Speech by Mr. Tom Kitt, T.D., Minister for Labour, Trade and Consumer Affairs at the Launch of the ICTU "Guidelines for Presenting Cases to the Employment Appeals Tribunal" at Congress Headquarters, on Thursday 22nd July at 2.30p.m.

It gives me great pleasure to be with you today for the launch of this very important "Guide to Presenting Cases to the Employment Appeals Tribunal."

One of the things that struck me when reading through the Guide was the absence of what I would term jargon. This Guide is a breath of fresh air to me in terms of its clarity and its step by step approach as to the most effective way to represent an employee before the Tribunal. I notice the hand of a former civil servant - Bill O' Shaughnessy - who served with the Tribunal at its foundation. I wish, of course, to acknowledge, along with Congress, his sterling contribution to the work of the Tribunal during his long association with the EAT and his work in the area of employment rights generally.

I have come across many instances of information booklets which miss their target market through the overuse of jargon. Phrases like "re-engineering, synergistic effect" and so on have become part of everyday language, particularly in regard to the written word. Such terminology leaves you with the sense of a new language being created - unnecessarily so in some instances - which can result in poor communications.

A driving force behind the Strategic Management Initiative across the public sector - and other reform measures currently taking place - is the requirement to improve customer services. Departments are now obliged to produce a customer services plan. Improving communications with our customers is a key factor and it is vitally important that information booklets produced by Government Departments are easily read and as user friendly as possible. This is a difficult challenge because it is often the case that the message to be transmitted is based on a complex set of legal principles and unravelling these complexities into plain language is not easy.

However, some of these problems can be overcome through the production of booklets which have clearly defined audiences. A person for example in the throes of a redundancy situation is not interested in the legislation or the concepts behind it, but rather, "what are my entitlements and rights". My Department has established a separate Information and Communications Unit. This Unit is examining ways and means of improving communications with our customers.

The Department, for example, recently launched its own Internet Web Site which contains information on our activities. This was a mammoth task given the very wide range of activities and responsibilities of my Department. This initiative is a step in the right direction on the way to improving customer services and communications.

And in this regard, I notice that your Guide makes reference to the possibility of decisions of the Employment Appeals Tribunal being available on the Internet before the year end. While this may be possible technically, there are some issues as to how much information the Web Site should contain. I am in favour of providing as much information as possible, however, I recognise that there may be sensitivities about divulging certain pieces of information such as home addresses. The Tribunal have been asked to examine the position in consultation with my Department. I am sure we will come to the right solution in the interests of our customers.

It should always be remembered that the Employment Appeals Tribunal is a very important forum in the whole Employment Rights area. Last year, for example, it dealt with in excess of 3,500 claims from people seeking redress. The majority of these claims related to Redundancy, Minimum Notice and Unfair Dismissals. The Tribunal is now 31 years old and in effect it was one of the first examples of Social Partnership in the State. The tribunal's importance in providing an inexpensive means of redress cannot be overstated. In the beginning it dealt with Redundancy cases only. Its remit since that time has expanded significantly with the introduction of the Unfair Dismissals Act, 1977 and various other pieces of legislation to the present position in which it can hear cases under more than 10 Acts.

In addition, the Minimum Wages Bill is due for enactment by April of next year and the Tribunal will have an important role to play here. I am optimistic, however, that the flow of work to the Tribunal from this Bill, when enacted, will not be significant and this will come about if all parties concerned pull together and accept the spirit against which the minimum wage provisions are being introduced.

The Tribunal itself continues to improve its services to its customers. The waiting period for cases to be heard has reduced in recent years. There is a constant self evaluation taking place with a view to making further improvements and the setting up of a Consultative Committee comprising Tribunal Members, the Social Partners and my Department is an important element in that regard. My Department is also proactive in seeking improvements and lend support to the Tribunal in terms of policy guidance, staffing and funding.

We read every day that it is a good time to be Irish. The unemployment rate is now close to what many economists regard as full employment. It is obvious to me that Partnership arrangements have worked. Our focus now has to be on developing further, intensive, measures to improve the position of the long-term unemployed and the disadvantaged members of our society. Perversely, despite the economic boom, the numbers being made redundant continues to rise.

Notified redundancies to my Department in 1998 were 10% higher than in 1997 and the trend has continued up to June of this year. In fact, the mid year figure would suggest that notified redundancies in 1999 will be higher than the 1998 figure of 12,893 - by as much as 20%. Redundancy can be a traumatic experience even at times like now, when the prospects of finding other employment have never been better. The Government's 'Employment Action Plan, 1999' recognises these difficulties and sets out a holistic approach for addressing such problems. In particular, strategies for improving employability and preventing long-term unemployment are contained in that Action Plan.

The nature of the redundancies in terms of sectors is wide-ranging. There have been significant losses in what might be termed traditional labour intensive firms and in high tech firms also. The conclusion to be drawn is that no sector is safe from the harsh realities of redundancy. I alluded earlier to the use of language and the trend towards jargonism in today's society. The word "redundancy" conjures up images of times gone past when quite clearly this is not the case. When we talk about redundancies in 1999 it somehow startles us back into the reality that everything is not fine. We, therefore, cannot afford to be complacent and the figures which I have just quoted bear this out.

I think that this is an appropriate forum to mention that active consideration is now being given to a revision of the £300 ceiling which is currently used for the calculation of statutory redundancy under the Redundancy Payments Acts. This ceiling is fixed by reference to average earnings as per the Transportable Goods Industry. The latest figures available in my Department from the Central Statistics Office show that average earnings in that industry are close to the statutory ceiling, now set, at £300. The ceiling was last revised in 1994. My Department will be consulting the Social Partners and other relevant parties in this regard in the near future.

I have already outlined how the workload of the Employment Appeals Tribunal continues to grow. Against this backdrop I read your "Guide to Presenting Cases to the Employment Appeals Tribunal" with great interest and, importantly, I understood it. It is testimony as to how it should be done. I'm sure that your officials will use it to great effect. Indeed, I am sure the Guide will be a valuable reference source for anyone presenting before the Tribunal. I wish you well with it and I have no hesitation in commending it as an example of a job well done!