Leaders of the main Garda staff association, the Garda Representative Association (GRA), are attempting to avert a split in their ranks over the deal which it was hoped would settle their two-year pay dispute.
The basis for the pay deal is a Government offer of a 4 per cent increase in pay and allowances, on top of a previous 9 per cent increase above the national pay award.
The deal is supported by rural gardai, who make up the bulk of the force and who do not work the same three-shift roster system as their city colleagues. The deal is also attractive to the estimated 2,500 gardai who have completed the 30-year service period after which they are entitled to retire on full, index-linked pension. Many of these gardi are waiting for the pay deal to be implemented so they can benefit from the increased pension benefits.
However, city gardai, and particularly the young officers who are facing difficulties in saving enough to buy homes and start families, are strongly opposed to the deal. Their opposition was reflected in the strong poll to reject the deal two weeks ago.
The pay increase is predicated on the city gardai's acceptance of a change to their working conditions which many see as eradicating the rights they earned 30 years ago when gardai first embarked on limited industrial action in support of improved pay and conditions.
The issue of city "rostering" was one of the central issues discussed during July and August before an adjudication board set up to decide the GRA pay claim. The board's report, which was not published, was completed on August 24th.
The board's report reveals that although Garda management is seeking to restructure the shift system for gardai in the city areas, Dublin, Cork, Limerick and Waterford, there is unlikely to be any saving to the Exchequer. Management is seeking to redirect the overtime payments to other areas.
Garda management is seeking to introduce "non-core" starting times which would allow senior officers to change working shifts to provide greater cover during the period from 3 p.m. to 11 p.m. when most crime and police work in the city takes place. Management is seeking the right to alter shifts within 15 days' notice.
In its submission to the Adjudication Board, the GRA said the new roster arrangements would result in savings on overtime and other allowances amounting to £12.6 million. The official side disputed this, putting the savings at closer to £1 million to £1.5 million.
The Adjudication Board stated in its judgment that it was not satisfied about the GRA's projection on savings.
In forming its view it relied on the submission of Garda management who said that savings on overtime payments under the present system would be needed for reallocation for other duties.
The board said it was clear from the Garda management report that "there is an undersupply of overtime in the sense that in many areas there is not enough money available to meet the overtime required for policing that [Dublin] area. He [the Garda management representative] indicated that it is not intended in the foreseeable future to have substantial reduction in the budget allocation for overtime for gardai.
"Rather what will occur is that any savings in overtime which will accrue from the altered rostering arrangements will to a considerable degree be allocated to other overtime duties, thereby bringing about better and more comprehensive policing in certain areas."
The Adjudication Board agreed that the proposed changes in the city police shifts would have a significant impact.
Other changes in working conditions included the introduction of a new computerised information system known as PULSE, increased use of civilian staff and the replacement of the weekly pay packet with a direct two-weekly lodgement system.
The report stated: "On an individual level it is likely that each garda will see fundamental change in the way that he or she carries our their duties and that the effect of the introduction of the measures will be that those duties will be discharged in a more cost-effective and efficient manner."
The board decided that given this change the proposed pay increase met the criteria for a special pay increase. It added that both sides in the dispute agreed that any pay rise would be "within the parameters of Government pay policy".