Léim ar aghaidh chuig an bpríomhábhar
Gnáthamharc

Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 18 Apr 1928

Vol. 23 No. 1

PRIVATE DEPUTIES' BUSINESS. - ADJOURNMENT DEBATE—CORK LABOUR DISPUTE.

I desire to call the attention of the House to the failure or, if you like, the inaction of the Department of Industry and Commerce to intervene in a dispute which may eventuate in a lock-out of a number of Cork Corporation workmen as the result of proposals for a reduction in their wages by the City Commissioner. I do not propose at this stage to go into the merits of the dispute. My purpose is to find out what are the powers and functions of the Department of Industry and Commerce in matters of this kind. Hitherto it has been customary for that Department, when acquainted with disputes, pending or in existence, to endeavour to reconcile the differences between the employer and the employees. It has also been customary for trade unions to notify the Department of disputes pending or in existence. In accordance with the customary practice which, as I have said, hitherto obtained, the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union communicated with Mr. Ferguson, the very courteous and able Secretary of the Department, in the following terms:

A Chara,

A demand has been served by Commissioner Monahan for a drastic reduction in wages on our members employed on Corporation work in Cork City. A conference took place last Thursday between our Cork officials and Mr. Monahan, but no agreement was reached. Seeing that the workers concerned yielded to a cut of 4/6 per week in 1925, and to a further cut of 2/- in 1926, the present demand for a general reduction of 6/- is regarded with the keenest indignation, and if it is imposed a stoppage of work will be inevitable.

That letter was dated 16th April. Today the following communication was received from the Department of Industry and Commerce:

I have your note of the 16th inst., on the subject of the threatened dispute in Cork City as a result of proposals made by the City Commissioner for a reduction in the wages of Corporation workers. You can understand that this Department is not free to take action along the lines generally followed in ordinary industrial disputes owing to the fact that another Government Department, the Department of Local Government, has certain responsibilities in this matter. Any communication on the subject of the intervention on the part of this Department would have to be addressed by you in the first instance to the Department of Local Government.

(Signed) R. C. Ferguson.

The Local Government Department, in answer to communications, state that they have no responsibility in the matter and they cannot intervene. In view of the fact that Cork City is faced with a stoppage of public work without any attempts on the part of the Ministry— attempts, as I have already pointed out, which have been usual up to this—to intervene in a matter of this kind, I would ask why the usual procedure has not been followed in this matter, namely, that the Minister for Industry and Commerce or his representative should not intervene as they have been asked to do by the union representatives.

I desire to make an explanation, as my name has been somewhat prominently associated with this matter. I was speaking to Mr. Monahan some days ago about it, and I am quite confident that Mr. Monahan is a fair-minded man who is capable of acting fairly towards the men. Those in the employment of the Corporation have regular work during the whole year round, and I should say that the Minister——

I do not think we should go into the merits of the dispute.

If the Deputy is to go into the merits of the dispute, to make a case for the Commissioner, then I think I shall have to claim the privilege of going into the merits of the dispute on behalf of the workers.

Deputy Egan will, I think, agree now, after Deputy Anthony's statement, that we must keep to the question of intervention by the Minister for Industry and Commerce. Deputy Anthony has kept strictly within the limits of his notice.

In that event, I do not desire to say anything further.

Unless the Deputy has something to say about the Ministry of Industry and Commerce, he should not intervene.

As a County Cork member, I do not like to intervene too much, but I wish to impress upon the Minister for Industry and Commerce, and also on the Minister for Local Government, that while Cork has been blessed by this Commissioner, it was only a short time ago that Cork was also blessed with a sworn inquiry into certain salaries, and a definite decision was come to by an inspector sent down by the Local Government Department that one official was entitled——

The Deputy must sit down. I cannot allow that.

I want to point out——

The Deputy must sit down.

I notice that Deputy Anthony in a few remarks he made has modified somewhat the words he used earlier this evening. I was rather appalled when I heard him speak of a notice calling attention to the refusal of the Department of Industry and Commerce to intervene in this dispute. To-night he has got a much better phrase. He called it the "failure" or the "inaction" of the Department. He answered it himself to a certain extent by reading the letter which was sent to the Department by the Transport Workers' Union. It is clear now from that letter that there was no invitation to intervene. It is just an ordinary intimation to the Department of a dispute which is likely to lead to a stoppage. He has read the answer which was received. The letter was received on the 17th and the reply was written on the same date. In addition to that I am not sure whether Deputy Anthony is aware that there was a consultation between the official of the Trades Union who wrote that letter to my Department and one of my Departmental officials. How far Deputy Anthony is aware of that and how far I am at liberty to speak of it I do not know. If I were to go into it I would have to give my view of that interview that took place with this representative of the Trades Union. I think it better not as this might be regarded as giving a wrong view of the attitude he took up at that particular interview. He was a representative with whom we have always had the best possible relations. However, there was an interview. I only stress that matter and point to the fact that the matter did not end with the notification that a strike was likely to take place and with the letter from my Department setting out that there were certain difficulties. The difficulties were gone into at the interview. The letter is not in very definite conflict with what the Department for Local Government would say.

