Anois, déanfaimid ár mbreithniú ar earcaíocht sa tseirbhís poiblí le hionadaithe ón gCeardchumann Seirbhísí, Tionsclaíoch, Gairmiúil agus Teicniúil: Damien Ginley, eagraí na hearnála sa rannóg sláinte; Luke Bell, atá sa rannóg céanna; agus Martin Corcoran, atá sa rannóg riarachán poiblí agus pobail. Cuirim céad míle fáilte rompu. Cuirim ar an taifead go bhfuil na finnéithe go léir ag freastal ar an gcruinniú ó sheomra coiste 3, taobh istigh de phurláin Thithe an Oireachtais.

Sula leanfaimid ar aghaidh, tá sé de dhualgas orm na rialacha agus na treoracha seo a leanas a leagan faoi bhráid na bhfinnéithe agus na gcomhaltaí uile. Meabhraím dóibh a chinntiú go bhfuil a ngutháin shoghluaiste múchta le linn an chruinnithe mar is féidir leis na gléasanna sin a chur isteach ar an gcóras craolacháin, eagarthóireachta agus fuaime. Tá an rogha ag comhaltaí freastal ar an gcruinniú go fisiciúil sa seomra coiste nó go fíorúil ar Microsoft Teams ar an gcoinníoll, i gcás cruinnithe poiblí, gur óna n-oifigí i dTithe an Oireachtais a dhéantar sin. Is riachtanas bunreachtúil é sin. Nuair atá comhaltaí ag freastal óna n-oifigí, ba chóir dóibh a bhfíseán a bheith ar siúl an t-am go léir agus iad féin le feiscint ar an scáileán. Baineann an coinníoll seo le finnéithe freisin agus iad ag freastal ar an gcruinniú go fíorúil. Chomh maith leis sin, ba chóir dóibh a chinntiú go bhfuil na micreafóin múchta nuair nach bhfuil siad féin ag caint.

Cuirim ar aird na bhfinnéithe go bhfuil, de bhua Bhunreacht na hÉireann agus reachtaíochta araon, finnéithe faoi chosaint ag lánphribhléid maidir leis an bhfianaise a thugann siad don chomhchoiste chomh fada is atá siad lonnaithe laistigh de phurláin Thithe an Oireachtais agus an fhianaise sin á tabhairt acu. Is fíric é nach féidir le finnéithe brath ar an gcosaint sin agus fianaise á tabhairt acu ó lasmuigh de phurláin Thithe an Oireachtais. Molaim d’fhinnéithe a bheith cúramach agus fianaise á tabhairt acu. Má ordaím dóibh éirí as fianaise a thabhairt i leith ní áirithe, ba chóir dóibh amhlaidh a dhéanamh láithreach. Ordaítear dóibh gan aon fhianaise a thabhairt nach fianaise í a bhaineann le hábhar na n-imeachtaí atá á bplé againn. Ba chóir dóibh a bheith ar an eolas go ndéanfar na ráitis tosaigh a chuir siad faoi bhráid an chomhchoiste a fhoilsiú ar shuíomh gréasáin an chomhchoiste tar éis an chruinnithe seo.

Iarrtar ar fhinnéithe agus ar chomhaltaí araon cleachtadh parlaiminte a urramú nár chóir, más féidir, daoine nó eintiteas a cháineadh ná líomhaintí a dhéanamh ina n-aghaidh ná tuairimí a thabhairt maidir leo ina ainm, ina hainm nó ina n-ainm nó ar shlí go bhféadfaí iad a aithint. Chomh maith leis sin, iarrtar orthu gan aon rud a rá go bhféadfaí breathnú air mar ábhar díobhálach do dhea-chlú aon duine nó eintiteas. Mar sin, dá bhféadfadh a ráitis a bheith clúmhillteach do dhuine nó eintiteas aitheanta, ordóidh mé dóibh éirí as an ráiteas láithreach. Tá sé ríthábhachtach go ngéillfidh siad don ordú sin láithreach. An nglacann na finnéithe leis na treoracha sin? Glacann. Gabhaim buíochas leo. Anois, iarraim ar an gceardchumann á ráiteas tosaigh a dhéanamh.

Tá brón orm ach ba mhaith liom caint as Béarla, má tá sé sin ceart go leor. I thank the Leas-Chathaoirleach and members of the committee for the opportunity to address them today.

I am a sector organiser in the health division of SIPTU. I am joined today by my colleagues, Martin Corcoran, organiser in SIPTU’s public administration and community division, and Luke Bell, organiser in the health division. Our submission has been made in English, but we will attempt to engage through Irish where possible, as some of my colleagues have limited Irish-language literacy.

SIPTU fully supports the objective of strengthening the Irish language in public life. However, we have several concerns about the implementation of the Official Languages (Amendment) Act 2021, specifically the requirement that 20% of all new public service recruits be competent in Irish by 2030. Our concern is not with the ambition but, rather, the rigid and uniform application of this target. If applied without flexibility, it risks serious and unintended consequences, particularly within the health service, local government, education and non-commercial State agencies.

Our submission reflects SIPTU’s diverse public service membership of approximately 75,000 workers and is structured in two parts. The first deals with the health division, representing a wide range of grades, including support staff, healthcare assistants, paramedics, radiographers and therapists. The second reflects our public administration and community division, covering local authorities, education bodies, and non-commercial State agencies.

