Written answers

Tuesday, 8 February 2005

Department of Communications, Energy and Natural Resources

Industrial Relations

8:00 pm

Photo of Tommy BroughanTommy Broughan (Dublin North East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 264: To ask the Minister for Communications, Marine and Natural Resources his views on the recent breakdown in talks between ESB management and unions on a new pay agreement, staff shareholding in the company and pension rights; his further views on whether these talks can be restarted in the immediate future; the efforts he is making to ensure that agreement between staff and management is reached, including at board level; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [3883/05]

Photo of Noel DempseyNoel Dempsey (Meath, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I do not have primary responsibility within the Government for industrial relations issues. The present difficulties between ESB management and the ESB group of unions are matters to be resolved by the parties within the context of the industrial relations machinery available to them. This includes the process established by the Labour Court currently being facilitated by Mr. Peter Cassells.

That said, it is my understanding that there is a willingness on both sides to find a way forward and that Mr. Cassells is engaged in efforts to bring the two sides together again. Given the importance of industrial peace in this sector for the economy in general, it is my sincere hope that these efforts will be successful.

In regard to the matters at issue, it is public knowledge that the claim of the ESB group of unions includes an increase in the employees' current 5% shareholding in the company to 19.9%, an 18.5% pay increase and a resolution of the company's pension deficit. All of this is separate from and additional to increases under Sustaining Progress. Considerations of national competitiveness, the partnership approach to pay in the economy and even the long-term future of the ESB itself raise serious questions about the appropriateness of these claims.

The question of shares is one for the Government as shareholder and they are not within the gift of the company. While I note from the ESB group of unions statement of 14 January that they now appear to have reduced their additional shareholding claim from 14.9% to 9.9%, I restate that Government policy on employee shareholding is clear and does not allow of a shareholding beyond 5% in the absence of a wider transaction affecting the company.

While my Department is keeping in touch with developments, I do not believe that intervention by me at any level is appropriate at present.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.