asked the Minister for Labour if he will report on the operation of the Protection of Employees (Employers Insolvency) Act, 1984; if he will give details of the number of employees who have claimed under the legislation; and the finance which has been paid under the terms of the Act.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Protection of Employees (Employers Insolvency) Act, 1984.
8.
In the period up to 30 September 1985 payments by my Department under the Protection of Employees (Employers' Insolvency) Act, 1984, from the redundancy and employers' insolvency fund have amounted to £3,269,224. The breakdown of payments made in respect of outstanding entitlements is as follows:—
|
£ |
|
|
Minimum Notice Awards |
2,042,811 |
|
Holiday Pay |
713,143 |
|
Wages |
482,967 |
|
Equal Pay Awards |
18,480 |
|
Unfair Dismissal Awards |
11,823 |
|
Total: |
£3,269,224 |
Statistics of the number of individual claimants are not readily available. In order to establish the precise number of beneficiaries, a detailed analysis of all claims would be necessary because individual employees can submit claims in respect of different entitlements; the average number of claims is about two per person. As the total number of claims received to date is in the region of 6,000, the best estimate is that the number of individual claimants would be approximately 3,000.
Is the Minister satisfied that the legislation is operating speedily on behalf of those people who have claims to make and could the legislation proposed take in some of the hardship cases lying around at the time of the enactment of the Bill? We spoke over a year ago about the reviewing of some of the borderlines cases when the Bill had been in operation for some time. Could these cases be reviewed at this stage?
I am happy that the legislation is operating as satisfactorily as we had anticipated. As the Deputy will recall, part of the delay in the introduction of this legislation related to considerable worries expressed by many about the difficulties involved in its administration in cases where there were inadequate records and where employees had been at the receiving end of improper management. The establishment of documentary proof is a necessary requirement for the distribution of taxpayers' money. These cases posed difficulties which we had anticipated.
We have kept the legislation and its operation under considerable revision. I would be prepared to enter into a review of its operation and in particular to look, if appropriate, at the specific marginal borderline cases.