The Irish health service is one of the most complex and multilingual public service environments in the State. It employs over 170,000 staff, faces chronic staffing shortages and relies heavily on international recruitment. A significant proportion of doctors, nurses, therapists and support staff are non-Irish nationals. In that context, English-language proficiency is already essential for patient safety and effective care. Introducing an additional mandatory Irish-language requirement for a fixed percentage of recruits risks further constraining an already fragile recruitment pipeline. The reality is that the supply of Irish-fluent healthcare graduates is extremely limited. Census data shows that only a small minority of the population has Irish at a level suitable for professional work. The education system simply does not produce enough Irish-proficient graduates in health-related disciplines to meet a 20% recruitment target. A rigid recruitment requirement could delay appointments, increase vacancies and negatively affect service delivery at a time when services are already under severe strain.

There is also a risk of creating barriers to promotion and career progression, particularly for those without Irish proficiency or international workers. This risks creating a two-tier workforce, with serious implications for equality, morale and industrial relations. SIPTU is particularly concerned that prioritising language skills over clinical competence could undermine standards of care and patient safety. Workers may be excluded from opportunities based on language ability rather than skill, experience or performance. We are also concerned that this policy could weaken Ireland’s ability to attract international health professionals, further intensifying workforce shortages.

While SIPTU strongly values Irish-language education, the reality is that the current system does not produce enough fluent Irish speakers entering healthcare careers. Most students in scientific and clinical disciplines do not achieve professional-level Irish. While Gaelscoileanna make a valuable contribution, their graduates do not enter health professions in numbers capable of meeting workforce demand at scale.

In the health sector, SIPTU is calling for a phased and sector-specific approach to Irish-language promotion grounded in patient needs, geographic demand and workforce realities. Recruitment of Irish-fluent staff should be targeted where there is a clear and demonstrated need, such as in Gaeltacht areas, community health services with high Irish-speaking populations and appropriate public-facing roles. We strongly support voluntary Irish-language training for existing staff, including paid study time, CPD recognition and flexible blended learning options. Existing platforms, such as HSELand, could be expanded to support both beginner and advanced learners. We also recommend the development of practical Irish-language supports within the health service, including language champions, translation services, on-call assistance and bilingual signage. Crucially, Irish-language competence should not be a mandatory requirement for promotion or career progression.

Turning to the wider public services, our local government, education, and non-commercial State agencies also employ highly diverse workforces. These include workers with limited formal education and literacy needs or from migrant backgrounds. The State must recognise the historical and ongoing role of local authorities and State agencies in providing stable employment and progression pathways. Proper resourcing, targeted implementation and strong partnership with unions will ensure workers across local government, further and higher education and non-commercial State agencies can meet new requirements without disadvantage. Uniform language requirements risk restricting access to secure public service employment, particularly for lower-paid and operational grades. There are serious concerns about recruitment bottlenecks, reduced diversity and barriers to career mobility if language targets are applied without regard to the duties of roles. Irish-language requirements must, therefore, be proportionate and role-specific. Paid training needs to be accessible, flexible and tailored to different grades, including foundation-level programmes for those with literacy challenges or with no prior Irish. This must include paid study time, phased implementation and genuine partnership with trade unions. All measures must be equality-proofed to avoid indirect discrimination.

SIPTU supports the State’s commitment to promoting the Irish language. However, this must be done in a way that is fair, realistic and inclusive. It must not undermine essential public services, patient safety, workforce stability or access to decent public service employment. We are calling for sector-specific strategies, proper resourcing and meaningful engagement with unions. We are particularly concerned about the impact on workers in disadvantaged communities. This submission reflects SIPTU’s long-standing commitment to Irish-language promotion, including Gaeltacht scholarships for members’ children and support for literacy among non-English speakers to promote inclusion and employment opportunities. I thank the Chair and members of the committee. We are happy to answer any questions.

Gabhaim buíochas leis an bhfinné. Ní thaitníonn sé liom a bheith ag teacht salach nó ag rá a mhalairt den rud atá á rá ag na ceardchumainn. Is fíorannamh a dhéanaim é sin. Bím ag tacú leis na ceardchumainn ach, sa chás seo, measaim go bhfuil SIPTU mícheart agus go bhfuil breall air. Tá sé ag díriú ar an rud mícheart.

Chun déanamh cinnte de go n-oibreoidh Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla (Leasú), 2021 i gceart, is é an príomhjab is cóir go mbeidh againn ar fad ná cinntiú go bhfuil na bunchlocha leagtha síos. Áirítear leis sin go mbeidh rochtain ar oideachas trí Ghaeilge, go mbeidh soláthar cúrsaí dóibh siúd atá ag lorg post nó arduithe céime agus go mbeidh scoláireachtaí agus am saor ar fáil. Is í sin an chéad fadhb. Bhí Ranna difriúla os comhair an choiste seo thar na blianta agus níor ardaíodh riamh go mbeadh fadhb chomh bunúsach is atá SIPTU ag leagan amach ó thaobh earcaíochta de. Is í an fhadhb is mó a fheicim ná go bhfuil cúig bliana caite againn ag fanacht go leagfaí na caighdeáin amach faoi na coda den Státchóras lena mbeidh muid ag déileáil agus na cineálacha coinníollacha breise a bheidh orthu.

Roghnaíodh an sprioc 20% faoi 2030 toisc gur shíl an Státchóras nó an Roinn ag an am go bhféadfadh an Státchóras cloí léi. Ní hé go mbeidh coinníoll ar gach uile dhuine amach anseo Gaeilge fheidhmiúil a bheith acu sa Státchóras. Ag an am, glacadh leis gurb é 20% an méid is mó go bhféadfadh muid déanamh ón tús, agus ansin gurbh féidir linn fás a dhéanamh ar an líon sin ina dhiaidh, suas go 30% faoi 2040 nó 40% faoi 2050. Níl aon duine ag rá nach bhfuil dúshlán i gceist. Tuigim dearcadh an cheardchumainn ina leith seo mar tá sé ag iarraidh déanamh cinnte de nach mbeidh na hearnálacha lena mbíonn sé ag plé, nó a chuid ball, thíos le haon cinneadh Stáit amach anseo.

