NO IRISH
NEED APPLY?

The very fact that the Irish Ferries proposal to replace 500 native crew with foreign seafarers at a third of the current rate of wages is even contemplated, tells you the direction the labour market is heading.
That it now appears to be legally acceptable, that we cannot stop it—even the Dail is powerless—tells how prevalent global thinking has become the norm in property mad Ireland.

"And we have made it very clear that we will not acquiesce with a Race to the Bottom in employment standards, whatever the consequences. The key question is the attitude of the Government. Apart from the Taoiseach's condemnation of Irish Ferries, he is on record more than once over the past two years declaring he does not wish to see a Race to the Bottom. But is the Government prepared to act? Right now, I cannot assure you, with any degree of confidence, that talks on a new national agreement can result in tangible measures to prevent displacement, curb exploitation or protect employment standards" (Jack O'Connor, President, SIPTU, Cork, 3.10.2005).

So this is where the trade union movement finds itself—after 18 years of 'partnership' agreements, 'the envy of trade unionists throughout Europe'! What was it all for? Was it not in truth a Pay Deal, with a social pickle or two thrown in?

In an economy rampant with excessive prices—the only commodity under control is wages! It was an employers' dream and having provided them with super profits and wealth, they have decided they need us no longer.
Jack O'Connor now admits that the "Open Door" for the new accession states on May 1, 2005, is turning out to be an unmitigated disaster for Irish workers. The state doesn't even have an Immigration policy.

On top of that, the ICTU gave unequivocal support for each EU referendum held, whilst all the while, the globalisers were eroding every progressive social aspect of the European Union.

On the one hand, the Taoiseach dishes out letters of comfort, hither and thither, while his former Finance Minister McCreevy, is trooping around Europe promulgating the "Irish Ferries" and "GAMA" formulas for a new Europe free of social and industrial constraints—who's kidding who?

There's a price for everything. It's pay-back time for Irish workers. We are now starting to pay for Tiger Ireland's embracement of a global economy.
At a Special Delegate Conference of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions (ICTU) on October 25, 2005, over 400 delegates deferred a decision on whether to participate in Partnership talks with the Government.

The opposition to social partnership talks comes after months of controversy over the way the Government has handled the disputes over Irish Ferries, Gama Construction and, most recently, An Post.

The decision was unanimous and followed a similar decision by the Services, Industrial, Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) the previous day, when all but one of the 450 delegates at a Special SIPTU conference voted in favour of a motion for the union to stay away from negotiations until the Government had offered more "tangible" measures to prevent worker displacement and staff exploitation. Jack O'Connor, General President stated that Ireland risks becoming an "exploiter's paradise".

The SIPTU position arises directly from the row over Irish Ferries' plan to replace hundreds of unionised seafarers with cheaper labour from Eastern Europe. SIPTU and other unions claim the Irish Ferries move is part of a 'race to the bottom' in employment standards which is also being experienced in other sectors, including construction.

SIPTU also argues that Government opposition to the EU Ferries' Directive and EU legislation to protect agency employees indicated it was not committed to combating 'social dumping'.

Addressing the ICTU conference, General Secretary David Begg criticised the business community for its 'ambivalent' stance on the issue. Employers, he said, put such a priority on competitiveness that it seemed almost anything else was acceptable.

"This begs one to ask the question: is there no threshold of decency below which the objectives of competitiveness will not drag us?" He questioned why apparently no one in the business sector had felt a 'moral obligation' to deprecate what was happening at Irish Ferries or to deplore the displacement of workers in other areas of the economy.

"Nobody in the business community was willing to come out and say, 'No, that's not the type of country we stand for…' Nobody in the business community has come out to take a moral stance on the exploitation of workers."

"Business organisations had queued up, however, to condemn the workers in An Post who were threatening to strike from next week. These workers, said Mr. Begg, had acted in full accordance with the terms of Sustaining Progress."

Mr. Begg said the "light touch" labour market regulation currently in place was no longer sustainable in the context of the opening of the Irish labour market to citizens of the new EU states.

