asked the Taoiseach if the Government have given further consideration to any steps which might serve to terminate the present dispute between certain employees and CIE; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Transport Dispute.
1.
The Deputy will have learned from the Press that on Thursday last, the 17th instant, the Irish Congress of Trade Unions sent a letter to the Labour Court asking the Court to investigate, at once, all outstanding claims and grievances of Unions having members employed by Córas Iompair Éireann.
In response to that request the Labour Court had discussions, on Friday last, with representatives of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and of Córas Iompair Éireann and, on Saturday last, with representatives of the CIE group of Unions and of the National Busmen's Union. Later, on Saturday, the Labour Court announced that it was considering the position further in the light of those discussions but that up to the moment it had little hope of being able to find a basis for an early resumption of work.
There has been no change in the situation since that announcement by the Labour Court, nor any indication that its further consideration of the position has disclosed the possibility of a useful initiative on its part at present.
Has the Taoiseach considered whether either the Minister for Industry and Commerce or the Minister for Transport and Power might investigate the circumstances which have arisen, whereby a particular union, the NBU is recognised for certain purposes by CIE but has not access to the same staff negotiating machinery as the other unions and has he considered that that particular circumstance has operated in any way to prevent a general discussion of the problem?
I do not think there is anything to be investigated there. The position is that the union to which the Deputy referred, the National Busmen's Union, is licensed by the Minister for Industry and Commerce and is recognised by CIE. It is not a party to this negotiating machinery which was set up by agreement between CIE and the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and which is confined in its scope to unions which are affiliated to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. It is possible that some easement of the situation could be achieved in an adjustment of that position, but it is not a matter in which investigation by the Minister would be of any use.
Would the Taoiseach not consider taking some steps to see that the Labour Court will meet the parties in the dispute again?
As far as I know the Labour Court has not indicated that it has brought to an end its interest in the dispute.
The Taoiseach will admit, I think, that the Labour Court in its statement appeared to be very pessimistic, more pessimistic than the situation really warrants, and it is my firm belief that there might be progress if the Labour Court called the interested parties together again.
I am sure that, if the Labour Court has any reason to think that, it will do so.
May I also ask the Taoiseach if his attention has been brought—I do not want now to make mischief here; I want to say that at the outset—to a statement appearing in this evening's Evening Herald to the effect that CIE are seeking an injunction against the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union to prevent that body pursuing a claim for a shorter working week on the basis of the claim being in contravention of the National Agreement? Would the Taoiseach not agree that such a move in present circumstances is calculated only to damage further industrial relations between CIE and other unions?
I have not seen that statement and I do not know if there is any foundation for it. In any event, I would not be prepared to comment on it.
May I say it is scandalous behaviour on the part of CIE if, in these circumstances of a transport dispute, they seek to get an injunction against a reputable union which is not contravening, and does not want to contravene, the National Wage Agreement?
May I say that the Government are gravely concerned by all the implications in this situation, both in regard to management-worker relations generally and in regard, of course, to the future of transport policy? It has been the experience in the past that, when CIE freight services were interrupted, either road or rail, there was a serious and permanent loss of business to CIE subsequently because firms that used these services decided to make their own transport arrangements. The implications of this situation in relation to transport policy generally will, of course, have to be taken into account.
Does that not emphasise the point I made earlier that no technicality in regard to negotiating machinery should be allowed to stand in the way of any possibility of fruitful discussions or, at any rate, some discussions?
The Deputy will appreciate that it is not a matter in regard to which I have any official knowledge, but inquiries I have made with regard to the point he has raised indicate that the National Busmen's Union has not applied for affiliation to the Irish Congress of Trade Unions and I assume it would be difficult for the Congress to regularise the position of the Union in regard to the negotiating machinery without such an application.
I think the Taoiseach must be forced to admit—if not in public, then to himself—that CIE have not behaved very tactfully in the past ten days, what with this lockout, now this injunction and the abuse in advertisements at the taxpayers' expense of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions. These things are not calculated to improve industrial relations.
I share with the Deputy the hope that there will be in the next few days an outburst of tact and commonsense and logic in this situation.
On the part of CIE. They opted out of their responsibility to provide public transport. They multiplied the strike.