Tá dúshlán ann agus aithnímid é. Tá dúshlán ann cheana féin ó thaobh earcaithe, ní hamháin sna hinstitiúidí sláinte - na hospidéil agus a leithéid - ach ina lán áiteanna eile. Caithfimid tús a chur áit éigin, áfach, agus sin mar a dúradh nuair a bhí muid i mbun plé ar Acht na dTeangacha Oifigiúla ar dtús. D’fhéach muid ar thíortha eile agus an cur chuige a bhí acu. Níl muid coimeádach sa chás seo ach níl muid radacach ach an oiread. Níl 20% radacach. Thug muid cuireadh do bhaill ón public appointments group - ní cuimhin liom an teideal atá ar an ngrúpa - teacht os ár gcomhair agus dúirt siad linn nach bhfeicinn siad fadhb ach dúshlán. An nglacann na finnéithe leis gur dúshlán é agus gur féidir linn an 20% sin a chur ina luí ar gach uile chuid den Státchóras ach gur gá dúinn díriú isteach ar chuidiú le daoine an inniúlacht sin a bheith acu sa teanga? Bhí comhrá maidir leis an litríocht sna scoileanna againn anseo roinnt seachtainí ó shin leo siúd atá ag múnlú an córas oideachais Gaeilge.

I thank the Deputy for his comments. At the outset, it is important to say we are probably not as far apart as may have been suggested in our opening statement. In our total submission we make reference to our commitment to trying to meet the challenge. However, based on the sectors in which we represent workers, we see the 20% as something that may be very difficult to reach based on the facts. Within the health service alone, approximately 34,000 workers fluent in Irish are needed to meet that threshold of 20%. As everyone is aware, we are struggling at the moment in the health service to recruit staff into the service. We are dependent on overseas workers and on workers who, in some cases, leave school early, to try to meet that need. At the moment we do not see the 20% being achievable within our health sector because of patient safety risk and a number of other factors outlined in our submission. However, that does not mean we are not up for the challenge. That does not mean that, as the Deputy alluded to, we would be against supportive measures being put in place in education, be it the scholarships or the courses that were referenced. It is something we talked about in our submission to try to get the public onboard, get the workers in our public service to grasp the nettle of the Irish language and hopefully meet the increase as well as we can. However, we genuinely feel there is a concern in relation to the 20% target by 2030. We also make reference to the fact that, as opposed to putting a target on this, this is something that can grow organically. There is a welcome appetite amongst the public in Ireland at the moment for the promotion of the Irish language, and we hope that can be developed. We hope that can be ramped up in parts of the health services, particularly in the Gaeltacht areas and in non-clinical patient-facing roles, that we can work with the HSE and that it invites us in as a stakeholder to engage to come up with measures to try to achieve what we all want, which is the promotion of Irish. However, there is a concern in relation to the 20%. I will ask Mr. Corcoran to make reference to the local authorities as well.

I agree with my colleague, Mr. Ginley. There is very little we disagree on here. SIPTU is very much supportive of the advancement of the Irish language and its growth. However, there are logistical challenges within the sectors that need to be addressed in order to support that phased implementation of Irish. There are educational challenges that need to be addressed. The delivery of some of the service in the local authority is very fragmented. We have many local authority workers who work in very challenging geographical areas. Training would need to be geared to meet that particular type of structure. We also have challenges in education in areas where very specialised technical work takes place and we would need to see tailored training in those areas. While I agree with many of the points the Deputy has highlighted, again SIPTU is very much in favour of the growth of the Irish language but there are logistical issues we will have to address. There are provisions within the work we do with the employer in terms of our local bargaining committees and the fact that we are involved in that space every day. There is a mechanism there where we can encourage the growth and work on joint projects where we can actually advance the growth of Irish and try to deal with the challenges that are there at that level.

Tá cúpla rud beag le lua agam. Níl an polasaí seo faoi cur chun cinn na Gaeilge; is faoi cearta teanga atá sé, agus tá difríocht mhór idir an dá rud sin. An dara rud ná nach bhfuil sé seo faoi daoine a bheith flúirseach sa teanga, díreach a bheith inniúil sa teanga agus go mbeadh siad in ann roinnt oibre a dhéanamh sa teanga. Ciallaíonn sé sin má tá 20 duine as 100 duine nua á earcú, go mbeadh Béarla fós acu. Níl muid ag rá nach mbeadh Béarla acu agus go mbeidís ag obair trí mheán na Gaeilge amháin. Caithfimid an chomparáid sin a dhéanamh gur cearta teanga atá i gceist anseo, ní díreach an Ghaeilge a chur chun cinn.

