There is huge disillusionment in the private sector with national agreements and with the ICTU, says Mr Michael O'Reilly, Irish secretary of the ATGWU.

He claims Partnership 2000 and its predecessors have not been even-handed in their treatment of workers in the private and public sectors.

Mr O'Reilly, who heads Ireland's second-largest union, the 55,000 strong Amalgamated Transport Workers Union, maintains that some public service groups have been able to have two or three bites of the cherry, while other workers have not. "This generation of agreements has been detrimental to the interests of workers in the private sector, and those in semi-state companies as well.

"My difficulty is not that other people are good negotiators. I think the leaders of the public service unions do a splendid job, but national agreements only make sense if they are uniform. Private sector workers have suffered disgracefully under these agreements."

Whether or not there is a formal national agreement, Mr O'Reilly argues that the government of the day will strike a public service deal that will be a de facto national agreement with its own employees. But it no longer makes sense to try to fit the needs of a diverse labour market "into the strait-jacket of one agreement".

"People should be able to set their own priorities in the private sector. And those priorities may not always be money.

"There are sections in our own union who would want to make the question of the working week a priority, or pensions."

He does not believe that national agreements are needed to help the more vulnerable elements in the workforce. "If we are really serious about helping the low paid we should agree a flat rate increase and allow people to bargain after that. There is no evidence of support for that approach in the broad coalition that is the Irish Congress of Trade Unions."

Asked if he sees the ICTU as primarily a vehicle for public service unions, Mr O'Reilly says: "There is huge disillusionment in the private sector with the ICTU. Over 50 per cent of people in the private sector vote against these deals and that's who I'm speaking for. I believe that if there was one vote per person in the trade union movement we would reject these agreements."

As evidence of his claim he points out that SIPTU, whose membership is fairly evenly divided between public and private sector employees, only voted narrowly to accept Partnership 2000 and his own union, which is overwhelmingly private sector, voted by almost 80 per cent to reject it.

In arguing against national wage agreements, Mr O'Reilly says he is not arguing for the depoliticisation of trade unions, or abandoning the wider agenda of tackling issues like social exclusion. "I believe there is a political consensus around the centre that will continue, whether we are in national agreements or not. I believe our job is to argue for a much more radical interventionist approach.

"We can't argue for radical political change and an interventionist government if we also act as a prop for every type and variety of coalition government that is on offer. ICTU is now acting as a prop to Mary Harney, what is interventionist or radical about her politics?

"Politicians ultimately have to be responsive to the electorate. I think we should be influencing the political debate and involved in politics." The trade union movement objective should be to help establish a majority left government, he says.

"That doesn't mean you don't deal with the government of the day. But you don't do it by saying we're not going to look after people in the private sector. That almost amounts to a form of discrimination."