Why can’t McDowell deal like Brennan?
These would have resulted in savings of in excess of 30 million the same amount that the Justice Minister Michael McDowell's proposals are expected to save, but without the closure of four prisons.
Prison management dismissed the POA proposals without the benefit of due consideration.
Their package was the only way forward, they said, and besides, the POA proposals would be in breach of Sustaining Progress. Really?
Recently, Aer Rianta agreed a package of productivity measures with employees in their catering department. It is reported that the deal is worth 10.8% over and above Sustaining Progress.
Among the measures that Aer Rianta and their workers agreed are changes in work practices and shift patterns and a reduction in overtime. Doesn't that sound familiar?
Because the package combines a real and tangible increase in employee benefits with a cost reduction to the company.
This is what is known in industrial relations as gain-sharing. As it is clearly not a cost increasing claim, it is fully compliant with the terms of Sustaining Progress.
Now isn't it very strange that Transport Minister Seamus Brennan's officials embrace such a philosophy to the benefit of all concerned, not least the taxpayers, while Mr McDowell's officials refuse even to consider a parallel package for the prison service?
Can it be that two government ministers are following different industrial relations policies, or is it the case that Mr McDowell is more interested in confrontation and provocation that an agreed solution that benefits all concerned?
Patrick Jordan,
St Patrick's Institution,
North Circular Road,
Dublin 7.
