JIMMY SOMERS, the quiet man from Cabra, has taken on one of the most difficult assignments ever given to a SIPTU president: to salvage its "social partnership" strategy and ensure union members continue to negotiate "win-win" settlements with employers.

After a decade of national agreements and unprecedented economic boom, the partnership approach to industrial relations should be safe. Ever since the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, publicly affirmed his conversion to the concept at the Irish Congress of Trade Unions biennial conference in 1995, politicians, trade union and employer leaders have been reciting the virtues of "social partnership" much the same way as third world-political leaders used to proclaim their socialism.

However, Irish commitment to social partnership has shown itself to be as fragile as third world socialism in recent days. On Wednesday, April 9th, the general secretary of the ICTU, Mr Peter Cassells, met Government and employer leaders to tell them bluntly to stop "dilly dallying" over commitments to develop the social partnership dimension of the new national agreement, Partnership 2000.

At a specially convened meeting he asked? them when the special working groups, promised in the deal to create the National Centre for Partnership, would provide childcare facilities for working parents and tackle the thorny problem of union recognition were being set up.

A few hours later came an even more ominous warning. At 2 a.m. on April 10th, the final results of the election for SIPTU's general president came through. Mr Jimmy Somers won by a comfortable margin with 51,651 votes. But, a shot steward from Waterford with Socialist Worker Party credentials, Ms Carolann Duggan, won 37,940 votes by running on an anti-Partnership 2000 platform and preaching a gospel of class war. Overall SIPTU has 190,000 members in the Republic.

For many of these workers national agreements and social partnership appear to have been no more than a survival strategy. Now they want to kick in the management's door. and demand pay rises that reflect the surge in profits over the past decade. On the other side of the fence are plenty of managers whose commitment to social partnership is equally opportunistic.

Mr Somers now has a war to wage on three fronts. First and foremost he has to make sure partnership delivers for his members - not just in terms of more consultation about change, but greater rewards for accepting it. Second, he has to convince employers that the alternative is a lot more painful and costly in the long run and, third, he has to dissuade politicians from tinkering with Partnership 2000 for short-term electoral gains - particularly in the areas of tax reform and union recognition.

It was to politicians and particularly the Progressive Democrats that he issued a blunt warning when The Irish Times spoke to him.

Any attempt by a new government to give. large income tax cuts to high earners at the expense of the lower paid would mean the end of Partnership 2000, he says. The PDs want to reduce the top rate of income tax from 48 per cent to 40 per cent.

He also warned the Government that the issue of trade union recognition will have to be resolved "in the very near future" if the new national agreement is to run its full three-year term.

As one of the negotiators of Partnership 2000, Mr Somers says he agreed to recommend it because it was "a new type of national agreement. It allows tremendous possibilities to sit down with employers at local level and negotiate new benefits for our members through the partnership approach".

Shop stewards and SIPTU officials are receiving training for local negotiations and a team of experts has been put in place to provide back-up and ensure negotiators maximise on "gain-sharing" opportunities through things like profit-sharing schemes.

"If employers think that they can sit back. and rely on a 9.25 per cent pay increase to provide stability over the next three years, it just won't work. Partnership 2000 will only survive if they deliver on every single aspect of it."

Mr Somers said the same holds true for the Government, "whoever is in power after the next general election". Asked if he was concerned at the prospect of the Progressive Democrats being at the Cabinet table, he said that the prospect had been a consideration in the union strategy when negotiating Partnership 2000. "We now have that agreement as a broad framework at our backs over the next three year irrespective of what government

The Progressive Democrats "want to reduce the 48 per cent tax rate, which would not be one of our priorities. We want to increase personal allowances and tax bands to get as many people as possible out of the higher tax rate. Obviously a reduction in the top rate would benefit higher income groups a lot more than the rest".

"We have specific commitments on tax reform over the next three years, as part of the Partnership 2000 agreement. We know what the intended adjustments are and we expect them to be fulfilled, whoever is in power." The total value of the package is £900 million "and we have that in writing

He is equally adamant on the issue of trade union recognition. He admits that SIPTU and other unions are not recruiting new members in anything like the numbers they should as a result of the jobs boom. The main reason is the non-union policies of major foreign companies investing here.

The issue of recognition "cannot be put off any longer. Members join unions voluntarily. They exercise their constitutional right in doing so, but there is no corresponding obligation on the employer. In an era of partnership that can't continue and Partnership 2000 could fall on that single issue".

If everyone is entitled to representation ink. our courts, it is an anomaly that they cannot be represented by a registered trade union in their place of employment.

The new national agreement gave specific commitments to deepen partnership at local level and recognition had to be delivered on.

He says that SIPTU does not accept the argument put forward by employers and the Government that it would require a constitutional amendment to force employers to recognise trade unions. Existing domestic industrial relations legislation, EU directives on worker participation and the social protocol of the EU Treaty all provide the basis for dealing with "maverick" employers, he maintains.

The Government and employers "must deliver on every key issue", he insists. He believes that the bulk of the votes cast for Ms Duggan were intended as a continuing vote of no confidence in the agreement. He favours extending the powers of the Labour Court so that it could issue Employment Regulation Orders enforcing de facto recognition of unions. This would still leave mavericks with the option entering voluntary agreements.

Returning to the SIPTU election, he accepts that there was probably "a woman factor" in the vote. Although women comprise nearly 40 per cent of SIPTU members, and 53 per cent of SIPTU staff, none of the three general officers are women and only one of the union's eight regional secretaries, Ms Janet Hughes, is a woman.

But SIPTU's lack of gender balance at the top is no worse than in most other unions. Mr Somers points out that equality initiatives are being put in place. It has an equality officer, Ms Noreen Greene, and 50 per cent of candidates on its recruitment panel are women. Two months ago it launched a joint venture with University College, Galway, to achieve greater participation by women in the union.

At the end of the day, however, the presidential election was not intended as a referendum on Partnership 2000, or anything else, Mr Somers says. Its purpose was to elect the best qualified person for the job. He is very pleased with his 51,651 poll and the result showed the election had been "democratic and transparent". Now the quiet man from Cabra must make his voice heard."