Sin a bhí mé chun a rá. Is é seo an dlí. Is féidir an dlí a athrú nó gan é a athrú ach sa deireadh thiar thall is cearta teanga iad seo atá bunaithe ar an mBunreacht. An fhadhb atá ann ná go bhfuil an Stát ag déanamh catch-up ó thaobh na Gaeilge de. Is é sin an fáth go ndúirt mé go bhfuil dúshlán ann. An fhadhb is mó atá agam, agus níl mise ag iarraidh a bheith ag troid le daoine atá ag rá go bhfuil an dúshlán ann, le cúig bliana anuas táimid ag fanacht ar an Státchóras leagan síos go díreach conas a shroichimid an 20% sin. Tá cúig bliana imithe. Bhí naoi nó deich mbliana le bheith ann chun cuidiú le gach uile chuid den chóras díriú isteach air. Sa deireadh thiar thall, ní 20% den Státchóras atá i gceist. Is 20% dóibh siúd a bhéas earcaithe atá i gceist. Luaigh Damien Ginley 34,000 - ní sin atá i gceist. Ag am éigin, sroichfear an figiúr sin. Is figiúr níos ísle é ach ní dhéanann sé sin mórán difríocht don dream atá i gceist aige.

Tá an ceart aige ó thaobh múinteoirí de. Tá sé sin aitheanta againn. Tá muid tar éis bheith ag caint leis na hollscoileanna ag iarraidh orthu cén fáth nach bhfuil na cúrsaí nó na modúil ann i nGaeilge. Tá an ceart ag Damien Ginley. Níl muid go huile is go hiomlán ina choinne ach táimid ag teacht ag an gceist seo ó bhonn difriúil. Tá muid den tuairim gur chóir go mbeadh sé seo ann agus gur dlí é. Más féidir in aon chor, is féidir leis na finnéithe brú a chur ar Roinn na Gaeilge agus na Gaeltachta, nó pé teideal atá air anois, na caighdeáin sin a fhoilsiú chomh tapa agus is féidir ionas go bhfuil a fhios againn ar fad cad é an pháirc imeartha atá os ár gcomhair, seachas go bhfuilimid ag obair go dall faoi láthair.

Tá dhá cheist thapa agam. Dúradh sa ráiteas tosaigh go bhfuil an ceardchumann buartha maidir leis an dlí seo agus daoine a thagann ó chúlra íseal socheacnamaíoch. Cén fáth?

We made that comment in our opening statement on foot of what we see as the current state of the education system. We currently have a number of workers in the public service who did not conclude second level education. These people have the support of employment opportunities within State organisations. In the health service, they work in support grades as porters, caterers and so on. Within local authorities, they work as general operatives and so on. These might work for Dublin Corporation, for example. These people have been employed without the restrictions the implementation of this law will impose. We are supportive of the law. We must be clear on that. We are concerned that some people from disadvantaged areas may be left behind as regards access to employment if they do not have the supports. The Government has a role to play in making sure the education system allows supports to be put in place to achieve this goal. We support the campaign in that regard. However, based on the current situation, those individuals who left school earlier and who are working in our public service, fulfilling very important functions and roles that we cannot survive without, could potentially lose out on promotional opportunities if a structure like that we have set out in our broader submission is not put in place. Our proposal is that the employer would provide training, paid time off and so on to allow them to upskill to be able to carry out the role in Irish.

Ritheann dhá rud liom maidir leis sin. Tóg mo bhaile áitiúil, Baile Locha Riach, mar shampla. Tá an Ghaelscoil lonnaithe in aice le tithíocht don Lucht Siúil. Tá 70% nó 80% de dhaoine faoi 30 bliain d'aois líofa sa Ghaeilge. In áit mar sin, fiú má tá cúlra íseal socheacnamaíoch ag daoine, tá an Ghaeilge acu agus bheadh siad in ann cur isteach ar na poist sin. Ina theannta sin, ní chiallaíonn an dlí nach féidir le daoine nach bhfuil na buntáistí sin acu cur isteach ar an 80% de phoist atá ar fáil dóibh a labhraíonn an Béarla amháin. An gceapann na finnéithe go bhfuil sé beagáinín diúltach a bheith ag breathnú air sa gcaoi sin?

No. In our submission, we made reference to the fact that, in Gaeltacht areas, the 20% target could be utilised more or greatly exceeded. There are opportunities there and resources should be put in place. Under heading 6.2 of our submission, we have gone into detail in that regard. There is scope and opportunity. I agree it should not be seen as a negative. It is not. However, the reality for a lot of the workforce in the public service is that, without supports being put in place, a two-tier system could potentially arise when it comes to recruitment and promotional opportunities. If supports are not put in place, not having Irish could be seen as a negative.

Maidir leis an "two-tier system" a luaigh Damian Ginley ansin, nuair a bhí mise sa Fhrainc agus ag lorg poist ann, bhí orm a bheith in ann an Fhraincis a labhairt. Tá stádas náisiúnta ag an nGaeilge. Is í an Ghaeilge ár dteanga náisiúnta agus ár dteanga dhúchais. Nach bhfuil two-tier system i bhfeidhm faoi láthair maidir leis an mBéarla i gcoinne na Gaeilge? An dtuigeann na finnéithe an coincheap sin? Nach bhfuil a mhalairt i gceist faoi láthair? Conas a athraíonn muid rudaí gan a bheith radacach mar sin agus rioscaí a thógáil?

It is a fair comment. I will use the health system as an example. At the moment, the process requires candidates to be proficient in the English language. That is the requirement to work in the health service at the moment. Any drift away from that could potentially impact our ability to recruit to our workforce, particularly from overseas. We are not opposed to that. We are just saying that supports need to be put in place to allow us to achieve what is required under the legislation. We are supportive of it. In our submission, we put forward some suggestions to help to achieve it. The Government will have to put resources in place to support existing workers to upskill - I apologise if that is the wrong term - and to support those who wish to come into the sector to achieve the threshold we are all looking to achieve. From a health perspective, we see it as being a challenge to achieve 20% across the broader health service by 2030. That is why we have flagged it in that manner.

