Written Answers Nos. 223-236
223. Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will report on measures to tackle zero-hour contracts; when legislation will be brought before Dáil Éireann; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14681/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraIn accordance with the Statement of Government priorities, I recently commissioned the University of Limerick (UL) to carry out a study into the prevalence of zero hour and low hour contracts and the impact of such contracts on employees. The appointment of UL follows a competitive tendering process. The key objectives of the study are:
- To fill the gap in knowledge that currently exists in terms of the hard data and information that is available concerning the prevalence of zero hour and low hour contracts in the Irish economy and the manner of their use.
- To assess the impact of zero hour and low hour contracts on employees.
- To enable the Minister to make any evidence-based policy recommendations to Government considered necessary on foot of the study.
The study will have a broad scope, covering both the public and private sectors, with a particular focus on the retail, hospitality, education and health sectors. The study will examine how zero and low hour contracts operate in practice and how they impact on employees. It will assess the advantages and disadvantages from the perspective of employer and employee and assess the current employment rights legislation as it applies to employees on such contracts. The study will also consider recent developments in other jurisdictions, including the UK in particular. The study may also identify how the information gap might be addressed in the future.
Unlike the position in the UK, Section 18 of the Organisation of Working Time Act 1997 provides that where employees suffer a loss by not being given the hours they were requested to work or be available for work, they can be compensated for 25% of the time or 15 hours, whichever is less. There is no equivalent provision in the UK, where employees on zero hours contracts are only paid for time spent working and if they are not given any hours by their employer they receive no compensation.
A wide range of stakeholders will be canvassed to contribute to the study and I expect the study, which commenced in February, to be completed within six months.
The Deputy will appreciate that I cannot anticipate the outcome of the study or the Government’s consideration of the study’s findings.
224. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will intervene in a dispute in a company (details supplied) to reach a solution which would be acceptable to all parties involved; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14809/15]
Amharc ar fhreagra226. Deputy Terence Flanagan asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation his views on a matter (details supplied) regarding collective bargaining; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14865/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 224 and 226 together.
I understand that the current dispute revolves around a range of issues, including the introduction of banded hours contracts, individual and collective representational rights and a review of the use of temporary contracts. The trade union is seeking to engage with the company on these issues and the matter was referred by the union to the Labour Court under section 20(1) of the Industrial Relations Act, 1969 in October of last year.
The company was not represented at the Labour Court hearing. In this regard, the Court found it regrettable that the company declined to participate in the investigation of the dispute or to put forward its position on the union's claims.
In its recommendation of 14th November 2014, the Court reaffirmed earlier recommendations it had made by noting that the Company and the union were parties to a collective agreement signed in 1996 which provides a procedural framework within which industrial relations disputes and differences arising between the parties can be resolved by negotiation and dialogue. The Court pointed out that the dictates of good industrial relations practice requires parties to honour their collective agreements in both spirit and intent.
I am disappointed that the company decided against attending the Labour Court hearing, contrary to good industrial relations practice in that regard. In my view, the experience and expertise of the Labour Court offers the most appropriate and effective avenue for resolving such issues.
I would urge both parties to avail of the services of the State’s industrial Relations machinery who remain available to assist the parties, in a flexible manner and without prejudice to positions of principle that may be held by any party. It is my opinion that engagement with the State's industrial relations machinery offers the best way whereby the parties involved in this dispute can hope to resolve their differences.
Ultimately, responsibility for the settlement of a trade dispute rests with the parties to the dispute. However, I would like to see an early and fair settlement to this dispute.
As regards representation rights, Cabinet approval was obtained at the end of 2014 to legislate for an improved framework for workers who are in dispute with their employer regarding their terms and conditions in situations where there are no arrangements with their employer to resolve the matters through collective bargaining.
When enacted this legislation will mark the fulfilment of one of the most significant commitments in the Programme for Government which indicated that reform in this area was needed. In developing these proposals Minister Bruton and I have been keen to respect the positions articulated by stakeholders to develop proposals that sustain our voluntary system, but also ensure that workers have confidence that, where there is no collective bargaining, they have an effective system that ensures they can air grievances about remuneration, terms and conditions and have these determined based on those in similar companies and not be victimised for doing so.
I expect this legislation to be published during this Dáil session and enacted as expeditiously as is possible thereafter.