It is pointed out that the Department for Local Government has a responsibility in the matter. Deputy Anthony said that the Local Government Department has denied that it has any responsibility in the matter. I cannot say if they did say that, but I think what they did say was that the Commissioner was clothed with all the powers, judicial rights and responsibilities of the old Corporation and the attitude of the Commissioner was that of an elected Corporation. Even if there was an elected Corporation, my attitude in this matter would have to be the same. My Department does intervene in industrial disputes. It intervenes at times without any request being made by either party but generally it intervenes only when a request is made. I have no power to force parties to come together, but generally when a request is put up they come together. There is the other fact that my Department does not intervene when it is clear that one of the parties is not likely to come into the conference. In this particular instance I feel that it is not an ordinary industrial dispute, and I feel that one of the parties is in the place of a local authority. I feel that the Department of Local Government to some extent—I do not like to have to define at this moment what the extent is—stands between me and one of the parties in the dispute.

I do not feel that any useful purpose would be served at the moment by any attempt to intervene. I may say further that there have been attempts made by local people to bring about conciliation, and I have no reason to believe that any attempt on my part would meet with greater success than has, so far, attended, or is likely to attend, the efforts of local people. The information that I have gives me no indication that there is any basis upon which agreement could be reached. If Deputy Anthony gives me any indication privately—I would rather not have the matter discussed openly—that there is any possibility of agreement between the contestants in the dispute, then, although I still hold that the Local Government Department stands between me and intervention in this case, I will see how far I can go. I hesitate to go into any dispute where my entry might complicate matters still further and might not ease the situation. The information I have at present is that intervention would not be of any use. I want to avoid any discussion as to the merits. Obviously, if there is a case for intervention, and if I am to intervene later, it is better I should not discuss the merits.

I was very brief in my remarks in order to give the Minister time to reply. In view of the fact that there is a conflict between two Departments—the Department of Industry and Commerce and the Department of Local Government—will the Minister give me an assurance that he will accede to the request sent him by the representatives of the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union? If he is prepared to accede to the request contained in the communication from the Union that will satisfy me.

No request has been made to me yet. The letter Deputy Anthony refers to contains merely a statement that a "cut" has been announced. It is a mere notification that a dispute is likely to take place. The letter states that a demand has been served by Commissioner Monahan for what is described as "a drastic reduction in wages." The letter goes on to say: "A conference took place last Thursday between our officials and Mr. Monahan, but no agreement was reached.... The present demand for a general reduction of 6/- is regarded with the keenest indignation and if it is enforced a stoppage of work will be unavoidable." That deals with that point. As regards the other point, I am not aware that any dispute has arisen between my Department and the Department of Local Government and Public Health with regard to our respective powers in this matter.

But there is the fact that the Minister for Industry and Commerce said that he was not responsible. I have on several occasions acted with the Ministry in matters of this kind. The usual form was gone through of notifying the Department, which was taken as equivalent to a request for intervention. That has been the custom. I have acted with the Ministry in Cork in settlements of disputes, and I think the procedure from which some good results have accrued might have been followed on this occasion. I do not know what the chances of success would be, but I think the usual procedure might have been tried.

I would ask the Deputy to refer to the letter sent from this Department, in which it is stated: "You can understand that this Department is not free to take action along the lines usually followed in ordinary industrial disputes, owing to the fact that another Government Department —the Department of Local Government—has certain powers and responsibilities." That is, surely, not a refusal. That only states that we cannot act, in this particular instance, as freely as we could in the ordinary type of industrial dispute. There is no refusal. The Department is ready to intervene at any moment that it thinks intervention is likely to lead to any good result. But those circumstances do not obtain at the moment.

Would the Minister intervene before a crux is reached and before the citizens of Cork are, perhaps, left without sanitary or other services? I submit it is the duty of the Ministry to intervene in this case. I do not speak as representing the workers of the city only. I speak as representing the citizens as a whole.

The Minister has stated that there is no dispute between his Department and the Department of Local Government with regard to their respective powers in this matter. May I ask if there is any dispute as to the justification for this drastic reduction, or is there complete unanimity between the two Departments?

I do not propose to say a solitary word on that. If I have to act as arbiter, or umpire, at any other time, I should not be asked to make any statement of this sort at this time.

There is one matter I should like information upon. It arises out of the Minister's statement. The Minister obviously makes a distinction between this case and what he calls the "ordinary dispute." It is not clear to me why that distinction should be made. This Commissioner is acting in the name of the old Corporation. Am I to take it that if there was a dispute likely to occur between a local authority and its employees, the Minister would not consider it his duty to intervene in order to obviate that dispute if he thought he could obviate it? Would he hold the opinion that because the local authority functioned under the Local Government Department he should not intervene? The distinction is not clear to me, and I do not see any reason why it should be made. I cannot see the difference between one class of dispute and another. The Minister's object in intervening in these disputes is to act as conciliator. He has no power to force one side or another into the conference. He tries to bring the parties together and he acts as mediator. I do not see why he should not use his good offices in a dispute between a local authority and its employees just the same as in a dispute between a private company and its employees.

