Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 2 Apr 2015

Vol. 873 No. 3

Leaders' Questions

Today across the country there are up to 6,000 Dunnes Stores workers on strike. This strike is not about an increase in pay; rather, it is about basic rights such as respect, equality and dignity.

Yesterday, the Taoiseach said in the Dáil:

I support the Dunnes Stores workers in having a right to clarity in so far as their working lives and working weeks are concerned ... I would hope this strike does not have to go ahead ... I support the workers in their right to have clarity about their working lives. Therefore, the message to the employers is that this can be sorted out. These workers are loyal workers. They provide services every day of the week on a 24-hour basis. That should be recognised.

Unfortunately, it has not been recognised. Today across this country there are workers outside Dunnes Stores outlets protesting - not about anything extravagant, but highlighting that they are on zero-hour contracts. They do not know from day to day how many hours of work they will get. Nobody is worth zero. There should be some basic element of protection in terms of working hours and conditions.

The point I am making is that Dunnes Stores has not listened to the Taoiseach. The Taoiseach was weak, in my view, in his expressions of solidarity with the Dunnes Stores workers.

Nobody listens to him any more.

Milk and water.

What we need is an unequivocal statement from the Tánaiste that she supports the workers on the picket lines outside the Dunnes Stores outlets today. In terms of a response, Dunnes Stores has offered a 20% discount on online purchases up to midnight tonight. What does this say to the Taoiseach and Dunnes Stores workers? It is high time this Government stood up and stood with the workers on this particular issue.

Dunnes Stores workers have a strong resonance with the people of this country, in light of many of them having stood against apartheid in the 1980s. On the wall in my office is a photograph of myself with the late President of South Africa, Nelson Mandela, taken in Cape Town in 1995. During a meeting with him at that time, he asked me: "How are my girlfriends in Ireland? They meant a lot to me in our struggle." We are today not supporting people who supported a country that at that time faced greater challenges than this country does today. I urge the Tánaiste to unequivocally condemn the intimidatory and bullying tactics of Dunnes Stores, to stand with the workers and to bring forth legislation to address the issue of zero-hour contracts. Kicking address of this issue to the low pay commission is not good enough.

Fianna Fáil did nothing about it.

These workers are only looking for their basic rights and entitlements and the Tánaiste should support them unequivocally.

I thank the Deputy for his comments. Like many people in this country, my first experience of employment was as a worker in a number of Dunnes Stores outlets, where I was a member of the union that subsequently became Mandate. My period of employment at Dunnes Stores was very short. I salute the level of service, cheerfulness and commitment of the staff of Dunnes Stores down through the years, many of whom are women, and, in particular, the service they provide to older customers who might need support.

With regard to this dispute, I regret that the Dunnes Stores organisation has not utilised the industrial relations machinery of this country. I believe it was wrong not do so and that it should do so now as soon as possible. As stated by Mr. John Douglas, secretary general of Mandate, in an open letter to Dunnes Stores: "...as with most disputes between parties they can be only resolved via dialogue between the parties."

In regard to the Deputy's reference to South Africa, it has been my privilege to know personally many of the people who were on strike during those years, because at that time I was honorary secretary of the anti-apartheid movement. The Deputy is correct that there is a resonance among people in Ireland with the Dunnes Stores workers who in the 1980s refused to handle South African oranges. The then Minister for Labour, Deputy Ruairí Quinn, sorted out that problem by restricting the importation of oranges at that time.

We know there is an avenue to a solution for this dispute. Staff of Dunnes Stores should not have had to resort to a strike. We know that the issues in dispute have been before the Labour Court on a number of occasions and that Dunnes Stores management has not engaged in the industrial relations machinery.

Like almost everybody in Ireland, I believe this strike is deeply regrettable, but there is an avenue through which the issues can be addressed and settled, namely, the industrial relations machinery of the State. I would encourage the company to use that machinery. It is very clear from all of the statements by Mandate and other spokespersons for the Dunnes Stores workers that they are happy to engage in an industrial relations process to resolve this dispute. Nobody could put it better than Mr. John Douglas when he said that this matter can be only resolved via dialogue between the parties. I strongly support that.