225. Deputy Eric Byrne asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to set out his plans to transpose the European Union directive on part-time work into Irish law; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14815/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Act 2001 (the 2001 Act) implemented EU Council Directive 97/81/EC into Irish law. The purpose of the Directive was to implement the Framework Agreement on part-time work concluded by the European cross-industry organisations UNICE, CEEP and the ETUC. The purpose of the Framework Agreement, which was annexed to the Directive, was to eliminate discrimination against part-time employees and to improve the quality of part-time work. It also aimed to facilitate the development of part-time work on a voluntary basis and to contribute to the flexible organisation of working time in a manner which takes into account the needs of employers and employees. Accordingly, the 2001 Act provides a wide degree of protection for part-time employees, including the general protection that a part-time employee shall not be treated in a less favourable manner in respect of his/her conditions of employment than a full time employee.
Further, Section 13(5) of the 2001 Act contained provisions in relation the preparation and publishing of a Code of Practice by the Labour Relations Commission in relation to the steps that could be taken by employers for the purposes of Clause 5.3 of the Framework Agreement. Clause 5.3 of the Framework Agreement provided that, as far as possible, an employer should give consideration to a request by workers to transfer from full-time work to part-time and vice-versa. The Labour Relations Commission prepared this Code of Practice, based on the provisions in Section 13 of the 2001 Act, following consultation with the social partners. It was deemed to be a Code of Practice and implemented, in 2006, by the Industrial Relations Act 1990 (Code of Practice on Access to Part-Time Working) (Declaration) Order 2006 (S.I. No. 8 of 2006). Under Section 42(4) of the Industrial Relations Act 1990, the Code is admissible in evidence in any proceedings before a Court, the Labour Court, the Labour Relations Commission, the Employment Appeals Tribunal or the Equality Tribunal.
I understand that IBEC and ICTU were involved in the process of drafting the Directive’s Framework Agreement at European level through the European social partner organisations. At national level, a tripartite group involving this Department, ICTU, IBEC and other relevant Government Departments was established to consider the measures necessary for implementing the Directive in Ireland prior to publication of the Protection of Employees (Part-Time Work) Bill 2000.
I am satisfied that Ireland has met its responsibilities in transposing EU Council Directive 97/81/EC into national law. This position is confirmed by a 2003 report on the implementation of the Directive undertaken by the European Commission.
227. Deputy Finian McGrath asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to set out the reason for not implementing the social entrepreneurial axis under progress microfinance of the employment and social innovation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14871/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe new EaSI programme 2014-2020, managed by the European Commission and totalling EUR 919 million, consists of three axes which build on previous EU programmes, namely PROGRESS, EURES and Progress Microfinance. Under EaSI, Progress Microfinance has become Microfinance and Social Entrepreneurship. Organisations that can apply for funding under the Microfinance and Social Entrepreneurship axis are public and private bodies established at national, regional or local level and providing microfinance for persons and micro-enterprises and/or financing for social enterprises. Critically, applications for participation do not require State involvement and the Department of Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation does not have a direct role in the implementation of the Microfinance and Social Entrepreneurship axis of the EaSI Programme. It is overseen directly by the European Commission.
One of the objectives of EaSI is “promoting employment and social inclusion by increasing the availability and accessibility of microfinance for vulnerable groups and micro-enterprises and by increasing access to finance for social enterprises.”
Over EUR 86 million have been earmarked through Microfinance and Social Entrepreneurship to stimulate, broaden and speed up the development of the social finance markets across Europe between 2014 and 2020. Its funding will be evenly spread between microfinance and social entrepreneurship, with a minimum of 45 % going to each. Cross-cutting projects will account up to 10 %.
Microfinance Ireland (MFI) is the selected intermediary for the micro-finance strand which will continue to facilitate access to microfinance for individuals and micro-enterprises. In November 2012, MFI and the European Investment Fund (EIF) signed an agreement under the European Progress Microfinance Facility (Progress Microfinance). This initiative is managed by the European Investment Fund on behalf of the Commission and the European Investment Bank. The EIF does not provide direct financing to micro-entrepreneurs, micro-businesses or individuals. Financing is made available through intermediaries participating in the Facility. Each agreement is negotiated individually and is subject to approval by the European Commission following due diligence. Applications for participation do not require State involvement.
While continuing the microfinance support as under the current programme, Microfinance and Social Entrepreneurship will include several new elements:
- Funding for capacity-building in microfinance/social enterprise institutions – the EaSI-Microfinance Social Entrepreneurship Work Programme includes activities to support capacity-building activities for microfinance and social entrepreneurship. Such funding could take multiple forms and could be used, for example, by a microcredit provider to buy an IT system.
