asked the Minister for Labour if he will outline the discussions he has had on the Government's Discussion Document on Worker Participation; and when he proposes to introduce positive proposals.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Workers Participation Discussion Document.
18.
My purpose in publishing the discussion paper Worker Participation, which was released on 27 March 1980, is to focus public attention upon developments relating to worker participation at different levels of the enterprise, promote public discussion and stimulate all concerned to formulate their views on the subject.
The paper sets out to pose options rather than put forward any hard and fast blueprint. It has been designed so that both sides of industry and other interests will have an opportunity to put forward their views and point the way forward. Until the social partners in particular have outlined their positions Government initiatives as regards the private sector would, in my view, be premature. Any worthwhile progress in this area must be based on consensus between the interest groups concerned.
To aid this process I propose to set up an advisory committee on worker participation composed of representatives of the main interest groups. The terms of reference of the committee will be to undertake a study of the feasibility of possible initiatives, including research, in relation to worker participation and to make recommendations.
Will the Minister confirm that he has not had discussions with anybody on the worker participation document? Does he not agree that the House ought to be tired of his fobbing off of issues to working parties, standing committees and commissions which will not report until many years after the Minister has left office? Does he not consider that this matter is more urgent and needs positive action by him?
The Deputy should realise that a discussion paper was provided to stimulate discussion, particularly among the social partners and the community at large. It was part of the commitment by the Government in last year's national understanding. I believe it to have been a very positive and progressive step forward. To give some indication to the Deputy of what has been happening since the document was issued I should like to tell him that many seminars were organised by various groups. I addressed a number of those and at all times I supplied officials from the Department. Further seminars have been arranged and will be held in the near future. With regard to the advisory committee mentioned in the reply I should like to tell the Deputy that it will be representative of both sides of industry. The Deputy should realise that an issue like worker participation needs to be promoted and discussed. I do not think that in our situation something imposed by a Government is the answer. The answer is to get the views expressed and considered by both sides of industry when the commitment is a complete one.
Would it not be a clearer sign of the Government's intent and dedication towards worker participation if, for instance, he sets up a worker participation agency to promote worker participation in the same fashion as the equality agency? Will the Minister consider that suggestion?
I do not agree. Both sides of industry received the discussion document very well. I believe that in an area like that, where obviously all views will not coincide, it is important that public discussion takes place. Public views should be expressed by both sides of industry and the community. The document, which was welcomed, served a very useful purpose.
Does the Minister accept that both management and unions are a little afraid of worker participation and are dragging their feet in this regard? Does the Minister agree that it is the interest of the community at large to follow this path, admittedly very carefully? Does the Minister accept that the best way to pursue this would be by setting up an agency which would diligently approach the problem over the years?
I would not disagree that there is a certain amount of caution being exercised by both sides of industry in regard to this but, however, both sides welcomed the issuing of the discussion document. I believe the proposal in that is the right way forward and not through an agency. I do not see what role an agency can fill in this area. The essential components of success in worker participation are both sides of industry and for that reason I am looking forward to their response to the discussion document.