New Round of Pay Talks

Dub13

A new round of Pay talks are going on this week.These will be very interesting as both sides were very far apart at the end of the last talks.

RTE News

The first day of talks on a national wage agreement are drawing to a close this evening.

Under the terms of partnership, talks will continue until Friday evening.

Unions are hopeful that low income workers can be protected, but employers this afternoon said everyone must be treated equally.

Today and tomorrow are about identifying the issues and finding common ground before the hard talking begins.

Whether the partnership process can deliver another national wage agreement is yet to be determined.


Employers' body IBEC joined the talks this afternoon. Unions and the Government were in negotiation since this morning.

IBEC has said a separate pay agreement for the low paid is not credible. The group said the state of the economy makes a pay pause very necessary.

Tough decisions ahead: IBEC

Brendan McGinty of IBEC said the issue of low pay is a difficult one. He said employers under major financial stress at the moment could not meet an agreement on increased pay for low income earners.

Mr McGinty said difficult discussions lie ahead, but he said most ordinary people understand that hard decisions need to be taken.

He said everyone must take the pain in reaching an agreement, which he said is the right thing to do for the country.


Going into the talks this morning, some unions rejected out of hand the notion of a pay freeze.

Taoiseach Brian Cowen has said all sides in the talks must take account of the changed economic circumstances.

Speaking in Tullamore, Mr Cowen said he would be available to assist the parties on an ongoing basis 'as I was indeed in the last phase - which unfortunately didn't mean that the fact that I was available brought about a successful conclusion'.

Asked if he was more optimistic about a successful outcome this time around, Mr Cowen said there was a growing realisation that there are a lot of pressures in the economy. He said the many job losses this year are a reflection of the downturn in economic activity.

He said there is a need for an affordable solution for the medium term 'so we can find space to bring about changes for the better' in what he called a very challenging international environment.


Unions press case at talks


Betty Tyrrell-Collard of the CPSU - which represents lower paid public service workers - said that a pay pause for her union members would be an absolute non-runner.

She said a pay pause for people who earn over €50,000 per year would be acceptable. But Ms Tyrrell-Collard said that clerical staff that are low paid and work hard to secure bonuses for higher paid staff could not suffer.


SIPTU's general president said he wanted to make sure a deal could be done. He said unions would not agree on an exercise to insulate businesses profits.

Jack O'Connor said he would not reveal details of what SIPTU would be demanding, but he said all unions needed to decide on a way forward.

He said there is a broad consensus on a deal that will take the economic condition into consideration and that will protect lower paid workers.


Mandate's John Douglas said there will be no deal unless the low paid are protected during the talks.

He said the ball was in the court of the employers and something will have to be found to deal with the difficult issues for low paid workers.


Mr Douglas said low paid workers have not been dealt with fairly in previous agreements and now more than ever efforts are needed to deal with the low paid.

IBOA 'not optimistic'


Larry Broderick of the Irish Bank Officials Association said he was not optimistic heading into the talks. He said Government needs to put something constructive on the table if the talks are to be successful.

Mr Broderick said his staff would not react well to a pay freeze.


He said a new structure is needed and new legislation on constructive bargaining is needed. A flexible arrangement on pay at local level is needed so that different approaches could be taken in different companies.


Peter McLoone, General Secretary of IMPACT, said he hopes that at the end of the week a clear package for public sector workers will be on the table. He said what the Government has in mind with regard to a public sector pay freeze must be clear.


He said the purchasing power of low paid people within the public sector must be protected. Mr McLoone said it makes no difference what sector you work in when it comes to buying products and trying to live.

nesf

The unions are asking for too much I think. The employers, especially smaller ones, are being hit by the exact same pressures on fuel and electricity as the employees, if we're to avoid second round effects like we had the last times oil spiked a pay freeze, or at the very least very small increases, are what's needed. Any increase given to wages will just push up prices more next year because of the need to pay people creating even more pressure on wages to increase and so on so forth creating an even bigger headache next year and the year after. Much of the cost of living increases are coming from what looks like permanent rises in fuel costs and arguing for higher wages won't fix this and only put even more pressure on the entire system.

People did very well out of the wage agreements in the past two decades, it's time they learned that they need to tighten their belts and show restraint when it's needed but I've my doubts about the unions being that sensible or long sighted.

genericgoon

nesf wrote: »

The unions are asking for too much I think. The employers, especially smaller ones, are being hit by the exact same pressures on fuel and electricity as the employees, if we're to avoid second round effects like we had the last times oil spiked a pay freeze, or at the very least very small increases, are what's needed. Any increase given to wages will just push up prices more next year because of the need to pay people creating even more pressure on wages to increase and so on so forth creating an even bigger headache next year and the year after. Much of the cost of living increases are coming from what looks like permanent rises in fuel costs and arguing for higher wages won't fix this and only put even more pressure on the entire system.

People did very well out of the wage agreements in the past two decades, it's time they learned that they need to tighten their belts and show restraint when it's needed but I've my doubts about the unions being that sensible or long sighted.

Tbh, I think its more a case of aim high, expect low. Theres no way they'll actually get the increases(they'll be lucky to get any immediate increases) they're looking for from the majority of the employers. I expect these talks will fail as well and it we'll see continuing collective bargaining.

is_that_so

I also think they are asking for far far too much and seem to be living in that same state of denial as the Govt. The foolishness of it is that it raises expectations that cannot be delivered on and gives them a couple of scapegoats to blame.

