Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

1. To ask the Minister for Public Expenditure and Reform the nature of the sectoral agreements, commitments and understandings in place under the Lansdowne Road agreement; if he will publish full details of same; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [26605/15]

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I ask the Minister to outline the nature of side deals, sectoral agreements, commitments or understandings that are in place under the Lansdowne Road agreement and if he will publish details of those which do not feature in the substantive agreement.

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The context of the discussions that I initiated with the trade unions and associations representing public servants across the public service was the need to plan and provide for a measured unwinding of the Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest Acts. My aims were also to secure the continuation of the productivity measures introduced under the Haddington Road agreement, honour the Government's commitments under that agreement and provide for a continuation of the stable industrial relations agreement and structures in the public service which has served our recovery well. Any outcome also had to be consistent with our international obligations under the Stability and Growth Pact to manage our public finances in a prudent manner.

The Lansdowne Road agreement, if ratified by the trade unions, will extend the terms of the Haddington Road agreement to September 2018. Given the complex industrial relations processes within the public service, issues on matters of local interest are raised on an ongoing basis between sectoral management and trade unions, with or without the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission or involvement by my Department. I understand that at the time the agreement was being negotiated, the Labour Relations Commission was asked to resolve a number of sectoral discussions on matters of local interest. These discussions do not form part of the proposed public service agreement, are not part of the overall pay settlement and are not in the document on which public servants are being balloted. Copies of any agreed outcome to industrial relations issues in other sectors are not retained by my Department.

For the Deputy's information, the following issues were raised by Civil Service unions with officials of my Department and agreed with the assistance of the Labour Relations Commission. First, the previously agreed approach to resolving anomalies on pay between former Health Service Executive and Combat Poverty Agency staff transferred to the Department of Social Protection in 2010 will be applied from 1 January 2016. Second, various matters raised by the Civil and Public Service Union, including an outstanding claim for loss of "bank time" which was abolished in 2010, a review of pay and allowance structures for attendants in the cultural institutions, some anomalies highlighted by the union on leave entitlements and issues relating to the redeployment of some Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine staff are to be subjects of further discussion and-or referral to arbitration, as appropriate. Third, as a pilot, staff will again be able to take up to 1.5 days of flexi-leave per month, subject to an overall limit of 13 days per annum.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

My understanding from the Minister's reply is that it was coincidental that these discussions occurred at the time the Lansdowne Road agreement was being negotiated. The relevant public sector trade unions probably believed the talks were an appropriate time to raise these issues as it would allow them to return to their members with something that, while not part of the deal, would perhaps make the agreement a little more saleable.

I note the list of points the Minister raised. I have also heard media reports about issues such as the fixing of the registration fee for nurses, a flexitime system for assistant principal officers, recruitment to assistant principal grade being subject to open competition, outsourcing and the carrying forward of flexitime work arrangements of up to six days per quarter.

Outside the Lansdowne Road agreement is the Minister in a position to indicate how many of these types of issues have come back to him for approval?

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

When all the senior negotiators for every trade union in the public service have been in the same building, often on the same floor and in the same rooms, as the senior negotiators for each line Department for a protracted period of time - as the Deputy will know there is a good deal of waiting time in all these negotiations - bilateral discussions can take place on issues that are not part of the pay agreement but that have been niggling or outstanding for a long time. Sometimes those issues can be resolved over that period of time, when advantage is taken of the proximity of negotiators involving representatives of public servants and line Departments or agencies. That is not surprising. I have indicated the issues that were raised with my staff, for which I am responsible. There were other issues. For example, the Deputy instanced the registration fees for nurses and I know that issue was raised with the HSE staff and with the Department of Health negotiators who were there. Those are issues because there were anomalies and they were addressed and resolved bilaterally, but they are not part of this agreement.

Seán Fleming (Laois-Offaly, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I accept that point. It can be a useful tidying-up exercise and everyone believes in taking a practical approach to issues that can be dealt with. The Minister might comment on two issues that we were told came up in that discussion. One issue is the question of outsourcing. Some people believe that this agreement will restrict the level of outsourcing, which might be a value for money issue about which the Minister must have a concern. Outside the Lansdowne Road agreement, the Minister said that some of issues we just talked about may have an impact on Estimates in line Departments. Is it possible during a future Estimates debate that any concessions during the course of the year as a result of industrial relations negotiations could be flagged by way of a note from the line Minister explaining them? For example if there are three, four, five six or seven points teased out, some may involve a cost or some may be cost neutral. Is it in the public interest that people know what is going on?

Brendan Howlin (Wexford, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I do not think any line Minister has any difficulty in explaining what was agreed by their negotiators during the process. I want to make it clear that it is not part of the overall agreement and it is not part of what has been balloted upon. I will raise that with colleagues if people want to raise it with line Ministers.

In regard to the outsourcing question, we have a procurement process which examines value for money issues very rigorously. One of the issues, and this was raised with me directly by unions in the past, is to make sure that when one is comparing models, either procurement of a new service internally or externally, that one is comparing like with like and that all the factors would be taken into account. Clarity in regard to that was all that was provided. There will be, and will remain to be, in the provision of any new service a rigorous evaluation to ascertain what is the most efficient and cost effective way of providing that service to the public, whether it will be internally or externally.