Recent threats of industrial action in parts of the public sector highlight the smoldering discontent about the share-out of the benefits of the economic boom. Company profits are soaring, many executives have gained generous share options and highly-skilled employees in many sectors are benefiting from ever-higher salaries.
In contrast, those stuck on the basic pay terms of the Programme 2000 agreement have secured relatively moderate wage increases. And while unemployment has fallen sharply, many of the long-term jobless remain untouched by the boom.
It forms a difficult backdrop for the social partners as they attempt to agree a new national programme. Discussions have still to get under way in earnest and a successful outcome cannot be guaranteed - in fact those close to the process see significant obstacles ahead.
The key issue facing the negotiators is the sharing of the fruits of economic success. Central to this must be stepping up the fight to tackle poverty. Many remain trapped in long-term unemployment and deprivation but the resources are now available to mount a sustained attack in this area. Clearly a multi-pronged approach is needed, involving short-term income supports and improvements in education, training, housing and the health services.
The other critical issue is how those in work should be rewarded. As the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI) pointed out in its latest quarterly commentary this week, a new agreement should not incorporate a high level of basic wage and salary increases because to do so, would undermine competitiveness and damage our economic prospects. Government commitments to cut taxes will help to put more money into people's pockets, as has been the case in recent Budgets.
However one further factor is essential in a new programme. Much wider use of profit-sharing and other gain-sharing schemes is required, to give employees an opportunity to get a return from rising company profits. Such schemes have grown in popularity in recent years, but agreement on their wider implementation will require compromises on all sides.
While many companies - particularly big multinationals - already have profit-sharing or employee share schemes, there is resistance to them in much of business. Employers need to realise that, with profits increasing strongly, well-structured profit-sharing schemes can help motivate the workforce, retain loyalty and, crucially, ensure that wage costs do not rise in an unsustainable way - if profits fall.
Trade union negotiators, meanwhile, must realise that the rules set down centrally on the use of such schemes cannot be overly prescriptive; company circumstances differ and what can be afforded by one company in terms of profit-sharing may impose a too heavy burden on another. A flexible approach is also required from the Revenue Commissioners.
These twin difficulties of agreeing a programme to tackle poverty and finding new ways to reward employees, will not be easily overcome. But every effort must be made to do so, if the formula on which our economic success has been built is to continue.