I think this is probably the proper opportunity for directing the attention of the Minister and the House to the possibility of industrial unrest on the railways due to the recent notification of the railway companies of their intention of withdrawing from the negotiating machinery as far as wages and conditions are concerned. I would at the outset direct the attention of the House to the fact that since 1923 no strike has taken place upon the railways, as far as the grades who were parties to the negotiating machinery were concerned. It might be well, at this stage, if I pointed out the origin of this railway negotiating machinery. In 1921 there was a considerable amount of unrest on the railways, and at that time there were a number of lockouts, strikes and threats of strikes. That was when the Government gave over control of the railways and when the railway management threatened to reduce wages and salaries of employees and to worsen the conditions generally for the employees. At that time, through the intervention, I think, of the Provisional Government, a tribunal was set up, presided over by Mr. Carrigan, K.C., and the whole question was gone into. No agreement was arrived at, with the result that Mr. Carrigan made an award. As far as that award was concerned, it practically involved the setting aside of all the conditions and rates of wages which the railway trade unions had fought for for a number of years previously. It was objected to by every railway man, North and South, from Mizen Head to Malin Head, with the result that the Provisional Government again intervened, and a temporary arrangement was arrived at as far as wages and conditions were concerned, which lasted from February, 1922, to August, 1922.
On the termination of that temporary agreement the country was in, I might stay, a state of chaos, and had the railway employees at the time liked to take advantage of the situation, they could have demanded from the railways any terms they desired; and if such demands had not been acceded to the railways would have had to close down, which would have meant a lot of dislocation as far as the commercial life of this country is concerned. Certain suggestions were made at the time that negotiating machinery should be established. This negotiating machinery was established. The machinery is very comprehensive, working up from local departmental committees covering big groups of employees at places like Kingsbridge and Cork to the Irish Railway Wages Board, which is a body composed of an equal number of representatives of the companies and the three railway trade unions, with four representatives of the users of the railways, and presided over by Mr. Justice Wylie. A majority finding of the board is operative. The findings are not absolutely binding on either side, but no side has so far endeavoured to break away from any of them. As far as the findings or the awards of this Railway Wages Board is concerned, there is no gainsaying the fact that the railway companies have got the lion's share. In one finding in April, 1926, they got three cuts in wages against the whole of the traffic grades, and four cuts in the case of one section. Not long afterwards they secured a finding giving them all-round reductions in rates of pay in the case of the whole of the new entrants to the service, as far as the operative grades are concerned. Subsequently they got concessions in the case of the locomotive grades: drivers, firemen, and cleaners. As far as these findings are concerned the position of the men employed in the grades I have mentioned is much worse than the position of men in similar grades in Great Britain. However, the men loyally abided by the award, with the result that they are now in a worse position than their colleagues on British railways employed at the same class of work.
I might mention, for the information of the House, that as far as this negotiating machinery is concerned, it is similar to that in existence on the British railways, only in a somewhat modified form. Last year, in so far as the British railways were concerned, more especially the four principal groups, there was a falling off in receipts of nearly four and a half million. As a result of that the companies approached the machinery in operation in Great Britain, and asked for a ten per cent. cut in salaries and wages. After the situation was threshed out fully as between the representatives of the men and the companies, the men agreed, at any rate, to accept a two and a half per cent. reduction lasting over a period of one year. As a result of that, the Irish railway managers, although their employees were working at a much lower rate in certain grades than the employees in Britain, approached the Irish Railway Wages Board and put forward a demand for a ten per cent. reduction in the wages of the operative grades and a five per cent. reduction in the salaried grades, and that notwithstanding the previous reductions already made by the tribunal under the chairmanship of Judge Wylie. However, this application of the railway companies went to the Railway Wages Board, and the companies' advocate, Mr. Shanahan, Accountant to the Great Northern Railway, gave evidence on behalf of all the railway companies. It was shown, notwithstanding his statement, that the reductions in revenue which he said took place during the previous year were more than counterbalanced by the reductions in working expenses, with the result that the year 1928 was the best year, from the view-point of net receipts, that the railway companies have had since 1924. After a full hearing the Wages Board found as follows:—
"As such restrictions (if any) as this Board could agree to would not materially benefit the companies, and would further divorce the efforts of the employees from concentrating on improved working and popularising railway transit with the public, we refuse the application."
The Board turned down the application of the companies as far as the ten per cent. reduction in the wages of the operative grades and the five per cent. reduction in the wages of the salaried grades were concerned.
The companies took this very badly. It was one of the first adverse decisions given by the Railway Wages Board against the companies; and although numerous decisions were given against the men they had loyally abided by these decisions. The companies have now given notice to the parties concerned that they want to withdraw from the negotiating machinery altogether. In April next, I understand, this withdrawal will take place, as, according to the agreement, twelve months' notice must be given on either side in order to comply with its terms. The companies having intimated their intention to withdraw, I can see that they are preparing to make drastic attempts to reduce the wages of the employees, and if such takes place I want the House to realise that it is the duty of the Minister and his Department to see that steps are taken to prevent the railways from being brought into the chaotic condition which will be brought about if a strike takes place. It seems to me extraordinary that at a time when abnormal attempts are being made to bring about peace in industry the railway companies are flinging the sword into the industrial area as they are doing on this occasion.
As I have said, I believe that it is the duty of the Minister to see that every effort should be made to bring the railway companies to a full sense of their responsibility. The machinery that was set up has been working satisfactorily to all concerned, but because one adverse decision was given by the Wages Board against them the company is going to throw down the gauntlet and will probably withdraw from the Board and attempt to reduce the wages of the employees. If they do that, it will throw the whole railway situation into a chaotic state, with great disadvantages so far as the trade and commerce of the country are concerned.
