Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am sure every Member is extremely concerned with regard to the situation in respect of industrial relations at present. We must ask ourselves how, in July 2009, we have arrived at a point where proven and expensive mechanisms for resolving industrial disputes have failed. At a time of unprecedented economic and difficulty for our country, we find ourselves in a strike position. People believe that this strike relates to pay but it is sending out the wrong message with regard to our country.

Despite the difficulties the Government has been experiencing, the international perception of Ireland was that at least some attempts were being made to resolve and deal with those difficulties. We may differ in respect of the decisions the Government has taken but the message being sent out into the international arena has the potential to become absolutely catastrophic in the context of the position vis-À-vis employment in this country. Some 418,000 people are currently on the live register, the message is being sent out that Ireland is in a strike position. That begs the question as to how we have arrived at a point where our industrial relations machinery has not been able to resolve the problem.

The Taoiseach has placed his personal credibility on the line on a number of occasions in respect of social partnership. I understand that this is not a simple problem and that there aspects which will prove difficult to get right. However, the Association of Electrical Contractors of Ireland made an arrangement with the Construction Industry Federation, CIF, which was subsequently appealed to the High Court. What is the Government's view in respect of whether that arrangement is legally binding? Does the Government have an opinion on the matter? Has it been advised by the Attorney General, as the legal officer to the State, that the agreement entered into a number of years ago is legally binding? That is the net question and the answer to it will provide an indication of the nature of the solution which might be arrived at. In the interests of finding a solution to this complex issue, will the Taoiseach indicate whether it is the view of the Government that the agreement to which I refer is legally binding?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

It is important to state that it is clear a situation has arisen that is damaging to the specific industry in which the industrial dispute has arisen and which potentially has wider damaging effects for the economy. I note that a Private Notice Question has been scheduled for 5 p.m. this afternoon regarding the details of the dispute and it is important that rather than emphasising the merits of their respective cases, the House should call on both sides to use the industrial relations machinery and considerable expertise that is available in the State. Every industrial relations dispute is a matter of deep regret and it is important to be prepared to ensure both sides use the available machinery and to try to resolve this dispute quickly.

On the question of registered employment agreements, pay in the electrical contracting sector is set out in a registered employment agreement that sets legally binding minimum rates for the industry, which covers electrical contractors. Up to last year, the increase was calculated through an analogue pay comparison exercise, based on the pay of electricians outside the contracting industry. While certain legal challenges have been brought to the agreement, the issue is that of an industrial relations dispute, based on an existing registered employment agreement, which must be resolved through the use of the industrial relations machinery. I believe that process should be used to the full.

Enda Kenny (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

With respect, that reply does not answer the question. My concern is about the message that is going out about Ireland and the position in which we find ourselves, whereby public perception is that a strike is being held on the basis of a pay increase. That is fine until people begin to understand that 418,000 people and rising now are on the live register and that companies with major productivity concerns are being affected by this dispute, despite having had neither hand, act nor part in it. There has been evidence to this effect from Diageo, Cadbury and a number of major infrastructural projects that are under way at present.

This issue arose neither today nor yesterday but has been signalled for some time, and since last November in particular. The point is that although everyone will call for both sides to come together and to use the State mechanisms to resolve this issue before it reaches a potentially catastrophic position, a decision cannot be made until there is evidence of what is the answer to the question I raised. At the time when the Tánaiste reported to her Cabinet colleagues on this matter, surely there was an obligation for the evidence and advice of the Attorney General to be given as to whether the agreement is legally binding. If it is legally binding, then there is one answer, while if it is not, there is a different answer. While using the mechanisms of State and if it is legally binding, it may be that the money due will be paid and agreement then will be reached on a freezing of rates or whatever. I understand there is room to drop both the claim for a decrease or cut back in wages and the claim for an increase in wages, depending on the resolution of the question of whether this agreement is legally binding.