"None of the leaders of the 40 unions represented chose to address the conference, which ended after just 30 minutes, reflecting a growing sense of confusion in senior union ranks," according to the Irish Independent, 26.10.2005.

"In a repeat of the last pay negotiations in April, 2004, SIPTU, as the largest union, has effectively dictated the Congress position, much to the annoyance of some public service union bosses." (ibid).

Last year SIPTU forced a seven-week delay in pay talks over the restructuring of Aer Rianta and protection of employment standards in areas like cleaning, catering, the construction industry and security services.

SIPTU has 77 votes out of 399—just under 20%—of the votes at any ICTU conference.

"Only last Thursday, Congress President Peter McLoone, whose union has 34 votes, said that entering a new national agreement with employers and the Government was 'capable of delivering an agreed framework to prevent a 'race to the bottom' of pay and working conditions" (Irish Independent, 25.10.2005).

SIPTU Delegate Conference

At the SIPTU Delegate Conference, over 430 delegates were—

"handed copies of a letter from Taoiseach Bertie Ahern sent over the weekend to assuage union leaders' fears of further 'social dumping'.

"He wrote that 'we do not want to see people building competitive advantage based on poor wages, casualisation of labour, low health and safety standards in any new talks." (Irish Independent, 25.10.2005).
SIPTU President, Jack O'Connor said the union would need further details explaining how the Government would implement any of the measures Mr. Ahern spoke of.

"I believe that the Taoiseach meant what he said when he drafted that letter. I believe that he meant what he said when he condemned the action of Irish Ferries proposed to take. But I think that the Government and the Taoiseach are presented with a challenge into how they can give practical effect to their public statements," he said.

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.

---

"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).

---

 

"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 Mr. Ahern responded by saying partnership was impossible without SIPTU, Mr. O'Connor said the cause of workers' rights 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."

Before their National Delegate meeting in Cork on 3rd October 2005, there was a lot of annoyance among SIPTU's National Executive over what was considered pressure by Congress President Peter McLoone to secure a vote in favour of entering talks on a successor to Sustaining Progress.

Mr. McLoone, who heads up the rival IMPACT public service union advised union members that "a new national agreement could be a vehicle for stopping a 'race to the bottom' in pay and working conditions in an increasingly global economy".

He warned rival unions "not to talk themselves out of a deal before discussions even begin" which was interpreted by some senior SIPTU members as interference in their deliberations.

SIPTU has the largest public sector base, although about two-thirds of its membership are in the private sector.

Benchmarking

"A subsequent paper by O'Leary, Rory McElligott and Gerry Boyle, Public-Private Wage Differentials in Ireland, 1994-2001, concluded that pre-benchmarking public pay levels were actually 11% higher than those in the private sector. A more recent statement by the Irish Small and Medium-sized Enterprises Association, ISME, asserted that public-sector pay was now 41% higher than private-sector pay.

"IMPACT, a leading public-sector union, has criticised the comparison. The figures in the second O'Leary paper, they argue, compare apples and oranges in that they compare public-sector workers with workers in industry. Public servants are better educated and more capable than industrial workers and should earn more than them, according to IMPACT. Better to compare public-service pay with more educated workers in the private sector, they say." (Irish Times,18.10.2005).

"One for all, all for One". How are you, Brothers, sorry, Half-Brothers. Some are more equal than others!

Immigration

"O'Connor believes the root of the problem lies in the government's decision to adopt an open border strategy from day one with the new EU accession states without the same level of regulation and enforcement that other countries such as Sweden, which have similar policies. 'We welcome that decision because we need to build this economy and it's not possible without a high degree of migrant labour, but if you're to do that, then the corollary is a level of regulation and enforcement that is equal in dimension,' said O'Connor.

"Only two other countries did this—Britain and Sweden. The effect of that is unique in the history of the developed world as it brings about a situation where countries with a population of more than 75 million are feeding into a labour market of three countries with a total population of 60 million." (Jack O'Connor, President, SIPTU, The Sunday Business Post, 30.10.2005).

