Public service unions want implementation of the bench marking process, aimed at securing them greater pay parity with the best-paid groups in the private sector, brought forward at least 12 months. The demand was put by the powerful public service committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions when it met senior officials of the Department of Finance yesterday morning. The meeting was immediately before the ICTU was due to discuss entering further talks with employers on the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness.
The delegation consisted of ICTU vice-president and INTO leader, Senator Joe O'Toole, IMPACT's general secretary, Mr Peter McLoone, and PSEU's general secretary, Mr Dan Murphy. They are understood to have made it clear that progress on the issue was an important "confidence-building" measure towards a satisfactory outcome to the pay talks.
Under the PPF, no negotiations on the implementation of the benchmark body report are supposed to take place before June 2003. The public service unions are pressing for talks by June 2002 with a provision for backdating to be introduced on pay from the end of 2001.
Mr O'Toole seems so confident of securing this concession that he has already tabled a Seanad motion welcoming it for next week's schedule.
Mr McLoone confirmed last night that a report had been given to the ICTU yesterday evening on progress in the bench marking talks. He rejected suggestions this represented a down payment on benchmarking for the State's 250,000 public service employees. Nothing could happen before the bench marking body completed its report.
On the overall negotiations on the review of the PPF, he said: "We recognise we still have difficult negotiations ahead with the employers on the pay elements of the PPF, but we are more confident than ever that the negotiations will result in a successful conclusion."
ICTU leaders agreed yesterday afternoon to re-enter talks with the employers. Both sides are meeting this morning to begin negotiations on a national pay review. They hope to conclude these before Budget day. Failure to do so could mean the collapse of the PPF.
It is by no means certain agreement can be reached. The opening offer from the Irish Business and Employers Confederation could be as low as 1 per cent, while the unions will be seeking at least two to three times as much. It may be that the gap will be bridged by a combination of measures rather than across-the-board pay increases.
Last night, ICTU's general secretary, Mr Peter Cassells, said: "There is a clear intention from the union side to make this review work, but the ball is firmly in the employers' court. Pay increases will have to be adequate to compensate for the erosion caused by the unexpectedly high levels of inflation."
Last night, IBEC's director of social policy, Mr Brendan Butler, spelt out what the preconditions meant. He said the industrial peace clause was intended to preclude any form of disruption, not just strikes.
The "inability to pay clause", clause seven of the pay annex to the PPF, would also extend to companies and sectors which had already agreed to pay considerably more than had been envisaged in the national agreement. The most significant single sector here is construction where increases of over 40 per cent have been negotiated at local level.
Most critical of all, he said, was the provision that where employers could pay more, they would be entitled to seek savings or increased productivity to offset wage increases. If the unions accepted this, Mr Butler said he was optimistic a deal could be struck. "There's a bit in it yet but we have clarified the rules of engagement and believe we can reach agreement in that context."