In search of lost time
Kevin Callinan
Public servants were applauded in 2013 when they accepted the Haddington Road agreement, which included a third pay cut for higher earners and increased working time for most of the rest.
For me and other union leaders it was a hard sell, barely three years after pay cuts averaging around 14% had been imposed across the board.
But these were torrid times for Ireland and, when the Government sought savings to fill an extra and unexpected €1 billion hole in the public finances, we agreed to talk and workers subsequently – and reluctantly – voted to accept a third hit.
By doing so we produced the savings that enabled the country to meet the harsh Troika bailout terms. And we avoided the imposition of another public service-wide pay cut under the hated FEMPI emergency legislation.
It was the right thing to do at the time. But six years later we’re left with yet another two-tier public service problem, which leaves those on low and middle incomes – mainly women – losing out.
The Haddington deal worked like this. Higher earners – those on €65,000 a year or more – suffered a third, but temporary pay cut. By January 2018 this had been restored in full, as envisaged in the agreement.
Those who earned less accepted increased working hours. But, unlike their higher-paid colleagues, these workers have seen no restoration and are still carrying the cut.
Those who earned less accepted increased working hours. But, unlike their higher-paid colleagues, these workers have seen no restoration and are still carrying the cut.
In fairness, most of the measures imposed on, or accepted by, public servants during the crisis fell harder on the higher paid. But this anomaly continues to disadvantage lower paid workers long after better-paid staff have experienced restoration. That’s not fair.
And, however justifiable increased working time may have been during the crisis, it goes against the prevailing grain of efforts to better balance work and family responsibilities.
Last year, Fórsa added its voice to international trade union calls for a reduction in working time across the economy – often expressed as a four-day working week with no loss of earnings – as part of a response to productivity improvements arising from new technologies and improved work organisation.
Perhaps unsurprisingly, the idea is backed by many unions across the globe. But it’s getting some traction among employers too. For instance, New Zealand finance company Perpetual Guardian switched to a four-day week following a successful trial last year.
Technology enables us to work cheaper and faster, and that should make us all better off. And reduced working time can help secure a fairer share of the benefits of economic growth and technological advances for all workers in all sectors of the economy. It’s a sensible, modest medium-term goal.
Fórsa conferences this month will adopt policies calling for the restoration of the time lost by those on low or middle incomes during the crisis.
More immediately, Fórsa conferences of workers in health, local government and the civil service will, this month, adopt policies calling for the restoration of the time lost by those on low or middle incomes during the crisis.
A few years ago, when we were in the eye of the economic storm, I opposed similar conference motions. But I’d struggle to construct a convincing argument against them now, in light of our current economic performance and rapidly-developing technological possibilities.
I said recently that the Public Service Stability Agreement (PSSA) needs a mid-term review to bolster its credibility by taking account of improved economic indicators and past income foregone.
The agreement which, along with its predecessors, has underpinned the stability of vital services to the public, would be greatly enhanced in the eyes of lower and middle-earning public servants if a plan for the restoration of pre-crisis working hours formed part of that review.
Kevin Callinan is Senior General Secretary Designate of Fórsa and Acting Secretary of the ICTU Public Services Committee.