Dell Redundant Workers Association's ResponseTo Minister Cannon's RefusalTo Implement Further EGF Interventions

DRWA Response To Ministers Refusal to Implement Further EGF Interventions

Dear Minister Cannon,

Firstly we would like to thank you for taking time out from your extremely busy schedule to meet with us on the 13th and 21st of April.
Secondly we would like to express our thanks for delivering two of our recommended Intervention proposals .

1. The extension /rollover of EGF specific CE schemes and
2. The implementation of an EGF website. Albeit you failed to advise in your letter dated the 30th

• When this Web site will be up and running.
• What information will this Web site contain?
• Will this web site advise EGF clients how and why so little of the €22,800,000  was spent ?

More importantly`
“Right ,how are we going to spend this money “

Your opening statement at our meeting on the 21st of April..
Attended by ourselves, Jan O Sullivan  TD.,Kieran O Donnell TD , Alan Kelly TD. , Fàs  and the civil servants directly responsible for EGF implementation .
As the meeting progressed and you argued for the implementation of the majority of our proposed interventions we stood back and thought at last we now have, not only a “CAN DO MINISTER “ but also an “ I want to do Minister “  In the short time that has expired from that meeting and the time we received your letter of refusals we have asked ourselves what became of that Minister we first met on the 13th April . The Minister that proclaimed a passionate support for the EGF client .The Minister we spoke of so highly to our members, Local TD’s, regional Mep’s and the local media.
What made this bastion of the EGF client turn so drastically in such a short time ...why now such an insouciant attitude towards the embattled EGF client..What indeed happened to our proclaimed Knight in Shining Armour, the Minister who spoke so passionately at our first meeting about doing what needs to be done to benefit the EGF client? You cannot imagine our  feeling of betrayal, We felt utterly betrayed as we read your letter in total disbelief.

Let us now concentrate on the “Letter of Refusals”  in response to our proposals for further interventions under the Dell EGF programme as discussed at our meeting in Leinster  House on the 21st April 2011.
The D.R.W.A believes that the purpose of the global fund is to provide an enhanced addition above and beyond that provided by existing state benefits and work schemes. A fundamental basis for the use of the Global Fund is that it should be completely separate from existing training schemes, employment subsidies and educational allowances already available to unemployed workers. Unfortunately due to a lack of foresight and the ability to think outside of the box the originators of the Dell EGF submission missed a golden opportunity to be innovative and create a real possibility of helping workers regaining their place in employment as rapidly as possible. Which is the ultimate aim of EGF ASSISTANCE? It is with this statement in mind that we the DRWA put forth these proposals which unfortunately seem to have been completely ignored.

1. Job Search allowances:   

A Contribution to EGF clients for the costs incurred while seeking employment.
This cost would include but not necessarily be limited to: 

• • Childcare / crèche places/expenses/vouchers
  • Public transport travel expenses / free travel passes / taxis
  • Mileage Expenses for use of own vehicle
  • Meal expenses food allowances
  • Overnight allowances
  • Stationary and CV printing costs

Government Response:  Refused

Reasoning behind refusal of implementation
No provision was made for Expenditure on job search allowances in the approved EGF programme and commission approval would be required
Given that this activity has already taken place, it is not clear what additional benefit would be gained from expenditure on reimbursing this activity.

DRWA Response

• Why was this intervention omitted from original application for EGF funding?Considering 96% of all EGF applications to date have included this intervention .
• “Commission approval would be required “This would imply commission approval was not sought in the first instance .Please advise if this is the case.
• Recovery of expenditure already paid out would benefit EGF clients financially.

1. Mobility Allowances:

A Contribution to EGF clients for the costs incurred while undertaking EGF training programmes
A mobility allowance that covers the cost of travel, meals and accommodation. For all EGF clients not just those completing FÀS training programmes.
An increase from the current 2002 mobility allowances currently in place for those EGF clients participating in Fas training programmes

Government Response:  Refused

Reasoning behind refusal of implementation
Given that this activity has already taken place, it is not clear what additional benefit would be gained from expenditure on reimbursing this activity.

