The Minister's announcement that he is prepared to make certain changes is welcome particularly in so far as he has indicated that one of the changes to be made will ensure that those affected—not just by the closing of the branch lines but by reduced working on the branch lines— will not suffer. I take it reduced working in any section will come within the scope of the Bill as a result of the Minister's amendment.
On the question of consultation, it is important to have, and it would be valuable to insist on, the prior agreement of the trade unions as far as workers becoming redundant are concerned. He has indicated that he expects C.I.E. will be in constant consultation with the trade unions in relation to reorganisation. One remark made by the Minister caused me some concern, particularly in view of the information that Deputies have given the House in relation to the manner in which C.I.E. management can operate without consultation or without any prior notice.
The Minister stated that, in general, the Bill was to deal with the position of workers who become redundant because of the introduction of a comprehensive scheme. He said he could visualise, however, conditions under which there might be redundancy in some sections, due to a reduction in working, and in such circumstances he felt it would be his responsibility to ensure that the workers affected would not get the protection of this Bill. I would ask the Minister to consider that position again. It is possible that the operations and decisions of the board might lead to redundancy which, on the face of it, might appear to be casual, but which in fact would be of a permanent nature.
I was very interested in Deputy Dillon's brief advice to the trade union movement as to how they should conduct their affairs. It appeared to me to come strangely from Deputy Dillon who, I have always gathered, is the advocate of the individual in this House. He suggests to members of trade unions, who have a deep personal concern with the operations of C.I.E., particularly when those operations might result in their becoming redundant, that they should pass over their rights and responsibilities from their own officials and committees to a plenipotentiary committee. Deputy Dillon makes everything very simple indeed. I do not know whether Deputy Dillon has ever attended a conference with a large number of representatives, either of trade unions or of employers. The fact that there are 17 different spokesmen does not necessarily mean that 17 different points of view are expressed at such a conference. It often means that, although 17 different bodies are represented, the representatives of which have the duty to report back to their own organisations, there may well be only one effective point of view put forward.
The difficulty of disposing of problems between management and workers within the C.I.E. organisation is not because there are 17 unions but because on the other side there is a reluctance to invite and welcome the active co-operation of the 17 unions representing all grades in C.I.E. If the management of C.I.E. were prepared to have normal negotiations and consultations, I feel there would not be any great difficulty arising from the fact that the workers of C.I.E. are in a number of different organisations. The Minister can testify to that himself. In respect of certain clauses in the Bill, he had discussions with the trade unions, and, through them, the C.I.E. workers, and I do not think he had seven, eight or 15 points of view put forward to him. If the powers that be in C.I.E. would follow that example, there would be much less trouble.
We realise that the question of redundancy is a very serious matter for any individual worker, no matter in what part of C.I.E. he is employed. I think it is fair to say that if it were reasonably possible to ensure the operation and development of C.I.E. on the basis of keeping all those workers in full-time employment, it would be welcomed here by every Deputy. Deputy Dillon suggested that recruitment should be stopped. He said that a number of employees would be due to go out on reaching pension age, thus leaving gaps which should be filled, not by recruitment but by transferring workers from the various grades.
That suggestion might be examined, but I think there would be quite a number of difficulties and problems to be faced. You are not dealing with a very simple organisation. There are specialists in the various grades, the signal grades, clerical grades and the road undertaking. There are craft workers in a number of these grades who have reached their present position because they have served their apprenticeship to their trades. I am sure the Minister realises quite well that it would be difficult, if not impossible, in the case, say, of a redundant checker, porter or linesman, at a time when there was a demand for a skilled craftsman, to transfer such an unskilled or semiskilled man into that category.
The same position could occur in connection with, say, the signalman. There are so many separate and distinct grades in the service that it would not be easy to make this transfer. Certainly, in proposing to adjust matters by way of such transfer, the representative unions would be involved and consultations would have to take place at I think all levels.
The Minister must be aware of those difficulties and I do not think it necessary to point them out at any great length. However, if it were possible to maintain the employment of as many of the existing employees of C.I.E. by that means, at the highest level, the very fact that the Minister brings this matter before us in this Bill would make it appear that he visualises that, even so, there is inevitably bound to be some redundancy arising from a change in methods, a change in services and a change in operations and that, therefore, this Bill is to deal with the situation of workers affected by such changes.
With regard to the amendment, we welcome the Minister's indication that he proposes to make some changes that will widen the scope of and give protection to further sections of workers. Again, I suggest that the importance of more active steps by the management of C.I.E. to obtain the co-operation and assistance of the trade unions should not be overlooked. I have no doubt but that, if C.I.E. want co-operation and assistance, they will get the whole-hearted co-operation and assistance of the various trade unions representing workers in the concern.