Irish Times chap on radio yesterday commented that the sticking point will be what low-paid is. Unions seem to be suggesting average industrial wage of €38K might be the marker for increases which could bring thousands if not tens of thousands into it. Hardly a pay pause from the IBEC point of view. There is also the issue of collective bargaining by unions in non-union companies which I think is dubious at best.

turgon

Socialist unionist appear to me just very greedy, and unwilling to compromise. Like what kind of bigot insists on a pay rise when the cost of oil is so skyrocketing?

crohnic

The government/politicians give themselves exorbitant wages and super-secured pensions....for not legislating (because they don't) and not working ('less you call a third of a year working) ! There are T.D.s who haven't even 'seen' the inside of the Dail !
The 'lords' of industry take even more than the politicians do.
The people who made fortunes over the 'celtic-tiger' years are now asking those that made the fortune for them to tighten their belts??? They're havin' a laugh aren't they? The reason the talks shouldn't succeed is that those in power will not take a reduction in their own monies. If the government and the other fat cats took a reduction of 75% (or more if I had my way) and lived like the electorate for a while....then talks might have a chance....think that'll happen?? Yeah...right !!!

irish_bob

crohnic wrote: »

The government/politicians give themselves exorbitant wages and super-secured pensions....for not legislating (because they don't) and not working ('less you call a third of a year working) ! There are T.D.s who haven't even 'seen' the inside of the Dail !
The 'lords' of industry take even more than the politicians do.
The people who made fortunes over the 'celtic-tiger' years are now asking those that made the fortune for them to tighten their belts??? They're havin' a laugh aren't they? The reason the talks shouldn't succeed is that those in power will not take a reduction in their own monies. If the government and the other fat cats took a reduction of 75% (or more if I had my way) and lived like the electorate for a while....then talks might have a chance....think that'll happen?? Yeah...right !!!

you seem to be suggesting that it was public servants who made fortunes for the so called captains of industry , public servants dont make money for anyone , even they are performing well ( which they are not ) that isnt thier function

crohnic

irish bob,
Not sure what post you read....but it certainly wasn't mine....if your reply to me is serious; however....take your point that "public servants don't make money for anyone"!....well said...and...well...you've opened up another vista there....but do you want to visit it?

gurramok

is_that_so wrote: »

I also think they are asking for far far too much and seem to be living in that same state of denial as the Govt. The foolishness of it is that it raises expectations that cannot be delivered on and gives them a couple of scapegoats to blame.

Irish Times chap on radio yesterday commented that the sticking point will be what low-paid is. Unions seem to be suggesting average industrial wage of €38K might be the marker for increases which could bring thousands if not tens of thousands into it. Hardly a pay pause from the IBEC point of view. There is also the issue of collective bargaining by unions in non-union companies which I think is dubious at best.

I dispute that avg ind. wage of 38k. Latest we have is 33k (http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1012697.shtml )

I think anyone on 33k or above is doing fine and can afford a pay freeze. The unions say help the low pay, low pay should be those on below 25k that should be helped as this is an an expensive country to live in.

Interesting to see if collective bargaining is won this time, it was a factor for the no vote in the lisbon treaty. There is a fair amount of union membership in non-union companies who need that collective bargaining inserted since the Ryanair supreme court ruling on the matter!

is_that_so

gurramok wrote: »

I dispute that avg ind. wage of 38k. Latest we have is 33k (http://www.finfacts.ie/irishfinancenews/article_1012697.shtml )

I think anyone on 33k or above is doing fine and can afford a pay freeze. The unions say help the low pay, low pay should be those on below 25k that should be helped as this is an an expensive country to live in.

Interesting to see if collective bargaining is won this time, it was a factor for the no vote in the lisbon treaty. There is a fair amount of union membership in non-union companies who need that collective bargaining inserted since the Ryanair supreme court ruling on the matter!

Well you should take that up with Martin Wall of the Irish Times. He quotes IBEC on it.
Otherwise agree on €25K as a reasonable threshold.

A Dub in Glasgo

Ignore the average, what is the median?

gurramok

Median is not available in this country for any sector or the entire workforce, unlike the UK

mike65

Pay deal done - nobody happy.

Mike.

Dub13

mike65 wrote: »

Pay deal done - nobody happy.

It seems that way.

K4t

turgon wrote: »

Socialist unionist appear to me just very greedy, and unwilling to compromise. Like what kind of bigot insists on a pay rise when the cost of oil is so skyrocketing?

The TD kind. (actually they don't ask, they just award themselves the rise) :rolleyes:

My dad is in the civil service and doesn't really need the pay rise. As long as my parents combined income stays under 120k, I couldn't give a f**k.

BOHSBOHS

why % increases why not a flat rate increase?

3.5% is worth a lot more to a TD or someone on 100k than somebody on 20k-30k ...the gap widens


protecting the low paid = giving them 0.5% after 21months ??????!

nesf

BOHSBOHS wrote: »

why % increases why not a flat rate increase?

3.5% is worth a lot more to a TD or someone on 100k than somebody on 20k-30k ...the gap widens

It's simple, because some day those people in the public sector beavering away at the lower ranks hope to "inherit" into the middle or upper ones when the people above them leave/retire, not to mention that since most of them can look forward to going up in pay grade every so often anyway a percentage increase benefits them more than a flat increase in future terms.

There is absolutely no reason that they would pick a flat over a percentage increase.

quad_red

Probably a silly question, but how are social partnership pay rises enforced in the public sector?

ie. I can see how any increases in minimum wage would be. It's the law.

But how is a eg. 2% increase across the board implemented? Is it legally binding?

nesf

quad_red wrote: »

But how is a eg. 2% increase across the board implemented? Is it legally binding?

They might have some legal standing, I don't know, but even if they don't they'd work on a "we get this pay rise for our workers and our union promises not to strike", if either side breaks their half of the deal they know they'll have an awful lot of trouble making another one so it's in their interests to hold to it.