Mick Wallace
Ceist:13. Deputy Mick Wallace asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will consider banning zero-hour contracts; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12175/14]
Amharc ar fhreagraThursday, 13 March 2014
Ceisteanna (13)
Freagraí ó Béal (5 píosaí cainte)
The problem with zero-hour contracts is that they do not provide a set number of hours in the week. A person might get 20, 30 or 35 hours one week and nothing the next. It is very hard to plan a life under those conditions. I understand that the Minister does his best to make it as easy as possible for people to create work, but there must be a balance. We must also consider workers' rights as well.
Zero-hour contracts are covered by contract law and must be entered into freely by the employer and the employee. They cannot be forced upon an employee. Zero-hour contracts are normally found in sectors such as retail, health care and hospitality. I am very conscious that in certain circumstances they may be of great benefit to both employers and employees. They allow greater flexibility for both by reducing the employer's pay costs and allowing workers to decide when and if they want to work. Such contracts may be preferred by employees who require flexibility to facilitate educational or other personal necessities. Banning such contracts could do a disservice to these workers. However, it is a matter I will keep under review.
Section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 contains a specific protection for employees who are employed on zero-hour contracts. The zero-hour protection applies to all employees whose contracts operate to require them to be available regardless of whether they work on a casual basis. It covers situations where, for example, an employee is sent home if things are quiet or is requested to be available for work and is not asked to work on the day. Where an employee suffers a loss by not working hours he or she was requested to work or to be available to work, the zero-hour provisions of the Act ensure he or she is compensated for 25% of the time during which he or she is required to be available, or 15 hours, whichever is the lesser. The level of compensation may be impacted if the employee gets some work. Claims of breaches of section 18 may be referred to a rights commissioner.
An expectation of work does not, however, entitle an employee to compensation. The zero-hour provision does not apply to lay-offs, short time, emergency or exceptional circumstances, employee illness, employee on-call situations or where the employee is paid wages for making him or herself available for work. Section 17 sets out the requirements regarding notification to the employee of the times at which he or she will be required to work during the week. Generally, an employee is entitled to 24 hours' notice of his or her roster.
Research carried out by Mandate in 2013 found that 17% of people living below the poverty line worked in precarious jobs with zero-hour contracts. While the Minister has responsibility for jobs, not social protection, it is relevant to note that where employees have good working conditions, it works even better for the employer in the long run. It is to adopt a very short-term vision to think otherwise. It is not in an employer's interests to be able to treat a worker poorly. Zero-hour contracts are not good for Ireland. They are certainly not good for the employee or, in the long run, for the employer. The Government should move on them. They are not fair.
I add my voice to that of Deputy Wallace. There has been an increase in underemployment under the Government, including in the last set of figures. There are thousands of workers who work to seven day, zero-hour contracts with no guarantee of work, which is exploitative. It disproportionately affects those who are on very low incomes, in particular women. We must value care work in our society, which this type of contract does not do. Many of those on zero-hour contracts are carers who work for people with disabilities and the elderly. If we do not value their work, we are doing a disservice to their livelihoods, ability to survive and to the people for whom they care.
Clearly, part-time work does not provide a full-time income support, which will always be the case. There has been a pattern in the recovery whereby there was an initial growth in part-time work whereas now 90% of increased employment relates to full-time positions, which is encouraging. Part-time workers are protected by employment law and must get the same terms and conditions as full-time workers. There is a protection in statute whereby zero-hour workers who are required to be on call must be compensated to the tune of 25%. They also have rights in relation to annual holidays.
I will keep the area under review. One must strike a balance. Such contracts suit certain people and banning them will close out opportunities for people to supplement income in ways they find beneficial. I will bear in mind the points the Deputies have made.
Written Answers follow Adjournment.