Maidir leis an gcóras sláinte, aontaím le Damian Ginley i mbealach amháin go bhfuil fadhbanna ansin agus go bhfuil baol ann go mbeadh folúntais ann agus nach mbeadh muid in ann gach post a líonadh leis an 80%. Tuigim é sin.

Tá ceist dheireanach agam. Tá rud éigin scríofa sa ráiteas tosaigh, "All measures must be equality-proofed to avoid indirect discrimination." Bhí Fórsa istigh linn thart ar shé mhí ó shin. Dúirt an duine a bhí istigh go raibh baol ann go gcruthódh an dlí seo spás do chiníochas. Is é sin an dara huair a léigh mé rud den saghas sin. Tá frustrachas ag teacht orm go bhfuiltear ag rá go bhfuil idirdhealú nó ciníochas ag baint leis an dlí seo nuair is é ár dteanga dhúchais atá i gceist. Cén fáth go bhfuil sé sin scríofa sa ráiteas tosaigh?

Our statement has been prepared based on what we see as the current situation within our public service. SIPTU represents health workers and local government agency workers. That workforce is supplemented by a significant number of non-Irish nationals. They are required to ensure we can provide a safe service to the public, who deserve that. This is not a concern in the sense that we are opposed to the measure. We are just highlighting it as an issue that needs to be addressed to the greatest extent possible between now and 2030. The reality is that a large number of the workers who come into the Irish system come from overseas. If they see the Irish language as a prerequisite to come into the Irish system, they may avail of opportunities in the UK, in other parts of Europe or in Australia. We run a risk there in relation to the workforce.

Glacaim leis go bhfuil riosca ansin go mbeadh daoine a bheadh ag teacht go hÉirinn ag dul go tíortha eile ach is é an téarmaíocht faoi leith atá i gceist ná "indirect discrimination". An labhróidh Damian Ginley ar an gcoincheap sin seachas ar an earcaíocht féin? Tá frustrachas ag teacht orm agus mé ag éisteacht leis an téarmaíocht sin maidir leis an teanga. Tuigim go huile agus go hiomlán go bhfuil baol ann go mbeadh dainséar in ospidéal mura bhfuil duine le Gaeilge ann do phost sa chóras sláinte. Tuigim an fhadhb sin ach cén fáth ar úsáideadh an téarma "indirect discrimination"?

It was done for the reasons I have outlined. I apologise if I am not being clear. From our point of view, the education system we have at the moment is not delivering when it comes to the Irish language. I completed second level and third level education and did Irish for my leaving certificate but I would not be able to work in a job that had an Irish-language requirement. That is just an example. When we put targets in place, we have to be careful that everyone who is needed and required is given a fair and equal opportunity. All we are saying is that, in the absence of the supports we have suggested in our submission, there is scope for indirect challenges for those who do not have the Irish language. We are trying to overcome those. We are highlighting this point as opposed to-----

Tá difríocht idir dúshlán agus idirdhealú nó ciníochas. Tá sé tábhachtach a bheith soiléir faoi sin.

I understand and hear the frustration. I understand this is more of a rights-based policy rather than the alternative. I appreciate the frustration around its implementation. We always seek continuous resources to be put into the sectors we represent. In this context, as I highlighted earlier, a number of the challenges can be addressed with additional supports and funding.

There was a call for us to support the implementation of this rights-based policy at a local level and apply pressure in that regard. We have no problem with putting forward a rights-based policy, but it needs to be supported by funding at a local level to allow us to engage with the employer so that we can progress the policy. We can only do that with support at a local level.

This is particularly relevant to the community development sector where we represent a lot of workers. As was pointed out at various other Oireachtas committees, there are funding issues in the sector. There are challenges whereby it is not clear whether the employer is the development company or the Department. It will be very challenging in that space due to the lack of funding. We represent many workers in that space. We all agree that we would like to see this rights-based policy implemented, but we and our members need support in order to deliver it. As policymakers, we hope the committee bares that in mind when it comes to the implementation of this rights-based policy.

Tá an plé seo thar a bheith spéisiúil. Tá difear mór idir an ráiteas tosaigh a léigh Damien Ginley amach ar dtús agus na freagraí atá anois á dtabhairt ag na finnéithe, agus cuirim fáilte roimhe sin. Sa ráiteas, sheas na focail “role-specific” agus “proportionate” amach dom. Chuir siad isteach orm mar, le focail mar seo, tá muid ag rá le duine éigin sa Ghaeltacht go bhfuil specificity ag baint le rochtain a fháil ar bhanaltra nó dochtúir. Cé nach dóigh liom gurb é sin an méid atá á rá ag na finnéithe, nuair a úsáidtear focail ar nós “role-specific” agus “proportionate”, cruthaítear imprisean gur rud roghnach é seo in áit ruda atá bunaithe ar chearta.

Faoi mar a dúirt an Seanadóir Curley, bhí finnéithe ó Fhórsa os ár gcomhair cúpla mí ó shín agus chuireamar na ceisteanna céanna orthu. Faoi mar a dúirt an Teachta Ó Snodaigh, tá muid leath bealaigh síos an bhóthar seo. Ba mhaith liom a bheith den tuairim nach bhfuil aon dul as seo. Caithfidh muid iarracht a dhéanamh an sprioc seo a bhaint amach. Cuirim fáilte roimh an aighneacht atá déanta ag SIPTU chun acmhainní breise a fháil agus féachaint ar na rudaí sin ar fad, ach níl mé ag iarraidh go rachaidh an teachtaireacht amach ón choiste seo go gcuirfidh muid na hacmhainní ar fad ar fáil ach nach mbeidh ar dhaoine é seo a dhéanamh. Níl mé ag rá go mbeidh sé éigeantach ar gach aon bhall foirne ach an oiread. Más rud é, áfach, go mbeidh muid ag rá nár chóir idirdhealú a dhéanamh ar bhonn líofacht sa Ghaeilge i gcás ardaithe céime, tá fadhb ansin. Ní chuirfí suas lena leithéid i dtíortha dátheangacha eile, ar nós Cheanada agus na Beilge.

