asked the Minister for Labour if, in view of the impasse which has now arisen in the negotiations for the settlement of the bank dispute and of the very serious effects its continuance is having on the economy, he will hold an inquiry into all aspects of the matter; and if he will make a statement on the situation.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Bank Dispute.
14.
The parties in the banks dispute have been negotiating within their own joint industrial council.
The constitution of the joint industrial council, which was negotiated between the parties some years ago, provides that, if the council does not succeed in effecting a settlement of a dispute, the matter may be referred by either side to a tribunal consisting of a chairman and two other members.
The negotiations broke down on the 16th July. Reference to a tribunal under the agreed procedures was rejected and accordingly I asked the Labour Court, on the following day, to examine the situation and report to me.
The examination by the Labour Court is proceeding.
In view of the protracted nature of this dispute and the serious consequences involved to the economy, would the Minister consider incorporating in the course of the inquiry a recommendation for different negotiating procedure, both in respect of pay and conditions?
This is indeed a serious dispute. It would justify examination after a settlement is reached. The Labour Court now, as requested by me under section 24 of the 1946 Act, can carry out an investigation. It is another matter whether it will be considered sufficient or ample. In any event, the procedure will have to be examined. The procedure available to them now of a joint industrial council was agreed by all parties and held to be an ideal piece of machinery for settling all future disputes.
Would the Minister not agree that the same situation arose in the cement dispute? It was suggested that he should intervene. Although he refused on the same grounds that he is now refusing to intervene in the bank dispute, eventually he had to intervene and get a settlement arranged. Before things get any worse, would he not consider intervening in this dispute now?
I do not like at this juncture saying too much about it because it is in the course of examination by the Labour Court. The cement people had exhausted all the machinery available to them. I am not too happy that those people have done that. They seem to want to set themselves up as people apart and to have only the Taoiseach or some top person settling their dispute.
Is there not an objection from the point of view of the community to the idea that in disputes of this character either a Minister or the Taoiseach should become a court of appeal?
This is a totally new departure which may have to be considered. We would prefer to see the present system of free collective bargaining going ahead successfully rather than bringing in the Government or any Department of it as part of the machinery.
Would the Minister not agree, in view of the difficulties that have arisen and the character of this particular dispute, in the sense that the particular service which is provided by banks is such a vital link in the economic chain, that it might be desirable at this stage to consider alternative negotiating procedure and also to consider the question of either service contracts or employment contracts which would be applicable to the parties involved in the dispute?
It is obvious that some special machinery should be available to those people if they regard themselves as people apart. I am not too sure that what is happening here is not to a great extent related to what the Hierarchy referred to some time ago—people using economic power or the ability to hold the community up to ransom—rather than the justice of the case?
Has the Minister's attention not been drawn to the statement of the secretary of the Bank Officials Association that his referring this matter at this stage to the Labour Court will prolong the dispute? I believe that to be true. Has the Minister no intention of paying attention to this statement by the Irish Bank Officials Association?
I do not agree with what is implied in the Deputy's supplementary question that this would only prolong the dispute. In any event, no matter what happens eventually, an examination of the case now by the Labour Court is an essential step in this matter.
All I can say is that this has taken a very long time.
(Cavan): Would the Minister not agree that special steps might be considered by him and by the Government in this dispute? In a normal dispute only services are withheld from the public, but in this dispute people are being deprived of their property and their money. They are being put to very considerable inconvenience. Their rightful property is being put into cold storage and they are being deprived of it for long periods of time.
The banks are now closed illegally. The whole thing is illegal.