"The partnership process is a bit like the peace process", says Peter Cassells. "Nobody ever felt it would do away with all the conflict on its own." Precisely because it is a process, and not a magic formula, it provides a way for tackling problems, not abolishing them.
He accepts that there has been a series of worrying disputes in recent times, of which the two most disturbing are those involving local authority craftworkers and the Garda. He doesn't see any particular pattern to the disputes "and by adding them together you don't necessarily see the bigger picture", he says.
"Take the guards, for example, and I am familiar with their case because I helped bring them back together. They certainly have a good case for an increase, and an increase is there for them that could be kept within the PCW (Programme for Competitiveness and Work) parameters if they can agree to restructuring and to change for the future."
But he accepts that the problems encountered in resolving the Garda dispute and that of the craftworkers are symptomatic of the bigger problem. "There is a malaise out there and a grave danger of undermining what we've achieved so far in this economy if it's not tackled."
The gardai and the craftworkers are representative of the great bulk of PAYE workers on middle incomes, who have shown pay moderation only to see the main benefits of the boom go to others. "We need to accept an economy must serve people."
"It's quite correct for Government ministers and members of the Central Bank, and economists to talk about ensuring the economy is fundamentally sound, so that we don't slip back, but we also have to ask what the economy is doing for Irish society.
"There is a grave risk of us slipping into a three-tier society. At the top are 25 per cent who are doing extremely well, like the owners of businesses, shareholders, senior managers in companies, consultants and professionals, not to mention the banks with their £1 million-a-day profits.
"In the middle are 50 per cent of the population, moderately paid, working very hard just to stand still, or improve their position slightly. These people are producing more, under a lot of pressure in their family lives, and are feeling a high level of insecurity. They see themselves as a dot on an economic map rather than part of a society that is improving.
"They are earning £15,000 to £20,000 a year and were squeezed in the last Budget, because most of the benefits went to the top 25 per cent. Meanwhile they are contrasting the very moderate pay rises and tax reductions they received with the dramatic increases in profits and outrageous increases in house prices.
"The bottom 25 per cent are in low-paid, or casual jobs, they are long-term unemployed and early school-leavers. The young, single male unemployed are especially at risk. Many of them are losing any attachment they have to society, or even their local community."
Mr Cassells says the Taoiseach's assurance at the recent IMPACT conference that the recommendations of the Commission on a national minimum wage would be introduced soon was very welcome and would help this group. So was the endorsement of IMPACT members for a campaign to make flatrate pay increases an important part of any new national agreement.
But he added that, "without understating the needs of the bottom 25 per cent, the problems of the middle 50 per cent of the population are the biggest issue facing us". This group forms over 60 per cent of trade union membership, Mr Cassells points out.
Meeting their needs "is the big challenge for the Government, for employers and also for us". Mr Cassells fears that if these workers cannot be reassured that their needs will be met through Partnership 2000, increasing numbers will be tempted to resort to the traditional strike tactic. This could lead to wage claims helping to fuel, and then chasing, inflation; as they did in the 1980s.
There was an urgent need to return to the tax priorities agreed in Partnership 2000. "It would be important that the Minister for Finance give a very clear signal now that he will do something to benefit this group in the November Budget.
"He is getting all sorts of advice from the Central Bank and the EU not to give significant tax cuts, but from the point of view of addressing the major needs of that 50 per cent, he should concentrate on targeting cuts at them."
In the private sector Mr Cassells believes that profit-sharing and gain-sharing needs to be a priority for both employers and trade unions. He points to the success SIPTU has had in negotiating such agreements in recent months as the way forward. "That is a modern and innovative way of addressing the demands being made on the modern worker. They can't be met any longer by the old method of annual pay increases alone.
"In the public service there is the whole question of restructuring agreements, of rewarding flexibility and change with decent pay increases." The other big issue is house prices. "In the past, even when times were bad, people were able to buy their own homes, but now we are back to a situation where young married couples are moving in with their parents because they are totally priced out of the market."
