Vol. 402 No. 8
18 Mr. Sherlock asked the Minister for Labour the number of employees covered by joint labour committees; the percentage of the total workforce represented by this figure; if he will outline his plans for the future of joint labour committees; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Approximately 40,000 employees are covered by joint labour committees. This figure represents about 5 per cent of all employees.
The Industrial Relations Act, 1990, contains a number of measures which are designed to facilitate the establishment of joint labour committees; to improve the functioning of existing joint labour committees and to bring about more effective enforcement of Employment Regulation Orders. In addition, one of the functions of the new Labour Relations Commission will be to carry out periodic reviews to determine whether new joint labour committees should be established or existing joint labour committees extended.
I believe that these changes will ensure that the joint labour committee system functions efficiently and effectively and adequately addresses the problem of low pay in certain sectors.
Does the Minister not agree that the time has been reached to revamp the entire legislation governing minimum pay, that the joint labour committees are contributing to the problem of low pay endemic in the economy, that there is generally poor enforcement of employment regulation orders and that it would be much better to use the considerable abilities of the Minister and his office to facilitate a climate for minimum pay legislation in the economy generally?
That might yet prove to be the case. I believe that joint labour committees, if worked for individual sectors, can bring about fairly substantial improvements for the low paid. They do so all the time. In the 1990 Act we were attempting to make the system more efficient and to obtain more powers for the implementation and enforcement of employment regulation orders. We have increased the inspectorate in that area. This issue has been discussed as part of the Programme for Government. I do not want to indicate what might or might not happen in those discussions. In the meantime I am committed to trying to extend and expand the operation of joint labour committees to make them more effective.
I am sure the Minister would agree that in any given area covered by a joint labour committee the levels of pay are substantially lower than elsewhere in the economy. The Minister referred to the Programme for Government but I presume he is talking about the social and economic programme. I take it this matter is the subject of discussion with the social interests.
It is a matter for discussion. Joint labour committees were put into sectors which had particular problems in an attempt to protect people in those sectors. They fulfilled a useful function. The employers and trade unions concerned in a sector talk about the problems peculiar to it and try to get the best arrangement for employees. Joint labour committees are very important and are seen as such by the trade union movement.
Has the Minister given any consideration to the concept of a minimum income through the provision of reasonable pay levels and some adjustment or expansion of the concept of the family income supplement?
Yes. That is a matter for social welfare. This year the family income supplement has been expanded. The thresholds for PRSI and the income figures for taxation are ways to tackle the income question. I have said several times that the answer to low pay is to do with training, education, social welfare and taxation. All those aspects taken jointly can help those on low pay, not any single aspect.
Would the Minister not agree that the most effective way of dealing with this problem is to introduce minimum wage legislation? Joint labour committees, like the Agricultural Wages Board in the past, indicate an acceptance that there are abuses in the marketplace. This will continue as long as there is not proper legislation to cover those at the bottom level of the labour market.
There are numerous ways of dealing with this problem. Collective bargaining for people who may not be in the bottom 10 per cent is one way and the joint labour committees can be effective in the sector they cover. We should be looking at the sectors where there is low pay. We have a joint labour committee covering the contract cleaning sector but it applies only to the Dublin area. Congress now want to replace that by a committee which would cover the whole country. IDATU, together with the vintners, want the establishment of a joint labour committee to cover retail grocery and allied trades. The trade union movement are using the joint labour committees for the intended purpose.
What about those who are not organised?
A great number of these are not organised. The biggest joint labour committee is for farm labourers, who work on about 20,000 different farms. The joint labour committee has worked for them during the years. It is a good mechanism but it is not the only one. Taxation and social welfare are a fundamental part.
And means testing.
Would the Minister not agree that most of the joint labour committees deal with work that remains women's work and is very low paid? With the experience of the joint labour committees, some sections of FÁS could concentrate on the training and skills needed to move people out of the low income area. That may be the most positive way of moving out of the low income trap.
I agree fully with Deputy Barnes. There was a joint labour committee which helped sections of the clothing and textile industry. People are now trained for the most modern part of the textile industry, which provides very good employment, far from the sweat shops in back streets throughout the country. There is actually a shortage of skilled people in the better textile areas. This is despite the fact that there is a joint labour committee classifying the employees as mainly women in the low paid area. Employers are now coming to me seeking employees. Some months ago we asked FÁS to conduct courses in that area. It seems contradictory that there is a low paid area where they cannot get people to fill jobs.
Can we take it from what the Minister has said that in the upcoming talks on a programme for social and economic development the Government are considering an integated approach to pay, social welfare and means testing so that we might remove from the system many of the anomalies and poverty traps?
I gave a lengthy answer on some of the aspects earlier. All these aspects are being discussed in isolation from each other, but there is the view that we would make more progress by a combination of these measures, even if it takes a number of years to do it.
