IRISH FERRIES:
"A SINKING FEELING"

Irish Ferries has rejected outright a proposal to resolve the continuing dispute between the company and the Trade Union movement put forward by the Labour Court on 14th November 2005. Irish Ferries intend replacing over 500 Irish seafarers with foreign seamen, paying wages of one-third the current Trade Union Rate

Three days following the Labour Court recommendations,

"Management representatives yesterday held direct talks on the outsourcing plan with seafarers on board Irish Sea vessels the Ulysses and the Isle of Inishmore.

"The 543 workers on the Irish Sea routes have been offered the choice of redundancy or continued employment on reduced pay and conditions. The company says 90 per cent of the employees involved have applied for redundancy. It is understood the purpose of the ongoing meetings with crew on the ships is to ascertain the current views of staff and to explain the company's intentions." (Irish Times, 18.11.2005).

The company's stand increases the difficulties faced by the Government in its attempts to secure a new Partnership deal.

Unions have decided not to enter talks on a successor to Sustaining Progress in the absence of specific commitments from the Government on measures to prevent exploitation of workers.

The talks had been due to begin on 16th November 2005, but have now been postponed indefinitely.

The unions' stance arose directly as a result of the Irish Ferries controversy.
On 17th November 2005, SIPTU began balloting workers from Irish Ferries for strike action.

Labour Court Recommendation

In a recommendation, the Court said the company should not proceed with its plan to lay off up to 543 seafarers and replace them with cheaper labour from abroad.

It told the company to honour a three-year agreement on seafarers' pay and conditions, reached with unions in June last year.

The recommendation was rejected within hours by the company, which described it as being "incapable of acceptance and implementation".

It repeated its assertion that it had no choice but to implement the redundancy and outsourcing programme in order to ensure it remained competitive.

Unless the Government moves to prevent the company from proceeding with its plan, which involves hiring agency seafarers on hourly pay of €3.60, it is unlikely that unions will enter Partnership talks.

The outsourcing plan has been condemned by Taoiseach Bertie Ahern, who has said it remains to be seen whether the company "gets away with" it.

However, both Mr Ahern and Minister of State for Labour Tony Killeen have expressed doubts in the Dáil about the potential for Government action to stop the company.

"The Taoiseach has ruled out emergency legislation to prevent Irish Ferries from laying off 543 staff and replacing them with cheaper foreign workers." (Irish Examiner, 16.11.2005).

In its recommendation on the dispute between the company and Siptu, the Labour Court said the conduct of "orderly industrial relations" required that parties honour agreements.

The company, it said, had not made out a "sufficiently compelling case" to justify unilateral termination of the agreement reached with unions in June last year on seafarers' pay and conditions.

Accordingly, it was recommending that the company honour the agreement of 2004 and that the parties resume negotiations on such modifications as were considered necessary.

In a second recommendation, the court found in favour of a Seamen's Union of Ireland claim that members who wished to remain at the company ought to retain their existing terms and conditions of employment.

The company also rejected this recommendation. It has offered its 543 seafarers on Irish Sea routes the option of redundancy or continued employment, but on reduced pay and conditions.

Union officials said this would mean national agreements were not "worth the paper they were written on".

The Taoiseach stated that the Labour Court was "the proper arbiter" of good industrial relations practice. "I would hope that both parties would respect the decision of the court."

Shares in its parent company, Irish Continental Group, fell by 18 cent, or 1.7 per cent, to close at €10.47, after the Labour Court recommendations were delivered.

An application by the company to re-register its Irish Sea vessels to Cyprus, meanwhile, has been turned down by the Department of the Marine.

'Naked' Bertie

"The ferry company's proposal to shed its Irish-based seafarers and replace them with low-cost agency workers from Eastern Europe has been roundly condemned by the Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern, and by the Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment, Micheal Martin.

"While the Minister of State for Labour Affairs, Tony Killeen, recently told the Dail that over forty recommendations arising from an internal review of the Labour Inspectorate were due to be brought to Cabinet shortly, he did not offer the concrete guarantees sought by unions to combat jobs displacement, unfair labour practices and gross exploitation." ('Liberty', November, 2005, SIPTU monthly journal).

