Mary Flaherty
Ceist:22 Miss Flaherty asked the Minister for Energy the action he proposes to take to ensure that changes are made in the ESB industrial relations structure to ensure that power cuts from industrial action do not recur.
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - ESB Industrial Relations.
Séamus Pattison
Ceist:24 Mr. Pattison asked the Minister for Energy if he will outline the steps he has taken to help to secure a resolution of the ESB strike and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Dick Spring
Ceist:35 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Energy if he has satisfied himself that industrial relations procedures in the ESB are adequate given the implications of an ESB dispute; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Gay Mitchell
Ceist:41 Mr. G. Mitchell asked the Minister for Energy if he will ensure that the Labour Relations Commission and the ESB will jointly study the causes of the recurrent industrial unrest in that company with a view to bringing about industrial peace; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Nuala Fennell
Ceist:45 Mrs. Fennell asked the Minister for Energy whether the recent dispute in the ESB has underlined the need to (1) proceed with the electricity interconnector, (2) allow internal competition and (3) end the ESB's monopoly situation.
Séamus Pattison
Ceist:53 Mr. Pattison asked the Minister for Energy if he will outline the arrangements he is making to ensure that major disputes in the ESB cannot recur in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Michael D'Arcy
Ceist:64 Mr. D'Arcy asked the Minister for Energy the action he can take in co-operation with the ESB management to ensure that there are sufficient skilled personnel available in the event of a full dispute to maintain at least a minimum supply.
Dick Spring
Ceist:67 Mr. Spring asked the Minister for Energy the steps he is going to take to ensure that hospitals and other emergency services are not affected by interruptions of electricity supply in the future; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
Mary Flaherty
Ceist:116 Miss Flaherty asked the Minister for Energy the action he proposes to take to seek to improve the industrial relations climate in the ESB following on the recent dispute which was the third inside seven years.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 22, 24, 35, 41, 45, 53, 64, 67 and 116 together.
As Deputies will be aware, the strike by ESB workers was resolved on Saturday last after the intervention of the Minister for Labour in the dispute.
All parties last week in the Dáil were appalled by the disastrous effects of the ESB strike on individuals, industry and employment. The universal concern about this problem means we must undertake an examination of all options to minimise the risk of a recurrence of this sort of problem. It will obviously be necessary to review all existing structures and procedures both within the ESB and elsewhere to ensure that there is an appropriate mechanism for consideration of grievances and attainment of a just settlement without the need for strikes.
The Government are particularly concerned that this dispute arose so soon after agreement of the Programme for Economic and Social Progress and I am sure the Government can look forward to the support of Congress in developing these important initiatives.
The ESB board are very conscious of the needs of hospitals and other essential services. However, on this occasion it was difficult for the ESB to ensure power for emergency services as the necessary switching is normally carried out by ETU members. As Deputies will be aware, the ETU were supported by members of other unions refusing to pass ETU pickets, thus effectively taking strike action without giving strike notice. Running a modern electricity grid is a very sophisticated operation. The required skills allied to specific experience of ESB systems are only available among ESB staff and with the large number on strike it was only possible to maintain the minimum supply of power necessary to avoid a total shutdown.
As well as examining the need for change in the industrial relations arena, it will also be necessary to consider whether complementary measures are available to minimise our vulnerability to power cuts in the event that a dispute proceeds to the strike stage.
While it is likely that an electricity interconnector would have alleviated the situation, interconnection alone cannot guarantee continuity of supplies in the event of a dispute. Interconnection has been an active policy of this Government; I have facilitated discussions already underway between the ESB and the National Grid Company in the UK. The House can be assured that in the Government's wide-ranging examination of arrangements to minimise our vulnerability to electricity strikes, no option will be ruled out, including a review of ESB's monopoly situation.
Is the Minister aware that the public and the parties in this House were not just appalled at the devastating effect of the strike but also at the apparent helplessness of the Minister in the face of that strike? Had the Minister any prior warning from the ESB? Did he intervene? Has the Minister, at any time during the dispute or since, had a meeting with the chairman, the chief executive and the unions in relation to the problems which emerged last week?
There was no explicit warning issued to the Government, to me as Minister for Energy or to the Minister for Labour, about the gravity of the pending situation and the development of such an extensive and devastating strike. It is exactly because of that situation that the major review is now being carried out. The Minister for Labour has had meetings with the employers' federation this morning. He is meeting with the ICTU on Thursday and had a meeting with the chief executive of the Labour Relations Commission yesterday. The primary objective of these discussions is to initiate proposals for putting together a code of practice for industrial relations. I have had discussions with the chief executive of the ESB. The Government considered the matter this morning and will be taking whatever steps are deemed necessary to ensure that in future this country is not held to ransom as it was during the past week.
I would ask the Minister to elaborate on what he has said. During the 14-day period of strike notice, was he contacted by the ESB or did he attempt to contact them? Would the Minister agree that the action that was subsequently taken by the Minister for Labour should have been taken before the strike occurred? Would the Minister agree that he had an obligation and duty to take some action in the period before the strike took place?
There were notifications and discussions between all the relevant authorities, including my Department. As I said last week in reply to questions, the unions had options open to them which they could have explored further and it was not anticipated that the dispute would have such widespread support within the group of unions in the ESB. The industrial relations machinery that existed within the ESB failed this test and failed to indicate the extent of feeling and the measures that would be taken by the staff. That is most regrettable and the Government are anxious to ensure that these matters are attended to immediately by establishing quickly a new code of practice agreeable to all to ensure that this type of situation is not allowed to arise again.
We still have three Priority Questions to deal with in only five minutes.
I wish to ask two questions. Does the Minister accept that there was and is a bitter industrial relations problem and a total breakdown of communication between management and other levels? Can the Minister explain how he was unaware of this and why he was not made aware of it by senior executives in the organisation? It came out of the blue. This indicates that some people at the highest level are not doing their job properly. The Minister indicated that we would not be held to ransom again. How does he propose to ensure this?
I had hoped for brevity, for obvious reasons.
It is a very important issue. The other questions in my name will have to be left over to another occasion. Has the Minister considered making available to management sufficient trained personnel, whether former employees or other skilled people, who would at least be able to guarantee a minimum service because I do not believe the Government can be seen to do their job unless they can give the public that minimum guarantee?
All the lessons of the recent strike have been dearly learned. With the benefit of hindsight the Government, Opposition and others will be a lot wiser. I doubt whether I could give a guarantee that this would not recur. May I say we are seeking to put in place codes of practice and procedures, hopefully, which will ensure that such circumstances do not recur, but nobody, not even I as Minister, can give that type of guarantee.