I move:
That Dáil Éireann:
acknowledges the establishment of the Low Pay Commission and the Government’s decision to fund research by the University of Limerick into the prevalence and impact of zero-hour and low-hour contracts across both the private and public sectors; and to assess if vulnerable workers have sufficient protection under the law;
notes that:
— Ireland has a significant low pay problem with almost 12% of workers being at risk of poverty;
— according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Employment Outlook Report for 2014 Ireland has the second highest percentage of low-paying jobs in the OECD, following the United States which has the highest;
— the Dunnes Stores dispute brings to the fore the inadequacy of existing legislation to protect vulnerable workers;
— currently such workers have no guarantee of hours of work; and that an employee may be scheduled for work but is likely to be sent home;
— such employees are extremely vulnerable to having their working hours reduced;
— the operation of split shifts whereby the employee’s hours of work are broken up across a day or week (for example working 20 hours a week spread across six days, or working 4 hours a day broken into two 2 hour shifts) makes it extremely difficult to make plans, such as provision of child care or school pick-ups, while also making it difficult to complete household budgets because there is no consistency of weekly income;
— the practice of spreading a short number of hours a week across six days makes it impossible for workers to claim social welfare to boost their low income; and
— employees often receive very short notice of their working hours schedule;
further notes:
— existing legal safeguards are inadequate, including section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, which requires that where an employee on a zero-hours contract has received no hours then they should be compensated either for 25% of the possible available hours or for 15 hours, whichever is less; and
— the newly established Low Pay Commission is extremely narrow in focus investigating the minimum wage only;
calls on the Government to introduce legislation to:
— provide a clear legal entitlement to workers to full-time work;
— allow workers request banded hours and place a corresponding obligation on the employer to consider the request and permit refusal only in exceptional circumstances which can be objectively justified;
— require employers to provide information to employees on the overall availability of working hours available in the employment;
— provide an immediate ban on all zero-hour contracts;
— task the Central Statistics Office to record the incidence of low-hour contracts as part of the Quarterly National Household Survey;
— amend the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997, to ensure workers are entitled to be compensated for 100% where they have been called into work;
— improve the compensatory elements of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 to protect employees from penalisation in the form of being ‘zeroed down’;
— provide a statutory entitlement to overtime for hours worked in excess of those stated in the contract or over 38 hours whichever was the lesser;
— immediately implement in full the EU Directive on Part-time work; and
— broaden the remit of the Low Pay Commission to deal with specific sectors where low pay is particularly prevalent such as amongst women, younger workers and migrants and to deal with other contributing factors to poverty amongst those employed such as regressive taxation and inadequate public services and State supports; and
further calls on the Government to set a date for the introduction of Collective Bargaining legislation before the summer recess which statutorily compels employers to engage with trade unions; provides for trade union recognition; and has robust anti-victimisation clauses to protect workers from intimidation.
The 31st Dáil will be remembered as one of the most divisive in the history of the State. As we approach the end days of this Government, it is clear its legacy is one of inequality in a two-tiered country, in a country where the gap between those who have and those who have not is increasing. Low-paid insecure work is now entrenched in the labour force. Some 20% of workers are in casual or part-time work. Ireland has one of the highest rates of low-paid workers in the OECD and the rate of under employment here is one of the highest in the European Union. Almost 12% of those in work are at risk of poverty. Half of workers in the State earn less than €25,000 and 30% of all workers earn less than €20,000. Every day, some 135,000 children face material deprivation. This has not happened by accident, but is a clear output of the policies pursued by the Government. Economic inequality is not an unavoidable consequence of recession. Fine Gael and the Labour Party clearly chose to cut taxes for higher income earners while creating flat taxes for those on low incomes and allowing insecure work practices and low pay to proliferate.
Some people listening to this debate may feel this is business as usual and that this is part of the old debate between the right and the left. They are dangerously mistaken in that belief. What we are witnessing is a deadly acceleration of inequality over the past decade. This can be seen in international statistics. According to Oxfam, the richest 85 people on the planet own the equivalent wealth of the poorest 3.5 billion people. In this State, the trend is severe. Here, the richest 5% own the equivalent of half of the rest of us in the State. This has not happened by accident. It has happened at a time when the ESRI has stated that Fine Gael budgets have been regressive. In other words, the Government has redistributed wealth from the poor to the rich.
