Four cases involving workers' rights which were the subject of controversial rulings by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) could not have happened in Ireland, members of the Oireachtas Joint committee on European Affairs said today.
Speaking at the launch of a report on Lisbon Treaty and workers' rights, Clare TD Timmy Dooley said that the Laval, Viking, Ruffert and Luxembourg cases were all peculiar to the member states involved.
He said that the Lisbon Treaty would not institutionalise the ECJ judgements and "enshrine a neo-liberal agenda."
"Opponents of the treaty are basing this claim on article 52 (2) of the charter of Fundamental Rights but they fail to say that the Laval and other cases are based on existing treaties and not the Lisbon treaty", he said.
The Oireachtas report says that the Laval case occurred due to the manner in which Sweden implemented a EU directive on the posting of workers. It said that the Laval case, which has been highlighted by some on the "No" side in the current referendum campaign, could not and should not be linked to the Lisbon Treaty.
"They are two very different issues", it says.
The report states that the Laval case could not have happened in Ireland.
"This is due to the fact that Ireland not only has a statutory minimum wage, therefore complying with one of the core criteria set out in the Posting of Workers Directive, but it has a statutory minimum terms and conditions applicable to workers in vulnerable sectors covered by Employment Regulation Agreements - most notably in the construction sector - which are applicable to, and can be enforced against contractors based outside Ireland", it says.
Mr Dooley said that the other controversial cases could not have happened in Ireland either.
The report says that the ECJ in the Laval, Viking, Ruffert and Luxembourg cases also established some important principles which benefit workers' rights in Ireland.
"These include the right to collective bargaining, including taking strike action and the legitimacy to take strike action to combat social dumping," it says.
The second co-author of the report, Joe Costello of the Labour Party, said that the reason for compiling the report was to bring a sense of clarity to the debate on the Lisbon Treaty and workers' rights.
"From our detailed enquiry, it is clear that claims made by opponents of the Lisbon Treaty that it will undermine workers' rights or force a reduction in the minimum wage are completely false", he said.
Mr Dooley said that the European Union did not systematically take the side of employers against workers. He said that EU has always worked in the interest of workers in further and protecting their rights.
"There is nothing in the argument that the EU is neo-liberal and seeks to undermine workers rights," he said.
Asked whether the Government would introduce legislation to grant collective bargaining rights to trade unions Mr Dooley said that he understood that the Government was working with the social partners to address this issue
"Clearly when the right to collective bargaining becomes a fundamental component of EU legislation then, in my view, it follows that ultimately it will be dealt with here as we will have to comply with the conditions as set out in the treaty. This, obviously, is one of the positive elements of the Lisbon Treaty since it does set out in a fundamental and straight-forward way the right to collective bargaining is something that will be required and something that will ultimately be dealt with through negotiations with the social partners and the Government".
Deirdre de Burca of the Green Party said that the issue of collective bargaining rights was something that the Government could look at over the coming months