I thank the Tánaiste for her reply. We need to be unequivocal in this. During a radio programme this morning, some of the staff involved spoke of their working hours being limited to 15 hours per week spread over five days, which means they are not eligible for social assistance from the Department of Social Protection. Not only are they not getting any form of contract from their employer, but they are also being denied access to basic social welfare payments because of the structure of their working hours. There are many problems in terms of basic employment rights and the facilitation of people with working hours which allow them to claim their entitlements from the Department of Social Protection.

By way of an aside, has Dunnes Stores ever made an application under the JobBridge scheme?

I do not know.

If so, we would want to revisit that very quickly.

On the broader issue, over the past couple of days we have heard strong words of condemnation, and people have been urging Dunnes Stores and Mandate to involve themselves in negotiations. However, Dunnes Stores has already indicated that it does not accept the findings of the Labour Relations Commission or the Labour Court and is saying to the Government that it does not care what it says or does.

Unfortunately the Government has done very little in terms of legislation to address zero-hour contracts. The Tánaiste talked about them mainly being women, which is true. Some of the women I met were very fearful that there may be consequences to their standing on the picket line this morning.

They are intimidated.

They believe they have no choice because of the threats from Dunnes Stores management and the fact that it has failed to engage with the industrial relations machinery. The Government seems to be paralysed in addressing this fundamental abuse of basic working rights.

The Tánaiste should visit them on the picket line.

I remind the Deputy that for people working in Dunnes Stores, one of the most significant things the Government did and I did in legislation was to reverse the cut Fianna Fáil made to the minimum wage when in office.

It did not apply to them.

The restoration of the minimum wage has been important. Deputy Kelleher had a position of responsibility in that regard at the time.

Deputy Kelleher signed it.

The Tánaiste is playing political football with people's lives.

The Tánaiste has the floor.

Deputy Kelleher had a position of responsibility in that Department at that time. When I became Minister, the first thing I did in legislation was to reverse that cut-----

They were not cut.

----- which was a very difficult cut for some of the women he mentioned.

That is factually incorrect.

Let us return to the main point.

It only affected new entrants to the labour market.

Sorry, Deputy-----

Let us come to the solution.

The Tánaiste has the floor.

On a point of order, that is not true.

Let us talk about the solution. The first part of the solution, as proposed by the general secretary of Mandate, is dialogue and engagement with the industrial relations process of the State.

That is not happening.

They will not do it.

The second is through the introduction of collective bargaining legislation which we hope to have before the Dáil and enacted before the summer.

As a former Minister of State in the Department, Deputy Kelleher knows he was unable to do anything about it from the Fianna Fáil benches during its long period of service in government.

The Government has been there four years and has done nothing.

It will be coming before the Dáil and I hope when it does, Deputy Kelleher, on behalf of his party, can undertake to support the extension of collective bargaining in the State.

The Tánaiste should ask the Fine Gael Deputies behind her.

Bernard is nodding. Che Durkan.

Absolutely. It is an agreement and the legislation, which is complex, will be before the Houses of the Oireachtas after Easter and enacted by the summer.

Will it get past the Cabinet?

The Deputy spoke about people being fearful of intimidation or victimisation, which is a very serious point. I say to the Dunnes Stores management and owners that that is not in the tradition of that business which over many decades has given employment and service throughout this country, originating in Cork. There will be an anti-victimisation clause in the collective bargaining legislation. That is a key part to allow-----

The next Government.

It will be after Easter and I do not think we will be having an election until this time next year.

I thank the Tánaiste.

It will be passed, but it has been-----

Shane does not like collective bargaining.

I call Deputy McDonald.

(Interruptions).

Go raibh maith agat, a Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

(Interruptions).

I remind the House that this is Leaders' Questions.

