Mandatory Trade Union recognition: How likely is leglislation?

I know of course that pre election promises are easy to make & are often discarded when election is secured.

However the following extract from the Programme for Government is pretty unequivocal , the Government undertake to " reform the current law on employee's rights to engage in collective bargaining , so as to ensure compliance by the State with recent judgements of the European Court of Human Rights. "

I have emailed all TD's recently in my constituency & contacted Mr. Bruton's office in an attempt to find out when the legislation is to be enacted - I only did this recently & hopefully I will receive some replies in the coming week !

Now FG may indeed deem it politic to prevaricate on introducing the promised legislation but I think ICTU have cut the ground from under them by lodging a complaint with the ILO.

For further extensive details I would refer posters to www.ictu.ie - under press office - there is a list of News , press releases & speeches from Congress .

When you have finished reading the speeches - I would refer you to bullet points 5 & 9 which outlines ICTU's stance & arguments in favour of mandatory recognition.
 
Thanks DB,

The following from the ICTU site is interesting.

In a recent Supreme Court Ruling concerning IMPACT and Ryanair, the Supreme Court made the observation that the Oireachtas has no power to introduce a law granting the right to union recognition.
Click to expand...
So it would appear that to introduce leglislation in the absence of a favourable constitutional ammendment such leglislation would in all likelhood be struck down in the event of a Superme court challenge.



ajapale said:
How likely is TU recognition leglislation to be passed into law?
Click to expand...
Unlikely in my opinion.

aj
 
The Supreme Court shares it's authority with the European Court of Human Rights - legislation is required to enact mandatory Trade Union recognition - no constitutional amendment or referendum is required , a situation accepted by all political parties.

Interestingly ILO conventions are binding on the State AND the judiciary.

The Irish Times published an illuminating article on ICTU's complaint to the ILO on the 4th July last - forgive me I can't post a link - simply google " Irish Times state in dock " & the article pops up.
 

I agree. The other thing we haven't heard much about yet is the opposition from companies. I have no doubt that many companies, especially international ones have either plans in place to move their operations or at the very least have put expansion plans in Ireland to a halt. The government could certainly postpone any necessary legislation without any backlash from the public.

If mandatory trade union recognition is introduced then at the same time employers should be empowered to deal with strikes as breaches of contract. If a company's workforce threatens to strike unless certain demands can be met, then the employer should have the right to see if other workers can be found that would work under the prevailing conditions. This would only be fair.
 
Perhaps FG may be tempted to prevaricate , although the unequivocal wording in the programme for government would indicate otherwise.

The Labour Party however must surely be anxious to see the promised legislation introduced sooner rather than later ?

Equally ICTU's complaint to the ILO must increase the pressure on Government particularly as it is hoped that the complaint will be heard before years end.

Do I gather from your post that when you refer to " necessary legislation " you accept that the such legislation will be introduced - it's simply a matter of when ?
 
It's been over 2 years since I started this thread.

Progress at last however , as someone who participated in preparing a submission to the body charged by the Government to procure & consider such submissions from all interested parties I have been advised that the new legislation on collective bargaining promised in the Programme for Government is due to be considered by the cabinet shortly.
 

And the cabinet will announce a committee to examine the proposed legislation in greater detail. See you in two years time!!!!
 
Sunny said:
And the cabinet will announce a committee to examine the proposed legislation in greater detail. See you in two years time!!!!
Click to expand...

Getting there slowly but surely , I can wait 2 years - as long as the legislation is enacted during the current term of this Government as promised then I'm happy.
 
Deiseblue said:
Getting there slowly but surely , I can wait 2 years - as long as the legislation is enacted during the current term of this Government as promised then I'm happy.
Click to expand...

Does this mean that if only one employee is in a union then the employer has to engage with the union?
 
would these be the same type of business owners that are happy to take free labour under the slavebridge scam perhaps???
 
blueband said:
would these be the same type of business owners that are happy to take free labour under the slavebridge scam perhaps???
Click to expand...

If you are referring to Job Bridge then I don't see the link between the two.

Employers are concerned that Unions will close their businesses. The is, perhaps, because Unions have a long history of closing businesses due to their ignorance and an ideology that is destructive and hostile.
 
blueband said:
would these be the same type of business owners that are happy to take free labour under the slavebridge scam perhaps???
Click to expand...

Don't blame businesses for the JobBridge scheme. It is a State scheme, the State and its agencies both actively promote & encourage its use, and use it themselves.
 
This is what Richard Bruton said a couple of years ago on this amazing pledge that was in the programme of government. This Government or any other Government will not pass legislation forcing companies like Ryaniar and multinational companies to recognise and deal with trade unions. They will pass some piece of legislation to try and sell to labour supporters but it will fall far short of formal union recognition.

The commitment in the programme for government reads: “We will reform the current law on employees’ right to engage in collective bargaining (the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act 2011), so as to ensure compliance by the State with recent judgements of the European Court of Human Rights.”
Mr Bruton said: “There is not any commitment to recognise unions but to deal with a setback for what was a system put in place to deal with unresolved disputes in employments.



​
 

Sunny said:
And a recent Dail question on the subject. Once again, compulsory union recognition is not on the table.

http://oireachtasdebates.oireachtas...ck.nsf/takes/seanad2013110500055?opendocument
Click to expand...

That's excellent news.
There is already a comprehensive state infrastructure in place to deal with disputes. The only reason the Union commissars are pushing for this is to generate more revenue to pay their own bloated salaries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register