Eyeing a chance amid the crisis to reorganise the Irish workforce

INSIDE THE TRADE UNIONS: PART II:Trade union leaders are sensing that the traditional left-right debate – which has been muted in Ireland – may be beginning to emerge, writes CARL O'BRIEN

IF THE past is a foreign country, then sometimes it can feel eerily familiar. Before the first partnership agreement was struck in 1987, all economic indicators were pointing in the wrong direction.

Unemployment was soaring. The number of days lost to industrial action had broken the million mark a few years earlier. Free-for-all bargaining on pay was the order of the day. The economy, it seemed, was on the brink of collapse.

“There was a grave danger that we were becoming part of the problem and, at an individual level, becoming marginalised,” recalls a senior trade union leader who helped broker the first agreement.

US firms which didn’t recognise trade unions had arrived, while employers were surprised at how well free-for-all bargaining was working for them.

“We really feared our influence was just drifting away,” the former union leader adds. “There was a bigger picture to address. There would have to be a shift in strategy.”

That new strategy culminated in the first partnership agreement, the Programme for National Recovery.

TODAY, THE economic indicators are also stuck firmly in the wrong direction.

Another 70,000 people are set to join the dole queues this year. Free-for-all bargaining, too, will be an inevitable consequence of the breakdown of partnership. The storm clouds of industrial action are quickly gathering on the horizon.

What’s different this time is that partnership looks dead and buried. If anything, the gap between unions and the Government appears to be growing, not narrowing.

David Begg, general secretary of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions, says the collapse of partnership is a major turning point in the relationship between unions and Government.

“Its decision to pull out of the recent talks represents a seachange in the extent to which public policy and thinking within Fianna Fáil has changed in relation to labour affairs and unions especially,” he says.

He just might be right. This week the Government is to consider a Department of Finance proposal to clamp down on services and facilities which it provides to unions representing staff in the public service.

It probably won’t happen – politically, it would unnecessarily heighten tensions with unions ever further – but it is a bold declaration of intent.

Jack O’Connor, general president of Siptu, agrees that partnership as we know it is over. He says the Government’s “lurch to the right” represents a highly dangerous move.

“There’s every possibility that we’re moving so far to the right so rapidly that we’ll find ourselves in a dreadful place in the not too distant future. Some of these measures being talked about – like those restrictions on trade union rights – were never even imposed by Thatcher,” he says.

A RETURNof class warfare. Capitalism in crisis. A new revolution. These were some of the words echoing around a hotel function room last week, where the Irish Congress of Trade Unions held a "think-in" on the future of the union movement.

Had the ghosts of Larkin or Connolly returned from the afterlife? Or maybe a 1913-style lock-out was taking place in an out-of-town industrial estate?

Neither, as it turns out. They were the words of the arch-pragmatist, David Begg, as he sought to map out a vision of where society is going and where the next union battles will be fought.

He foresees not just a breakdown in union-Government relations, but a potentially seismic shift in the political landscape. The traditional left-right debate – which has been muted in Ireland – may be beginning to emerge.

“It may be that workers, as voters, will begin to adjust their political preferences in line with their class interest. It’s not without significance that a debate on class interest politics is also taking place now in the British Labour Party in advance of the next general election.”

He even goes so far as to say that a new form of “authoritarian politics” could emerge as a result of increased social tensions.

“It shouldn’t be forgotten that it was the middle classes who formed the fascist parties in the 1930s as a consequence of dissatisfaction with both markets and democracy.”

He quotes Eric Hobsbawm, a Marxist academic, who wrote, “the appeal of the radical right was stronger, the greater the threat to the standing, actual or conventionally expected, to middle class occupations . . .”

If capitalism really is in crisis – or at least the liberal market version of it, adopted by Ireland, UK and US – it presents opportunities for the trade union movement, says Begg.

“Look at what’s left behind of that model. The building industry, which employed up to 400,000 people indirectly, has collapsed. The financial sector? We were setting ourselves up as an alternative to the Cayman Islands. Where’s that gone?”

