THE current upsurge in industrial unrest augurs poorly for the prospects of another national pay deal.

Back in 1987, when the national debt was spiralling out of control and thousands of jobs were under threat, it was comparatively easy to convince the trade union rank and file disaster was the only alternative to consensus - especially as the wages "free for all" of the 1980s left most PAYE workers between 5 and 10 per cent worse off in real terms.

Since 1987, wages have increased ahead of inflation, albeit by little over 1 per cent a year in real terms. While everyone was acknowledging the role industrial peace was playing in securing record growth rates in the economy, those providing it became increasing sceptical that pay restraint would be rewarded by significant pay increases further down the line.

The Irish Congress of Trade Unions signalled strongly before Christmas that the Government needed to increase tax relief significantly for the PAYE sector if it wanted to ensure continuing support for national agreements. It asked for £300 million in tax cuts. It received £89 million for 1996, or £150 million in a full year.

Most of the benefits to the most clawed back through the abolition of the PRSI allowance and continuing cuts in mortgage interest relief. The Minister for Finance, Mr Quinn, pointed out that PAYE workers take home pay, like everyone else's, was increasing through low interest rates, but this cut little ice with SIPTU.

THE country's largest union was for long the strongest advocate of national agreements, but it has now emerged as their most consistent opponent. It is disappointed that short term welfare benefits for part time and seasonal workers are being taxed and that many firms are refusing to adopt a "partnership" approach to unions. Particularly worrying is the trend for new companies not to recognise unions.

IBEC and the Taoiseach, Mr Bruton, have tried to allay union fears in recent weeks but without noticeable success.

Mr Bruton has gone so far as to ask the National Economic and Social Council to include provision for "partnership" at company level in guidelines it is drawing up for a successor to the PCW.

A further destabilising factor is that SIPTU is heading into a election period over the next two years, with its president, Mr Edmund Browne, and general secretary, Mr Billy Attley, due to retire. As potential successors crank up their election campaigns the collective voice of SIPTU is likely to become more strident on the showcomings of national agreement.

Public sector workers have done comparatively well out of national agreements, gaining increases worth up to 60 per cent more than the average in the private sector. However they too are dissatisfied.

One reason is the slowness with which local pay bargaining deals are progressing. These pay claims were supposed to be dealt with under the Programme for Economic and Social Progress, which expired in 1994.

So far, only the Public Service Executive Union has concluded an agreement. Pay talks with the other major clerical union in the civil service, the Civil and Public Services Union, have broken down.

Teachers are just balloting on their pay offer and the nursing unions have entered renewed talks in an effort to avert a strike. Almost everyone else is backed up awaiting the outcome of the nurses' negotiations. The Government can blame the delays in part on previous governments, but some problems are of its own making.

TAKE the teachers, for instance. Their pay deal is, hard to equate with those offer to other unions because of the unique structures of the profession. But other unions are quite capable of translating the £67 million cost of the package into how much they should receive pro rata.

CPSU members, for instance, have estimated the deal they were offered and rejected would only have cost the Exchequer £4 million extra while nurses calculate that Ms Breathnach praise for teachers deal has not helped an equivalent package for the nil would cost at least £40 million double what they have been offered.

The Minister for Education, Ms Breathnach, has not helped the situation. In her anxiety to win acceptance for the deal from the teacher unions she has painted it in glowing terms. She has gone so far as to admit that "settlement on this issue will inevitably have cost implications beyond the period of the PCW".

The Minister for Finance has also aggravated the situation. Besides an unresponsive Budget for PAYE earners, Mr Quinn has now introduced a public service recruitment embargo to reduce staffing levels by 300 during 1996.

In the process, he has given the public service unions a stick with which to beat him. Industrial action over pay is prohibited under the PCW, but the embargo is outside the PCW.

The 10,000 strong CPSU, whose pay talks with the Department of Finance have broken down, has introduced an overtime ban in protest at the embargo. IMPACT, whose pay talks have yet to begin, is expected to instruct its 5,500 professional and technical staff in the civil service to take limited industrial action from the end of this month over the embargo.

Nor have the nursing unions their strike timetable or April if the current pay talks break down. It now seems inevitable that any deal for the nurses, like Ms Breathnach's package for the teachers, will have "cost implications beyond the PCW". The problem is the cost of not settling could be even higher.

Ultimately that is the nub of the problem for everyone. Unions, Government and employers may find the thought of signing up for another marriage to the same social partners pretty unbearable. But the option of a divorce could be even more costly.

Of course, the teachers could reject the PCW package, the nurses could close the hospitals and the civil servants could carry on their overtime ban in perpetuity. But it is still much more likely that, moaning and groaning, the social partners will opt to soldier on.