- Investments for developing and expanding social enterprises – the European Commission has been developing the new financial instrument for social entrepreneurship to promote social entrepreneurship by making available hybrid financing for social enterprises in the form of a combination of equity, quasi-equity, loan instruments and grants. Complementarity will be ensured between these actions and those undertaken in the framework of cohesion policy and national policies. The total amount that a social enterprise can receive is €500,000, while respecting state aid rules. Programme support will be limited to enterprises not listed on the stock market, with a turnover or annual balance sheet not exceeding €30 million.
I welcome the progress made by the European Commission in devising and publishing a new standard to allow social enterprises of all sizes to better measure and demonstrate their social impact and so help them in their discussions with partners, investors, and public sector funders. The standard will help European social enterprises to benefit from EU level funding via EaSI and the European Social Entrepreneurship Funds (EuSEF).
I should point out that a number of Government Departments are engaged with the Social Enterprise sector. The State currently provides substantial funding to Social Enterprises through a range of programmes and schemes. These include the Community Services Programme managed by Pobal for the Department of Social Protection, Community Employment schemes, the Wage Subsidy Scheme for the employment of people with disabilities, public sector contracts through the HSE and others, the Social Finance Foundation, and LEADER and Local Community Development Programme (LCDP) funding from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government.
228. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation to set out his views on the type and extent of training being provided to the cohort of staff identified as proficient in providing services to members of the public who wish to transact with the Department through Irish. [14888/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraIn accordance with our obligations under the Official Languages Act, 2003, my Department is committed to communicating with clients who wish to transact their business with the Department through the Irish language.
Arrangements are in place whereby 16 staff volunteered to participate in appropriate training courses to enhance their Irish language skills. To date 5 staff have completed this training, which is being provided so that we have a cohort of staff who can assist business units to respond to clients who wish to communicate through the medium of Irish. The training plan developed for the provision and delivery of Irish language training and proficiency testing within my Department contains the following features:
- Training is delivered by Gaelchultúr, at levels 3 to 6 on the National Framework of Qualifications. Completion of the course results is a Certificate in Professional Irish at the level taken;
- Volunteers have their level of proficiency in Irish assessed by Gaelchultúr, and following assessment, are invited to participate in courses to improve/maintain their proficiency;
- Staff whose standard is Level 3 or above are offered a classroom based course (real or virtual, as appropriate) - 30 hours over 10 weeks plus homework per Level, and are afforded time off to attend class and take examinations;
- Staff whose standard is below Level 3 (the level at which the professional certificate in Irish programme can be commenced) are offered an online course called “Gaeilge Gan Stró” (80-100 hours to complete where proficiency of Irish is below the entry requirement for Level 3 of professional certificate in Irish);
- Staff who volunteer to translate requests and documents in Irish are provided with the necessary IT support to assist them with this task.
As part of Seachtain Na Gaeilge 2015, my Department facilitated a lunchtime meeting to encourage staff to meet through the medium of Irish with a view to enhancing their Irish language skills. It is proposed to arrange further similar initiatives over the coming months.
In summary, I am happy to report that staff in my Department, who volunteer to provide services through Irish, are provided with the appropriate supports to enable them communicate through Irish, with members of the public who wish to conduct their business with the Department through the Irish language.
229. Deputy Seán Kyne asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will report on the status and operation of the protocol between his Department and Údarás na Gaeltachta regarding the work of and supports provided by local enterprise offices in Gaeltacht areas. [14889/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraCurrently no protocol exists between DJEI and Údarás na Gaeltachta regarding the work of and supports provided by Local Enterprise Offices (LEOs) in Gaeltacht areas. When the County Enterprise Boards were dissolved in April 2014 their functions, assets & liabilities transferred under primary legislation to Enterprise Ireland, with the functions being carried out through the Local Authorities through the establishment of Local Enterprise Offices.
A memorandum of understanding exists since 2009 between Enterprise Ireland and Údarás na Gaeltachta in relation to areas of cooperation and coordination between the two agencies. This was updated in 2013 through the inclusion of an addendum to enable Údarás na Gaeltachta to optimise the resources available to its client companies through supports and programmes administered by Enterprise Ireland, with very specific criteria.
In that regard meetings and discussions have also taken place between Enterprise Ireland and Údarás to clarify the role of the LEOs and Údarás within Gaeltacht areas.
