The undermining of social partnership and the proposed break-up of Aer Rianta, are among the issues that must be addressed by the Government before SIPTU will participate in further partnership talks, a senior SIPTU official has said.
In a speech to the Galway Mayo Institute of Technology (GMIT) this evening, Mr Jack O'Connor, general president of SIPTU, questioned whether the "so-called social partnership" was compatible with the "race to the bottom" now underway.
Mr O'Connor said that despite all the "bluster and prophesies of doom" from the employer organisation, there is space to conclude a pay agreement based on inflation and growth, projected at between 3.5 per cent and 4.5 per cent respectively for 2004 and 2005.
He said recent Eurostat data published by the Wall Street Journal last Saturday showed Irish labour costs were only 11th in Europe and our labour productivity was second highest.
Mr O'Connor said the proposed Aer Rianta break-up and the privatisation of the bus market, were "symptomatic of a deeply ideological preoccupation with "competition as the recipe for all problems.
"It ignores the real key and pressing issues in each of these sectors and flagrantly disregards the lessons of international experience as far as the implications for the travelling public are concerned," Mr O'Connor said.
He said that from the perspective of security and quality of employment and standards of employment into the future, the "overwhelming body of international evidence suggests entirely negative outcomes".
He added that this must be viewed in the context of a "clearly emerging pattern of deteriorating standards in the quality of employment" across various sectors.
"Increasingly, work traditionally performed by trade union members in the public sector is being outsourced on the basis of contracts excluding any reference to trade union rights and pay and terms of employment, including pension and sick pay provision."
"Clearly in this the most prosperous and rapidly growing economy in Europe a 'race to the bottom' is well underway, driven by a preoccupation with a version of 'competitiveness' in which cost advantage is achieved at the expense of workers and which is facilitated by the approach of the authorities."
Mr O'Connor said the question must be posed as to whether so-called social partnership was compatible with this "race to the bottom".
"Ironically, I must acknowledge as a trade unionist that whatever prospect exists of addressing these issues within the process, there is less outside it - which of course is precisely why those neo-liberal economic commentators on the hard right despise it so much and apply themselves so assiduously to the objective of bringing about its demise."
Mr O'Connor conceded that on the union side too, change that is "positive and constructive" had to be promoted.
"Indeed it may well be that the challenge faced by social partnership is that of reconciling the objective of a dynamic competitive economy with that of fairness and promotion of workers' rights and interest in the workplace.
"And, to paraphrase the Tánaiste's recent statement which provoked my Union's withdrawal from the commencement of talks on a second part of the Agreement: if we can't have those commitments implemented then we would have to ask ourselves why would we stay there?"
"Accordingly we must have some clear indication that these issues will be addressed by Government either in the negotiations themselves or otherwise, before we participate in any further talks. Otherwise - while some of the positions which have been adopted by Government and employers render renewal of the Agreement very difficult indeed - it is not impossible.