Is industrial action the only way of setting pay disputes?

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
54,789
Back in the 19th Century when there was no legislation protecting employees and they could be dismissed at will or locked out as a group, the ability to strike gave the workers some bargaining power.

But do we really need strikes now?

Employees are very well protected by a raft of legislation including Unfair Dismissals, anti-discrimination measures, etc.

Civil disputes in all other areas are resolved by some independent party - a court, an ombudsman or planning authority.

Why do we not have an independent body that decides on industrial disputes?

The employees want 30%. The employer doesn't want to pay anything. The arbitrator decides: 10%. As in any dispute, one side will not be happy with the outcome but it protects consumers.

The employees have the upper hand anyway. If they are not happy with the pay award, they can switch jobs. The employers can't decide to dismiss them and hire cheaper employees.

Brendan
 

Why are the HSE still forcing some doctors to work 24-hour shifts? That has been against EU and Irish law for over 20 years.

The last doctor strike was settled when the HSE agreed to limit shifts to "only" 24 hours... which they have subsequently ignored in many hospitals.

Not to mention recent examples of more minor but still serious issues like non-payment of overtime, delayed payments, etc. etc.

Not true if the government is a de facto monopoly employer, e.g. non-consultant doctors.

I'm using doctors as an example because that's what I'm familiar with but you can bet there are worse cases in other industries.
 
Media reporting of disputes is often unsatisfactory.

Reports, particularly of major industrial disputes, tend to concentrate on how the public is affected, with scant detail about how the dispute arose.

I usually look at sites, such as the Workplace Relations Commission, to obtain a timeline of a dispute and to be better informed, because I am not getting it from the media.
 
Sophrosyne said:
Reports, particularly of major industrial disputes, tend to concentrate on how the public is affected,
Click to expand...

Certainly that is what concerns me most.

I am worried that my holiday will be ruined by the WTR by pilots. I am not terribly worried about why they are paid only €200k a year.

But I would have every confidence that an independent body could decide what the appropriate salary for them is.
 
I am all in favour of more practical and inventive ways of solving disputes rather than letting them drag on indefinitely.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
The HSE might be the biggest employer but presumably doctors are very employable elsewhere.

Brendan
Click to expand...

For the first 4-10 years of your career you are employed but still in postgraduate training and the HSE is the only employer. There is a single national non-consultant hospital doctor contract. Once you are finished then you can go and do private practice or move abroad.

Even at consultant level we saw James Reilly make swingeing unilateral pay cuts for new consultants which has only recently been resolved but will have ramifications for years/decades.
 
arbitron said:
For the first 4-10 years of your career you are employed but still in postgraduate training and the HSE is the only employer. There is a single national non-consultant hospital doctor contract.
Click to expand...
That's one example of information you don't get from the media.
 
What about private hospitals or does the ubiquitous "HSE contract" apply there as well?
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
But I would have every confidence that an independent body could decide what the appropriate salary for them is.
Click to expand...
What if they don't like the salary an independent body sets?

Pilots are just trying to squeeze the maximum they can from the system like everyone else.
 
Dr Strangelove said:
What if they don't like the salary an independent body sets?
Click to expand...



I might not like the decision that a court makes. I might not like the decision that An Bord Pleanála makes. I might not like the decision that the Financial Ombudsman makes. But I get on with my life.

The employer is stuck with the decision if they don't like it. At least the employee can change jobs if they don't like it.

Brendan
 
Just to be clear. I am suggesting that is the way it should be and not the way it is.

Either side can ignore a recommendations from the WRC.

I am suggesting that there should be arbitration not recommendation so the findings would be binding.

Brendan
 
I get it now. Your point is that employees can walk.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
But I would have every confidence that an independent body could decide what the appropriate salary for them is.
Click to expand...
An independent body (probably publicly funded) determining the pay of private sector interests would create a whole world of problems that would have far greater consequences beyond someone’s holiday plans.
 
Salvadore said:
An independent body (probably publicly funded) determining the pay of private sector interests would create a whole world of problems that would have far greater consequences beyond someone’s holiday plans.
Click to expand...

Could you list out some of them?
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Could you list out some of them?
Click to expand...
Well for a start, as a matter of principle, people should be able to negotiate their own remuneration without having it set by the state. The state shouldn’t have a role in determining individuals’ value to prospective employers. Any such attempts would have far greater IR consequences than occasional strikes.

The right to take industrial action was a hard-won battle. It shouldn’t be surrendered just because it’s occasionally inconvenient.

And if we get to the point where the State tells us how much we can earn, why stop there? Why not impose a range of other restrictions of freedom in the name of societal protection.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register