This, he says, allows it to lobby in support of a sustainable alternative: A Nordic-style social market economy. (See panel)

“We can reconnect with our members, free of the ‘guilt by association’ with any government policy. This gives us an opportunity to offer the public an alternative vision of society and economy,” he says.

MOST UNION leaders agree it is time to get back to basics, to organise members, re-establish its voice on social issues and heal the divide between public and private sector workers.

Peter McLoone, general secretary of Impact – the largest public sector trade union – says unions are needed now more than ever.

“For all the negativity, there is a sense – shared by many – that perversely, yes, maybe this could be a good opportunity for us.

“But we have to go back to basics and re-define our purpose as a trade union movement which is about the protection of workers, defending their interest and improving their employment conditions.”

For now, though, there are more immediate concerns. A wave of industrial action is on the verge of breaking out across the public sector which may escalate further into the year. With a hostile public opposed to disruption and a Government determined to hold the line on pay, something surely will have to give?

Joe O’Toole, a former president of Ictu and now a Senator, says the line peddled by some commentators that unions are heading for oblivion doesn’t hold up.

“Remember, the leaders are bright; there is a strategic plan how they move forward; they aren’t going blindly into something they can’t control; they’ll go back to basics. It’s about organising, reconnecting with the grassroots, Whatever comes out of this won’t be partnership as we know it – but it could be something that doesn’t have the restraint and discipline of a national agreement.”

Jack O’Connor agrees broadly. He says some form of social dialogue is crucial for the years ahead.

“In this modern, uncertain world, we have an obligation to try to bring about the development of a context in which working people can influence the broad thrust of economic policy and labour market policy.

“We can have a structured dialogue between representatives of different interests of society, and that’s probably a requirement of any civilised society.”

Wielding a placard in anger and being willing to sit down with employers are not mutually exclusive approaches, O’Connor maintains. It is vital that, above all, unions provide coherent and effective opposition to any attacks on workers’ conditions.

“That’s not just industrial action; it’s about developing a coherent alternative and seeking to negotiate an acceptable compromise.”

The form of dialogue that emerges once the dust of the latest industrial disputes settles is likely, as unions see it, to be narrower and less focused on acquiescence on broader public policy.

“It will have to recognise that we all have an interest in a prosperous economy – but also that there are conflicts between the interests of capital and people who go to work every day.”

Whatever happens, the days of broad, consensus politics among social partners look finished.

What follows will be noisier, less amicable, but certainly more interesting.

Scandinavia:  the alternative?

IT MIGHTN’T come as a surprise, but when union leaders look to the future, they look to Scandinavia.

The Nordic social market economy is characterised by a generous welfare regime, equal access to well-funded public services, higher taxes and a pro-business climate.

What distinguishes it from other market economies is its emphasis on maximising labour force participation through, for example, good quality and affordable childcare.

“The neoliberal path that we’re on is the wrong trajectory”, says David Begg, general secretary of Ictu.

“The Nordic path is much better, but I’m also a realist. I know it’s based on a social democracy which has roots in a red-green alliance between farmers and union in the 1930s.

“It’s a very, very good system. If you look at those countries, they have the best indicators across a broad range of headings. But to get there, we’d have to overcome huge cultural barriers about taxation and public spending.

“There’s such a corrupted view of that here. But what’s clear is we don’t have any future in the current model.”

He adds: “This is my life’s challenge - I’m serious about that. I’m so totally convinced that were going in the wrong direction.”

Jack O’Connor of Siptu agrees.

He says it’s clear we need a more “sustainable model than the current get-rich-quick one that we have.”

What’s worse, he claims, is that our current approach seems to be based on a “get poor quick” approach.

“The way we’re going about cutting pay is giving a dramatic shock to the economy, on top of the shocks already inflicted. It’s in danger of catapulting us all into a prolonged downward spiral of deflation . . . we need a more measured and medium-term solution.”

Series concluded