And one country, the Irish Republic has a population of four million people.

It is absolutely incredible that nobody seen this coming. But then you cannot say 'boo' in relation to Immigration here at the moment.

Multiculturalism is the in-thing with the chattering classes, they all want their cappuccino served by a Russian or Latvian maid. Of course, none of these people give a damn what wage or conditions these young foreigners receive. To tell the truth, did they ever give a damn about the wages and conditions of their own native workers? They did not.

If one was to take it at face value, or at the word of the media, the opinion shapers : the welcome Immigrants receive is incredible when compared with the manner the same community treated their own emigrants not too many years ago. They couldn't get rid of them fast enough.

Perhaps the events in Paris for the past week might require them to re-think!

But failing to reproduce ourselves, we need the numbers to fill TESCO and our investment in new apartments and shopping centres, and, yes, somebody to serve the cappuccino.

Trade Unions Opposed To Partnership

Ireland's third largest union has pulled out of talks on a new Social Partnership deal for the first time in 20 years.

MANDATE, representing more than 40,000 pub and retail trade workers, announced that it is boycotting talks on a successor to the Sustaining Progress agreement.

MANDATE claims that low and middle-income earners are effectively being ignored in the current round of negotiations.

Besides MANDATE, the Irish Bank Officials Association (IBOA), AMICUS, and engineers in the TEEU are opposed to the "one size fits all" centralised pay deal in the Social Partnership talks.

These unions are also pressing for a local bargaining clause in addition to a centralised wage deal.

This would mean that unions would have the right to negotiate additional increases from profitable companies on top of the national wage agreement.

"There is an 'inability to pay' clause for employers," said one source. "By the same token, there should be an 'ability to pay' clause based on profitability and productivity."

But divisions are emerging among the public sector unions, with the Irish Nurses' Organisation (INO) supporting local bargaining for its own members based on productivity. This is opposed by IMPACT, which insists that local bargaining is not a runner in the public sector.

Liam Doran, General Secretary of the INO, said that "flexible local bargaining"—rather than benchmarking—represented the way forward for nurses, as it would allow the examination of productivity and grades "on their merits".

"We don't believe that 'one size fits all' is the way forward and would say that local bargaining would also work in the public sector, as it would give unions the freedom to negotiate specifically for grades they represent—such as in the health sector," said Doran.

However, Bernard Harbor of IMPACT was adamant that "local bargaining is not going to happen in the public sector because the government won't agree to a national pay deal, a benchmarking award and another bit of the cherry".

There's a man who knows which side is bread is buttered on!

The 'Real' Taoiseach McCreevy?

On 25th October 2005, Commissioner McCreevy faced his critics in the European Parliament. Socialist MEPs who launched a series of "stinging attacks against him, complaining his policies were too right-wing" and some felt were an attack on Sweden's social partnership.

The conservatives and liberals backed Mr. McCreevy and accused their left-leaning colleagues of populism.

But the socialists argued the whole debate was about the quality of jobs Europeans want.

Socialist leader, Martin Schultz advised the Commission President to "put the brakes" on "neo-liberal" Commissioners such as Mr. McCreevy or the Dutch Neelie Kroes, in charge of competition, to demonstrate support for the European social model and to receive the group's support.

But the Commissioner also received some strong support, with some coming from unlikely sources, including Ian Paisley's DUP.

The party's sole MEP, Jim Allister, spoke out on behalf of Mr. McCreevy.

"I rarely see it as a function of mine to defend the commission. Just occasionally they may say eminently sensible things," he said.

However, there was a low turnout when the Commissioner, backed by Commission President, Jose Manuel Barroso, came before them.

"If members of this house expect me to creep around quietly… then I'm afraid they're going to be disappointed," McCreevy told them.

He said he should not have to justify remarks he made in relation to a legal dispute between the Swedish government and a Latvian construction firm over wage agreements.

McCreevy "insists that as someone who was involved in the social partnership in Ireland between unions and employers, he wouldn't attack it elsewhere in the EU".