I join, I hope, everyone else in the Chamber today-----

(Interruptions).

I cannot hear.

Stop, please. I ask the Deputy to start again. I cannot hear either.

I join, I hope, everyone else in the Chamber today in sending out a strong message of support to the striking Dunnes Stores workers. I salute them in the action they have taken. At the centre of this dispute is the gross abuse of 15-hour contracts by Dunnes Stores management.

I spoke to one woman whose story is very typical of her co-workers. Mary has worked in Dunnes Stores for 13 years. Her partner also works for Dunnes Stores and has done so for nine years. Both of them are on 15-hour flexi contracts. From week to week they do not know how many hours they will have or what their pay will be. Often their hours are spread across five days and deliberately kept below 19 hours. This means that Mary and her partner cannot claim jobseeker's allowance or the family income supplement. In some weeks Mary and her partner do not have enough money to buy food for their child. It is nothing short of scandalous that Dunnes Stores treats its workers in this manner. They are constantly in a state of fear of losing their jobs and they are deliberately denied the most basic decent conditions and pay. All the while Dunnes Stores maximises its profits.

I agree with the Tánaiste in condemning Dunnes Stores for its failure to engage with the industrial relations mechanisms of the State and with the union representatives. That point is well made. However, Dunnes Stores can only abuse its workers in this way because the Government lets it. Fine Gael and Labour, like Fianna Fáil before them, have failed to protect these workers. How is that? They have failed to implement fully the part-time workers directive and have failed, after four years in government, to introduce collective bargaining legislation. That is where it is at. While the Tánaiste correctly condemns the proprietors and management of Dunnes Stores, this is happening on her Government's watch and because of its failure to act.

I thank the Deputy.

Why have these two crucial pieces of legislation to protect working people like Mary not been introduced? Has the Tánaiste raised these urgent matters with the Taoiseach? Why amidst her condemnation and words of support does she tell us in her next breath that we have to wait again for these two pieces of legislation? This is an emergency matter.

The Tánaiste described the strike action as regrettable. I put it to her that the regrettable piece is the behaviour of Dunnes Stores management. The strike itself is inevitable. Inevitably workers will not tolerate these abuses endlessly. The Government can make that stop by introducing the necessary legislation. Why has there been such an unacceptable delay?

The Deputy may be aware of the history regarding Dunnes Stores. The company and the union were party to a collective agreement which provided a framework within which disputes and differences could be resolved by negotiation and dialogue. The Labour Court has pointed to this as a mechanism and an avenue to resolve the dispute, as the general secretary of the union has also said.

It is in fact open to the owners and management of Dunnes Stores to have a resolution of the dispute through dialogue. I urge them to take that avenue as soon as possible. The company has a long history of employment, service and business in this country and has employed very many people down the years. Having worked there on brief occasions, I am very aware of the staff who work in Dunnes Stores and give great service to the public. They are not particularly well paid and certainly the advent of minimum hours contracts-----

----- has made life very difficult either for a single worker or for a couple, and there are many couples who work in Dunnes Stores.

As people have been describing, it is actually very difficult. That is why the collective bargaining legislation, which will come before the Dáil and be enacted in the next term, before the summer recess, will be absolutely critical to modernising our industrial relations framework. That is why I have asked the Minister of State, Deputy Nash, to prioritise it and he has done so. It has involved intensive discussions with the trade unions, which are strong supporters of it, and the employers, who, in many cases, have to be persuaded of the merits and value of collective bargaining to modern businesses.

The inclusion in the collective bargaining legislation of anti-victimisation clauses is to overcome the understandable fears of the workers who may have taken strike action in this situation. I hope that Sinn Féin will support this legislation.

Along with Fine Gael.

As a result of the Organisation of Working Time Act, as people involved in industrial relations will know, there is a framework of 15 hours. However, for many people 15 hours is not enough and they need certainty as to when their hours of work are to be in order that they can make arrangements - this applies in particular to women - for their families, whether their children or perhaps older parents they are helping to look after. That is what we want to see in terms of the collective bargaining legislation.

