This article is adapted from Morning Memo, The Journal’s daily business and economics newsletter. You can sign up for the newsletter in the box below.

WHEN IT WAS first announced almost a year ago, it sounded like a radical plan to modernise working practices once and for all; a law that could finally give Irish workers the right to a better work-life balance. 

Tánaiste Leo Varadkar kicked off 2022 by mooting plans to enshrine remote working provisions in law via the Right to Request Remote Working Bill 2021. But this week, TDs are attempting to hammer something out in the Dáil – and it’s not sounding too crash hot from an employee’s point of view. 

For a start, that bill no longer exists in its original form, as it’s now lumped in with the Work Life Balance and Miscellaneous Provisions Bill 2022. This covers a range of entirely unrelated legislation such as new measures to help people affected by illegal birth registration.

This kind of law-making – creating bills that, like grandma’s nightgown, cover everything – makes it much more difficult for TDs to meaningfully debate what’s at issue on any individual part of a bill within parliamentary time constraints. 

Last night in the chamber, Labour TD Aodhán Ó Ríordáin accused the Government of trying to “rush through” the laws without proper “debate and scrutiny”. He believes the coalition is trying to enact ”watered-down rights for workers”. 

And Social Democrats TD Catherine Murphy stormed: “This is typical of what we see in December and it is hugely disappointing… to have the debate this evening guillotined to 60 minutes is a joke.”

Of course, it would be a big deal for any government to make laws that tell company bosses what to do. But that’s exactly what opposition politicians – along with a majority of Irish workers – are hoping the coalition will ultimately do. 

The Tánaiste had wanted the law published by Christmas. But that won’t happen. As of this morning, in terms of Dáil debates, the bill has completed stage three out of five. This means it’s quite a way off from its Seanad debates or being signed into law by President Michael D Higgins. 

Revealing plans for remote working laws back in January, Varadkar had mused: “I want it to be a choice. I want workers to be able to work from home or remotely or hybrid if they want to. So long as the business get done and services are provided, employers should facilitate it.”

In parliament yesterday, Ó Ríordáin pointed to an Ireland Thinks/Labour Party poll showing that some 71% of people believe in the right to flexible work. “Instead, we are getting a right to request it,” the TD said.

As it stands, you must be an employee for six months before you can even request work-from-home arrangements. Ó Ríordáin, backed by the Joint Committee on Enterprise, Trade and Employment, wants that stipulation removed so that new employees can also apply for it.

And he revealed: “We know the gains made by workers during the pandemic on flexible work are being eroded and employers are more frequently demanding that employees return to the office.” 

Catherine Murphy is also adamant that employers must not be given a choice. The TD said working practices have changed since the pandemic and there can be “no going back”. 

She told the Dáil during last night’s debate on the bill: “A right to request working from home does not go far enough. The default position should be that flexible working is permissible. It should not be at the whim of employers to accept or reject it.”

Many jobs can be done remotely without the loss of productivity, and “the Government should not pretend otherwise”, Murphy went on. 

The coalition “needs to do more than make minor incremental changes in this area”, the TD insisted, adding: “There can be no going back to the old working practices. To ensure overdue and long-lasting reform, plans must include a legal right to work remotely.”

Sinn Féin’s Louise O’Reilly pointed to one proposed section of the law that would force workers to state the reason they are seeking remote working arrangements.

She argued: “Why should workers have to talk about their personal circumstances? 

“Why should their personal circumstances form part of the consideration for a remote working request? 

“In my mind there is a paternalistic aspect to this, which will mean requests for remote working will not be equally considered.”

O’Reilly also fumed over part of the proposed legislation that would make employees state exactly where they intend to work from. 

“So long as the worker is based in the State, what business is it of the employer where they will be located for the purposes of their work?… We are talking about adults here. They are not kids,” she said. 

All in all, it looks as though any genuine balancing up of workers’ rights as against those of their bosses are – as ever – a long way off.