Mandatory Trade Union recognition: How likely is leglislation?

D

Deiseblue

Registered User
Messages
835
Across a number of threads the pro's and con's of mandatory Union recognition has been discussed.

Rather than arguing such pro's & con's may I ask if there are posters out there who feel that the promised legislation will not be enacted & the reasons why ?
 
I don't know much about the legislation but (rightly or wrongly) there is not a lot of sympathy out there for unions so I don't think there would be much fuss if it was not enacted. There are far more serious issue to be dealt with by the government.
In fact, looking at it politically Fine Gael may benefit from distancing itself from it.

Why should it be mandatory?
I worked in a large irish company and there was no union. There was instead a staff assocation and everyone seemed happy with that arrangement. There were good pay and conditions too.
 
Here is why I think it should not be enacted;

Labour costs in the multinational sector here are already high, the cost of doing business here is also high. Our selling points are as follows:

· Corporation tax – advantage being eroded by the competition (especially in Central/Eastern Europe), and by EU intentions re creation of a harmonized corporate tax base – and as looks likely, N.Ireland after they are ‘allowed’ to reduce corporation tax

· English language capability – not hugely important, especially as there are 60million English speakers on our doorstep

· Educated workforce – now, a bit of a joke really – we are rapidly sliding down the international rankings on key subjects

· Option not to recognize unions – statistics hide the fact that virtually all recent (last 10 years) FDI by US multinationals have been into ‘non-union’ operations. This is no mere ‘accident’. If reflects their (correct) belief, that in an Irish context, unions will eventually strangle the business – through excessive pay demands, and insistence on restrictive practices.


The single biggest concern of these companies, is the prospect of forced union recognition. So, the unions can rock on, the investment will move to mainland Europe or elsewhere, we will be left with tumble-weed
 
The staff who need this the most are not in the multinationals

They are working in hotels, kitchens, cleaners and so on.
Abuse is rife and some companies treat staff very badly. Sure I'd say a lot of us have done these minimum wage jobs and were treated badly.

Instead I seem to hear more about unions fighting over bank time, privilege days and lecturing the government on social housing, mortgages and national policies. Things that have nothing to do with them

Unions have a crucial role in helping their members but seem to have forgotten why they were originally setup for and now some members earn over one hundred thousand while claiming to represent the working man

I think mandatory union recognition can help a lot of working people.
But unions need to get back to basics first

Some multinationals deal with unions quite well, Procter and Gamble and SIPTU deal with over five hundred in Tipperary.
So it can work.
I expect IBEC to put out their dire doomsday warnings as usual
 
I appreciate your views Thedaras as to why legislation granting mandatory Union recognition SHOULD not be enacted.

With all due respect , that is not the question I posed - do you believe that the legislation WILL be enacted ? -bearing in mind that the provision for such legislation is contained in the plan for Government & that furthermore ICTU are pursuing the matter via the ILO?
 

Will if it's not, then it probably indicates that the stories about Eamonn Gilmore at the cabinet table are correct.
The fact that it's in the Govt Plan doesn't mean it will be implemented.

Personally, I believe the Govt has more interest in reducing quangos/state bodies involved in labour dispute resolution (which is a good idea) and perhaps simplyfing the procedures in those areas. That will take their priority. Even if they do bring in legislation, I'd fully expect it to be challanged in court by IBEC/SFA and by the likes of Ryanair so I think this will trundle on for a while yet
 
There are already far too many mandatory regulations and restrictions governing employment without adding another layer, especially when the country is on its knees. Any legislative measure that would make it harder for people to hire more staff would be likely to lead to more unemployment. For these reasons, no sane government would go down this road at the present time.
 
While I am a former trades union activist and agree in principle that trades unions are important to the workforce, I think it should not be mandatory for somebody to be a part of something in which they don't believe. People have free will and should be left practice accordingly.
 

Well said except for the IBEC bit
 

surely they're not making it mandatory for everyone to join unions, just mandatory for organisations to allow them if someone there wants to join?
I've worked in some of the most unionised org's in this country and would'nt join them if they paid me (like ESB and Mr.Ogle kinda!!!).

There is more than enough EU and Irish law out there to protect workers...mandatory union recognition will put jobs at risk and potentially harm future investment.
Will it happen with this current Govt....hard to know. FG probably have zero interest in bringing it in. But as a a bargaining chip to get Labour to lay off on something else such as lower dole payments etc, I could see it getting through
 
Delboy,I think that if someone has a choice (mandatory for the company to regocnise unions) to join a union and chooses not too,will cause unimaginable problems.
Take for example electricians,there are many who dont want to join a union,but they wont get the work if their not members.This gives the unions even more power.so altough not mandatory to join a union,it would be next to impossible not too.
Also from personal experience I know how some union members are very antagonistic towards those who dont join up.
Its,to my mind not at all about workers rights,its about getting a vicegrip on people,and power ..
 

true. I've seen it myself, people move into a new role and their 'obliged' to join a union as the role is deemed to be unionised
 

Just to point out that FG as part of their pre election promises undertook to bring in legislation in this matter & subsequently included same in the plan for Government - Leo Varadkar was the spokesman who confirmed this to the media.