Cuirim fáilte roimh an soiléiriú agus molaim go ndéanfar an soiléiriú sin a scaipeadh go poiblí. Molaim do SIPTU gan focail ar nós “role-specific” agus “proportionate” a úsáid mar ní focail iad a luíonn leis an méid atá ráite ag na finnéithe maidir leis an nGaeilge a chur chun cinn. Tá mé ag iarraidh a bheith soiléir faoin méid sin i dtosach báire.

Ag féachaint ar na cúinsí áitiúla, cén sórt idirghabhála atá tar éis a bheith tarlaithe ag an leibhéal áitiúil idir SIPTU agus fostóirí cosúil leis na húdaráis áitiúla, na húdaráis sláinte agus a leithéid? An bhfuil an idirbheartaíocht ag tarlú ag leibhéal náisiúnta faoi láthair maidir leis na hacmhainní atá ar fáil le cur le cumas Gaeilge oibrithe na n-earnálacha sin?

In respect of local authorities, we have well-established engagement structure forums at local level. To answer the Deputy’s question directly, the employer has not presented a strategy or plan for this. It goes back to my point that this is probably going to need to be looked at on a sector-by-sector, departmental level in order to have that local engagement at local authority level. The engagement we have at local level is always constructive. Due to training requirements, flexibility around training, literacy levels and all of that, we are possibly looking at a training needs analysis to see where people are at and then forming an implementation strategy. We are always available locally to have these discussions, but it will need a bit of work in order to progress it. I fully understand the frustration with the length of time this is taking. My feeling here is that the local authorities and other sectors are going to need additional support in order for it to be progressed at local level.

To go back to the point I referenced earlier with regard to the community sector level, that area is very fragmented. When we were looking at pensions and pay for workers in that space, it was not clear who the employer was. Was it the Department or the actual development companies? In that space, it is going to be challenging to implement this rights-based policy unless we have a clear and defined strategy around its roll-out at local level. As a union, we are always available to engage locally but no strategy has been presented to us at local level.

B'fhéidir go bhfuil píosa oibre le déanamh ag an gcoiste sa chomhthéacs seo chun iarradh ar na húdaráis áitiúla teacht isteach agus an straitéis sin a chur ar fáil. Ag filleadh ar an earnáil phobail, ó thaobh idirbheartaíochta de a dhéantar ar phá, pinsean agus coinníollacha oibre, cé leis a ndéanann SIPTU an idirbheartaíocht sin?

Is that from a union perspective?

Yes.

Within our public administration and community sector, we have the community sector. We have a well-established sector that engages at Department level. It also has its own sector. That is the normal course of engagement with the employer.

Ní féidir riachtanais maidir le traenáil sa Ghaeilge agus úsáid na Gaeilge a dhéanamh mar chuid den idirbheartaíocht sin. An bhfuil Martin Corcoran ag rá go bhfuil rud éigin difriúil ag teastáil chun an plé sin a dhéanamh leis na heagraíochtaí pobail?

Across the sectors, our structures, committees and representatives are always available to discuss terms and conditions of employment, work practices and so on. It is likewise when it comes to the implementation of this rights-based policy. If we are to engage in a period of development, there is going to have to be engagement between the various stakeholders, whether at community or local authority level or whatever. It will have to be done on a departmental and sectoral basis in order for us to be able to have that engagement. Perhaps a strategy around that will be required. It must take into account the diversity of the workforce. In the cohorts of workers I represent, there are many challenges around literacy, the geographical locations of where people work and the requirement to be at a certain point during the day. There will be a need to have flexibility around training and possible paid leave. There are a number of items that we highlighted in our submission that could be engaged on, but they must take place at a local level.

Níl mé ag iarraidh a bheith obstructive anseo ach tá mé ag iarraidh é seo a thuiscint.

Tharla an plé maidir le coinníollacha oibre agus téarmaí oibre cheana féin. Tá sé sin ráite ag SIPTU. Tarlaíonn sé sin ag an trí leibhéal - ag leibhéal na Roinne, ag leibhéal na hearnála agus ag leibhéal áitiúil. Tarlaíonn sé sin cheana féin. Nuair a thugtar isteach riachtanais nua maidir le trealamh nua a úsáid, déantar an cur i bhfeidhm sin mar chuid den phlé sin maidir le coinníollacha oibre. Glacaim leis go bhfuil easpa straitéise ann ón bhfostóir. Glacaim leis sin. Sin rud a thabharfaimid linn.

