Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Wednesday, 14 May 2003

Vol. 566 No. 4

Adjournment Debate. - Job Losses.

Mr. Healy

I am glad of the opportunity to raise this matter and to request that the Tánaiste and Minister for Enterprise, Trade and Employment intervene in the continuing laying off of staff at John Ronan and Sons, Dudleys Mills, Clonmel, and make a statement on the matter.

Approximately 100 workers have been laid off by this company, 90 in Clonmel and ten in a store in Dublin. The factory has three elements: a hide tannery, a sheepskin tannery and a hide and sheepskin trade. The 100 staff have loyal service to the Ronan family ranging from ten to 44 years, most at the upper end of that range. Many have more than 30 years service.

The company laid off the staff on 1 April last for an initial period to the beginning of May with the intention of reviewing the position at that stage. It did that and extended the lay-off period to 7 October. The company has indicated that there are trading difficulties and instanced the war in Iraq as one of the difficulties affecting it.

The workers are not happy with what has been indicated in this regard because it is clear that business is available. A tannery close by, Michel Ireland in Portlaw, which is not far from Clonmel, has in recent weeks advertised for workers to allow for a 50% increase in its workload. A hide company in the Longford area has also taken over a significant amount of the business of the Ronan factory. There is a concern that business exists to be worked on but other motives are behind the lay-offs. Will the Minister of State address the continuing indications that there is a deal with another company which will involve the closure of Ronan's and the transfer of the business to another company, Michel Ireland, in Portlaw?

The workers are trying to establish the right to their jobs and, if that is not possible, to a decent redundancy deal. Of late, they have organised a sit-in on the premises to ensure either their jobs are protected or a reasonable redundancy deal is offered.

I appeal to the Tánaiste to intervene in this dispute. This company is an old established industry in the Clonmel area which began around 1957. It has provided almost 50 years employment in the area, has a tradition of families in the area working for it and a substantial number of the workforce have up to 44 years service with the company. I appeal to the Tánaiste to intervene to ensure the company is viable or a decent redundancy deal is made available to the workforce.

Minister of State at the Department of Health and Children (Mr. B. Lenihan)

In March 2003 John Ronan and Sons Limited, which operates a tannery in Clonmel, announced that it had decided to withdraw temporarily from the tanning business due to a slump in demand and reduced orders. The company laid off a number of process operatives and indicated that these lay-offs would be for a temporary period during which the company would endeavour to build up its order book with a view to re-entering the market. The company has been in operation in Clonmel for more than 40 years and has made an enormous contribution to the economy of the town and the surrounding area.

Employees of the company, due to perceived uncertainties as to future activities, began a sit-in at the company's premises early in April. This sit-in, which was undertaken by members of the Amalgamated Transport and General Workers Union, is an unofficial action.

The Tánaiste has stated in the House on many occasions that it is not appropriate for her to intervene in such disputes. The role of the State is to provide the dispute resolution machinery for the parties to use in the event of a dispute, and the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court have been established for that purpose. The parties should utilise the expert services of the commission and the court to avoid disruption and settle their dispute. The experience and expertise of these services are available free of charge to disputing parties and offer the best avenue for resolving their differences. Ultimately, however, it is the responsibility of the parties concerned to ensure that agreement is reached.

The Labour Relations Commission had contacts with both sides in an effort to bring the parties together. However, the State's dispute resolution machinery should not be utilised while unofficial industrial action by the affected employees continues. Accordingly, I call upon the employees to suspend their unofficial action and avail of the services of the Labour Relations Commission and Labour Court, as appropriate.

Deputy Healy divided his claim into two parts, one for redundancy and one for the security of the employment, but the Labour Court could at least address the issue of redundancy were that to be the end resolution in this issue. Settlement of industrial disputes requires the goodwill of both sides. I take this opportunity to encourage both sides to demonstrate their goodwill and desire to resolve this impasse by engaging in dialogue, either bilaterally or through the dispute resolution machinery.