There is just another point. The Minister said that one of the reasons why he did not intervene in this particular case was that he saw no use in offering his good services if one of the parties were not likely to come into the Conference. Are we to assume that the party in this case not likely to come into the Conference was Commissioner Mr. Monahan? I take it that is what he meant, because, as I gathered from Deputy Anthony and the correspondence he read, it would appear that the very fact that the Workers' Union notified the Minister did indicate that they would be pleased if he did intervene and that they would be prepared to come into the Conference. I take it the party not likely to come in is the Commissioner, Mr. Monahan.

The Deputy is making a particular application of a sort of general statement I made. I referred to a type of case in which I would not intervene.

Mr. O'CONNELL

I took it the Minister was making that point in this particular case.

At that moment I was stating that there were cases where we could not intervene. I did not mean that to have any application to this. I did not state it with that intent. As to the question the Deputy asked me, I would not accept it as a general rule that because people were under the control of a local authority, or, to some extent, paid by them, and the local authority did not want my interference, I would not interfere. But obviously the chances of success are prejudiced if, say in the case of a local authority paying road workers, the local authority states: "We do not want you. We think we are quite right. We do not want intervention." Obviously there would not be a chance of a successful intervention. But the case I am making generally is, in so far as the Department of Local Government has a certain function—I am not going into the details of how far their powers go or exist—in so far as it has a certain authority with regard to local authorities, I have made it my practice always to ask that Department, and to take its advice, before I intervene in anything which has relation to a local authority. I ask their advice. I do not say I always take it. I think it is only right that one Government Department should communicate with another in the sphere that particular Department is responsible for. In this case the matter is somewhat complicated. I want to get back to Deputy Anthony's question. I have not refused to intervene in this dispute. There have been a few letters to us and one interview. Those interviews can go on, and there is a possibility that they may result in intervention in the end, but I would not have myself taken as now saying that I see any case for intervention at this moment.

I would like to make the position clear with regard to the Department of Local Government. Deputies on the Labour Benches will remember that recently I had approaches from them with a view to stopping the state of affairs that existed where the Local Government Department prescribed certain rates for certain workers under local bodies urging that the local authorities were the people who controlled local circumstances and that they ought to be allowed to pay the rates they considered were proper for the particular class of work which was being done in accordance with general conditions in their area. In going into the general circumstances of the case I realised that was reasonable. As a matter of fact, with a view to making the position from that point of view clearer and in furtherance of the policy of the Department to disentangle as much as possible petty matters in our relations with and control of local bodies I have had the whole question considered, including the position of minor officers under the local bodies. An Order has been prepared and is practically ready for issue placing the responsibility for conditions and terms of service and pay in respect of the minor officers of local bodies entirely on local bodies themselves. So, as far as I am concerned as Minister for Local Government at the moment, it is my desire that the Department here shall not be rate fixing, shall not attempt to fix the rates of pay for workers or minor officials of local bodies. In that spirit I would hesitate as Minister for Local Government at the appearance of a dispute over wages between a local body and its workers to interfere until either an application from one side or the other or the development of any particular set of circumstances decided me in favour of intervention. I know nothing of the Cork dispute, and nothing that would bring me into the situation at this particular moment or which would suggest to me that I ought to approach the Minister for Industry and Commerce to bring him into it. I desire that in so far as the workers and minor officials of local bodies, their rates of pay and conditions of service are concerned they will be, so far as we can possibly arrange, de-centralised in their control from the Department of Local Government and left to the people responsible for local government.

The Minister for Industry and Commerce referred to the fact that up to the present he had not received any request to intervene in this particular dispute. I would like to ask the Minister if he has received a request from the Irish Transport and General Workers' Union to convene a conference between representatives of the men and the Commissioner, and is he prepared to do so?

Not at all. Not merely on the receipt of such a request. I merely pointed out to Deputy Anthony that the letter was a notification and not a request. I do not want it to be understood that if I got a request I would take immediate steps to convene a conference. I must be allowed to use my judgment as to whether or not a conference is likely to be any good.

I would point out that the phrase used in the letter from the Ministry of Industry and Commerce was: "Another Government Department—namely, the Department of Local Government—has certain powers and responsibilities in this matter." I suggest that those powers should be exercised and those responsibilities faced. I have already stated that I am asking, not alone on behalf of the people I directly represent, but on behalf of the Cork citizens generally, that the Ministry should intervene at this moment. It may serve a useful purpose now, and I also suggest that there is no use in waiting for things to develop. They may not develop in the way the Ministry assumes they will develop. I personally ask that the Ministry should intervene. I may say I have no authority from the union concerned to ask that, but I ask it as a citizen of Cork.

The Deputy's request will be borne in mind. That is the most I can say. We take it as a request from a responsible Deputy.

The Dáil adjourned at 9 p.m.

Barr
Roinn