Seanad debates
Wednesday, 7 May 2003
Adjournment Matters. - Industrial Disputes.
2:30 pm
Jim Higgins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Cathaoirleach for allowing me to raise this important matter on the Adjournment. With the permission of the House, I would like to share time with my colleague, Senator Ulick Burke.
Jim Higgins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The ongoing dispute at Michael Davitt House, Castlebar, County Mayo, as well as in Galway, Limerick and Kerry, is an unmitigated disaster. It is now in its sixth week, and there is absolutely no sign of a solution or resolution. There are no talks taking place. Without meaningful dialogue, the dispute will go on and on. The consequences are horrendous and causing enormous hardship.
It must be recognised that, at all times of the year but particularly now, farmers need money. They cannot have it, however, as they cannot sell their cattle because the only testing taking place is for brucellosis. No testing is taking place for tuberculosis. Today a young widow whose husband died nine months ago was literally crying because she could not get suckler and other agricultural grants owing to the situation, and she is but one of many.
My second point concerns farmers presenting for annual tests, particularly if the results for their herds prove inconclusive. They cannot get the cards back. There are now six weeks worth of cards stacked up in Davitt House, Castlebar, as well as in Galway, Limerick and Kerry. The pile is getting bigger all the time.
My third point concerns the national interest regarding cattle exports, which have been frozen. Jobbers, dealers and exporters are walking away from marts. The reason is fairly fundamental and understandable: lack of promotional opportunities. There is a huge disparity between the promotional opportunities available to those in the Department of Agriculture and Food next door to this building and those available in Castlebar, Galway, Limerick and Kerry. Within the offices there also are huge anomalies regarding such opportunities. In Castlebar, staff upstairs are on a ratio of one staff officer to seven. Downstairs it is one staff officer to 14.
Essentially I am saying to the Minister that this cannot go on, for it will escalate. Now staff in Clonakilty are out with the result that the number on strike has grown from 80 to 100 to 150 to 200, and it will become nationwide. The Minister says he is available. Being available is one thing – everyone is available – but unless we have meaningful dialogue and people sit down with something to offer, the problem will not be resolved. Meanwhile the strike continues. The pickets are in place and there is total stalemate. I remind the Minister that every dispute has a resolution, and the sooner people start talking, the better for everybody involved. The more disentrenched people become, the nearer we will be to a solution. The hardship, strike and industrial action simply cannot go on. That is the reason that I ask the Minister of State to ensure meaningful dialogue takes place straight away in order that the stand-off and stalemate will end once and for all for the betterment of all involved.
Ulick Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Senator Higgins for sharing his time with me. As we speak, 260 Department of Agriculture and Food personnel are on picket lines outside the various offices that Senator Higgins mentioned. This is unfair. The initial action of the Department was provocative in the extreme in the way in which personnel were told – by email at 4.20 p.m. – they would be taken off the payroll on 1 April 2003. It is a classic example of the provocation of personnel within the Department towards the farming community and the Department's staff. At the time of the foot-and-mouth disease outbreak those who sought their entitlement to fair promotional opportunities were guaranteed, albeit verbally, that immediately that crisis, which they helped to prevent, was over, their cases would be resolved. There have been many reports since. The personnel survey of local offices was complete in June 2002, yet we are still waiting. Those concerned have reached the end of their tether regarding commitments and undertakings from the Department. Now they have no alternative but to demand their rights. The Department's response has been to tell them that they are no longer on the payroll.
In Loughrea, in the Minister of State's constituency, personnel have been on the street for the last six weeks. What has he done to resolve the situation? Is he concerned about the personnel involved and their families, for they have had no pay during that time? How does he respond to this? How can any Department treat its personnel in such a cavalier fashion? The other side of the coin is the hardship of the farming community to which Senator Higgins referred. Farmers have no access to their cars or veterinary certification. They cannot have all their other entitlements dealt with. REPS applications and those regarding farm buildings are not being processed. The Department has stated they have been available since last Thursday to it and the Minister. We have heard nothing but a deafening silence in the interim.
In 2003 that is no way to treat personnel of high standing who have been doing a good job in the interests of the farming community and the Department, yet nobody seems to care about the situation in which they find themselves. Like my colleague, I ask the Minister of State to intervene as a matter of urgency to resolve the dispute. There is no justification for its continuing as the Minister of State and the Department have allowed.
Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the opportunity to update the House on the action being taken by the Civil and Public Services Union in the Department's local offices. In February CPSU members in those offices voted in favour of industrial action to secure what they considered improved promotion structures.
The industrial action commenced in the local offices with effect from Tuesday, 18 March 2003. Union members decided not to perform normal duties arising from telephone calls and faxes. In addition, they refused to perform duties at reception desks. The services provided from our local offices are essential to the farming community in the context of cattle movements to factories and marts, as well as the various direct payments to farmers which are critical to their income position.
Officials from the Department met CPSU representatives on 2 April but unfortunately no basis for a settlement emerged. Initially the CPSU had advised the Department that it would regionalise the dispute into four regions but following the meeting on 2 April it advised that the officers removed from the payroll in Galway, Limerick, Mayo and Kerry would not be returning to work until the dispute was resolved. It also indicated that it would be picketing the offices involved from 3 April. Non CPSU members in the Castlebar office have also refused to pass the picket since that date.
The Department's decision to remove staff from the payroll was not taken lightly. However, given that the CPSU staff members involved refused to perform core duties, arrangements were made to remove them from the payroll with effect from 2 April. Details of the staff numbers removed from the payroll are as follows: Galway, 75; Kerry, 45; Mayo local office, 51; Mayo headquarters office, 37; Limerick, 31; and Clonakilty, 23. I emphasise that normal duties are being carried out by CPSU members in offices other than those in Kerry, Limerick, Mayo, Galway and Clonakilty, County Cork.
I regret to have to say that the union's action is contrary to the existing Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and the new Sustaining Progress agreements and cannot be condoned by anybody. These agreements specifically exclude cost-increasing claims over and above the increases provided for under the agreements which have been agreed by the social partners and the Government. The CPSU claim is for more promotional posts, which would obviously involve higher costs for the Department. Moreover, all unions undertook in these agreements not to engage in industrial action in pursuit of claims.
The Department is examining the staffing of its local offices. However, any reorganisation involving upgradings would have to be dealt with against the background of the continuing need to control public finances. In any event, as I have said, the industrial action is contrary to the social partnership agreements. I am personally and publicly appealing to the union to instruct their members to resume duty.
Noel Treacy (Galway East, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like to state clearly that the scope for agreeing any deal is limited by the terms of the various social partnership agreements, the need to control public expenditure and the implications for other sectors of the public service, if a concession is made in this case.
I am aware that the actions being taken by the CPSU members are causing unnecessary hardship to the farming community We regret that the staff in the Department of Agriculture and Food are involved in such actions and we have requested them to return to work immediately. We are also aware that many members of the CPSU have no wish to prolong this situation.