Éamon Ó Cuív Warns of Precarity for Secretarial Assistants
Éamon Ó Cuív spoke on 30 November 2021 about a bill governing the running of the House, focusing on pay scales and staffing. He argued that secretarial assistants face a large pay gap and precarious employment and called for urgent resourcing and recognition of their unique workload.
Pay scales and gap
Éamon Ó Cuív highlighted the secretarial assistance pay scale range cited in the debate, noting salaries moving from 24,223 to 46,888. He warned the difference at the low end is about 16,500 and that it can take up to 18 years to close that gap, a timescale he described as unacceptable given the precarious nature of the roles.
Unique workload of secretarial assistants
He underlined that secretarial assistants perform atypical, public-facing work with a heavy multitasking burden - handling constituency work, knowing many schemes, and dealing with whatever is in the public domain. He argued an actual job analysis would show unusually demanding conditions compared with ordinary clerical roles.
Precarity and funding responsibility
Ó Cuív stressed that the roles are precarious because employment often depends on the tenure of the elected representative. He said the matter of funding must be addressed and that a clear signal is needed that awarded money will be provided and paid to secure these posts.
Changing demands since 1989
Drawing on his own experience, he contrasted the current workload with 1989, when fewer staff, no emails, limited mobile phones and less media meant very different working conditions. He said the growth in committees, pre-legislative scrutiny and research means the modern workload is "literally worlds apart" and requires updated resourcing.
Public expectations and staffing realities
Ó Cuív described practical pressures in constituency offices - limited staff, time off, sickness and tasks often done personally by representatives, such as diary management. He warned against underestimating the work of staff and urged a fearless public discussion about properly resourcing parliamentary work.
We publish thousands of recordings to make Irish politics transparent and resistant to manipulation. Spotted an error? Report it — together we are building a reliable archive of Irish politics.
Minister, I am pleased to be able to come in here today and I am talking about the bill, it is an important bill, but it does cover the whole running of this House and there are two things I would like to address, the first thing is that when you do examine the pay scales of the secretarial assistance going from 24,223 to 46,888 and when you compare particularly at the low end the difference between them and our parliamentary assistance, it is something like 16,500 of a difference at the bottom of the scale and after 18 years you do close the gap but it is a long way and it is a very long time to have served as a secretarial assistant to be there 18 years because as you know this is precarious employment because a lot of secretarial assistants only last in the job as long as we last and the turnover of this House as you have seen in recent elections is quite dramatic. I would make a general point, I have believed that the gap between low paid in the public service and the top paid has widened and widened in real terms since the 60s and that has been retrograde in society. Now I think it is also important to look at the work of our secretarial assistants because it is not the same as somebody working in a big office as a clerical officer because our secretarial assistants have unique features, they are doing a public facing job, they have a huge work burden, they have to multitask and know about many schemes all at one time, whatever is in the public domain at any time. When they are working in the constituency office and they are virtually working on their own, they are virtually working on their own, on their own self-initiative, they cannot be ringing you about everything. And I think if you did an actual job analysis of what they do, you would find that they are atypical workers with very, very unusual work conditions and as I said, their work is quite precarious because it is only as good as long as the people that are elected last. And I believe that that issue needs to be addressed urgently. I am not sure how the monopolisms work, I do know in the ultimate you have to provide the money and that is where you come in and make a clear signal that if money is awarded that it will be there and paid. But I think we, as a collective, have to look at this issue of people like this who are so crucial to the operation of democracy in this country. Now, the second issue I would like to address, and nobody has addressed it yet here, is the bigger, well not the bigger question, but the parallel question as to whether we are resourcing ourselves properly to do the work that the public wants us to do, and whether we actually respect democracy enough to believe that it is vital, that our work is vital, that our work is vital, and that we have to be resourced to do it properly. Now, they were talking about 1998 and years like that. I first came into this House as a Senator in 1989, and yes, we had one Secretary as a Senator in those days between three senators, or one Secretary between three senators. But the world was so different. There were no emails, everything came by post, so everyone had to do the onerous task of writing to you or typing to you. There were virtually no mobile phones, there was the odd brick phone, but your constituents did not have them in their pockets. They did not expect instant contact. There was very little media to be done in those days. The procedures of this House were totally different. The amount of paperwork coming, the complications of all the consultations that go on, the amount of research we have to do, it was all totally different. They are literally worlds apart. People talk about the change between 1920 and 1950, but the changes since 1989 and that 30 years have been just as dramatic when you analyse them. And I think we have to go with that so that we can do justice to the job. We did not have pre-legative scrutiny, we did not have all the committees that we all spent so much time in, preparing reports, doing detailed work, etc. It amuses me at times what the public think we have and what we have. I have often had people contact me and say, could you ask one of your staff to look at the diary and come back to me? The staff that does the diary in my place, because my staff are so, so crazy busy, is myself. But if you do not do it, then they have to do it. But if they are doing that, they cannot be doing something else for you. It just depends on how you divide the labour. But the reality is, we have two staff. They are entitled to holidays, they are entitled to breaks. They sometimes get sick and so on. So the idea of asking your staff is if you had a whole bevy of staff there and you had one for the diary and one for the constituency work of one type and one for preparing it for the parliament. It is not that way. And we all know it is not that way. But we are shy, we are afraid. Because the media might not like it. Or certain sections of the media who purposely do not want to understand the importance of democracy. I think we have to be fearless. I think we have to do something about this. It always reminds me of, many years ago, a lady rang my constituency office and she was complaining that, you know, I was getting paid effectively to get re-elected. In other words, that the people working in my constituency office were helping me to be re-elected. I noticed the number was a Dublin number because in those days people rang on landlines. So I rang her back and she was giving out about the constituency office and I said, by the way, you rang my constituency office and she said yes. And I said, you did expect the phone to be answered even though you were not in my constituency. And she said yes. And then she suddenly realised that she had put her two foot in and she started laughing. And I said, she was not the only one because people are ringing from all over the country. And we are, we do all of us collectively owe to all of our constituents, which covers all the people of the state. We do owe to all of those that we provide a good service. My belief is that the ordinary plain people of Ireland want us resourced to do the job. And what I'm suggesting is, yes, for those particularly who engage in committees and put a lot of time and effort into committees in this house, which is very, very time consuming, we should be given more support staff. And I'm saying that, and I know I'll be criticised by people who want to not understand the workload that is not only on us, but on our staff. So Minister, I do think we all collectively, and with no petty politics in this, need to make a stand for democracy in this house and do it fearlessly. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you for downloading 🙏
If you publish this material on social media, we would be very grateful if you tagged VideoParliament. It helps us reach more people and keep building a transparent archive of Irish politics.