There is an avenue open to the Dunnes Stores group before that happens and I urge Dunnes Stores to use that mechanism.

I am sure people will be interested to know that the Tánaiste worked in Dunnes Stores once upon a time.

Briefly, as did tens of thousands of other people.

Exactly, but that is of little comfort or consequence to people who find themselves in the circumstances here and now.

Will the Tánaiste go back?

They cannot plan with any certainty their level of income from one week to the next. They are only one example of working people living in poverty. This is not by any means unique to Dunnes Stores; we are all aware of that. The Tánaiste urges the Dunnes Stores management and the proprietor to engage with the industrial relations machinery. The Tánaiste refers back to the 1996 agreement. At this stage, those responsible in Dunnes Stores have made it very clear that they are not minded to engage with those structures. Frankly, they do not give a curse about any agreement that they may have previously signed up to.

I put to the Tánaiste that it is not sufficient for her to urge Dunnes Stores or any other enterprise or concern, on the basis of goodwill, to engage with the system. It is now abundantly clear that we need legislation to end the opt-out that Dunnes Stores currently enjoys. We need the legislation before the House. The Tánaiste has been in government for four years. The Labour Party has now been in government for four years and it is still long-fingering this legislation.

This is the first time Sinn Féin has raised it.

This is the first time the matter has been raised.

Why not bring it in?

Sinn Féin never raised the problem before now.

Order, please. A question, please.

Why not bring it in as an emergency matter?

Sinn Féin has no understanding of it.

We all know that when it comes to other matters this institution can sit late into the small hours. Why not on this matter? Why not give the striking workers the certainty of knowing that the law will protect them, that Dunnes Stores can no longer act with impunity and can no longer snub its nose at workers like Mary, and her family, who, as I have told the Tánaiste, struggle from week to week to feed their child?

Thank you, Deputy. I call on the Tánaiste to conclude.

I am sure as the deputy leader of Sinn Féin Deputy McDonald has had an opportunity to be briefed in respect of her party's position in the North. In the North, approximately 32,000 workers are on zero-hour contracts. Sinn Féin gave a public commitment that the party's position was to ban them outright. Then, when the relevant Northern Ireland Minister undertook a review on behalf of the Northern Ireland Executive, to which Sinn Féin is a party, Sinn Féin changed its position to a matter of regulation.

(Interruptions).

Let me say in respect of Ireland-----

The Labour Party has been doing that for four years.

The Organisation of Working Time Act is significantly stronger than what pertains in the North. In Sinn Féin's time in government or in the Dáil, that party has never, to my knowledge, taken any interest in collective bargaining.

That is nonsense.

We have raised it many times.

The Sinn Féin Deputies do not understand it.

They do not care. It is not in their make-up.

The collective bargaining legislation will be coming before the Dáil in the next term. It will be enacted before the recess. That work has been done. It has involved complex and detailed negotiations and consultation with employers and trade unions. As an economy, we want legislation that works because we want our people at work. We do not want anyone having to resort to strike action.

Does the Tánaiste understand the collective bargaining rights enjoyed in the North?

We are strengthening workers rights in the collective bargaining legislation.

Does the Tánaiste wish to comment on that, not that it is of any use to the Dunnes Stores workers?

I hope that, unlike in the North, Sinn Féin will be good enough to support the collective bargaining legislation when it comes before the Dáil.

I call Deputy Paul Murphy from the Technical Group. Can we have order, please?

Listening to the Tánaiste, one could certainly be forgiven for thinking that her Labour Party is not in government. Yesterday, there was a statement from the Labour Party to the effect that it believes the Dunnes Stores workers deserve its unqualified support. Today, from the Tánaiste, we have what is perhaps more qualified support, but words of support none the less, as if we do not have a Labour Party in government and as if we have not had a Labour Party in government. It is as if the Labour Party has no power to do anything relating to this matter. If Marie Antoinette said, "Let them eat cake", the Tánaiste says, "Let them wait for collective bargaining legislation".