Too right, Deputy Killeen didn't even say 'boo'—a similar exercise is being carried out in his own constituency at Shannon Airport by the Dublin Airport Authority involving 500 Trade Unionists in a 'take-it-or-leave it' offer, despite local Trade Union agreements. This dispute has now been referred to the National Implementation Body.

Estimates 2006

"Despite the lack of provision for any new partnership deal, Mr. Cowen said he fully supported social partnership.

"I believe it's been one of the major stabilising influences that has brought us the sort of economic and social progress that we have,' he said." (18.11.2005)

You have the express opinion of several of Fianna Fail's 'high-fliers' but not a single Cabinet statement on Irish Ferries : that is the essence of this industrial stand-off. The most silent element of the Cabinet, of course, is the Tanaiste and her PD colleagues. Bertie can 'huff and puff' for ever but if he doesn't act and Irish Ferries gain the day, the trickle will become an industrial tsunami.

In his Estimates 2006 presentation in the Dail on 17th November 2005, Mr. Cowen made no provision for a new Partnership Deal and any pay rises it may contain.

"Consequently, estimates for salaries, wages and pensions are all notional, since there is as yet no pay deal for the public sector for 2006.

"But there is provision for the employment of an additional 3,000 public sector staff despite a benchmarking promise to cut the number of public servants by 5,000.

"With 290,000 already on staff, wages take up 34.5% of next year's total estimates while another 4.2% of the estimates total will pay for public sector pensions.

"Together, wages and salaries will account for 19 billion Euro of the Government's entire 48 billion spend." (Irish Examiner, 18.11.2005).

---

"Irish Ferries Shareholders' sinking feeling"

The contrasting views were reflected in the contrasting notes published by the two major brokers. Davy's work entitled Battle of Wills blasted the Labour Court for locking the company into an "uncompetitive cost base'' and predicted that management will regardless tackle the cost base and win approval for its voluntary redundancy programme.

"Clearly the current uncertainty will drive the share price lower but if you believe that this is too big an issue for management to give in to, then it has to be an opportunity to buy into this weakness", according to the Davy analysis. However, Goodbody was having none of it. Its report, A Sinking Feeling, found "few simple solutions to the current impasse'' and predicted that the "company's rejection of the Labour Court ruling will probably advance a strike'' and make worse ICG's short-term financial problems" (Sunday Business Post, 20.11.2005).

---

"Political detractors claim that Mr. Ahern's Dail outburst was more a move to keep SIPTU and their Labour Party allies on side—as potential coalition partners—rather than a threat to frustrate Irish Ferries “restructuring”.

"But it may also have been intended to keep the wider trade union movement peaceful for a few stressful weeks until the ICTU secures a mandate on October 25, 2005 to enter negotiations for a seventh, successive social partnership agreement." (Gerald Flynn, Sunday Independent, 2.10.2005).

A New Year:
An Old Down
Hark Free Collective Bargaining!

Well, Gerald O'Flynn's October 25th prediction is beginning to appear more and more remote. And, despite a certain snide criticism from several quarters, Jack O'Connor's premonitions are a lot closer than we might think. And as the day of industrial reckoning approaches, an air of caution appears to have descended on many of the long-time advocates of Free Collective Bargaining!

"Private-sector unions are preparing to hit employers with a wave of pay claims in anticipation of there being no new national agreement.

"Siptu, the State's biggest union, is to write to its 120 branches next week instructing them to begin drawing up claims for more than 50,000 members whose current deals expire at the end of December, 2005

"Other unions including the ATGWU, Amicus and the Irish Bank Officials' Association are also preparing claims on behalf of workers due to receive pay increases in the new year.

"The prospect of a spate of pay claims will cause deep concern to the Government and employers, who argue that wage restraint is vital if the economy is to remain competitive.

"A round of such claims is inevitable, however, given that the terms of Sustaining Progress expire on December 31, 2005, for workers in many sectors of the economy.

"Formal talks on a successor deal had been due to begin this week, but have been postponed as a result of Irish Ferries' plan to replace up to 543 unionised seafarers with cheaper migrant labour.

