Vol. 402 No. 8
9 Mr. T. O'Sullivan asked the Minister for Labour if he will tabulate the total number of redundancies in the economy, broken down in compulsory and voluntary totals in each year from 1985-1990; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
The annual totals of proposed redundancies notified to my Department under the Redundancy Payments Acts for the years 1985 to 1990 were: 1985, 22,531; 1986, 22,790; 1987, 24,090; 1988, 23,037; 1989, 13,395; and for the first ten months of 1990, 11,488. The breakdown requested by the Deputy is not available in my Department. The figures available relate to all cases of redundancies covered by the Redundancy Payments Acts but do not differentiate between cases in which the employees concerned have voluntarily accepted redundancy payments agreements and other cases in whcih such agreements have not been reached.
Would the Minister explain why it is not possible to give a breakdown of the figures? At present a number of profitable firms are making people redundant. It is now being used as a device to shed staff rather than as a device to make a company more competitive. Even though profits are increasing the number of jobs is reducing all the time. Therefore there is a need to differentiate between the two. Will the Minister give the House an assurance that this could be done?
I do not think so because the Acts do not differentiate between voluntary and compulsory redundancies. We presume that people are made redundant for a reason and they are entitled to their benefits. The benefits under the Acts are not set at any specific levels to induce people to take redundancy despite what may happen under different agreements. The redundancy Acts do not contain any special provisions.
Would the Minister not concede or agree that we have a very inadequate statistical base to enable us understand what is happening in the labour market particularly in relation to redundancies? Furthermore, having regard to the high levels of unemployment, notwithstanding other positive factors in the economy, does he propose to introduce in his Department any mechanisms which would enable him to get the statistical qualitative data that Deputy O'Sullivan sought in his first question?
The second question is very different from the one asked by Deputy O'Sullivan. The statistical data available in the Department on redundancy payments is excellent and relates to notified redundancies. To differentiate between——
There is no distinction between voluntary and compulsory redundancies.
In relation to compulsory and voluntary redundancies, people claim their entitlements from the social insurance fund when made redundant. I presume that the rates in relation to voluntary or statutory redundancy are not too attractive and I would not presuppose for one second that people are acting in cahoots with each other — if this is the implication — and wish to be made redundant compulsorily. It is not a question of people being made redundant either voluntarily or compulsorily — they are made redundant.
If the Minister does not know from the statistics and is offering an opinion, however well informed that may be, is it clearly not now time for us to get more qualified quantitative information which would enable us to look at the way the labour market is developing?
That is a matter for debate. While I do not think debates are allowed at Question Time, I do not agree with the Deputy. I presume the people who fill in their forms for redundancy entitlements have been made redundant against their wishes or that the redundancy may be linked to the introduction of technology or rationalisation. I do not think that is the breakdown required. I would consider the question if it was easy to break down the figures but I do not think that is the case.
