asked the Minister for Labour if he has satisfied himself with the operation of the Unfair Dismissals Act to date; if his attention had been drawn to the fact that in the majority of cases where dismissal is found to be unfair, financial compensation is awarded rather than reinstatement or re-engagement; his views on whether money will compensate for unfairly losing a job; if he will consider amending the Act so that, when a dismissal is found to be unfair, reinstatement must be provided unless there are compelling reasons not to do so, and that any such reasons must be stated in the recommendation or determination as appropriate; his views on the practice of deducting social welfare payments from financial awards; and if he will take immediate action to end this unfair practice.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Unfair Dismissals Act.
I believe that the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977, has in general worked well in that it has afforded unfairly dismissed employees a clear avenue of redress. There is also evidence to suggest that as a result of this legislation there has been less industrial conflicts or dismissal cases.
On the question of redress for unfair dismissal, I would agree that, ideally, the injured party should be re-employed. However, this may not always be feasible. The present tendency towards the award of compensation rather than re-instatement or re-engagement simply reflects the two realities that (a) in some instances re-instatement or re-engagement is not a realistic option where there has been a complete breakdown in the relationship between the parties, and (b) in many cases compensation is the preferred choice of the employee. The Employment Appeals Tribunal and the rights commissioners have wide experience in this area and, in my view, the choice of solution in any particular instance is best left to their judgment in the light of the circumstances of each individual case.
As regards the practice of deducting social welfare payments from financial awards the reasoning behind this is the provision in the Act that the employee should be compensated in respect of any financial loss incurred by him which is attributable to the dismissal. Clearly, the financial loss of an unfairly dismissed employee is mitigated by any other income received — such as social welfare payments or, indeed, remuneration from alternative employment — and this is simply reflected in the amount of the compensation he is awarded.
As stated in reply to another question I am at present studying the outcome of a review recently undertaken by my Department of various issues which have arisen under the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 — including those mentioned by the Deputy. When I have concluded this examination I shall indicate what measures, if any, I propose to take in this area.