Public sector unions seek clarity on abolition of post-crash emergency legislation

Contacts between Government and public sector trade unions in the coming days will seek to pave the way for an opening of formal talks between the two sides on a new pay agreement for the State’s 385,000 public servants, which sources say could happen as early as next week.

Public sector unions said on Friday that a new multi-year agreement on pay will only be possible if the Government removes the remaining elements of emergency legislation, which was first introduced after the financial crash, that gives the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform what they regard as an effective veto on locally agreed deals.

At a meeting of the 19 unions, whose members would be impacted by any new national agreement relating to the public and Civil Service, it was agreed to seek clarification from Minister for Public Expenditure Paschal Donohoe on whether he is willing to dispose of the legislation as part of the progress.

Government sources expressed some puzzlement at the approach, but in a statement the Department of Public Expenditure said that “all sides have issues they want to see addressed. The best way to resolve these issues, including those raised by Ictu [Irish Congress of Trade Unions], is to progress into discussions at the Workplace Relations Commission.”

The Dublin-New York Portal didn’t show us Manhattan, just our badly-behaved selves

---

Cannes 2024 Movie Quiz Special: How many women have won the Palme d’Or for directing?

---

Eric Clapton in Dublin review: guitar hero rocks the grey-haired faithful with a night of classics

---

Dublin-Monaghan bombings: ‘When I looked out into the street, I knew all normality was gone. It was like hell on Earth’

---

[ Public sector pay talks to begin within days as unions meet to consider strategy ]

[ ‘Turbulent winter’ in prospect if no progress made on public sector pay deal, union leader warns ]

“Government is not setting any preconditions to these talks and is willing to engage on all issues, including those raised by the Public Services Committee of Ictu at their meeting [on Friday],” the department said.

In his invitation to the unions at the start of the week to participate in talks on a new agreement, Mr Donohoe expressed a preference for the successor to the Building Momentum pay agreement to be one that would run over a number of years.

However, in a letter sent to him on Friday after its meeting, John King from Ictu’s public service committee said it first wanted “an assurance that the Government will take all necessary steps to restore industrial relations in the public service to the position which applied before the enactment of the 2009 emergency legislation”.

This is a reference to Financial Emergency Measures in the Public Interest (Fempi) legislation, introduced after the 2008 financial crisis, which the unions argue gives the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform the final say on any deals negotiated with local authorities, departments or other public sector employers in relation to issues outside of the national agreement. The unions say a substantial number of these issues have built up over recent years.

Fórsa general secretary Kevin Callinan, who will, as chair of the committee, be another key figure in any negotiations, said the unions were keen to pursue a deal that provided pay increases that addressed the impact of cost-of-living issues for their members.

But, he said “the type of agreement favoured by the Minister... is really only achievable if we establish normalised industrial relations”.

[ Irish consumers to cut Christmas shopping spend as cost of living bites ]

“Multi-annual deals provide a high degree of cost certainty, and stability, for the Government. While we’re willing to consider such a deal, we made it clear months ago that any deal would need to contain sufficient flexibility to address issues affecting specific groups of workers,” he said.

Senior Government sources said it was possible that backdated payments – which were included in the last deal – could again be a feature of any new agreement. However, they said that for this to happen, it would likely have to be concluded before the end of the year – a timetable that all sides agreed was tight.

Responding to the comments made on behalf of the Minister after they were put to him, Mr King said he had not received any response to the letter from the Minister “and I’d be disappointed if that was the totality of his response”.

“The issues we have raised merit his consideration. And this is not about preconditions, this is about us having the confidence his officials will have the capacity to reach an agreement on these issues.”