Vol. 409 No. 2
4 Mr. Rabbitte asked the Minister for Labour if, in the light of the recent ESB dispute, the Industrial Relations Commission have been asked to draw up codes of practice for industrial relations in the electricity industry; when such codes are likely to be drafted; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
One of the functions of the Labour Relations Commission, as provided in the Industrial Relations Act, 1990, is to prepare codes of practice on various areas of industrial relations. Earlier this year I suggested to the Labour Relations Commission a number of issues, including essential services, on which codes might be prepared and the commission had already begun work in this area. Arising from the recent dispute in the ESB, priority is being given to the preparation of a code of practice on dispute procedures and levels of cover to be provided in relation to disputes in essential services. In drawing up the code the commission will consult employer and union organisations and it is expected that the code will be finalised within months. The Act empowers me on receipt of the code from the commission to make an order declaring that the code is a code of practice for the purposes of the Industrial Relations Act, 1990.
Will the Minister confirm whether in the work which is underway to draw up codes of good practice in the energy industry, account will be specifically taken of the fact that the early warning system in the recent dispute failed and that the country was taken completely unawares as, apparently, were the management of the ESB? The result was that large sections of the country were plunged into darkness and many areas of industry put at risk. Will this specific area be provided for in any new code of industrial practice which is likely to emerge?
"Yes" is the short answer. At Question Time at the end of the dispute I gave a commitment to undertake a confidential examination within the Department with all the various interests in relation to what happened the early warning system. A report is being prepared at the moment and I have had an opportunity over the last four weeks of seeing why it happened. Such an arrangement must be built into a particular code. I have also had the opportunity of seeing the hard reality, in cash terms, of what was lost to the economy and the country during the dispute. One company alone lost £250,000 and I am very conscious that a new code should reflect those difficulties.
I welcome the Minister's approach in the calm of reflection in regard to this problem. Will he agree that any mandatory system of outlawing dispute action in the public utilities would be contrary to the essence of collective bargaining which is characterised by the Labour Relations Commission system? Some areas of the public service do not have the clout of the energy industry, for example, health workers who have to remain at their posts notwithstanding their depth of grievance in relation to whom there was not the same public outcry as in the case of the ESB for mandatory action. There should be a general underpinning by good codes of practice on a voluntary basis to — I hope — avert this kind of dispute in future.
Codes of practice can make an important contribution to the promotion of good industrial relations as they provide practical guidance for employers and unions in relation to standards of good behaviour and particular aspects of industrial relations. They can also clarify the respective rights and responsibilities of unions and managements. Deputies Jim Mitchell, Rabbitte and Toddy O'Sullivan took a major part in the debate of the dispute and they are aware that codes of practice are not legally binding. However, they should foster good practice and encourage reasonable behaviour in accordance with widely held standards. If mandatory arrangements are brought in by legislation or otherwise, they will fail to achieve the purposes I set out and prove to be counter-productive. I have given examples in that regard; It is very easy to have statutory provisions — as other countries have — which cannot be enforced in a major dispute. Therefore, voluntary codes of practice will achieve far more, they may not eliminate every essential service dispute forever but they will negative the damage of some and eliminate others. Codes of practice are a far more sensible approach.