The Sinn Féin motion we are putting forward seeks to reverse the development of this damaging regime of low paid and insecure work. The Low Pay Commission, as currently constituted, is deficient. It is one dimensional and seeks to tackle the minimum wage only. As currently constituted, it will do nothing for most of the 12% of workers in danger of poverty. It seeks to replicate the British model, which by Britain's admission is in need of serious change. Our motion seeks to broaden the remit of the Low Pay Commission to deal with the specific sectors where low pay is particularly prevalent, such as among women, younger workers and migrants. We seek to broaden its terms to deal with conditions of employment, public services, taxation and State supports. In other words, we want a low pay commission that deals with low pay and its effect - poverty among those in work.
Zero-hour contracts are a cancer that is eating away at job security. They are a catalyst for poverty in work. They are anti-family and prevent mothers and fathers from earning enough to raise their families and from organising their lives, from child care to mortgages. Yet, zero-hour contracts are stark omissions from the terms of reference of the Low Pay Commission. The eradication of these contracts should be a core political goal for the Labour Party. Shockingly, however, a decision on these contracts has been delayed and politically neutered by a third party report. This motion seeks to provide an immediate end to all zero-hour contracts. It is clear that Fine Gael is laying down the law on this issue. While this strategic stalling is being undertaken, the Minister should at the least request the CSO to record the incidence of zero and low hour contracts as part of the Quarterly National Household Survey, thus providing the Government with real time information.
It is necessary to ensure there is no competitive advantage at the heart of these low hour contracts. That is happening. Some unscrupulous employers see low-hour and zero-hour contracts as competitive advantages in fighting against other businesses. We need to remove that competitive advantage from the system. Therefore, our motion seeks to amend the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 to ensure workers are compensated 100% where they have been called into work. Unfair work practices could also be made uncompetitive by providing a statutory entitlement to overtime for hours worked in excess of those stated in the contract or over 38 hours, whichever is the lesser. In other words, if a member of staff is asked to report for five hours but does not get five hours, he or she should be paid and compensated for the five hours. Also, where a person is required to work over seven hours, he or she should be paid overtime for the hours worked over the initial contracted amount. This practice would quickly ensure unscrupulous employers focus on ensuring people have proper contracts that will not be manipulated.
A recent Mandate survey of members who work for Dunnes Stores found that 85% of members felt that insecurity around hours and rostering was used as a method of control over workers, while 88% felt that hours were distributed unfairly. This came into to sharp focus during the recent one-day strike. To prevent this in future, we need to improve the compensatory elements of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 to protect employees from penalisation in the form of being "zeroed down".
Our motion provides the Government with an immediate mandate from the Dáil to ensure that a worker has guaranteed hours of work and that a worker who is scheduled for work will not be sent home. This Sinn Féin motion seeks to place an obligation on the employer to consider a request for banded hours and limits refusals to exceptional circumstances which can be objectively justified. Our motion seeks to require employers to provide information to employees on the overall availability of working hours. This is logic, not rocket science. It is simply about decency in the workplace.
Our motion also seeks to rebalance the relationship between employer and employee by setting a date for the introduction of collective bargaining legislation - before the summer recess - which will statutorily compel employers to engage with trade unions, provide for trade union recognition and include robust anti-victimisation clauses to protect workers from intimidation. Workers such as those in Dunnes Stores deserve more than tea and sympathy and crocodile tears. They deserve real legislative change now that will eradicate exploitation and pay workers a decent wage for a decent day's work.
No doubt what we will hear from Fine Gael is the mantra that we need to have a competitive economy. Why is it that the only place that Fine Gael looks for competitiveness is in the pay and conditions of low-paid workers? The costly sheltered sectors, such as the legal profession, or the upward only rents of Fine Gael's landlord friends are taboo when it comes to legislation. The truth is, decent employers know that productivity, staff retention, improved service and an enhanced reputation are the outputs of fair pay and conditions. The Labour Party will tell us that this is in hand, but deficient watered down promises yet to happen at the back end of this Administration is not good enough, given the crisis facing thousands of families right now.
My colleague, Phil Flanagan, MLA, is our employment spokesperson in the Six Counties Assembly. He has raised similar issues and concerns at meetings in the North. He has articulated the party's strong opposition to zero-hour contracts in the North. He is facing similar resistance with regard to ending exploitative work practices. The Minister may rest assured that neither he nor Assembly Minister Farry will have a minute's rest until workers get a fair wage for a day's work. We urge the Government to take this opportunity with both hands.