Vol. 490 No. 3
10 Mr. Gormley asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs whether it is his Department's policy that unemployed young people who are offered employment or training and who refuse to accept may find themselves being cut off from receiving social welfare payments, even if these offers are thought unsuitable or unsatisfactory. [10133/98]
37 Dr. Upton asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs if he is considering proposals to reduce benefit payments to persons who refuse job offers; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10108/98]
70 Mrs. B. Moynihan-Cronin asked the Minister for Social, Community and Family Affairs the changes, if any, he intends to make to the criteria used to determine people's entitlement to unemployment payments in view of the publication of the Employment Action Plan; if he intends to introduce regulations to this effect; if a debate on these regulations will take place at a sitting of the Select Committee on Social, Community and Family Affairs; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10201/98]
I propose to take Question Nos. 10, 37 and 70 together.
To qualify for unemployment benefit or assistance a person must be unemployed, capable of, available for and genuinely seeking work. In order to show that he or she satisfies these conditions an unemployed person must demonstrate that he or she is making genuine efforts to secure employment.
At present, any person who refuses an offer of suitable employment or training will have his or her unemployment claim reviewed. There is provision, under social welfare legislation, to disqualify a person for receipt of unemployment benefit or assistance for a period of up to nine weeks where it has been determined by a deciding officer that he or she has refused an offer of suitable employment; or refused or failed to avail of any reasonable opportunity of receiving suitable training provided or approved by FÁS; or failed or neglected to avail himself or herself of any reasonable opportunity of obtaining suitable employment. In addition, the legislation provides for a disqualification for the receipt of unemployment benefit or assistance where a person is regarded as not being available for or genuinely seeking work.
I will shortly be bringing into effect new regulations on the conditions requiring those on the live register to be available for and genuinely seeking work. Those regulations will consolidate and clarify existing practices and procedures. They are intended to help ensure a more consistent and uniform application of the rules governing the deciding of unemployment benefit and assistance claims. The new regulations will be accompanied by guidelines which will inform and assist my Department's deciding officers. These guidelines will be published by my Department in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, 1997. Regarding debate on those regulations, I have written to the chairman of the Joint Oireachtas Committee on Family, Community and Social Affairs requesting an opportunity to discuss the new regulations with members of the joint committee when they are published.
The Minister's reply is particularly interesting in light of his reply to my earlier question. Deputy Gormley tabled this question because the Tánaiste indicated quite bluntly that unemployment assistance may be withdrawn from anyone who refuses an offer of work or training under the Employment Action Plan discussed previously. Will the Minister stick to what he said in this reply, given that in his reply to my earlier question he referred to allaying fears when I suggested this is what will happen? Who decides what is suitable employment when it come to a person who cannot take up a position? Where does this leave those involved in voluntary work which is socially valuable but unrecognised apart from their social welfare payment?
A question to the Minister please, Deputy.
Who decides the suitability of employment? What will happen to all the voluntary work done if doing such work will prevent somebody taking up a position? Where do parents working in the home fit into the plan? They are also unrecognised and often depend on welfare payments.
The regulations will not make it more difficult for people to qualify. They will benefit everybody, including deciding officers and officials in the Department, and ensure there is uniform adherence to the practice which has built up over the years. There will be no difference in the qualifying criteria which state that a person must be unemployed, capable of, available for and genuinely seeking work. That has always been the case. As the Deputy is aware, social welfare legislation provides that a person may be disqualified if the deciding officer is not satisfied. The officer can then take action accordingly.
Regarding the issue of determining whether a person is available for suitable full-time employment, the deciding officer must take into account the person's skills, qualifications and experience, the length of time the person has been unemployed and the availability of job opportunities in the locality. Ultimately, the deciding officer and the officials must base their decision on the reasonable steps a person has taken to secure employment.
Is that paid employment?
Yes. The regulations have been discussed with a number of interest groups, including the INOU, who had an input. Representations were also received from a number of other organisations and the views expressed with regard to the regulations have been taken into account.
The Minister will accept this matter involves subjective judgments. As a consequence there are grey areas in terms of what may be considered reasonable or suitable. I note the Minister had discussions with interest groups about the new regulations. The guidelines will be important and perhaps the Minister could discuss a draft copy with the Committee on Social, Community and Family Affairs. He may find to his surprise that most members of the committee have dealt with many social welfare matters and may have constructive proposals to make. He should not bring along a finished product. I accept he must then make the final decision. However, it would be sensible to avail of the expertise of the committee in advance of the production of new regulations.
Unfortunately, I am ahead of the Deputy. I hope to sign the regulations on Friday. However, I indicated to the chairman of the committee that the regulations and the guidelines will be available for discussion by the committee.
They will be in operation at that stage. A discussion will be a waste of time.
This issue of suitability for work is a grey area. I am aware of a case where a hotel receptionist, who trained for three years, was out of work for a couple of months. She was capable of, available for and genuinely seeking work. There was a shortage of workers in the local food processing factory but she lost her unemployment benefit because she declined an offer of unsuitable work. There are grey areas with regard to this matter. Some people work in seasonal industries and they are offered other work for which they are unsuitable. If they refuse to take up this work, they lose their unemployment benefit. I hope this area can be addressed.
The regulations are being put in place for that reason and to ensure there is as little ambiguity as possible. A number of factors are taken into account in decisions on whether a person is genuinely seeking work. These include a person making oral or written applications for work to employers or persons who advertised job offers on behalf of an employer, looking for information on the availability of employment from employers, advertisements, employment agencies, etc, availing of reasonable training opportunities suitable to his or her case and acting on the advice of a job facilitator, a FÁS adviser or a placement agency such as the local employment service. These are not unreasonable conditions in the payment of unemployment assistance.
Is the Minister open to any changes, given that he hopes to sign the regulations on Friday? He referred to people being available for work. Does this mean they must be idle? It appears the most obvious way to show one is available for work is to be idle. Is that a good thing to encourage among the unemployed? A later question relates to the black economy but there are considerable opportunities for people to do useful work even if it is not paid employment. In terms of a person's skills, experience and length of time being unemployed, will the criteria take into account involvement in voluntary work? Will that aspect inform the decision? This debate is a clear justification for the introduction of an unconditional guaranteed basic income payment over a phased period. This would remove subjectivity in terms of what is appropriate work, what is considered paid employment and what is useful work. These are matters people must decide for themselves and from which communities will ultimately benefit.
The regulations will be published. They have been subject to wide consultation with outside groups. They will place on record exact conditions and definitions of employment. Ultimately, a person must seek employment, which is, in effect, paid employment. That has always been the case and will be the case in future. The regulations will put on paper what has been the practice over the years.
That has only been the practice since the 1980s.
