Two of the main unions rejecting the terms of the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness have said they will seek pay increases in excess of those provided for in the new national agreement.
The general secretary of Mandate, Mr Owen Nulty, said his members would continue their efforts to close the gap between low-paid workers and others. He issued his warning after members voted by 89.7 per cent to 10.3 per cent to reject the PPF.
The general secretary of the Building and Allied Trades' Union, Mr Paddy O'Shaughnessy, said his members were "totally disillusioned with the whole process". They voted by seven to one to reject the PPF.
"There was a lot of disappointment that the Construction Industry Federation refused to negotiate with us," he said.
With more than 220 delegates empowered to vote for the PPF, Mr Nulty accepts it will be passed at today's special delegate conference of the ICTU. He estimated that in recent months the union has secured increases worth between 17 per cent and 40 per cent through restructuring, profit-sharing and other arrangements. "The retail trade is having to offer those terms to hold and recruit staff," he said.
Mandate has a particular problem because it has a lot of "late starters" under Partnership 2000, who will receive the final phase of 1 per cent only this year. "The reality now is that, when the current inflationary trend is taken into account, there will be an actual pay decrease of at least 3 per cent in real terms for the low-paid this year."
As a result of the Mandate ballot, its 28 delegates will be voting to reject the PPF at today's ICTU conference. BATU has 10 delegates. However, the Civil and Public Service Union, which mainly represents low-paid clerical grades, voted by 54 per cent to 46 per cent for the PPF yesterday. The proposals were sent out without a recommendation by its executive.
The general secretary, Mr Blair Horan, said the vote to accept the new agreement "is definitely due to the successful campaign by the union to be included in the 3 per cent early settlers' clause.
The significant vote against the PPF is due to the failure of the new programme to address the problems of low pay through flat rate increases."
The Irish National Teachers' Organisation also endorsed the PPF, but by the narrowest of margins - 51 per cent to 49 per cent. The fact its general secretary, Mr Joe O'Toole, first signal led that teachers would be looking for catch-up increases on nurses and gardai and then championed the PPF terms probably added to the union leadership's problems.
Last night the Minister for Finance, Mr McCreevy, announced an extra £163 million was being provided in the Government's revised estimates to allow for public service pay increases due under the PPF. He said the increase would push the annual increase in spending to 4.46 per cent, as opposed to the Government target of 4 per cent.