Dáil Éireann Debate, Tuesday - 13 October 2009
65 Deputy Richard Bruton asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if her attention has been drawn to the downsizing of a company (details supplied); if she will investigate the causes; if there is a strategy to avoid this outcome; and the way workers can be protected. [35187/09]
Amharc ar fhreagra69 Deputy Michael Creed asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if her attention has been drawn to the dissatisfaction of employees and their trade union representatives with a company (details supplied) which has announced proposals for rationalisation of its operations here and which has failed to enter into negotiations with the employees and their representatives to date regarding an alternative to the level of job losses and closures necessary; the options open to her Department in this regard specifically with regard to the company’s entitlement to a rebate of up to 60% of the statutory redundancy payments in view of the fact that the company has failed to consider anything more than statutory redundancy; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [35243/09]
Amharc ar fhreagra70 Deputy Róisín Shortall asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment if she has engaged in consultation with a company (details supplied) following the news of the impending closure of 14 shops here; the steps she has taken to assist the staff in a bid to stop further redundancies; if this company has disclosed detailed financial information regarding its current circumstances; if she has received an application from this company or from another company for an Exchequer rebate for statutory redundancies in respect of employees; and, if so, her views on this application. [35302/09]
Amharc ar fhreagra71 Deputy Thomas P. Broughan asked the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment the position regarding the industrial relations difficulties at a company (details supplied); if the industrial mechanisms of the State are being utilised to resolve all outstanding issues for the 95 staff whose jobs are under threat; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [35354/09]
Amharc ar fhreagraI propose to take Questions Nos. 65 and 69 to 71, inclusive, together.
My Department received a collective redundancy notification in relation to proposed redundancies at the company in question on 14 August 2009. Under the Redundancy Payments Scheme administered by my Department and funded from the Social Insurance Fund, the essential function of my Department is to ensure that all eligible employees receive the statutory minimum redundancy entitlements due to them. Currently, the statutory redundancy entitlements for all qualifying employees are two weeks pay per year of service plus a bonus week.
There are two types of redundancy payment made from the Social Insurance Fund — redundancy rebates of 60% which are payable to employers who have paid the minimum statutory redundancy payments to qualifying employees and, statutory lump sums to employees whose employers are insolvent or not in a position to pay. In the case of employers who pay the statutory redundancy payments to their employees, they are entitled, by virtue of their social insurance contributions, to avail of a 60% rebate in respect of the redundancy payments paid out. Neither the Tánaiste nor I have any role in relation to the negotiation of ex gratia payments to employees in excess of the statutory minimum payments — this is entirely a matter of discretion for the company and an issue for negotiation as between the employees and the company.
In accordance with Sections 9 and 10 of the Protection of Employment Act 1977, companies are required to consult employees' representatives and to supply certain information regarding proposed redundancies. Should it be the case that there is dissatisfaction about the level of consultation and information as set down in the Act, it is possible for a complaint to be taken before the Rights Commissioner Service who will hear the case and communicate the outcome to the parties involved. An appeal can lie from a decision of the Rights Commissioner to the Employment Appeals Tribunal.
I understand that a conciliation conference involving the parties was held under the auspices of the Labour Relations Commission on 8 October last, and that both sides agreed to reflect on their respective positions and revert to the LRC shortly. The experience and expertise of the Commission offers an appropriate avenue for resolving these issues. In this context, I would encourage both parties to avail of the professional services of the Commission in their efforts to resolve their differences.
Responsibility for the resolution of industrial disputes between employers and workers, whether in redundancy or other collective disputes, rests with the employer, the workers and their representatives. The State provides the industrial relations dispute settlement machinery free of charge to assist this process, which, in line with the general principles of industrial relations in Ireland, is voluntary in nature. The system of industrial relations in Ireland is designed to help and support parties in their efforts to resolve their differences, rather than imposing an extensive set of legislative conditions on the parties to an industrial dispute.
It is always open to those affected in situations where the rationalisation of a company's operations may be at issue to utilise the Industrial Relations mechanisms of the state — the Labour Relations Commission and/or the Labour Court — to further claims intended to identify and promote alternative strategies in an effort to forestall or mitigate the negative employment consequences of any such rationalisation.
