Protracted negotiations on pay and inter-union rivalry have contributed to the present strike by health service careworkers, writes Padraig Yeates, Industry and Employment Correspondent
It began as a good news story last April when pay rises of up to £8,328 a year - 44.8 per cent - were agreed for house parents in residential childcare, in order to attract workers to the sector.
The previous month, Mr Justice Peter Kelly had been "profoundly disturbed" to discover more than 50 children had been placed in accommodation run by a private security company because health boards lacked personnel.
The increases, negotiated by IMPACT, set a new headline for the care sector, just as public service unions were entering the benchmarking process. About 1,300 people were estimated to gain from the deal and, on April 11th, a circular was sent out by the Department of Health and Children to "Each Chief Executive: Health Boards/Voluntary Hospitals/Mental Handicap Agencies" outlining the new rates of pay and grade structures for house parents, who were to be redesignated child care workers. The circular added that: "The sanction of the Minister for Health and Children can be assumed for the implementation of the arrangements set out in the attached circular".
Then the problems arose. The Health Service Employers' Agency, which negotiated the deal on behalf of the Government and various health service providers, said it did not apply to house parents in the intellectual disability sector and the expert group review, on which the increases were based, had only mentioned childcare. It also pointed out that, in publicly welcoming the deal, IMPACT only referred to the childcare sector.
However, the union's national health secretary, Mr Kevin Callinan, says he was simply responding at the time to an announcement of the increase for childcare staff by the Minister of State for Children, Ms Mary Hanafin. Mr Callinan says the pay link between house parents and other residential carers has existed for years, and the qualifications and work are virtually identical.
A joint union-management committee set up to follow through on the expert group review took on the job of sorting out the pay issue, at the request of IMPACT.
A memorandum of understanding was signed where each side outlined its position. The preferred option of management was to refer the whole issue to the Public Service Benchmarking Body, which heard submissions from both sides last year and is due to report in June.
There things might have rested but for the intervention of SIPTU, which represents the majority of care assistants in the sector. This is the grade immediately below house parents.
SIPTU also has local negotiating rights for some house parents, particularly in the south and west. Last November SIPTU members working for the Brothers of Charity in Cork took strike action over pay and IMPACT subsequently served notice on all employers for a national strike.
Relations between the two unions have been strained since the row that ended with the defection of most of the Aer Lingus cabin crew from SIPTU to IMPACT last year. Now a protracted series of negotiations on pay increases for carers in the intellectual disability sector has been complicated by competition between the unions for members.
The events of the past week only make sense in that context. SIPTU threatened strike action last Friday, ahead of IMPACT's Monday deadline. It deferred action only after the National Implementation Body gave commitments that the "historic pay links" of care assistants with house parents would be respected in any talks.
When both unions went to the Labour Relations Commission on Saturday and the Labour Court on Sunday to negotiate, they did so separately. Sources on both sides claim they have gained members from their game plans.
The decision by IMPACT to reject an invitation to talks at the Labour Court today and take to the pickets lines is based on a belief in the strength of their claim, but also a fear of being wrongfooted by SIPTU and concern that the court might decide house parents in the sector are not entitled to the full award. SIPTU has reserved the right to strike, but by going into court, it has established its right to represent house parents nationally.
The chairman of the court, Mr Finbarr Flood, will be anxious to resolve the dispute as quickly as possible but he will also be aware that the only union in court represents a small number of house parents, as opposed to care assistants.
There is no certainty that any award he makes will be acceptable to IMPACT but he can be guaranteed SIPTU will seek pro-rata increases for care attendants.