I spent the morning visiting picket lines and discussing the matter with Dunnes Stores workers, expressing my support and that of the Anti-Austerity Alliance.

The stories of bullying, harassment and intimidation were shocking. Workers were brought in groups to be put under pressure not to go on strike.

(Interruptions).

Deputy Murphy has the floor, please.

Workers on probation contracts were told point-blank that if they went on strike they would not be employed. A worker on a temporary contract was told that if she went on strike her contract would not be renewed. This kind of bullying, harassment and abuse of workers is widespread throughout the stores. This is the second largest private sector employer in the State with 10,000 employees. It is a highly profitable company with estimated profits of approximately €350 million per year. This is a company whose owners have a collective wealth, according to the Sunday Independent rich list, of €758 million.

(Interruptions).

The owners are behaving like 19th century dock owners, using their ability to give or withhold work as a means of control, punishment and reward to create a submissive workforce. They were able to do so because of the inaction of this Government and because of the abuse of low-hour 15-hour contracts. I salute those workers for standing up today in the face of bullying and exploitation. I encourage them to continue to do so if Dunnes Stores does not back down. Those in the Labour Party should hang their heads in shame today because they could have taken action.

A question, please, Deputy.

They could have counteracted the major power imbalance between a ruthless employer like Dunnes Stores and low-paid workers. They could have introduced collective bargaining legislation. They could have fully transposed the EU directive on part-time work. They could have outlawed exclusivity contracts, which even the Tories in Britain have done. Instead of subsidising low-pay employers through the family income supplement and social welfare, they could have introduced a living wage.

This is my question. Is this the model of the Tánaiste and the Labour Party for a so-called recovery? Is the vision based on the best small country to exploit workers and a recovery for the rich built on the super-exploitation of the rest, people working for free, low-hour contracts and precarious work as well as bullying and exploitation of workers like those in Dunnes Stores?

I suppose, of all the people in this House, the Deputy probably knows a little bit more about bullying, intimidation and threat than almost anybody else-----

The bully with the silver spoon in his mouth.

-----whether on these benches or on the benches opposite. He is kind of a connoisseur. With regard to the Dunnes Stores workers or to any other dispute, we want everybody at work. Yesterday, the live register fell below 350,000 for the first time since January 2009.

They are all in Sydney.

I was out yesterday, talking to workers on the National Gallery site, where there is a €26 million project underway and building workers back at work. That is what we want. The way to have a proper industrial relations system in any country is to have good industrial relations structures.

We have the weakest in Europe.

We have that and will be bringing legislation before the Dáil. It will be intriguing to see, when it comes before the Dáil, whether the Deputy will actually support collective bargaining legislation.

Of course, we will. That is stupid.

He will find a reason why he will not.

Generally speaking, the Deputy is somebody who looks for the negative in almost everything. The people in Dunnes Stores who have gone on strike are vindicating their rights as Irish citizens to seek, through their union, proper terms and conditions of work, and fairness at work. Fairness at work is the hallmark of the industrial relations structure in this country, which will be enhanced by the collective bargaining legislation that will come before the Dáil. That will be an opportunity for the Deputy to put his money where his mouth is and actually support it when it comes before the Dáil. We will await the day, and we will see what he actually does. He tends to be somebody who has torrents and rivers of language but, as a legislator, he has very little to show for it. He should come in here and do the work on the collective bargaining legislation to enhance our industrial relations situation.

Going back to the current strike, there is a mechanism open, as the secretary general of that union has said, and he has advised on behalf of the workers he represents that the employer should actually enter a dialogue. I do not know if the Deputy is opposed to a dialogue with the employer. What the Labour Party has stood for since its foundation is to actually have a mechanism of dialogue so that workers do not have to endure strikes but that they have fair pay and fair conditions built in to their terms and conditions of work.

