The Government is to begin a round of intensive meetings with the social partners next week on trade union recognition. The initiative is being taken following the report of the inquiry into the Ryanair dispute which closed Dublin Airport last March. One of the main conclusions of the report, published yesterday, is that the High-Level Group on Trade Union Recognition examine "the possibility of adopting a more selective and flexible approach to the question of trade union recognition and negotiation rights where union members are in a minority position". It suggests that, in such circumstances, union members might agree to binding third-party arbitration in return for the right to be represented by their union officials.
The Minister of State for Labour Affairs, Mr Tom Kitt, said last night that he had been authorised by the Cabinet to begin immediate discussions with the High-Level Group on the problem of industrial disputes in essential services. According to reliable sources, the Government will also ask the High-Level Group to review the overall recognition issue as a matter of urgency. The group includes senior trade unionists, employer representatives, civil servants and representatives of State agencies such as the IDA.
Mr Kitt said he regretted that the inquiry team - former ICTU president Mr Phil Flynn and FUE director general Mr Dan McAuley - had not been able to find a solution to the Ryanair dispute. "Events such as occurred in Dublin Airport last March have no place in modern industrial relations," he said. He also said the social partners should seek "to modernise rather than abandon voluntarism in the industrial relations area".
The Minister for Public Enterprise, Ms O'Rourke, has also acted immediately on a recommendation that a review of industrial relations procedures for essential services at Dublin Airport be carried out to prevent another closure of the airport.
She spoke to the chairman of Aer Rianta, Mr Noel Hanlon, and wrote seeking an immediate review of contingency plans under the Industrial Relations Act.
Ryanair and SIPTU were both severely criticised in the report. In a statement, the company acknowledged that it had "made mistakes in the past and that our internal communications may not have evolved sufficiently during the company's rapid growth of recent years".
But it failed to respond to the criticisms relating to SIPTU or to the key issue of union recognition. Neither did it address criticism of its decision to sack striking baggage handlers who were on probation while the investigation was in progress.
It contested a finding that Ryanair was not paying its baggage handlers superior rates to its competitors. But it said that if calculations carried out for the inquiry by the Irish Productivity Centre proved correct it would "immediately address this issue directly with our people". Given the pay differentials suggested by the IPC's analysis, baggage handlers could expect increases ranging from as little as £11 to £4,300.
The senior SIPTU negotiator, Mr Paul O'Sullivan, said the report showed it was the company's refusal to meet the union and discuss the baggage handlers' pay claim that led to the escalation of the dispute. He denied the inquiry team's criticism that SIPTU seemed to be following another agenda.
No evidence was produced to support that claim, he said. "We had no agenda but to represent our members." He felt that the team had "sugar-coated" its criticism of the company. He will meet the baggage handlers over the next few days to discuss the report. Neither side is expected to take precipitate action, but there is no obvious way of resolving the dispute short of accepting the inquiry proposals for limited recognition of SIPTU to represent baggage-handler members with the company.