Louise O'Reilly (Dublin Fingal, Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

I join with others in thanking the members of the commission for the work they have undertaken. I want to specifically refer to section 8.4.5. I have not had a chance to read all of the report but I have engaged with that section with which I would be the most familiar.

In 2009, when I was a union organiser, my union joined an organisation called the 24-7 Alliance, which was mostly made up of shift workers. Fianna Fáil and the Labour Party were in government and as ever, with their usual regard for workers and workers' rights, they could see that workers' wages were under threat, specifically by the nature of the work they were doing because it was 24 hours per day, seven days a week shift work. The people who were represented by PDFORRA and the Representative Association of Commissioned Officers, RACO, were not allowed to be members of that association, or that alliance. They were prohibited from membership and, in fact, at our meetings, we used to put an empty chair at the table to symbolise that.

I spoke at length to members of the Defence Forces at the time. They felt very vulnerable and voiceless and very much left outside of a process that would have had profound implications for their pay and conditions. They were not allowed to be part of the alliance, although we knew we had their support.

The alliance continued into the following Government with the Labour Party and Fine Gael because the alliance was, of course, very necessary. Workers need to come together under the auspices of their trade union to defend themselves, sometimes against their employer and, indeed, sometimes against the Government.

I want to specifically refer to the section where the commission references that while it sees "no reason ... why full affiliation with ICTU could not be accommodated, it does recognise that there is greater complexity to taking this further ..." It goes on to mention "the absolute requirement for the Defence Forces to fulfil its aid to the civil power and aid to the civil authority roles i.e. to step in, without question ..." That is strike-breaking. That is essentially what that refers to. That is talking about people going to situations where there is an industrial dispute.

I do not believe it is beyond anybody to be able to resolve those issues but I think what the Defence Forces and I would like to hear from the Minister, if possible, is a commitment that they will not be used to break strikes and that through their affiliation with ICTU, they will be respected, their rights as trade union members will be respected and they will not be used in that way. I do not think it is in any way, shape or form necessary for the Defence Forces to have that fear but that is what is referenced here. The language does not directly say that is what it is but the Minister and I both know that is what it refers to. It is the undermining of industrial tributes because other than that, there is no difficulty with them being full members of the ICTU.

When we went in to negotiate pay agreements, however, we were sitting at the table and they were sitting in the next room. That was as much as they were permitted to be part of the process but they were not part of it; they were outside of the process. The old principle of trade unionism of nothing about us without us was left at the door because they were not allowed to participate. I do not believe the Minister has anything to fear from them being allowed to participate. They should be allowed to fully participate fully. I note that the Minister said he is not hostile to that. When he talks about affiliation to the ICTU, however, we need to have a discussion about what exactly that means. That means the men and women of our Defence Forces will be full trade union members and will act in accordance as trade union members. It does mean the dereliction of duty. Ambulance personnel are trade union members who play a vital role, as are nurses and doctors.

All these things can be accommodated but we need to hear a willingness from the Minister that he has a view that the Defence Forces can and should be collectively represented by the union of their choice and affiliated to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and all that goes with that. We need to hear that they will not be used to break strikes and will be allowed to be full members of the trade union and fully participate in that way. That is what those words mean. They do not say "strike-break" but that is what it means.

I remember when I was growing up, my father used to sing a song. I will not sing it but the words were, "The buses are on strike and we can't afford a bike, roll along, army lorries, roll along." That is a small concern but I do not think it is a concern that could not be gotten over. The focus needs to be on members of the Defence Forces being full and active members of their trade union because, believe me, that is the best hope they have of achieving decent pay and conditions.

See this speech in context