I spoke to Mr. Varadkar prior to the election & he basically told me that FG felt they had little option but to play nice with the Unions in this matter as the party felt that to attempt to block such legislation would not withstand concerted pressure from the unions.

In fairness to Mr. Varadkar his preference was to see staff associations becoming more effective .
 
In the interest of balance I would also out that I raised the matter with 2 FG candidates in Waterford pre election who were far more enthusiastic about the putative legislation than Mr. Varadkar , both of them suggested that despite the pressure on all political parties by the Lisbon Treaty & European Court decisions to introduce legislation FG as a party felt that there were genuine reasons to do so in any event.
 
The Talk Talk company debacle in Waterford has taught us that trade union recognition is very important. I believe that if you ask the employees of Talk Talk if union recognition should be mandatory by any employer the vast majority would be in favour. Obviously, I see that they are at the receiving end of their own labours and did not see that the light at the end of the tunnel was an express train roaring towards them and no refuge was at hand.

Let's look at our Garda Force. There was a time when they had no representation other than talk to the station sergeant who brought matters to the Superintendent who in turn off loaded the problem to the Chief Superintendent and so on. The Gardaí were treated very badly and the Garda Representative Body was born. You can say the same of our Nurses, the Army (remember they had to set up an organisation for their wives to defend them).

Though some would think, we are not a third world country. Employers have IBEC to represent them (probably the biggest trade union in Ireland). I see nothing wrong with workers having a trades union representing them. However, I don't think it mandatory for an employer to recognize unions, but I think any employer who has respect for the staff should have the decency in recognizing workers union representatives.
 

I liked micmclo 's post above, many very good points. I wonder if the legislation will be long-fingered because of a visceral dislke of unions in FG and little public demand for change. Especially now. Overly powerful unions have done little to advance their causes. They overstep the mark so much and so often, the public have little appetite for increasing their power.


Likewise people are wary of dodgey employers and reckless financal institutions with little regulation or obvious accountability. The lessons of the last few years surely are that no vested interests should trump the will of the people or hold too much power. People should be able to join unions but unions should concern themselves only with employee issues and not try to extend their influence in the political sphere.
 
The legislation won't be passed. It would be almost impossible to implement it in the middle of the EU/IMF bailout. They won't chance introducing anything that risks jobs. This is nothing to do with being anti union. The simple fact is that a lot of this Country's biggest employers do not deal nor do they want to deal with trade unions just like they never wanted anything to do with the pay deals that came out of social partnership.

The only way the legislation might be introduced is if the trade unions made huge compromises in other areas like the minimum wage and wage agreements. There seems to be this idea that Europe would force us to recognise unions but that is not the case. We will introduce it when Britain introduces it i.e. Never.
 
The idea that we have to introduce legislation to comply with the Lisbon Treaty & recent European Court decisions has been accepted by all parties & indeed Richard Bruton has accepted this.

Equally if ICTU's complaint to the ILO is successful ( that Ireland is in breach of Convention by failing to legislate for collective bargaining ) then the introduction of such legislation will become an imperative.
 

The public should indeed have little appetite. Proponents of unions trot out the same old tired justification again and again i.e. that dodgy employers need to kept in line to protect low paid vulnerable workers. This is a mere smoke-screen, unions are mainly all about protecting higher paid workers, especially in the public sector.

The reasons most multinational firms are anti-union are founded on very sound analysis of what unions will do, once recognised. For example, take a company that needs to quickly adapt to changes in the market place - perhaps by retraining workers so that the company can produce a new product to compete with a new-product launched by a competitor.

In a non-union company,management meet employees - share information as to the challenge faced, and explain what needs to be done to protect market share. Employees would most likely make required changes, to protect theirs and the company's interests.

If unionized, the company could not approach employees directly about the issue. They would have to negotiate any changes with the union, who would demand payment for change. Eventually, agreement would be reached, however, costs would be increased and the time lost negotiating would have given the competitor an advantage. Thus the company's competitive position is eroded.

You may think this is an exaggeration - it isn't. My personal experience as a manager,is, when forced to deal with unions, that, absolutely everything is negotiable, even very very trivial things. And, that no amount of logical argument will move unions off completely irrational positions.

Furthermore, in Ireland, unlike most other countries in Europe, unions can negotiate on absolutely anything they wish - there are no limits. In most other countries they may only bargain on a limited range of issues.

Also, there is no binding step in Irish industrial relations (except in very limited circumstances) - which means, that even after months of negotiations, culminating in a recommendation from the Labour Court, that unions can refuse to accept the outcome, which they often do.

So, the multinationals are absolutely right to be against forced recognition. And, lets be clear, they will not accept it. Their opposition will be silent.....they just wont come here.......
 

I think the question relates to mandatory TU recognition (by employers) and not mandatory TU membership. Or perhaps I have misunderstood your post.

OP can you link to any proposals to make TU recognition mandatory? I'd like to read them to assess how far along the leglislation is. This would allow posters form a view on your question: How likely is TU recognition leglislation to be passed into law?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register