Skip to main content
Normal View

Decentralisation Programme.

Dáil Éireann Debate, Thursday - 30 March 2006

Thursday, 30 March 2006

Questions (21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26)

Simon Coveney

Question:

15 Mr. Coveney asked the Minister for Finance if the issue of confining promotions to only persons willing to decentralise has been modified as a result of recent Labour Court hearings; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12510/06]

View answer

Paul Kehoe

Question:

33 Mr. Kehoe asked the Minister for Finance if he has had discussions publicly or privately or through an intermediary with the management of FÁS in relation to its proposed decentralisation or issued observations in relation to the proposal. [12538/06]

View answer

Pádraic McCormack

Question:

55 Mr. McCormack asked the Minister for Finance his proposals to overcome the impasse in the decentralisation of State agencies where there are very few volunteers to move, no clear career path for persons who opt not to move and attempts by management to confine competitions for promotion to persons willing to decentralise has been ruled in breach of agreements by the Labour Court. [12528/06]

View answer

Dan Boyle

Question:

59 Mr. Boyle asked the Minister for Finance if Government policy on decentralisation in regard to the State agencies has changed from voluntary to compulsion; and what will happen to those employees who refuse to relocate. [12406/06]

View answer

Eamon Ryan

Question:

63 Mr. Eamon Ryan asked the Minister for Finance if he is prepared to review the decentralisation programme for the State agencies in view of the fact that trade union members have issued a strike notice in relation to the issue. [12415/06]

View answer

Ruairí Quinn

Question:

81 Mr. Quinn asked the Minister for Finance if his policy remains that the Government’s decentralisation programme will be carried out on a voluntary basis and that no public servant will be put at a disadvantage as a result of a declining to relocate; his views, in this context, on the growing industrial relations problem in the public sector as a result of problems arising from the decentralisation programme; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [12393/06]

View answer

Written answers

I propose to take Questions Nos. 15, 33, 55, 59, 63 and 81 together.

Both the Government and I have made it clear that participation in the decentralisation programme is voluntary. From the outset guarantees have been provided at Government level that all those employees not wishing to transfer out of Dublin will be facilitated with an alternative public service post in Dublin. This position has not changed.

The following is the current position in relation to promotions policy and decentralisation. In the Civil Service, progress has been made in discussions with the general service unions on issues relating to decentralisation including promotions arrangements. Discussions are ongoing on these issues with the unions representing the professional and technical grades in the Civil Service. I am hopeful these and other decentralisation issues arising in the State agency sector can be discussed with the relevant unions with a view to arriving at arrangements which support the decentralisation process while also meeting the concerns of staff. In the meantime, practices in decentralising organisations relating to recruitment, promotion, etc., must take account of the reality of decentralisation.

Turning now to the FÁS issue, officials of my Department and the parent Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment are in regular communication with FÁS management on various aspects of the implementation of the decentralisation programme. It would be helpful to outline the Labour Court ruling. In its recent recommendation in a dispute between SIPTU and FÁS concerning decentralisation and FÁS contracts of employment, the Labour Court considered the written and oral submissions of the parties. The court also noted the terms of the company-union industrial relations procedures agreement and said that it was of the opinion that FÁS was in breach of the consultation procedures provided for in that agreement. It made no ruling on the substantive issue of the relocation clause.

The court recommended that the matter be referred back to the appropriate central body, at which level the issues should be teased out with a view to arriving at agreed long-term solutions, in consultation with all the parties involved.

I strongly support the full use of existing industrial relations structures by all the parties involved and believe that this represents the best way forward. I would, therefore, encourage all the parties to the dispute to engage in central discussions as recommended by the Labour Court. It is only through dialogue that the issues raised can be addressed. I understand that FÁS has accepted the Labour Court recommendation and is available for talks. I hope that SIPTU will also be agreeable to participate fully in talks to facilitate an early resolution of this dispute.

Undoubtedly, there are complexities involved in the State agency aspects of the decentralisation programme which do not exist in the Civil Service. The Government and the decentralisation implementation group have always recognised that this would be the case. However, both the Government and the DIG remain of the view that these challenges can be addressed through the active engagement of management and unions. This State agency element of the programme will be implemented.

I am confident that we can arrive at a set of arrangements which will progress the decentralisation programme while also addressing the concerns of staff. To do so, however, requires the active engagement of staff interests at the negotiating table.

Top
Share