The Department of Social, Community and Family Affairs has told dentists' representatives it will be available for talks next Monday week on the dispute which has left over 1½ million people without dental cover.
The talks, and the date, had been suggested to the Department by the Irish Dental Association at the end of July.
In the meantime, most dentists will continue to charge fees under the PRSI scheme for certain procedures, such as fillings, which are higher than those provided for in their agreement with the Department.
The Department will continue to refuse to do business with dentists taking this form of action.
The dispute means those normally covered under PRSI contributions will either have to pay more than usual or will have to postpone treatment pending a settlement of the dispute.
The dispute centres on the belief by dentists that the fees on which the Department bases its 70 per cent contribution towards the cost of certain treatments are too low.
Dentists say they have been seeking an increase in line with medical inflation for two years.
In January, the Department offered to set up a working group representative of the IDA and the the State under independent chairmanship "to examine fee structures and related matters". The proposals included reference to an agreed third party in the event of the working group failing to reach agreement.
According to its secretary general, Mr Donal Atkins, the IDA believed such a working group had a valuable contribution to make towards rationalising State provision for dental services but did not address the association's health inflation claim.
The IDA's general practice committee decided to hold a ballot which led to the current action.
It is believed that the attitude of the association might have been more conciliatory had the Department agreed to make a concession on the medical inflation claim prior to the setting up of a working group.
It is also believed some IDA members feared the working group might not reach agreement for a long time and that this would delay a satisfactory outcome to their claim.
According to the Department, the IDA later indicated it would participate in the working group but that it would not suspend its action while doing so. This option was then rejected by the Department.