THE EXECUTIVES of the union representing lower-paid civil servants and of the representative body for personnel in the Defence Forces have both recommended that members should reject the new public service pay and reform deal.
The general secretary of the Civil Public and Services Union (CPSU), Blair Horan, said his union’s executive had felt there were no guarantees in the deal about the reversal of pay cuts and that the proposed reform agenda was “a bridge too far” in that it was too open-ended and lacking in clarity.
He said the CPSU executive, which met yesterday, had recognised that the union had achieved some concessions in the negotiations that led up to the Croke Park agreement, including priority being given to lower-paid workers in any restoration of pay rates and the retention of family-friendly policies and flexible working hours.
However, he said his executive had considered that the broad parameters of the deal did not contain enough for workers. He was certain the deal would now be rejected by members of his union in a ballot.
The current low- level industrial action by CPSU members, including a ban on carrying out work associated with vacant posts, will continue. However, there was no decision on a resumption of the ban on answering phones or of closing public counters such as occurred in recent weeks at the Passport Office.
Meanwhile, Pdforra, the association representing soldiers, sailors and aircrew of the Permanent Defence Forces, is to recommend to its members that they reject the Croke Park deal in a ballot over the coming weeks.
Pdforra general secretary Gerry Rooney said: “After a long debate our national executive has decided today to recommend rejection of the proposed national pay agreement. The deal was considered to offer no guarantees in relation to the recovery of pay lost through cuts or the pension levy or, indeed, that there would be no further cuts.”
He said it was felt the list of commitments being sought from ordinary members of the Permanent Defence Forces in return for vague guarantees on pay were excessive – particularly as widespread reform had taken place in the Permanent Defence Forces over the past decade.