Deputy De Rossa has been given permission to raise on the Adjournment of the House the subject matter of a Private Notice Question submitted by him today.
Adjournment Debate. - Bus Dispute.
I sought to raise the question of the threatened disruption of the bus services as a result of action by the management of CIE. I should like to thank the Ceann Comhairle for giving me the opportunity to raise this matter and to thank the Minister for coming here at this late hour to reply.
I find it extraordinary that a semi-State company like CIE should refuse to avail of the services of another State agency which was established specifically to help avoid a total breakdown in industrial relations. In the past Government Ministers have been very quick to criticise and condemn the trade union movement if they did not avail of the Labour Court. Therefore it is rather surprising to have the present situation where CIE refuse to go before that body. While the negotiations for the pay as you enter bus service, or the one person operated bus as it is known, have been going on for the past 18 years, the recent overwhelming rejection of the latest CIE offer by all the unions involved shows there are still areas not satisfactorily ironed out and in need of very patient negotiations.
One person operated buses cannot be introduced without the co-operation of the staff, the workers and the trade unions involved. While there are still issues to be resolved and while the workers are willing and even anxious to bring the matter before the Labour Court, it is extraordinary that this showdown has been precipitated at this time by the management of CIE. There are major difficulties in operating double deck pay as you enter buses. They can only be introduced effectively on a gradual, on a phased and on an agreed basis, where they are capable of being operated efficiently and safely, not just from the point of view of the company but from the point of view of the men and women who have to operate them, and particularly from the point of view of the men, women and children who will have to use them. A major obstacle in the way of their introduction is the method of fare collection, the security of the drivers, the stresses and the greater responsibility which the drivers, both men and women, will have to bear in handling these buses on their own.
Unfortunately, in recent years there has been a rise in the number of attacks on bus workers. Studies in other cities where these pay as you enter buses have been in operation have shown that the stress on the drivers has resulted in a very high level of heart conditions among them. There are serious issues in the whole area. Along with that, the bus workers are amongst the lowest paid workers. A married man with three children who does not work his rest day takes home approximately £92 per week and if he works on his rest day he may take home about £120. That could include shifts which could have a spread of almost 12 hours through the day with possibly a five hour break in the middle of the day. In those circumstances the bus workers concerned do not refuse substantial increases in pay without very serious reasons. The whole question of security and the nature of the work and the hours they have to work are issues which have to be dealt with in a humane way.
There are other problems relating to these kinds of buses. How do bus workers cope with elderly passengers, men and women with young children and prams, pregnant women and so forth? There are disadvantages in the system. From studies made in other countries, particularly in London and Manchester, it has been found that these buses take four times as long to travel distances previously covered by two person buses. This has resulted in some cases in a reduction in the number of passengers who have a choice of other modes of transport.
In this instance it is significant that CIE have chosen this time of year to force a showdown on this issue which has been around for 18 years. The fact that it has been around for 18 years does no credit to industrial relations. The DART system and the feeder services for it, which is the issue which has been used to precipitate the present situation, has been with us now for 18 months. The DART system has been quite successful and there is no doubt that it requires the feeder service to extend its use to other areas of the city. Why did CIE select next Monday to implement the feeder service? Why did they pick today to insist that bus workers must turn up for training in the new system? The only logical explanation is that they calculated that three weeks before Christmas is the bus workers most vulnerable time. They know that bus workers cannot afford to lose pay coming up to Christmas, that the areas most affected by a stoppage of buses or by a company lock-out are working class areas where most of the bus workers live and that they would obviously come under pressure to concede. What man or woman with a family would like to be locked out or involved in a dispute with a resultant loss of pay at this time of year? The escalation of this issue can affect the Christmas trade in the city and can cause a loss of jobs.
The decision of CIE not to go to the Labour Court is outrageous and it must be unprecedented for a semi-State company to take that action. It cannot have been done without the connivance of the Minister for Communications. It is further manifestation of the "Rambo" style of industrial relations being pursued by other companies under the Minister's direction. CIE management now appear to be persuaded that they should follow the lead given by Mr. Alex Spain of B & I where normal procedures have been thrown out the window. We know that the Minister for Labour has the power under the Industrial Relations Act, 1946, specifically under sections 18 and 24, to require the Labour Court to intervene in the public interest and report to him on the issues. If there was ever a dispute where the public interest was affected this must be it and the Minister for Labour should intervene and ensure that sanity prevails.
I commend the responsibility and mature reaction of bus workers and their unions in refusing to be pushed into a strike by the company's suspension of 20 of their colleagues. This is a clear indication of where the Minister must exert his influence in order to bring about a resolution of this problem. I never thought I would see the day when a semi-State company would use the tactics which William Martin Murphy used almost 72 years ago when he attempted to break the transport workers of this city. He failed then and I have no doubt that the tactics of today's CIE management will also fail. The Minister for Communications and the Minister for Labour must not allow the bus workers or the public transport users to be the victims of the tactics being pursued by the management of the company. I appeal to both Ministers to intervene and ensure that negotiations are started through the Labour Court.
