asked the Minister for Labour to take whatever steps are available to him to assist in resolving the current dispute in the ESB in the interests of both the staff and the consumer.
Private Notice Question. - ESB Dispute.
asked the Minister for Labour if in view of the deadlock in discussions between the chief executive of the ESB and the ESBOA what proosals he has to intervene and bring both sides together in meaningful negotiations on all the issues involved and thereby ensuring that there will be no interruption in power supply to the consumer.
At the beginning of this month the ESB Officers Association, which represents clerical, administrative, counting, technical, sales and supervisory staff in the ESB commenced industrial action in protest at the reduction of staff numbers. Basically the action resulted in affecting the billing and accounts functions in the ESB as well as telephone switchboards. Pickets have not been placed as yet and there is no immediate threat to electricity supply. The chief executive of the board has had a series of meetings with representatives of the other unions in the board over the past week. This resulted in a document settling out a framework for relations between the ESBOA and the board and it was transmitted to the ESB group of unions and to the ATGWU. The ESBOA yesterday rejected the terms of this document and indicated that the union's intention was to escalate the dispute further. The ESBOA executive are meeting, and other unions in the board, today to review the situation. The ESB have their own domestic dispute-settling machinery which has proved effective over the years and I would ask the parties to use that machinery at once.
I should like to thank the Minister for his reply. Notwithstanding the fact that the ESB have a very elaborate industrial relations machinery and set of procedures, will the Minister share with me the concern of most of the country, particularly those in the productive sector, that those processes do not appear to be working effectively? Will the Minister agree that the main participant in the dispute, the ESBOA have publicly expressed their dissatisfaction with the existing procedures and their desire to have an external intervention in order to resolve the matter? Having regard to that public statement will the Minister consider asking the Labour Court to intervene or make some other process of external intervention available?
Deputies are always very helpful when the House is considering industrial disputes and they will appreciate that I do not wish to say anything that may prove unhelpful. I have kept in touch with the strike in the last three weeks. Certain processes that were being followed failed. That is the end of them, as far as I see it. The joint industrial council, as the House will be aware, effectively have the same role or powers as the Labour Court normally would have in any other area and they have not been used in this dispute. Unfortunately, it is not open to me to instruct the chairman of the council to convene both sides; the request must come from both sides. All I can do is appeal to both sides — there may be some difficulties in doing that — to use those procedures. The last thing the country needs is any type of power strike. It would be disastrous. It seems to me that there are some grounds for discussing the dispute in the joint industrial council. It might be easier for me to do something else but the fact is that the dispute has not escalated and there are no pickets. The parties, in their own interests and because they have an elaborate mechanism for dealing with industrial disputes and a strong body with considerable powers, should, in the interests of good industrial relations, use the joint industrial council to try to resolve the issue. I appeal to them to do that.
If management and the unions indicate to me that there is no role for their joint industrial council in the efforts to resolve the dispute which is entering its fourth week, I will ask the Labour Court to intervene. I want to make it clear that I am asking the joint industrial council to inform us if they have a role to play, and if they do not, I will ask the Labour Court to intervene.
I appreciate the Minister's position and I do not expect him to say anything that might jeopardise his role in this dispute but there are complexities and difficulties involved. It is appreciated that it is not a question of money, conditions or something straightforward like that. The issue seems to be more complex. I should like to ask the Minister if he appreciates that the dispute has reached the stage where it could get worse because of the shouting both sides are engaged in through the press. There is a grave danger of a major escalation of the dispute because there is a principle involved on both sides, the right to negotiate changes in staffing and so on on the workers' side, and management's principle of the right to manage their staff. I am sure the Minister appreciates such issues have been raised in other sectors. I should like to ask the Minister if it is possible for him to speak to each side with a view to trying to get them to go before the joint industrial council, or getting them to meet. If that is possible will the Minister consider doing it?
I do not wish to say too much about that other than that I am aware of the views of both sides. However, it would be useful for the groups to use what is their own industrial mechanism, the joint industrial council. Members will agree that an organisation that has a very good structure for resolving industrial difficulties should use that procedure. If that does not prove successful I will be happy to ask the Labour Court to intervene. I am allowing time to elapse to allow the group of unions to use their own industrial mechanism, as I would have thought they would prefer. If they do not respond to that, or are not able to for some reason I will ask the Labour Court to intervene. I will not do so until I get a response from the JIC. I should like to add that nobody wishes to see another power strike, whether it affects the industrial or the domestic sector. I do not think it helps the issue if people are talking about that.
While there are agencies and mechanisms there they should be used. I do not wish to take any side or to express any view about the arguments but there is an obligation on both sides to use that machinery. I thank the Deputies for putting down the questions and I call on them to use their own mechanism, if they cannot use their own mechanism in the joint industrial council, I will then use the powers I have and ask the Labour Court to get involved tomorrow morning.
Perhaps Deputy Quinn will accept that one final supplementary question should satisfy the spirit of the question.
The Minister seems to indicate that there is a sense of urgency in relation to this matter. Would he not agree that the failure of the existing, and indeed expensive, machinery to resolve this dispute is a matter of long term concern? Would he also not agree because of the nature of the dispute in question, which will affect literally every house, factory and productive premises in the country, that it cannot be treated as any other industrial dispute, and will he therefore have the content of this Private Notice Question and the debate that has taken place here today and his own formal public appeal to both sides made directly known to the participants without delay so that we can see some action on this matter?
I intend to do so at 4 p.m.
Thank you.