I note the Taoiseach has made a strong case a number of times about social partnership and I have heard the comments of the President in this regard. Has that question been addressed in the briefing given by the Tánaiste to her Cabinet colleagues? As this question was not fully and finally signed off by the Labour Court, what is the Government's response to that? Is the agreement therefore legally binding or not? The answer to that question leads to a solution of this issue. This strike will end through discussion and dialogue. However, central to such discussion and dialogue will be the answer to this question. The Taoiseach does not wish to see any further deterioration in Ireland's employment situation or progress, as we are in dire straits as it is. However, this problem has gone on since last November and I do not want the legal mechanisms for resolving industrial disputes to fail to such an extent that the message goes out about Ireland that, in the midst of the greatest economic and unemployment crises it ever has faced, workers in the electrical sector are on strike for a pay increase, particularly given that 418,000 other people are signing on the live register. I again ask the Taoiseach to address this central question. Has the Government received advice? Has the Tánaiste briefed her colleagues as to whether this agreement, in the Government's view, is legally binding or otherwise? Alternatively, will the Government be obliged to appoint an interlocutor or to seek adjudication from the High Court on that net question?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I explained to the Deputy, the general principle is that registered agreements such as this form the basis upon which rates of pay are set. Obviously, this is not simply a legal issue. I acknowledge there have been challenges by various employer bodies to the actual basis of the registered employment agreement, REA, itself. However, the position is that were it a simple case as outlined by the Deputy, I am sure the issue would have been resolved by now.

The Labour Court hearing on the electrical registered employment agreement took place in June 2008, when it held an hearing to consider an application to vary that agreement to provide for the 5% increase due from April 2008. However, a stay was placed by the High Court on the court proceeding with the hearing, following a challenge by a group of independent electrical contractors. This stay eventually was lifted by the High Court in October, to allow the Labour Court to proceed. Subsequently, over 11 days in January and February 2009, the Labour Court heard applications both to vary the existing electrical contracting REA and to cancel the registration of the REA. The proposed variation would have involved an increase to the minimum pay rates set out in the registered employment agreement. That application to vary was opposed by one of the bodies representing electrical contractors, which sought to have the registration cancelled.

On 26 February, the Labour Court made its decision in respect of the electrical REA. The lengthy decision covered the applications firstly to vary the agreement and secondly to cancel the agreement. In respect of the application to vary it, as there was no agreement among the employer bodies party to the registered employment agreement to so do, the application was refused. The court also rejected the application to cancel the agreement. Having regard to all the circumstances of the case, the court came to the view that the changes in the electrical contracting industry since the registration of the REA have not made it undesirable to maintain its registration. Accordingly, the court did not propose to cancel the registration of the agreement. That decision now is the subject of a judicial review challenge.

In the course of its decision, the court noted that, on balance, it was satisfied that as a matter of probability, rates of pay would decline in the sector in the absence of the REA. It therefore noted that while the case was adhering regarding the court, it indicated that it might be desirable to make recommendations on certain matters of an industrial relations nature - one should leave out the courts for the present - that were raised in the course of the hearings. None of the parties objected to it so doing and the Labour Court made recommendations in respect of rates of pay and the review of the REA, which are outlined in its lengthy recommendation.

The issue in this regard is simple. A dispute is under way but we have industrial relations machinery by which it can be resolved. It is important that everyone takes on the responsibility of getting this dispute resolved. I believe the means still exist by which this can be done using the industrial relations machinery, were people so minded. We have a voluntary basis for industrial relations in Ireland and cannot impose a solution. However, we need both parties to use the machinery that is available and to enter negotiations while minded to move from respective positions in a manner that will achieve an outcome that is fair and reasonable in all the circumstances.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

What steps is the Government taking, if any, to bring about a resolution of the dispute? This is a serious dispute because of the number of electricians involved and the number of sites and places of employment directly affected by it. It is also serious because of the potential knock-on effect on the wider economy. As the Taoiseach said, there is a voluntary system of industrial relations. The problem is that the nature and complexity of this dispute and the degree to which the industrial relations issues in dispute criss-cross with legal challenges means that it is unusual.

As the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, the Tánaiste has powers under the Industrial Relations Act 1990 to cause the Labour Court or the Labour Relations Commission to intervene in this dispute. Under section 38 of the Act, where a dispute affects the public interest, as this does, the Tánaiste has the power to ask the Labour Court to intervene directly. Secondly, where the dispute is of special importance, she has the power to appoint the Labour Court or some other body to inquire into it and make a report to her. This is the kind of dispute for which these powers were envisaged under the Industrial Relations Act. Is it intended that these powers will be used to bring the parties together? From what we have heard on the airwaves, there is quite a degree of disagreement between the parties. This is what happens in a dispute. Sometimes, the longer the dispute goes on, the more entrenched these positions become. It is in everyone's interest that this intervention is made sooner rather than later.

