The intervention by the Minister for Public Enterprise, Ms O'Rourke, in the dispute at Bus Eireann was sensible. The strike would probably have developed quickly into a complete cessation of CIE services. The intervention will allow tensions to ease and hopefully usher in a less confrontational atmosphere. Relations between both sides in the dispute are said to be appalling. Both make great play of their commitment to social partnership; it is a pity their commitment does not guide them in their negotiations.
The strike had been threatened because management at Bus Eireann decided to go ahead with the introduction of new minibus routes in Cork, Galway, Limerick and Waterford. This development is just one of many in a comprehensive viability package designed to reduce costs. The extension of the minibus service to the provinces is not something to which the trade unions are opposed but co-operation will be given on nothing until every item in the viability package for each of CIE's companies is agreed.
There is some evidence to suggest that CIE management was looking for a confrontation. Bus Eireann is a good place to start because it is the most vulnerable. The company could go out of business and not be much missed. Private bus operators, who have already cherry-picked some of the best routes, would move in and fill most of the remaining gaps. Minibuses were a good issue to pick. They are popular with the public and they save money. The trade unions recognise the vulnerability of Bus Eireann and so, in an effort to save jobs at the weakest company, they link any changes at it to the other two companies.
The result is stalemate. The talks were meant to conclude in March; they have dragged on for eighteen months and got nowhere. For CIE this is not unusual; talks on one-person-operated buses went into a second decade. The situation is not made any easier by the intense rivalry for membership between the two trade unions involved, SIPTU and the National Bus and Rail Union. Progress towards an agreement can hardly be expedited if the trade unions involved are overly concerned about watching their backs.
CIE is losing over £1 million a week. The transport market is to be opened up fully to competition and the company, already losing market share, is in no condition to defend itself. The workforce are justified in fearing for their pay levels and even for their jobs. They are entitled to assurances on both as long as the assurances do not prejudice viability. In return, the workforce must abandon over-manning and outdated, inflexible work practices.
Ms O'Rourke was right to step in on Monday night. But she will get no long-term thanks if her contribution to the semi-State sector amounts to no more than preventing strikes. It would be another matter altogether if, unlike her predecessors, she manages to put CIE on a viable footing, confident and competitive in the marketplace. Ms O'Rourke must, in the end, lay down an immovable deadline after which unagreed items will go to independent arbitration, such as the Labour Court, and the recommendations must be binding on both sides.