230. Deputy Billy Timmins asked the Minister for Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation if he will provide a list of the semi-State commercial companies under his control; the policy of a dividend payment to the Exchequer from each company; the dividend paid by each company to the Exchequer for each year from 2000 to 2014; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14967/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI wish to advise the Deputy that none of the bodies under the aegis of my Department are commercial semi State companies.
231. Deputy Michael Healy-Rae asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if he will provide details on the total salaries being paid to the Irish Greyhound Board; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [14618/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraIt is assumed that the Deputy is referring to the fees being paid to board members. The Government approved the application from 1 May 2009 of revised fees for the non-executive chairpersons and members of the boards of State bodies. The revised fees are 10% lower than the fees which applied until 30 April, 2009. The following revised rates of fees are payable to Bord Na gCon Board members:
Chairperson : €21,600 and Directors : €12,600.
I can inform the Deputy that the total BnG Board members fees paid in 2012 and 2013 were €98,200 and €95,480 respectively. The 2014 audited accounts of Bord na gCon are not available at this stage.
232. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine in view of his acknowledgement that no radical change in the aquaculture sector was to be expected from the Seafood Development Programme 2007 to 2013 if he will refuse to continue to co-fund this policy, which cannot provide significant employment, has had sustained falls in production and is destructive to the environment, and to instead direct these resources into tourism and angling industries here, which have a proven record of job creation in coastal communities and serious potential for growth. [14922/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraI said in my response to Question No. 293 of 10 March 2015 that no radical change in the aquaculture sector was to be expected as a result of the modest investment supported through the Seafood Development Programme 2007-2013. Clearly a larger programme of supports would have incentivised more productive investments. Despite that, and the particular issues faced by the sector over the period, BIM advised me that the value of the sector held steady over the period, as did the overall employment although volume of production did fall for specified reasons as set out in my reply of 10th March 2015. I believe that significant growth can be anticipated in the coming years through increased investment. The potential for growth and job creation in the aquaculture sector has been widely recognised internationally over a number of years.
The Maritime Agenda for Growth and Jobs (Limassol Declaration) adopted on 8 October 2012 by European Ministers for maritime policy and the European Commission placed a particular emphasis on the potential of the Blue Economy to contribute to economic recovery in the EU. The Agenda focused in particular on 5 areas of high potential, including aquaculture. From a national perspective, Food Harvest 2020 recognises the potential of the seafood sector, in particular aquaculture and seafood processing, to contribute to employment growth and aims to increase employment in the seafood sector from 11,000 to 14,000 by 2020. This potential is echoed in Action Plan for Jobs 2015.
On 27 March 2015, I announced plans for a new €241 million development programme for the seafood sector for the period up to 2020, co-funded by the EU through the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund. I am inviting submissions on that draft Programme by 1 May 2015. The draft Seafood Development Programme 2014-2020 proposes investment of €30 million in a number of measures specifically intended to support the sustainable development of the aquaculture sector. Those investment plans will be supported by a new National Strategic Plan for Aquaculture, which I will publish for public consultation shortly. Through that National Strategic Plan and targeted investment under the Seafood Development Programme I will be seeking to identify all of the issues affecting the sustainable growth of the sector and the policy actions and supporting investment needed to address those issues. Strategic Environmental Assessments will accompany both the National Strategic Plan and Seafood Development Programme.
233. D'fhiafraigh Deputy Éamon Ó Cuív den Aire Talmhaíochta, Bia agus Mara cén réiteach fadtéarmach a dhéanfar chun páirceáil fheiliúnach a chur ar fáil saor in aisce d’oileánaigh i gcalafort Ros an Mhíl; agus an ndéanfaidh sé ráiteas ina thaobh. [13864/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraTá Ionad Iascaigh Cuain Ros an Mhíl ar cheann de shé Ionad Iascaigh Cuain shannta atá faoi úinéireacht, bainistiú agus cothabháil mo Roinne faoi Reacht.
Tá an úsáid a bhaineann muintir Árann as Carrchlós na nOileánach ag Ionad Iascaigh Cuain Ros an Mhíl éascaithe faoi cheadúnas.