Rud nach dtuigim ná cén fáth a bhfuil sé seo difriúil ón ngnáthphlé a dhéantar ar na coinníollacha agus na téarmaí oibre nuair a thugtar córas nua isteach. Glacaim leis go dtugtar córais nua isteach sna hearnálacha sin ar fad, sna húdaráis áitiúla agus ag leibhéal an phobail. Is ionann an rud seo agus córas nua a thabhairt isteach le cinntiú go bhfuil leibhéal áirithe sroichte ag daoine don traenáil. Rud nach dtuigim ná cén fáth a bhfuil sé sin difriúil ón gnáthphlé a dhéantar. Níl mé ag iarraidh bac a chruthú anseo; tá mé ag iarraidh tuiscint a fháil air. Ó thaobh gnáthidirbheartaíocht a tharlaíonn idir fostóirí agus ceardchumainn, tá an chuma air go bhfuil an tuairim ag an gceardchumann go bhfuil sé seo difriúil ón ngnáthathchóiriú a tharlaíonn ar an Státchóras, ach ní dóigh liom go bhfuil. Táim ag iarraidh tuiscint a fháil ar cén fáth a bhfuil an t-idirdhealú sin á dhéanamh.

We are not making a differentiation in terms of it being different. We appreciate that this is a rights-based policy. This is an area in which we would always engage in terms of the delivery of employment rights and so on. We have regular engagement with employers. It is very hard for us to engage in something that has not been presented to us.

Tá Martin Corcoran á chur ar ais ar an bhfostóir.

To go back to sectoral level, if there is an introduction of a policy, in this case, a rights-based policy, there is a duty on the employer to present us with it so we can have engagement locally.

Níl aon rud roinnte leis an gceadchumann. Tá an document ag Martin Corcoran cheana féin. Tá an polasaí ag an gceardchumann.

Yes, but I will go back to the point in relation to the resources that are required and the strategy to overcome the challenges that we spoke about here this morning. The Departments, the sectors and the employer are going to have to address those in order for us to engage.

Tá an-tacaíocht á léiriú ag SIPTU don Ghaeilge. Molaim go háirithe na scoláireachtaí don Ghaeltacht. An mbeadh SIPTU compordach ag cur ceiste ar na fostóirí na pleananna seo a chur ar fáil, in áit fanacht ar na fostóirí iad a chur ar fáil dó? Ó thaobh an pholasaí náisiúnta, glacaim leis sin, ach ó thaobh na bpleananna earnálacha agus na pleananna ag leibhéal na bhfostóirí, glacaim go bhfuil easpa ansin. An bhfuil SIPTU agus na ceardchumainn ag cur brú ar na fostóirí na pleananna sin a chur ar fáil? Ní léir dom go bhfuil. B'fhéidir go bhfuil, ach ní léir dom go bhfuil.

We can seek engagement. Within the health service is the Department of Health and the Health Service Executive. They would engage with the staff panel of trade unions, one of which is SIPTU. At the Deputy's request, we can seek to see the status of the Department's position in relation to the implementation of the legislation. It is not for me to speak on behalf of the Department, but there is a concern in relation to its ability to try to deliver. With that delivery comes resources and that challenge. I do not know how far the Department and the HSE are in their position as to how they see the implementation of this. It is something we can take away based on the question.

Chuirfinn fáilte roimh sin. An rud atá ag cur isteach orm faoin rud seo ar fad ná go bhfuil drogall ar gach duine. Tá drogall ar thaobh na n-áisíneachtaí Stáit agus ar na gceardchumann. Tá uaillmhian ag baint leis an sprioc 20%. Ní gheobhaimid deis mar seo riamh arís i gcomhthéacs an grá atá á léiriú don Ghaeilge agus an phróifíl atá ag an nGaeilge faoi láthair. Níl mé ag cur an mhilleáin ar SIPTU, ach is cosúil go bhfuil drogall ar dhaoine dul i ngleic le rud atá ann go reachtúil, rud ar thug an Dáil seo sainordú oifigiúil dó, agus a bhfuil dea-thoil i measc an phobail ina leith. Ar an mbonn sin, cruthaíonn sé frustrachas. Cuirim fáilte roimh an ngníomh go gcuirfidh SIPTU ceist ar na rannóga agus ar na fostóirí éagsúla faoi céard atá á dhéanamh i leith na Gaeilge. Tá ceithre bliana fágtha chun rud éigin a dhéanamh. Nílimid ag iarraidh go ndéanfaimid faillí nó neamhaird air.

Leanfaidh mé ar aghaidh ón Teachta Moynihan. Gabhaim buíochas le Damien Ginley as an ngníomh sin chomh maith. Má theastaíonn uaidh teacht ar ais chugainn agus an t-eolas a roinnt linn nuair atá sé tar éis labhairt leis an HSE agus leis an Roinn Sláinte agus pé Roinn eile faoi cad atá ar siúl acu, táimid sásta leanúint ar aghaidh leis sin chomh maith, an Roinn oideachais san áireamh.

Tá dhá rud uaim. Tá an chuid is mó de gach rud luaite ag gach duine cheana féin. Mar a dúirt an Teachta Moynihan, tá an-difríocht idir an mhéid a bhí ar pháipéar agus na ceisteanna agus na freagraí a bhí ag teacht amach inniu. Caithfidh mé díriú ar rud amháin i gcomhair soicind, is é sin na róil speisialta agus go dtagann daoine go dtí an tír seo ó thíortha éagsúla i gcomhair na ról speisialta sin. Tuigeann gach duine é sin. Níl aon duine anseo a theastaíonn go mbeadh Gaeilge ag surgeon ag teacht ón Ind. Níl aon duine ag rá sin. Tá róil sa Roinn Sláinte in áiteanna éagsúla, róil riaracháin agus róil éagsúla, nach bhfuil na róil speisialta seo i gceist. Nuair a labhraítear faoi na róil seo agus deirtear go bhfuil na róil seo ag teastáil uainn, déanann sé neamhaird ar 80% den chuid eile. Is féidir le 80% de dhaoine nua atá á earcú sa chóras go mbeidís in ann teacht ón Ind, ón Afraic nó pé tír eile. Níl á rá againn anseo ach go mbeadh an Ghaeilge ar a dtoil ag 20% de dhaoine nua atá á earcú sa tseirbhís phoiblí. Ní chuireann sé sin bac ar SIPTU nó ar aon duine daoine nua a earcú ó thíortha eile le róil speisialta. Caithfidh an teachtaireacht sin teacht ón gcoiste seo nach gcuireann an Ghaeilge bac ar dhaoine nua a earcú le róil speisialta. Ní féidir aon shórt cumarsáide eile teacht ón gcoiste seo.

