Remote work legislation
Deputy Nash criticised the Government’s remote work Bill as too weak and employer-friendly. The Taoiseach defended the approach, pointing to positive pandemic experience and ongoing engagement with unions and employers.
The future of how work in Ireland is organised is one of the greatest issues of our time and all the research shows the real appetite for working people to have a genuine right to flexibility in terms of work. Unfortunately, the Government seems determined to go back in time through its deeply flawed remote work legislation, which will essentially give employers a right to refuse requests for flexible work. The reality, as the Taoiseach knows, is that both unions and employers, for different reasons, have said the Government's plans are not worth the paper they are written on, and we agree with them. There is a right way out of this. The way out of this is to fast-track and adopt the Labour Party's right to flexible work Bill drafted by my colleague, Senator Marie Sherlock, which would enshrine a real right for workers to have flexible and secure work.
We believe workers have proven their ability to successfully work remotely during the pandemic and they must have the right to maintain flexible work arrangements into the future. Will the Taoiseach dispense with the flawed legislation that is currently before the Houses, adopt the Labour Party Bill, go back to the drawing board and ensure workers have a real right to request and have flexible work?
Comment on this
In this country, we are sometimes very critical of ourselves and that can be a good thing. I was struck by a recent survey that illustrated that it has worked very well in Ireland during Covid-19, even without any legislative framework, and we should acknowledge that. The experience for people who benefited from remote working is that they had higher satisfaction levels, quality of life and so on.
On the legislation, the Tánaiste has engaged with employers and unions in respect of this. Obviously, both have different perspectives and want improvements. In my view, we should continue to work with the social partners in respect of this. The purpose of the pre-legislative scrutiny was to scrutinise and strengthen the draft legislation. I do not think we need to go into another Bill. We have a legislative framework to provide clarity to all concerned. This is an evolving situation that has worked well so far without any legislation. With the legislative template now, I think we will get a better outcome.