I would like to thank the Minister for his presence here tonight for this debate on what I consider an important issue in our area. It is in connection with the strike in the Goodman plant in Rathkeale, County Limerick. This strike, which has continued over the past seven weeks, has led to a very serious position. Many attempts have been made to try to settle this. My information is, however, that the two sides are so far apart at the moment that, even now as a conciliation conference is taking place, the likelihood is that there will not be a solution at the end of this conference.
The issue is of great concern to the people of Rathkeale. It is a small town with a population of fewer than 2,000; and an industry with a turnover of £26 million and of wages going into the area of almost £2 million is a vital part of the economy. The loss of such an industry would have a devastating effect on the town of Rathkeale and of County Limerick in general. There is a strong possibility and a danger that this industry will be lost to the area. It will also be a loss to the farmers in the region, who for 38 years have supported this company. They were instrumental in the setting up of the original factory and have sold their cattle and supported the company over that time. Now because of this strike it is possible that the company will close for at least a year and a half. My hope is that the Minister will intervene and try to obtain a settlement. At this stage it is necessary to do so.
The factory was established in 1952 by the people of Rathkeale. The objective at the time was to create employment there. That remained the objective of the organisation and coloured the industrial relations process of the organisation over the years. They were always regarded as good employers who treated their employees in a fair fashion, who were progressive in their industrial relations policies, and the natural conflicts that arise in an organisation were always solved through the industrial relations process, through the negotiations, discussion and communications that are general in good employers.
The company were profitable up to the sale of the company. In the year the company were sold to the Goodman Group, 1987, they experienced their second biggest profit since 1952. The company were successful. They were a public company and the shares were brought from two shareholders which gave the Goodman Group a majority shareholding in the company. The objectives of the company changed obviously from being one of solely creating employment and improving the economy of the locality, as well as making profit, to one of solely making profit and reducing cost to the minimum, regardless of the consequences to the people and to the locality.
The issue has got to do with a bonus scheme which was established in 1974. It was a work study scheme based on work measurement, the establishment of work values and a bonus based on such a scientific approach. During 1974 to the takeover and up to six months after that there was a work study department in existence which ensured that the bonus scheme was kept up to date, that the scheme was updated to take into account any changes in work practices or in equipment, that new values were installed and that the scheme was maintained. Any argument that the scheme fell into disrepair over that period is not a viable argument.
In early 1988 the then work study department was abolished. The personnel management was also withdrawn from the company and over a period of time, because the scheme was not maintained, the standards slipped somewhat and the company changed their approach. I believe it was a conscious decision by the company to allow the scheme to go into disarray and to then create the argument that the scheme should be withdrawn. The purpose of the exercise was to reduce cost and to reduce the level of remuneration to the employees. This is what has happened and has created the problem.
The present situation is that the company have unilaterally withdrawn the measured scheme and have proposed the introduction of a piece work scheme. The company were fully aware that a strike would ensue from this. It was not news to the company because in October, during the height of the busy season in the meat industry, in the killing period, the company made an attempt to withdraw the scheme and were issued with strike notice. They decided instead to pick the period of January when the company was best able to take the strike because of the seasonality aspect of the trade.
Having looked at the new scheme and having known the old scheme intimately because, in fact, I was instrumental in introducing that scheme and in maintaining that scheme for a period of 16 or 17 years, there is no doubt that there is a substantial drop in remuneration to the employees at a time when standards of living and cost of living, etc., are under pressure. It is difficult at any time to ask employees to take a drop in incomes.
I believe that change is necessary in any organisation but change must come about by negotiation, by agreement, by the understanding of the employees, and by the understanding of the company that they must get agreement from the employees rather than create conflict and unilaterally change working conditions. Changes have come about prior to this in Shannon Meat in Rathkeale with the agreement of the workers. The workers were always positive towards change, once they understood the issues involved. They embraced change when they saw it was necessary. Certainly with the profitable levels of the parent organisation and the profitability levels of the factory itself it is very hard to convince workers that they should take a cut in their standards of living when the same organisation is in the process of buying up various enterprises right throughout Europe. Obviously it is the responsibility of the Goodman group to try to make their operations as cost effective as possible but I believe this is not the issue on which they should do it. I believe the approach, which I refer to as a macho-management approach, towards the problem and working towards a win lose situation and involving themselves in certain activities which have aggravated the situation there are not conducive to bringing about a settlement to this. I believe, and I am convinced of this because of other experiences, that the survival of the factory is under threat, if not indefinitely certainly for a period of time.
One of the biggest, most effective and most successful beef canning facilities is in Rathkeale. It was built up by the people of Rathkeale. It was built up by the management in Rathkeale prior to the Goodman takeover. There is a great worry that if the strike continues this facility will be lost, moved elsewhere, either within this country or abroad. This is a very successful enterprise and I would be very concerned that this will be lost even if there is a closure for a period of 12 months or a year and a half.
The sides are very much apart; the company are not prepared to substantially concede their proposals. The union sees the situation as so far removed from what their objectives are that they are not in a position to consider any change from their position. I believe that tonight will again prove that there is a very serious situation there and I think it is incumbent on us all to try to find a solution.
I have done what I could locally to try to obtain a solution, to influence the people involved but to no avail. The situation is becoming more and more serious and I earnestly ask the Minister to do everything he can by way of intervention or any other way to try to bring about a resolution. I am also aware, through my contacts in the industrial relations area, that any conciliation conferences that took place so far were of absolutely no help and in fact the position is so serious that the groups did not even meet at those conciliation conferences. Normally at conciliation people sit across the table from each other and have a certain discussion before going into side conferences but the situation is so serious that the groups will not even meet. I would implore the Minister again to do what he can to intervene in the situation and ensure that this enterprise and this employment is saved for the people of Rathkeale, for the economy of Rathkeale, especially for the employees who are likely to lose their jobs and for the farmers who support it and who require this service in the mid-west.
