Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 27 Oct 1993

Vol. 435 No. 1

Written Answers. - Reinstatement of Married Women in Civil Service.

Richard Bruton

Ceist:

83 Mr. R. Bruton asked the Minister for Finance the present policy regarding reinstatement of married women who were formerly employed in the Civil Service; whether he plans changes in this policy in view of the findings that this policy is discriminatory; and his views on the fact that for many families hit by unemployment, reinstatement would relieve the hardship they are suffering.

Minister for Finance (Mr. B. Ahern)

The practice of reinstatement of certain former women civil servants has been governed by specific statutory provisions in the Civil Service Regulation Act, 1956 and Civil Service (Employment of Married Women) Act, 1973. These exceptional provisions permitted a woman who resigned from the service for the purpose of, on or following marriage to be reinstated to her former position if she were subsequently widowed, if she did not marry or if she established to the satisfaction of the Minister for Finance that she was not being supported by her husband. The provisions were challenged under the terms of the Employment Equality Act, 1977 by the Employment Equality Agency and were found by the Labour Court to be discriminatory and contrary to the principle of equal treatment. The Labour Court recommended that the relevant statutory provisions be repealed at the earliest opportunity.

The Labour Court finding is, of course, an enforceable determination of the matters at issue in the case. Having taken legal advice on the matter, I do not consider that I have any option but to terminate the practice of reinstatement and introduce the appropriate legislation to repeal the relevant statutory provisions. However, applications which were submitted on or before the date on which the Determination issued will be processed to finality and any of the applicants who met the qualifying requirements on that date will be reinstated as and when suitable vacancies arise.

On the question of the reinstatements scheme relieving hardship, it should be appreciated that the scheme did not result in any net increase in employment in the civil service. The vacancies to which reinstated women were appointed would otherwise have been filled, directly or indirectly, from recruitment panels formed by open competition. Accordingly, each person who qualified for reinstatement secured employment at the expense of another person who had succeeded in an open competition. In its report on the recent case, the Labour Court took the view that "all recruitment to the service should be by open competition through the Civil Service Commission, including the re-recruitment of former civil servants who resigned for whatever reason".

A development of some relevance in this context is the raising of upper age limits in open competitions for recruitment to the civil service. Since 1991, the upper age limit for most competitions has been raised to 50, replacing age limits as low as 20 which had formerly applied. This change in age limits enables most of the women who might previously have applied for reinstatement, and would previously have had no other means of returning to the service, to seek to resume their careers in the service through the normal competitive procedure.