DRWA Response

• The EGF fund should  provide an enhanced addition above and beyond that provided by existing state benefits and work schemes.
• Recovery of expenditure already paid out would benefit EGF clients financially.

1. Educational Training and up skilling PC /Laptop Allowance:

 Approximately  645 EGF clients have to date participated in some form of computer training course through FÀS or Private colleges. Unlike their counterparts in 3rd Level Educational providers they have been denied an allowance to purchase a laptop /Pc for home training and up skilling..
Once there course is completed their ability to continue to practice their new learned skills has been denied. Without this resource what they have learned will soon be forgotten.  Their ability to continue up skilling themselves via online training courses taken from them.. we are proposing that all students who have completed a computer related course and who so wish to continue their studies should be allocated an allowance to purchase a PC / Lap top  for home practice and self training . There are a number of websites available such as www.alison.com which provides free online courses.

Government Response:  Refused

Reasoning behind refusal of implementation

1. I would like to point out that a number of EGF beneficiaries have already been provided with computers or with funding to purchase computers as part of their training and education.
2. Where participation in courses run by private colleges required that a computer be purchased for participants this has been done and the cost included in EGF claims
3. The process for purchasing computers would have to meet public procurement requirements .
4. Given that the that the training would already have taken place  it is not clear what additional  educational benefits would result in purchase of computers for EGF clients.

DRWA response

• The majority of, if not all EGF beneficiaries that have already been provided with computers have partaken in 3rdLevel studies where the €3000 EGF training grant that severely disadvantages private college participants. As a result the  purchase or inclusion of a computer would push them over the €3000 threshold therefore making them ineligible for the course in the first instance.
• All private colleges recommended continuous practice on home computers as the inclusion of buying one as part of the course would exceed €3000 threshold .
• The EGF fund should  provide an enhanced addition above and beyond that provided by existing state benefits and work schemes. Simply remove the red tape -
• I would ask that the Department of Education to clarify point 4  as this statement does seem to read that computers are not educational .

Furthermore we are not aware of any student who attending a private college course that has been granted funds to purchase a computer.

4.       Contribution to training Grant:
 Contribution to the training costs incurred by the new employer: this covers a
recruitment incentive of up to € 1000  that can be granted to an employer who offers a long-term contract to a dismissed EGF Client worker and agrees to provide him/her with on-the-job training of up to 120 hours during the 3 months following recruitment.
 When the EGF Placement research centre has matched potential employees with Employers this grant aid could be used as an added incentive to ensure employment and cover any costs of induction training.

Government Response:  Refused

Reasoning behind refusal of implementation
I would point out that recently the government  announced jobs initiatives including a number of elements which will encourage employers to take on the unemployed.
Recruitment incentives along the lines proposed would not be the responsibility of the department of Education and  skills.

DRWA response

• The EGF fund should  provide an enhanced addition above and beyond that provided by existing state benefits and work schemes.

• Please advise who’s department would be responsible to implement these recruitment incentives .Did your department consult with  them .
• Please advise why Recruitment incentives and Work placement programmes were omitted from original EGF application .

1. CEB’S:   City /Count Enterprise Boards

EGF Clients do not have sufficient time to draw down their entire allocation of grant aid
EGF Clients Cannot obtain finance from banks etc to  co-finance their business start ups.

Due to the late start up of EGF interventions ( 12-14 month delay ) the majority of these EGF clients are going to lose out .
The DRWA are proposing that the governments share of the overall surplus of EGF funds be used to extend closing date for financial assistance to CEB clients and allow sufficient time to draw down their allocated funding .
DRWA response
This particular Intervention was not addressed in your correspondence of the 30th May.

We look forward to your response and would again like to extend our thanks and appreciation for your time and consideration.

Many Thanks

DRWA Committee .