"Unions say they will not enter talks in the absence of Government guarantees on measures to prevent displacement of jobs and exploitation of workers.

"With no sign of a resolution to the Irish Ferries row in sight, it is increasingly unlikely that partnership talks will begin before the end of the year." (Irish Times, 19.11.2005).

Business & Finance: A Management view on Partnership

Partnership:

"There is little real appetite within the unions to bring it to its knees and any debate on this is kept to the margins." (B&F, November 3, 2005).

"How has social partnership contributed to a more equal distribution of wealth in society in the last 17 years?" asks Brendan Ogle who represents ATGWU members in ESB and who does not hide his disdain for the partnership process. "If it hasn't, then it has failed. The division between rich and poor in this country is growing in an era of social partnership. That's a black mark .

"Our trade union membership and density levels are falling below which is sustainable in the long term. That is suicide by a thousands cuts. We are failing to make any inroads in recruitment in a growing private sector. That is a black mark.

"Against all of that we have the highest levels of poverty in the EU. Our influence as a movement comes from the collective power of our members and it is about how we as a movement harness our collective power.

"There are more powerful ways of harnessing it than at a steak dinner in Dublin Castle every four years," says Ogle.

"We have a legion of trade union officials who have never negotiated a pay claim. What have they been doing? They are not trade union officials—they are industrial policemen. For the last 15-odd years, they have been running around the country enforcing the agreements with their members. Horror of horrors if partnership came to an end—they might actually have to go out and negotiate one themselves." (Brendan Ogle, Business & Finance magazine, 3.11.2005).

"And it is for this very reason that relatively few trade unionists, even those who are likely to publicly speak out against partnership, have any real appetite for doing away with the structures that have delivered relatively good results over the past decade.

"There is a huge element of pragmatism in this," says a representative of a smaller craft union that traditionally votes against partnership but happily goes along with it.

"If you are a trade union representative representing different categories of workers in different employments all over the country, to up stakes now and service all of those industries and membership would be a huge task. You will have to go foot slogging all over the place to service each one independently. It's a monstrous task—it would demand constant attention, day-in-day-out, whereas the national approach is a much easier way to do it. No matter what he might say publicly, Jack O'Connor [SIPTU general president] will have been thinking about just how he could possibly run SIPTU properly without partnership." (ibid).

In the above article, the journalist, Fearghal O'Connor goes on to state that in reality lower-paid workers would probably be even worse-off with collective bargaining:

"…because their bargaining positions are weak".

"By contrast, nurses, bank officials, surveyors, engineers and many skilled public sector workers are somewhat hamstrung by national agreements—skills shortages mean that free-for-all bargaining would suit them down to the ground." (ibid).

"The long-term SIPTU relationship with partnership would have been driven by people who are no longer there," says one observer. "Jack O'Connor wouldn't be seen exactly in the mould of Des Geraghty. You could speculate that if Geraghty and those around him were there it would never have been let get to the stage it is now at." (Business & Finance, 3.11.2005).

Jim Larkin

What did Big Jim Larkin always warn us against:

"Don't submit your minds to any one man. Think these problems out for yourselves. A leader who can lead you out of the wilderness can lead you back again. If there is a thinking intelligent movement, no leader can mislead you."

Throughout the Irish Ferries dispute, Jack O'Connor has demonstrated clear and calm leadership, he has taken his National Executive Council, a National Delegate Conference and a Special Delegate Conference with him. There has been no rhetoric or bluster.

"The country is at a crossroads, and must now take decisions over the kind of workforce it is creating, moving forward.

"This, in our analysis, is a watershed, a pivotal issue which will determine the shape of things for a very long time to come,' Jack O'Connor told The Sunday Business Post." (30.10.2005).

SIPTU president, Jack O'Connor said the dispute was "the greatest test that the social partnership process has faced" since it was introduced 18 years ago.

"Some people ask if we would be better off outside an agreement, but if employer organisations are going to behave like this increasing numbers of my members are asking if we are better off inside, and I am becoming inclined to agree with them."

Jack O'Connor also warned delegates that deferring entering talks should not be taken lightly.