"A Swedish building contract awarded to the Latvian company was withdrawn and the company subsequently went bankrupt after the Swedish construction union, BYGGNADS, blockaded the firm's site. The union took action against the firm after it refused to sign a Swedish wage agreement.

"Mr. McCreevy has come in for criticism for publicly commenting that the Swedish stance was not compatible with EU treaties, particularly article 49 on the freedom to provide services.

"The commission did not call into question the organisation of labour relations or collective agreements in Sweden or any other member state, he said. However, there was a broader issue of the development of the internal market and he had a 'duty' to express his view.

"I find it extraordinary that I have to justify remarks made about an incident that raises questions of compatibility with article 49," Mr. McCreevy said. 'I will continue to express my opinions loud and clear and I don't care if they upset some people.'

"He was not expressing a view that any social model was better or worse than another, but defending rights laid down in the treaty" (Irish Times, 26.10.2005).

A legal case is now before the European Courts to decide whether Swedish rules or less restrictive EU internal market laws should apply.

Dublin Trade Union Demonstration

According to the Irish Independent, 5,000 workers took to the streets of Dublin on 3rd November 2005, to protest at plans to replace Irish Ferries' workers with cheaper foreign labour.

The report by Gerald Flynn, Industrial Correspondent, sarcastically referred to "mainly middle-aged workers, marched through the streets of the capital wearing bright orange and yellow high-visibility jackets". I know there is a law against ageism, it looks as if we may have to secure one on 'middle-ageism'. I have never seen the Irish Independent refer to IFA marches in these terms.

Earlier in the week, Mr. Flynn mentioned that unions had not specified "if they want members to leave work to support their action" (1.11.2005). He then recalled a previous SIPTU demonstration, nearly four years ago: a demand for a minimum of three weeks' statutory redundancy when fewer than 2,000 people took part.

"This time the organisers would need up to 10,000 participants—just one in fifty of their members—to show broad-based support for their campaign."

On the following day, November 2, 2005, he had a headline: "Unions split down middle over planned protest rally to the Dail". Although the march has the backing of 15 of the largest trade unions, it is not being supported by the Seaman's Union of Ireland (SUI).

Yet on the day of the march, the demonstration was addressed by the General Secretary of the SUI: "Seaman's Union of Ireland general secretary, Bobby Carrick said seafarers had been fighting displacement of crews by Irish Ferries for over a year and would continue to do so" (Irish Examiner—4.11.2005).

The Irish Independent and its Chairman, Sir A.J.F. O'Reilly are ardent backers of globalisation and EU Services Directive, which is one of the reasons people have heard so little of it in the news media. Journalists in Ireland, like their counterparts in the UK have minds that are so addled by Free Market ideology that they are incapable of seeing, never mind reporting, on anything that affects the lives of ordinary people.

At the Dublin rally on November 3, 2005, Jack O'Connor warned that the proposed EU Services Directive would allow jobs displacement to spread far wider than Irish Ferries.

"It's about time that we asserted a few principles and the first of them is that whether a worker is from Dublin or Cork or Mullingar or Warsaw or Vilnius or Cyprus or from anywhere else in the world, we're here to assert that, here in Ireland, they have a right to be treated with courtesy and dignity and respect," said Jack O'Connor.

Yes, Jack, the Irish rate and conditions for the job! Nothing less! The same way Irish Emigrants in Britain, the U.S., Canada and Australia were treated—as equals.

The Bolkestein Directive

In the March, 2005, issue of Irish Political Review, we gave the background to the EU Service Directive:

"The Bolkestein Directive is a directive liberalising services, including employment services, throughout the EU. The way it works is that a factory owner in Ireland, for example, can decide to use, for example, a Latvian employment agency to supply him with labour services (factory workers).

"The Directive will make it almost impossible to apply Irish employment laws, pay, and conditions to workers registered with the Latvian company. The aim of the Directive is to reduce administrative 'obstacles' (such as employment inspections) to services across the European Union. It also enshrines the principle that the laws applying to the service will be determined by the 'country of origin' of the company supplying the service. There is a derogation of this principle for employees working in a different country to the country of origin of their company. However, this looks like a 'fig leaf'. The inspectors in the above example can be from the country of origin (i.e. Latvia). Will Latvian inspectors apply Irish law rigorously?