Ba chóir go mbeadh an deis acu an Ghaeilge a fhoghlaim más mian leo.

Bheadh an deis ar fáil dóibh. Bheadh ceachtanna ar fáil dóibh má tá sé ag teastáil uathu. An rud atá ag teacht amach ón gcomhrá seo go ginearálta, agus luaigh Martin Corcoran é cúpla uair, ná tacaíocht. Tá tacaíocht ag teastáil. Tá an tacaíocht ag teastáil ó na hoibrithe. Cén sórt tacaíochta? An bhfuil sé sin léirithe ag SIPTU go fóillín, nó an bhfuil sé fós ag smaoineamh faoi? An bhfuil sé soiléir gurb é seo an tacaíocht atá ag teastáil agus nach bhfuil sé ar fáil go fóill?

We have outlined in the submission a number of potential suggestions to try to achieve what we are all looking to do here, notwithstanding the fact that we see some challenges in relation to our ability to meet the requirements. It does not mean we do not try. Within the health sector, we have community health areas, local primary care centres, and resources and supports should be put in place to support our colleagues working in the Gaeltacht areas.

What supports specifically?

For our existing workforce, we are saying that there should be an opportunity to upskill. There should be educational supports, such as courses in the Irish language. The HSE has a programme called HSeLanD. Modules should be put in place to support workers there. That will help existing people. We should try and assist in having more of our public servants meeting the challenge. There are also suggestions in relation to continuous professional development modules, whereby clinical colleagues engage in CPD training to get modules to stay competent in their specialty. Points could be awarded with the Irish language as part of it.

We have talked as well about blended learning, which can be brought in in an organic format to try to support it. When it comes to supports, the supports come in the resources, be it the training and tutors and all that needed to support the public servants who wish to avail of this, but also in the time given to public servants when they are released to carry out these duties and in the pressures, if supports are not put in place, that leaves on their colleagues in the workplace. That is what we mean when we talk about the supports here.

Abraimis go bhfuil an continuous professional development agus na ceachtanna ar fáil agus go bhfuil an t-am saor á fháil ag oibrithe. Sa chás sin, agus gach rud foirfe, an dóigh leis na finnéithe go mbeadh muid in ann dul i ngleic leis an sprioc 20%, nó an bhfuil tacaíochtaí eile ag teastáil? Do we need any more supports?

It is probably broader than just those elements, based on the workforce within the health sector as one example. However, we have to start somewhere, which has been said a few times here this morning. Engagement with the various Departments would assist in trying to put in place appropriate measures. We need to talk to the workers - the broader workforce - as part of that as well to get their input into it. The stakeholder engagement would allow the discussion to get to the space the Leas-Chathaoirleach is talking about.

Mar cheardchumann, tá a fhios ag baill SIPTU nuair a théann siad isteach in aon idirghabháil go lorgaíonn siad gach rud atá ag teastáil uathu. Is é sin atá á dhéanamh agam anseo. Tá muid ag déanamh cinnte go bhfuil na foinsí go léir ar fáil againn agus nach féidir le héinne teacht thar n-ais i gceann dhá bhliain, cúig bliana nó deich mbliana le rá nach raibh seo nó siúd ar fáil acu.

Beidh na finnéithe in ann smaoineamh faoi sin arís agus labhairt le hoibrithe timpeall na tíre. B’fhéidir go bhfuil rudaí eile atá ag teastáil nach bhfuil ar fáil, lasmuigh de cheachtanna agus am saor, agus beidh na finnéithe in ann teacht thar n-ais chugainn leis na moltaí sin chomh maith. Beimid lánsásta labhairt leo faoi seo arís. Níl aon cheisteanna eile. Leis sin cuirfidh mé clabhsúr leis an seisiún seo. An aontaítear leis sin? Aontaítear. Go raibh míle maith agaibh.

Roimh dom deireadh a chur lenár mbreithniú inniu agus leis an gcruinniú, guím gach dea-ghuí ar Chlóda Lynam atá le pósadh i gceann coicíse. Mar sin, beidh sí ag imeacht uainn i gcomhair cúpla seachtaine. Go n-éirí go geal léi. Tá súil agam go mbainfidh siad an-taitneamh as an lá agus as an mí na meala nó pé rud atá ar siúl acu ina dhiaidh.

Gabhaim buíochas leis na hoifigigh ó SIPTU as an bplé fiúntach agus tairbheach a bhí againn. An aontaítear leis sin? Aontaítear. Molaim go gcuirfimid an cruinniú ar athló go dtí 11 a.m. ar an 12 Bealtaine 2026, nuair a phléifear le hionadaithe An Foras Riaracháin an t-ábhar: 20% d’earcaithe sa tseirbhís poiblí a bheith ina fostaithe dátheangach faoi 2030 agus na cúrsaí a bhfuil gá leo a sholáthar chun oiliúint dhátheangach a chur ar fáil dóibh. An aontaítear leis sin? Aontaítear. Is é sin deireadh an chruinnithe.