Coimeádfar soláthar áiseanna carrpháirceála do mhuintir Árann faoi athbhreithniú leanúnach, agus aird ar fhorbairtí féideartha amach anseo ag Ionad Iascaigh Cuain Ros an Mhíl. Is féidir liom a dhearbhú don Leas-Aire, faoi mar a rinneadh roimhe seo, go gcuirfear san áireamh go hiomlán tuairimí na gcónaitheoirí maidir leis an gceist seo.
234. Deputy Noel Harrington asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to set out the position regarding a single farm payment for 2014 in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Cork; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13878/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraAn application under the 2014 Single Farm Payment Scheme was received from the person named on 13 May 2014. Following initial processing, a dual claim was identified in respect of one of the land parcels declared by the person named. The person named subsequently confirmed that they did not have the right to claim the parcel in question. This resulted in an area over-declaration of between 3% and 20%. Under the Terms and Conditions of the scheme, the 2014 Single Farm Payment was based on the found area subject to a reduction of double the difference between the area found and the area declared. The person named was also subject to a Cross Compliance inspection, which resulted in a 5% penalty. An advance payment under the 2014 Single Payment Scheme, less deductions in respect of penalties as set out above, issued on 16 October 2014. The balancing payment issued on 1 December 2014 , both to the nominated bank account of the person named.
235. Deputy Charlie McConalogue asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to outline the outcome of a site inspection in respect of a person (details supplied) in County Donegal; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [13880/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraA review of the land parcels declared by the person named under the 2013 Single Payment Scheme revealed that two of the land parcels declared by the person named contained ineligible features. However, while t he person named was notified of this decision and of his right of appeal on 11 September 2013 and again on 12 June 2014, his appeal was only received on 26 January 2015. Following the review of my Department’s decision, as sought by the person named, a visit by a Department official to verify the position on the ground was deemed necessary. This visit has not yet been completed and has now been scheduled as a priority visit. An o officer of my Department will be in touch with the person named in the near future regarding the completion of the verification visit. Following completion of the visit, t he person named will be advised as soon as possible, in writing, of the findings o f the visit.
In the event that the person named is dissatisfied with the outcome of this verification check, the decision can be appealed to the independent LPIS Appeals Committee, within 4 weeks of the notification letter.
236. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine if there is representation from environmental non-governmental organisations on the discard implementation group to advise on the issues arising in the effective implementation of the new policies; and if not, the reason for their exclusion, in view of the fact that under the new Common Fisheries Policy, stakeholders have a right of consultation when European Union countries decide the rules for fishermen in their region. [13892/15]
Amharc ar fhreagraThe right of consultation for stakeholders the Deputy refers to is indeed part of the new Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) which I negotiated to conclusion in 2013. The stakeholders referred to are those who are members of Advisory Councils established under the CFP. Environmental stakeholders are active members of the North Western Waters Advisory Council (NWWAC) and the Pelagic Advisory Council (PAC) – the two Advisory Councils of importance to Ireland. Under the reformed CFP, Member States with a direct management interest in a particular region may propose joint recommendations on fisheries management to the Commission. Prior to making any recommendation, those Member States must consult with the relevant Advisory Council.
In North Western Waters, a regional Group of Member States (Ireland, UK, Netherlands, Spain, France and Belgium) is currently engaged in discussions with a view to forming a joint recommendation on a Discards Plan for demersal species that would come into effect in 2016. Ireland currently chairs this Group and representatives of the relevant Advisory Council – the NWWAC – have been invited and attended all meetings of this Group and their views fully taken into consideration.
To facilitate the phasing in of the landing obligation under the reformed Common Fisheries Policy, I established a national Discards Implementation Group (DIG) under the Chairmanship of Dr. Noel Cawley. The remit of this Group is to advise me on issues arising in the effective implementation of the new policy and to recommend practical solutions and arrangements that take into account the situation of the Irish industry. The primary aim of the group is ensure that the Irish fishing industry are fully prepared for, and engaged in, the practical implementation of the discards ban.
As it is the fishing industry alone that will be directly impacted by the implementation of the landing obligation I considered it appropriate that the membership of the Group consist of fishing industry representatives and the relevant agencies - the Marine Institute, Bord Iascaigh Mhara and the Sea Fisheries Protection Authority.
I am of course aware of the interest of Irish environmental non-governmental organisations in the work of the group and since the establishment of the Group. I have asked that they are kept updated on its deliberations on a regular basis and this will of course continue. I do not consider it necessary that they become part of the DIG given its particular remit in terms of practical implementation as opposed to policy development. I consider that they have every opportunity to input into discussions and inform advice within the Advisory Councils.
