ANALYSIS: WHEN TAOISEACH Enda Kenny and Tánaiste Eamon Gilmore address the conference of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions this week, close attention will be paid to any hint of the extent of the relationship they envisage between the Government and the unions.
Since the Irish trade union movement last met in conference two years ago the world of industrial relations has been transformed.
The two decades-long era of social partnership collapsed in the face of public service pay cuts, while in many parts of the economy it has become increasingly common for unions and employers to reach deals which trade pay cuts and/or changes in conditions for job security.
In the first 100 days or so of the new Government, its messages have been mixed for the unions. On the one hand it has stuck with the Croke Park agreement on public service pay and reform, albeit with regular warnings that it has to deliver. However, it is also about to change wage-setting mechanisms for hundreds of thousands of workers which could put it on a collision course with some unions.
But while Fianna Fáil-led administrations over recent years cultivated a close relationship with the unions, where stands the new Government? The strong links between the Labour Party and the unions are well known. Although in opposition Gilmore stressed that a Labour government would not be a trade union government.
Fine Gael in opposition adopted a more sceptical stance on social partnership. It opposed the controversial benchmarking pay increases in the public service and called for a ban on strikes in essential services.
In a speech to the National Economic and Social Council last month Kenny referred to “social dialogue and civic engagement” having an important role.
He said that while “it may well be the case that formal social partnership agreements are not appropriate to the current circumstances and issues that we face”, unions and employers should have the opportunities to engage with the Government and each other.
Old-fashioned social partnership was by no means just about pay. It gave the unions and employers enormous influence over large areas of government policy, not just in relation to jobs and the economy.
However, while social partnership undoubtedly contributed to the recovery from recession in the 1980s and to a long period of industrial peace, it has recently become increasingly criticised in some quarters for having contributed to the overall economic collapse of recent years.
When partnership fell apart in late 2009 over the then government’s decision to opt for public service pay cuts, the unions, employers and others lost the influence and access to those in power which they had previously enjoyed.
While the Croke Park agreement – which is an accord between an employer and its staff, not a social partnership agreement – was negotiated, the broader calls by the congress of trade unions for a different approach to economic recovery went largely ignored.
After the events of late 2009, it was virtually certain that there was no way back between the unions and the Cowen administration. However, signs have now emerged that the unions want to do business with the new Government.
In a speech at a private Department of Public Expenditure conference last Thursday, one of the State’s top trade union leaders, Shay Cody, general secretary of Impact, effectively called for a new social partnership system to be put in place.
He said the Croke Park agreement would benefit from being surrounded by the framework of a social partnership structure allowing insight for interested representative bodies in business, farming and the community and the voluntary sector.
“The trade unions are open to that. I believe that the other social representatives are. It is now a matter for Government to decide if this is to be developed and I believe they should.”
The Government’s attitude to any new form of social partnership remains to be seen. However, in opposition Kenny was a sceptic about the old structures.
In a speech in Mayo in 2007 after the negotiation of the Towards 2016 social partnership agreement, he raised questions about the democratic deficit associated with the process.
He said that in the expanding remit of social partnership, successive Fianna Fáil-led governments had bypassed troublesome elected representatives in the Dáil and created an entirely new, parallel and more pliable system of policy formation.
Irrespective of whether social partnership has a future, the Government, unions and employers have serious issues to discuss.
For example Ireland is obliged to transpose an EU directive covering workers provided by agencies before next December. Under this directive agency workers would have the same entitlements to pay, holidays etc as directly-recruited staff. However, a derogation is possible for a set period of employment – it is 12 weeks in the United Kingdom – but only if this can be agreed between the social partners in a member state, otherwise the equal treatment provision applies from day one on the job.
Separately, the programme for government contains a commitment “to ensure that Irish law on employees’ right to engage in collective bargaining is consistent with recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights”.
This is a hugely important issue for the unions. However, it is seen as equally crucial by employer groups who strongly oppose any suggestion of mandatory trade union recognition.
There is also the question of the important employment rights legislation, which fell with the last government.
Employers and unions again have differing views on what is needed.
So while pay may be off the agenda for the Government and many private sector employers for the near future, some process is going to have to be found to allow for discussions on other key issues of concern.
