National pay talks - Issue of local bargaining contentious

WITH the problems regarding displacement of workers by lower paid migrants practically disposed of, talks about a new national wage agreement finally commenced yesterday.

Whether the three-week time frame to conclude business between the social partners — Government, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) and the Irish Business and Employers Confederation (IBEC) — is overly ambitious remains to be seen.

While yesterday was largely for laying out of stalls, there would appear to be a significant gap between the unions and employers on a number of issues, not least of which is the question of a price for a deal.

What ICTU means by a “generous” settlement because it maintains conditions were never better, will be met with outright repudiation by employers, who claim that any pay deal will depend on recapturing competitiveness which has faltered.

The unions are seeking to impose what could be described as a two-tier pay package in that they want to include a local pay bargaining clause, which would give members in the private sector scope to pursue profitable employers.

This would be particularly attractive to those who would resent being tied to lesser off companies and therefore a smaller pay increase, but one which the employers are vehemently opposed to.

Asserting that there can either be a national wage agreement or local bargaining, but not both, the employers’ preference for a three-year agreement may not be achievable because of their adamant position on this issue.

Whether IBEC likes it or not, individual employers have been known to pay over the national pay rise when it suited them, despite their negotiating body insisting on pay restraint.

A precedent already exists to that effect, and it will be difficult to argue against the unions insisting that provision should be made for companies who can well afford to pay over the odds.

Even though Taoiseach Bertie Ahern has expressed support for the IBEC direction of three years, ICTU would rather a shorter span, possibly between one and two years.

There is common sense in Mr Ahern maintaining that to arrive at a shorter period of time in this process would be unnecessarily painful for everybody involved, but the unions have coupled the length of the agreement to the question of local bargaining.

Apart altogether from the two central planks to be argued in relation to the length of the pay agreement and the question of local bargaining, what has to be tackled is pensions.

So many people remain vulnerable in this area that it demands special attention, and different approaches by unions and employers will have to be resolved.

There appears to be acceptance that a longer-term agreement, possibly 10 years, would be appropriate for a programme laying out other policies relating to the wider social and economic issues.

Towards the end of this month the temperature will be somewhat gauged at the biennial conference of the country’s biggest public sector union, Impact, but well before then nurses will have made their voices heard.

The Irish Nurses Organisation begins its conference today and while it will be a crowded and contentious agenda, pay and conditions will certainly be to the fore.