"Think long and hard before you vote for this motion because it could mean that we could be out of social partnership.

"There would be plenty of forces that would like to see us out of the talks and it could be a long time before we get our feet under the table again." he said. While the Taoiseach, Mr. Ahern responded by saying partnership was impossible without SIPTU, Mr. O'Connor said the cause of workers' right would be far more difficult to achieve outside partnership:

"It is our analysis that partnership is the best way to do it… We're not going to say that it's impossible to do it otherwise but it's very very difficult indeed."

"The most daunting aspect of all that is taking place is the position being adopted by IBEC. Its director general, Turlough O'Sullivan, has refused to rule out similar approaches by other employers, citing competition as the reasons," Jack O'Connor stated. (Irish Times, 30.9.2005)

"It is incumbent upon all of us to make people aware of the threat that is looming for them and their families—if we do not achieve a fundamental change in our present social partnership model so that social objectives are given at least equal importance with economic growth." (Jack O'Connor, Liberty, November, 2005).

---

"I have no doubt that we will take punishment. But I am absolutely confident that we'll inflict it as well if the need arises," said O'Connor. (The Sunday Business Post, 30.10.2005).

---

Throughout the broad Trade Union movement, there is a realisation that this battle is different, it is taking place in a new Ireland, in a Europe which is a battleground between those like McCreevy who want an unimpeded Free Market, without a whit of concern for social obligations and a struggling workers' movement bereft of very little political party leadership. Indeed, some of McCreevy's greatest backers are the "New Labour" and former erstwhile Left student leaders of the 60s and 70s.

LABOUR COMMENT backed the Partnership concept from the outset, our problem with it in recent years was, that it just didn't move on : it ended up a Pay Agreement. At worst, when wage control was accepted, we should have demanded a simultaneous control on basic commodities. Once profits surpassed the pay percentages, then we should have demanded that some form of Local Bargaining kicked in.

AMICUS Difficulty—

Free Collective Bargaining

Amicus National Secretary John Tierney confirmed that this would be his union's strategy. The aim, he said, would be to select employers who were "in a position to do business".

Mr Tierney said a large section of the union's 30,000-odd members in the Republic, particularly those in financial services and manufacturing, were due pay increases on January 1st, 2006.

Many of the companies involved were going through change programmes, which put the union in a strong bargaining position, he said. "They are looking for something from us, and we will be looking for something from them".

He planned to hold a meeting of officials before the end of next week to begin finalising the Union's approach.

Mr Tierney, however, alluded to a difficulty facing the Unions if social partnership is to collapse after 18 years. Only two of Amicus's 15 full-time officials, he said, had previous experience of free collective bargaining.

ATGWU Common Strategy

ATGWU regional secretary Mick O'Reilly said his Union would be lodging claims for "substantial" increases in pay and other improvements in conditions.

He believed private sector unions needed to co-ordinate their approach and adopt a common strategy.

A special meeting of the private sector committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to discuss this would be held in the next couple of weeks, he said.

The ATGWU has traditionally opposed partnership deals, but Mr O'Reilly said it was too simplistic to describe the union as being against national agreements.

He had no problem with public service unions dealing in tandem with the Government, as an employer, but the "one size fits all" approach was not appropriate for the private sector, he claimed.

This argument has also been made by the Irish Bank Officials' Association, which last week signalled its intention to seek a 10 per cent pay rise for its members over two years.

One of the State's biggest private sector unions, Mandate, also plans to pursue its own pay strategy next year, even if there is a new national agreement.

Union leaders have had informal contacts with the Government since deciding last month to delay a decision on entering partnership talks. Substantive progress is unlikely, however, while the Irish Ferries controversy remains unresolved. The crisis deepened this week when the company rejected a Labour Court recommendation that it drop its plan to outsource crew.

On 17th November 2005, an offer to set up a special four-person "talks group" under the auspices of the National Implementation Body to "come up with a new formula designed to help solve the Irish Ferries stand-off" appears also to have been rejected by the company. Indeed, the entire approach seems a right 'cock-up' and appears to have enabled Eamonn Rothwell and his Irish Ferries crew to wriggle out of any negotiations.

---