Under the Transport Acts matters such as employment and conditions of employment are the responsibility of the board of Córas Iompair Éireann. It is my policy not to interfere in functions of CIE which are day-to-day matters.
One-person-operation of buses has been under negotiation since 1967, a period of 18 years of continuous negotiation. Since July of that year CIE have used all the negotiating machinery established by the State as a means of reaching agreement on OPO working. Hundreds of meetings and thousands of hours have been devoted by management and unions to the issue. The lengthy process of negotiation led to the Labour Court recommendation on 23 August last and the court's clarification on 10 October. The board informed the unions that from 8 December they proposed to introduce OPO, including DART feeder buses. The Labour Court recommendation, a long detailed document, concluded
Whatever the overall benefits of OPO to the company and the community, it should be clear that there are tangible benefits to bus workers who choose to avail of them. The proposals are entirely voluntary for each individual. They contain no threat to the job or security of any individual existing bus worker. In the light of this, the Court strongly recommends that the bus workers accept them now for Dublin as a blueprint for other cities.
OPO will bring an increase of £52.72 to bring the weekly wage for a basic 40 hour week for bus drivers to £210.91.
The consumer would benefit by a 20 per cent fare discount per journey — a saving of £1.60 per week on a ten journey ticket for a commuter currently paying a single fare of 80p. These tickets will be available from retail outlets and CIE offices to accommodate the public and to ease the work pressures of drivers. In addition each OPO bus will be fitted with a cash safe.
The board will benefit from a reduction in expenditure of about £4.5 million on Dublin city services each year after the implementation period of four years. The Exchequer will benefit from this reduction in expenditure which will be reflected in the level of subvention necessary for CIE. This is of importance in the context of CIE achieving the targets set by Government and to contribute to the long term future of CIE under the re-organisation plan.
The success of DART is dependent on the introduction of feeder services. CIE need 82,000 passengers per day on DART by 1987 in order for the system to meet its operating costs. This is exclusive of the Exchequer support for the interest charges on the capital cost of DART now running at £16 million per annum. Dublin is now virtually the last city in Europe to introduce OPO.
Implementation of the Labour Court recommendation seems a reasonable basis for the introduction of OPO. I appeal to the unions and the CIE bus drivers and conductors to think seriously on the damage which may be done by withholding their consent to the solution which is so strongly recommended by the Labour Court. The image of Dublin city services has been very seriously damaged by industrial relations there. However, I am very heartened by performance in that regard for 1985, the first year since 1972 so far that there has been no significant industrial stoppage in Dublin city services. I earnestly hope that CIE and their employees will build solidly on that base.
I would very much regret the hardships on the travelling public should bus services in Dublin be interrupted. I sincerely hope they will not be exposed once again to such a situation. At this stage there is no indication that circumstances such as those indicated by the Deputy will materialise.
The chairman of CIE has made the board's position clear on participation in a suggested conciliation conference. In that situation and taking account of the Labour Court recommendation, the statutory responsibility of the board for industrial relations in CIE and all the other circumstances, it would be inappropriate for me to intervene in such day-to-day matters of CIE.
In conclusion let me answer a number of points raised by Deputy De Rossa. He asked why CIE management picked today. They did not pick today. The calendar of events picked today. The Labour Court recommendation came out on 23 August. There were clarification talks at the Labour Court on 10 October and subsequently there were ballots by the unions which concluded only a few weeks ago. Therefore, after 18 years and a very strong and clear Labour Court recommendation, the management took their own decision. The Minister did not connive at that decision and was not implicated.
In the past three years successively each year CIE have reduced their deficit in real terms so that the deficit this year will be 25 per cent less in real terms than it was in 1982. In the preceding 15 years it escalated by seven times the rate of inflation. This success has been achieved by a number of factors, chiefly by Ministers not interfering in the day-to-day affairs of the company, and leaving them to the board and management appointed for that purpose. I intend to continue to pursue that policy. Not only has it been successful financially, but that financial success has been achieved without massive curtailment of services or massive redundancies.
It has also brought about an improvement in industrial relations. As I have said, 1985 so far is the first year since 1972 that there has been no industrial relations stoppage whatever in Dublin city. I consider it extemely important that strikes and threats of strikes should cease in Dublin city if the company are to get back the passenger numbers they have lost and provide a much brighter future for their employees. I am glad that the indications so far this year are that, for the first time in several years, there has been an increase in passenger numbers in Dublin city services.
The Dáil adjourned at 11.25 p.m. until 10.30 a.m. on Thursday, 5 December 1985.