Words, words, mere words, no matter from the heart.

The Blackrock College debating society - go on.

It is useless, from the point of view of these workers, for the Tánaiste to be promising something coming in the future. I am for dialogue with employers but it is useless for the Tánaiste to come in and for her answer to be that she urges the employers to come and have a dialogue. It is clear that Dunnes Stores has no interest in a dialogue with the workers.

How many questions did the Deputy ask before today?

He has no interest.

They refuse to engage with the industrial relations mechanism. That is precisely what has taken place over the past series of years. Therefore, the so-called voluntarist model of industrial relations, which this Government still touts in answers to parliamentary questions again and again, needs to go. When we have collective bargaining legislation, will the Government accept amendments from this side of the House to strengthen that legislation and to force employers to deal honestly and fairly with unions that represent a majority of their workers?

Answer that question.

Will the Government accept those amendments? I note a press statement from the Minister of State, Deputy Nash, almost a year ago, a few days before the local and European elections, which stated: "Today the Labour Party has delivered on that historic commitment [for a new bargaining law]". Convenient timing. We still have not seen it.

Another broken promise.

We still have not seen the heads of a Bill.

A question, please, Deputy.

The Deputy will have to vote on it soon. It was published back in December.

Did the Deputy turn up for it?

Please, Tánaiste.

Let us see the heads of a Bill. Will we have a break with the so-called voluntarist notion of industrial relations? Will we have legislation that ends anti-union practices by employers like Dunnes? In addition - I note the Labour Party when in opposition asked this repeatedly of the previous Government - can we have a full transposition of the EU directive on part-time work to enable part-time workers to avail of more hours, if available, which would make a real difference to the lives of the Dunnes workers right now?

The Deputy must recall that the heads of the Bill were published last December and that, on their publication, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions described it as the greatest advance in terms of workers' rights since 1913 - I am quoting the general secretary of congress. I want to ask the Deputy does he support the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and its leadership-----

They are sell outs - is that not right?

-----and the secretary general of the workers' union in this dispute-----

He is for the Blackrock boys union.

Please, the Tánaiste has the floor.

-----who says there is a way to a rapid conclusion of the dispute by the employer entering into a dialogue.

I am not quite sure what the Deputy's reference is to a voluntarist system because, in this country, we have a very elaborate system of legislation and of industrial relations, including the Labour Court, the Labour Relations Commission and custom and practice in regard to trade disputes.

It is still a voluntarist system.

Dunnes has ignored it for 20 years.

Yes, it does mean both sides coming together, including the workers and their representatives, the trade unions. However, I get the sense that none of that machinery of voluntarism, as the Deputy describes it, is enough for him. What is it the Deputy wants - some kind of Leninist approach to how industrial relations works in this country? Is that what he wants?

Force them to deal with the union.

A Deputy

That has worked well, has it not?

That is what James Connolly wanted. Check the history books.

That approach has not worked very well outside countries like North Korea, if that is what the Deputy is talking about. We want an actual legal framework which will be enhanced by the new legislation so we get actual results for workers. As we saw yesterday, more and more people are going back to work. We now have a situation where unemployment is down to 348,000. Instead of celebrating working people going back to work, the Deputy seems to want to strew every obstacle in their way.

It would protect Irish Water workers as well, by the way.

That concludes Leaders' Questions. I call the Tánaiste on the Order of Business.

I have not heard so much eloquence since I listened to a megaphone a couple of months ago. I think the megaphone was manned by the Deputy but he has not lost it.

We must move to the Order of Business.

Megaphones do not pay wages.

A Leas-Cheann Comhairle, is the Tánaiste to be allowed to make this type of comment?

It is called free speech.

I call the Tánaiste.

She has stood up in Dáil today and cast aspersions on Deputy Murphy and she should withdraw those remarks. She is a specialist in the snide remark anyway.

We will move to the Order of Business. The Tánaiste is well able to deal with it.

Barr
Roinn