When Elaine Harvey rose to speak on motion 89 a lot of delegates were beginning to drift away from the conference. Thursday had been a long day, and most people felt women's growing concerns at the lack of equality in SIPTU's upper echelons had been well aired by people like Ms Kay Garvey, president of the Dublin regional executive, who spoke of the "quiet seething anger" and the gender imbalance within the union.
The motion on sexual harassment was not seen as contentious. SIPTU has in place detailed codes of practice to cover the workplace, including its own premises. Delegates were stunned into silence as Ms Harvey began to give vivid details of sexual harassment she alleged had been inflicted on women delegates over a number of years.
Sources within SIPTU say that the main incidents she referred to occurred four years ago at a function in the west of Ireland. A senior male member of the union was the alleged offender.
Delegates applauded Ms Harvey loudly after she spoke and unanimously passed the motion, which called on the union "to redouble its efforts to eradicate such behaviour from within SIPTU and the workplaces where we represent members". It was only later that a reaction set in as delegates realised that the general nature of the allegations might brand the whole union.
At the conference dinner that evening Ms Harvey was visibly upset at the hostility of some delegates, women as well as men, to what she had said.
Besides feeling they were being tarred with collective guilt, many delegates felt that it was unfair to blame the new union leadership for the problem. "In the old days people wouldn't have been able to talk about the issue," said one angry union official.
"Harassment happens everywhere, in every organisation", said Bernie Moore, a Dublin delegate. "She said what she had to say. There's nothing wrong with that, and I don't know why people have a problem with it."
Another Dublin delegate, Rose O'Reilly, saw things very differently. A union activist for 18 years, she had spent much of that time representing a predominantly male membership at both local and regional executive level.
"I have always been treated with the height of respect, not only by members but all the officers of the union," she said. "I am horrified and saddened at the allegations and I reject them completely."
Senior officers of the union moved quickly to deal with the situation. On Thursday night the SIPTU vice-president, Des Geraghty, talked to another delegate, Margaret Neilus, who had spoken critically in the debate on sexual harassment about the attitudes and behaviour of some male members. Ms Harvey was too upset to talk to Mr Geraghty but he said yesterday he was available to meet her or, if she preferred to discuss the matter with another woman, she would be facilitated.
"The approach of the president, Jimmy Somers, and myself is to clarify the situation as quickly as possible."
However, he said it was not acceptable for people to make generalised allegations that branded the whole membership of the union. He did not believe there was a major problem. If people had specific allegations they could, and would be investigated.
SIPTU's equality officer, Noirin Greene, said that the union rules were very clear on the issue of sexual harassment. Anyone found guilty of such behaviour would be expelled from the unions.
It was perhaps inevitable that a union, which was formed only in 1990 from the amalgamation of the two largest unions in the State, would have to mark time for some years as it consolidated.
The controversy over sexual harassment has placed the new leadership on notice that women, who form 47 per cent of the members but have no representation at senior executive level, are impatient for change.