There have been problems with registered employment agreements. The Taoiseach referred to the court challenge taken by some electrical contractors to this registered employment agreement. There have been other court challenges to agreements in the hotel industry in respect of the joint labour committee system. The Government promised to bring in legislation to modernise the joint labour committee system and the registered employment agreement system. We have all heard of difficulties that arise in respect of electricians, hotels, catering, security and a number of other industries covered by registered employment agreements. The legislation has been promised for some time and does not appear to have advanced. Can the Taoiseach indicate when this will be progressed?

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I thank Deputy Gilmore for his comments. Powers are available under various Acts to a Minister, and in this case the Tánaiste, in respect of interventions in disputes. The use of that statutory power does not guarantee an outcome, nor does it provide us with the means by which an outcome may be achieved. At the request of the National Implementation Body, a reference to the Labour Court for further discussion was made. This took place on Saturday but did not prove successful. Contact continues between the Labour Relations Commission and both sides in the dispute. There is a need for both sides to be minded to use the process in a way that is beneficial in respect of an outcome to the dispute. The process of engagements behind the scenes, away from public view, between the Labour Relations Committee and both sides is part of that exercise. It is a matter of judgment in terms of how this proceeds. This is the best way in which to try to see how the matter can be resolved.

The Government is aware of the various provisions introduced by the 1990 Act to augment and supplement previous powers. We have a voluntary process of industrial relations for obvious reasons. It is open to the Minister to use these powers if we believe it will provide a resolution to the dispute. Simply bringing people to the Labour Relations Commission, or the Labour Court in this instance using these powers, does not in itself guarantee an outcome as we have seen from the engagement thus far. Contact and communication continues with both sides to see if it would be timely to return to the commission to see if a resolution can be found. These powers remain in reserve and are available.

Eamon Gilmore (Dún Laoghaire, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I accept that the Government and the Minister should not intervene in every industrial relations dispute that arises. It is a question of judgment when the intervention should take place. Where there is a dispute and an employer is involved, the approach outlined by the Taoiseach is appropriate. In this particular case, because of the extent of the dispute, the degree to which it involves employers and contractors directly and the knock-on effect for other employment and the wider economy, it is appropriate that the Government underlines the seriousness with which it takes the dispute and underlines the urgency that the Government should give to having it resolved by using the powers available under the Industrial Relations Act to bring people together.

Sometimes, when a dispute goes on for a bit, positions become entrenched and people say things that are difficult to resile from, while others are willing to throw oil on troubled waters. Where people are not talking to each other, are not willing to talk for whatever reason and we do not how long it will go on, there is a necessity for somebody to knock heads together. I suggest this is one of the occasions where the Government, through the Tánaiste, should use the services of the Labour Court or the Labour Relations Commission to knock heads together and achieve an early settlement.

The dispute will be settled eventually and it will be settled by people sitting down, talking to each other, working out the complexity of the issues involved and agreeing a settlement. It is better that the settlement of the dispute is secured earlier rather than later, in order to minimise the damage that a prolonged dispute will do to those involved, their employers and the wider economy.

Brian Cowen (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I agree that all Members of the House wish to see a resolution of this dispute as quickly as possible. We have industrial relations machinery in place. Engagement with the Labour Relations Commission has not been exhausted. We are bringing forward the Labour Relations Commission as a means of dealing with many of these issues without getting to the ultimate position of the Labour Court. The work of the Labour Relations Commission is not exhausted.

Quite apart from the need to resolve this dispute quickly, there is a need to find some means by which co-operative approaches can be established in the relationship between the parties. It is an issue in respect of pay, the strike and what arises out of that, the background to it and the need to improve relations. The Labour Relations Commission remains the best available option based on the engagement to date. The National Implementation Body, which has a strong status in industrial relations procedures, is the body that referred this matter to the Labour Relations Commission in the first place. We do not have a resolution to this dispute. We wish to see a resolution as soon as possible. I urge the parties to redouble their efforts to resolve the issues in dispute. The only way in which they can find an equitable resolution is through that method.

It is to be deeply regretted that attempts to resolve the dispute have so far failed but it is not an indication in any way of complacency on the Government's part regarding the use or non-use of statutory powers. The Government, through the independent industrial relations machinery available through the State aegis of the Labour Relations Commission stands ready and is engaged with the parties in an effort to find a basis upon which a resumption of discussions might have the prospect of success. That work is continuing and a precondition to success.