"But even this 'fig leaf' may be discarded if the EU Constitution becomes law. This Constitution enshrines Free Market principles and is likely to declare any 'obstacle' to the free market unconstitutional.

"This means that a company in Ireland can use an agency in a country with inferior wages and conditions to import workers. These workers will be subject not to Irish law, but to the law of the country in which the Agency is based. Under the new dispensation it would be advantageous to an Irish company to use imported workers, who will not have Irish entitlements in terms of wages and conditions. Indeed, once the idea catches on, companies may be forced to import such workers in order to remain 'competitive'.

"Understandably, many Trade Unionists in Europe and others are going berserk over this. They see this, rightly, as a way of undermining social protection and leading to higher unemployment in 'old' Europe. The UK, of course, is in favour, therefore no doubt so are the Irish establishment. Chirac is against, but most believe that he will change his mind after the French referendum on the EU Constitution. There is little said about it in Ireland and this is undoubtedly because of the looming referendum on the EU Constitution.

"The Bolkestein Directive is an attempt to change Europe in the Anglo-American direction—one that at present seems quite acceptable to the 'New Europe'—the new accession countries. At the moment this block is pro-USA in economics and foreign policy" (Irish Political Review, March, 2005).

How many times has Eamonn Rothwell, the Chief Exec. of Irish Ferries read that Directive? Yes, the European Constitutional referendum was defeated in France, which seriously altered the game plan. Had it succeeded and a referendum was held in Ireland, would not the Labour Party, the ICTU and even, SIPTU have campaigned in its favour—of course they would. But along comes Irish Ferries!

At the SIPTU Conference in Cork on 3rd October 2005, a motion calling for SIPTU to oppose the proposed EU Constitution was defeated by a 4-1 majority. Surely here was an opportunity to show some leadership and resolution by clearly voting against a Constitution which at present espouses stark Free Market values. It wouldn't necessarily mean that SIPTU was opposed to a Constitution per se but that they would only support a Constitution which advocated genuine social values.

It may have been a case of opposing the singer, Kieran Allen, and not the song but in times like these we should be sending out a clear message to Ahern and McCreevy!

The Sins Of The Father

On 1st March 1996, the German Government introduced a new law on minimum wages and training standards for building workers in that country. The new law meant all employers engaged in construction work in Germany had to pay the same rates to Immigrant workers as to their German counterparts.

"It was thus unfortunate to read in the Irish Times on March 1, 1996, that a prominent member of the ICTU Executive declared that the decision by the German government was not 'in the best interests of the Irish worker.'

"The ICTU Executive member admitted: "…the system had been used to employ cheap labour and, while Irish workers may not have been happy with it, they had been forced to accept. Many Irish workers had moved to Germany from Britain because of the building slump there."

"Only last year, Eithne FitzGerald, Minister of Enterprise & Employment joined the British Tories and IBEC to oppose and defeat a directive by the EU Social Affairs Council which would have given Irish construction workers posted abroad in the EU the same wages, rights and conditions as workers in the host countries, Germany and Holland, etc." (Labour Comment, 9.3.1996).

How the past comes back to haunt us!

At The Crossroads

"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).

If trade unionists cannot grasp this, we'll quote the US magazine Newsweek which gave its prescription to Ireland's 'ills':

"Prosperity has come at the cost of delaying confrontation with some powerful vested interests, whether businessmen or union leaders," the magazine says.

"A dose of British-style privatisation and swifter deregulation may be needed to add zest to the domestic economy." (Irish Independent, 28.10.2005).

If in the so-called 'good times' we cannot stand our social and economic ground, God help us when the hard times arrive.

P.S.—As we go to press (7.11.2005), Strike action by postal workers, which began this morning, is likely to be called off by this afternoon after An Post agreed to an independent review of its costs.