Croke Park, what now?

For any non-Irish readers of this blog, I might just place this briefly in context. In March of this year the trade unions and the public sector employers reached an agreement on pay and conditions in the public service (after negotiations in the Croke Park stadium, hence the title). This agreement was subject to ratification by the trade unions, and the unions involved proceeded to organise ballots under their own rules and procedures. Fast forward to last week: the Public Services Committee of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions ratified the agreement, by a substantial majority.

So all sweetness and light and industrial peace, then? Well maybe, or maybe it will be more complicated. Because while the unions have endorsed the deal, some individual ones have not. One of these is the Irish Federation of University Teachers, which voted against the agreement by a decisive margin. And then there was the Teachers Union of Ireland, which organises staff in the institutes of technology amongst others, and which also voted against. And the Education Branch of the union SIPTU (which organises academics in three universities and other staff in more of them) had recommended rejection, and would have achieved a vote accordingly but for DCU staff, who voted by a comfortable margin in favour and this just balanced the votes against in the other institutions.

But more than that, IFUT and the TUI have suggested that they don’t feel bound by the ratification by the ICTU overall, and will feel mandated to take action against the agreement if necessary (I guess in violation of normal trade union rules about respecting majority verdicts). So what should happen? I have myself suggested that the agreement, or more particularly its specific terms on higher education, is misguided and may produce some problems for the sector. On the other hand, the capacity of the universities to engage the politicians and convince them and other stakeholders that a different path to reform is better may be compromised if they have undermined the overall framework of industrial stability while we seek economic recovery. For that reason militant action against the agreement would be a very dangerous strategy to follow. While the public mood is still one of anger at the antics of those who helped push Ireland into deep recession, it does not follow that it favours those who create obstacles for recovery as they might see it. The public serice-wide action organised previously largely encountered public hostility. Reasoned debate will be better, and is actually more likely to get results.

Explore posts in the same categories: economy, higher education, politics

Tags: , , , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

6 Comments on “Croke Park, what now?”

  1. Vincent Says:

    What I don’t understand is why exactly will any Union tie-in their members to an Agreement when the other side has stated it cannot be held to it.


  2. I won’t present an opinion on the TUI position but I have to say that your inference, intentional or not, that IFUT’s so-called ‘militancy’ flies in the face of a concerted effort from organised labour in Ireland to help dig us out of this hole, is without foundation. It engages in the type of establishment doublethink so prevelent in Ireland today that sideslines any descenting view. Worryingly, this is the very attidue that will mitigate against any effective reform being informed by the experience of those on the ground delivering services into third level education.

    It might help to remind your readers to that IFUT’s rejection of ‘Croke Park’ is framed against the as yet unpublished final report of the steering group on higher education strategy [ http://www.biotechnologyireland.com/pooled/articles/BF_NEWSART/view.asp?Q=BF_NEWSART_310126 ] . The formulation of this report is no doubt known to you given that the strategy group chairman was speaking at the recent ‘Re-inventing the University – Crerating a New Vision’ conference [ http://www.dcu.ie/news/2010/jun/s0610lu.shtml ] last week in DCU. What has galled IFUT members is that we were being asked to sign up to a known unknown via the Croke Park agrement with far reaching consequences for our pay, pensions and conditions of employment. The devil in the detail is not yet public.

    I can assure you there will be no shortage of reasoned debate on this from IFUT.


    • Ah but Garret, you rather misrepresent my position. I have said that I too have reservations about the agreement. My point is that the IFUT tactics are likely to be counter-productive and will reinforce a sense of public hostility towards universities; it is already having that effect!

  3. Al Says:

    With the teaching contract due for renegogiation in a few months, it seemed imprudent to offer up so much prior to the negogiations….

  4. Latinum Says:

    Ferdinand, I’m very disappointed by your interpretation of IFUT’s position. Your piece is very dismissive and, in many respects, condescending of many of your fellow academic colleagues’ considered positions on the Croke Park Agreement.


    • Latinum, as I said to Garret above, I have not been dismissive in any way of IFUT’s position on the agreement, and indeed would agree with much of it. It’s IFUT’s tactics that I think are rather misguided, as they will tend to weaken rather than strengthen the universities’ position.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


%d bloggers like this: