Congress Condemns Failure to Enforce Standards
18 Oct 2005
Proposed Work Permit Bill will require 'major changes'
Congress General Secretary David Begg today condemned a "clear ideological bias in the Department of Enterprise, Trade & Employment, in favour of 'light touch' regulation."
Speaking at the launch of a Congress paper - Migration Policy & the Rights of Workers -
Mr Begg said Congress had previously requested boosting of the Labour Inspectorate to 75, but that the request had been effectively vetoed by the Department of Enterprise, Trade & Employment (DETE).
"Ironically, it was approved by the Department of Finance. To my mind, there was a clear political decision to deprive the Labour Inspectorate of the resources necessary to do the job. Ireland now makes a virtue out of 'light touch' regulation, he said.
It was hardly surprising then, he continued, that unscrupulous employers abused the system - with GAMA the most obvious example.
"The document we are publishing today also contains a series of first hand migrant worker testimonies which detail a litany of abuses and grievances. The common thread to all the stories is a clear failure of enforcement, on the part of the authorities."
Mr Begg went on to characterise the recently-published Work Permits Bill as "smoke and mirrors" and said Congress had "major problems" with the legislation.
The Bill, he said, failed to address the issue of employee ownership of permission to work.
"Contrary to advance publicity, that remains with the employer and the semi-bonded relationship between employee and employer remains unchanged.
"All the new Bill does is ensure the employee now has a physical copy of his/ her permit - but they can only change employment if another employer applies for their services. They'd be passed around like virtual chattels. They would have no freedom t move jobs, even in instances of abuse."
Mr Begg said Congress would be seeking major amendments to the proposed Bill.
He also said a coherent, over-arching immigration policy was required which was not motivated solely by "very narrow" labour market needs.
ends