Building costs had not increased significantly in the past two to three years and the current surge was due to speculative gain. "People making huge speculative gains should be taxed and the money redistributed through tax relief."
Mr Cassells would not be drawn on what method of taxation should be used. Asked if he was advocating a return to some form of rates, or residential property tax, he said that tax measures were a matter for Government. But they had to signal to speculators that the current bonanza was over.
He accepted that there was "no way you can condone or accept people picketing hospitals and taking other action without going through the proper procedures".
"But you have to ask why this is happening. I get a sense that some of the craftworkers see their crafts as under pressure. In the private sector people have been going through a lot of change, which hasn't been happening in the public sector.
"The biggest obstacle to change is fear of change. There is not much point in people like me lashing out at those who won't embrace change, if we are not prepared to devote resources to work with people for change."
"The core activity of unions will always be to improve workers' living standards, but we will have to switch our focus from issues like a shorter working day to how best to release people's potential in the workplace. We put a lot of effort into creating barriers in the workplace to protect people. Now we may need to dismantle some of them.
"That can be disturbing for a middle-aged craftworker used to demarcation lines. We haven't addressed enough how we work with these people to see that acquiring new skills can be liberating, rather than something that reduces their status or that of their job."
Many unions are "seriously out of date", Mr Cassells admits. "We need unions to go back to the workplace and fuller involvement locally. That local agenda must be a modern agenda as well, with skill training, access to new technology, profit and gain-sharing and a recognition that nowadays real power is in the boardroom and not necessarily on the barricades.
"The whole question of creating such structures may mean full-time officials giving back more power to workers." Unions need to be geared up for meeting the challenge of the modernising workforce and "one or two disputes going on at the moment show we are not geared for that".
Union recognition
On the question of union recognition Mr Cassells sees the situation clarifying shortly. The recent Supreme Court judgment in the Nolan Transport case showed that the right of trade unions to immunity from tort remained intact under the law, "and implies recognition".
Irish employers had cited the lack of trade union recognition legislation in Britain as a reason for opposing it here, on the grounds that our competitiveness would be undermined.
The publication of the British White Paper last week, which recommends that unions should be automatically recognised where they represent over half the workforce in a firm or bargaining unit, effectively removed that argument, according to Mr Cassells. The results of the Ryanair inquiry should be with the Government shortly. Once this happens, Mr Cassells says, the issue can be addressed from a number of ways.
"For example, company law can be amended to lay down standards or principles for employers to adhere to. Alternatively, mandatory procedures could be introduced that people would have to follow, like attending the Labour Court, or following Labour Court recommendations."
He said that unions had no problems with non-union companies. However antiunion companies were "totally unacceptable because there is a constitutional right to join a union that must be vindicated by the Government".
Union recognition "and our ability to resolve the issue is going to be one of the tests of the maturity of social partnership".
Minimum wage
The new British minimum wage of £3.60p an hour was much lower than anticipated, Mr Cassells said. It would create an anomaly for Irish unions, which could find themselves negotiating different rates for workers doing the same work in Northern Ireland and the Republic.
He also welcomed the provision to increase the new British rate by 20p an hour over the next two years. He had been talking to the general secretary of the British Trade Union Congress, Mr John Monks, who assured him that "the unions will use the new rates as a base to improve the position of low-paid workers.
"The priority in the Irish context is to get on with phasing in our own minimum wage."
Parental leave
"We are certainly very annoyed and very upset at the way the equality agenda has slipped down the list of priorities since it was tagged onto the Department of Justice. The failure to make resources available to draft parental leave legislation in time for the June 3rd deadline was symptomatic of that.
"It's another sign that the needs of the modern worker are being misread. The Department tends to see parental leave as an add-on or additional cost, rather than an essential need. That approach adds to the pressures on workers and helps undermine our economic success."