent times. It is not attracting people and it is easy to understand that. Previously, there would have been more than 200 applications for positions. Now, there is only a handful. Four long-serving staff members have recently left the national phone service in the past nine months. My understanding is that the employers group and the trade unions agreed a pay claim, brought it to the Department of public expenditure and it was refused last year. That should not have been the case. My understanding may not have been correct. I understand the employers group and the employees are on the same page. It is that the board and the funding is not available through the Minister's Department and through the Department of public expenditure and reform.
To be clear, there is a process under way. It has been referred to the Labour Court and a date set for 14 June. We have to let that process run its course. When the Labour Court concludes its work, my Department will not be found wanting in responding. Shortly after I was appointed, we managed to sort out a long-running issue, and it was long running, for CE supervisors.
We provided them with an ex gratia payment. I absolutely value and recognise the work carried out by the staff in the citizens information offices throughout the country. For many of us, it is the first place we go to look for information. The staff and, indeed, the volunteers do great work. At the same, the Deputy will appreciate it is not within my gift to unilaterally award pay increases. The Minister for public expenditure will need to be consulted on this when the Labour Court process has concluded. A date has been set for 14 June. As I say, I will not be found wanting in making the case when the time comes.
I have a few other points. The Minister made the point these staff members are not public servants. They were aligned to the public sector pay structure until the previous recession. I also make the point that the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, CCPC, is aligned to public sector pay. Even MABS, which is a sister company of the citizens information service funded through the Citizens Information Board, has received those pay increases. The point regarding the Labour Court is that the only people who can be brought before the court is the employers group of the citizens information service, but they are actually on board. They are going along with this.
The trade unions and the service are going to the Labour Court. The Minister and the Department cannot be brought because they are not the direct employer, nor can the Citizens Information Board.
I will take the Minister up on the point about a Supplementary Estimate. Is she saying that, pending the outcome of the Labour Court and so on, this will not necessarily wait until budget 2025 and that a solution could conceivably be found in advance of that funding-wise?
What I am saying is that I will not be found wanting, depending on the Labour Court outcome. We have to hear what it has to say. These people, as the Deputy knows, are set up in such a way that they are not employees of my Department. That probably emanates from voluntary boards many years ago. That is the way it is, so we have to go through the process. The Labour Court will make its finding, and I assure the Deputy that, whatever that is, I will not be found wanting in trying to resolve the issue. I agree with the Deputy that people should get a fair day's pay for a fair day's work and that nobody should be left behind. What I said was that if a request for an increased budget provision is formally submitted to my Department following the Labour Court process, my officials will consider it carefully and engage with colleagues in the Department of Public Expenditure, NDP Delivery and Reform with a view to determining if a Supplementary Estimate can be provided. Neither the CIB nor my Department was made aware of the request. My understanding is that it was a non-binding WRC process. Since then, SIPTU and the CIS employers' group attended the WRC again in February. Following that, the matter was referred to the Labour Court and a date was set in June. We have to let the process play out.
Níl an chéad duine eile anseo.
