Ref
:
BS 68/04
3 August, 2004.
Dear Branch Secretary,
Enclosed is a brief summary of the Second Report of the Flynn Implementation Group on
Decentralisation.
This report is due to be presented to the Government after the summer break.
A further meeting of the Sub-Committee of General Council on Decentralisation will take place
in September when the final results from Phase 1 of the CAF process are available.
This letter and enclosure will be on the Union’s web-site within the next few days.
You may also be aware that the ICTU affiliates, including this Union, appeared before the
Oireachtas Committee on Finance and Public Services on 29 July 2004.
The enclosed notes are a very brief summary of the main points made by the Union to the
Committee. This document will appear also on the Union’s web-site in the next few days.
Yours sincerely,
T. GERAGHTY,
DEPUTY GENERAL SECRETARY.
To : All Branch Secs in CS
IAA, Sports Council
HSA, FAS, Ord. Survey
BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE POINTS MADE BY THE PSEU TO THE OIREACHTAS COMMITTEE
ON
FINANCE AND PUBLIC SERVICES REGARDING THE GOVERNMENT’S DECENTRALISATION
PROGRAMME, ON 29 JULY 2004
1.
The Union is not going to involve itself in a debate about the Decentralisation Programme that
centres on the value to the regions on the one hand and the perceived impact on public
administration on the other.
2.
The Union’s sole concern is with the effect of these proposals on the people working in the
relevant organisations
3.
If the Union’s suggestion of a survey of staff, prior to specific announcements, had been
taken up it would have been possible to identify how many staff were interested in re-locating
and the locations that were of interest to them. This could have helped to avoid much of the
current controversy.
4.
Nothwithstanding the lack of pre-preparation the Union will deal with this issue as an
Industrial Relations matter and will use the relevant negotiating machinery to seek to have
members’ issues addressed.
5.
In this regard the Union’s membership and their perspectives can be broken down into three
categories :
a)
Close to 3,000 of the Union’s members are already located outside Dublin. This group
has had poor career prospects to date and would, obviously, welcome the provision
of opportunities due to the re-location of posts
b)
From the preliminary results of the CAF process, it seems likely that about 1,000
members in Dublin will indicate an interest in participating in the programme. For this
group also the programme has a positive aspect
c)
For the remaining 5,000 or so members who live and work in Dublin and who intend to
stay living and working in Dublin, the programme is seen as threatening and is the
cause of a great deal of apprehension and fear
6.
The Union, therefore, is willing to support the re-location of those members who wish to go
and is willing to participate in the Industrial Relations processes in order to try and find
solutions to any problems that arise.
7.
However, there are two absolutes so far as this Union is concerned, as follows :
a) the Union will resist, with every means at our disposal, any attempt to force people to
re-locate
b) the Union will not agree to a total shut-down in career opportunities for those members
who choose to remain in Dublin. Indeed, the Union signalled earlier this year that any
attempt to impose such a measure would move the Union to a position of outright
opposition to the programme
8.
For our members in 5 of the State agencies affected by the proposals, the issues are even
more acute. Many of these staff chose to work for the particular agency because they are
interested in, or have a specialist knowledge of, the area of work carried out by the Agency.
Obvious examples are provided by the Sports Council where people employed there are
interested in, and committed to, sports administration and have no wish to work for any
other agency. This type of situation is replicated in other agencies. Given the low level of
interest in these agencies, as evidenced by the preliminary CAF results, there seems to be
little point in attempting to deal with the range of contractual and legal issues that interchangeability across separate employments will involve.
9.
The Union, however, wants to make it clear that the problems experienced in getting staff
from the Agencies to re-locate cannot be resoled by substituting further parts of the Civil
Service, given that there are clear short-falls in applications for many proposed new Civil
Service locations.
10.
The lack of clarity surrounding the process is a cause for concern. Members need to know
how they will be affected, where are they likely to end up working if they stay in Dublin,
what job they will be doing, what effect will there be on their career prospects etc.
It is an unsatisfactory situation that these questions cannot be answered and fears are,
therefore, heightened. For some members who have additional earnings in the form of
allowances etc, these fears are heightened considerably.
11.
Interestingly, the preliminary results of the CAF process indicate high levels of interest
among staff in re-locating to towns within commuting distance of their existing places of
work. In reality, for many people this programme is an opportunity to change their
commuting patterns rather than to re-locate their home and family. These people can and
should be accommodated.
12.
Finally, the Union will continue to deal with this issue as an IR matter. We will not involve
ourselves in the politics of the issue and we are not interested in becoming embroiled in
arguments about the value of the programme as an instrument of policy. Provided the
employer adopts a reciprocal flexible position in discussions with us, we will participate in the
IR processes in a positive fashion, subject to the two absolutes outlined already.
18\decent\oircttee – note of mtg
DECENTRALISATION UP-DATE
SECOND FLYNN REPORT
ON NON-EVENT
On 30 July 2004, the second report of the Flynn Implementation Group on Decentralisation was
published. Despite the pre-publicity that suggested the Group would recommend that the time-scale
for the implementation of the Government decision should be lengthened, the Report states that any
recommendations regarding timing and sequencing should await the outcome of the CAF process in
September.
By and large, the document is a progress report on steps taken to date and contains very few
specific recommendations. The following is a brief summary of some of the main points of interest to
members of this Union :
1.
The Group recommends the engagement of independent outside expertise to ascertain how
those staff who are still prepared to consider their options, view the decision to move from
Dublin and the key levers and barriers to their decision-making
2.
The Group recommends that Civil Service Management and Unions should agree appropriate
arrangements on promotion following the outcome of the CAF in September. It recommends
also that the Department of Finance should ensure that the filling of normal course vacancies
in recruitment level grades takes full account of the programme and that the Department
should table proposals to the Unions in relation to ongoing regional recruitment, mobility and
promotion policy in a post-decentralised Civil Service
3.
In the context of the points at (2) above the Group suggests that there is little value in
dealing with these issues by making interim arrangements and that both sides need to
consider the outcome of the CAF in September
4.
The Group recommends that staff in Health Boards and Local Authorities should be enabled to
indicate whether they are interested in re-locating, through a separate process
5.
The Group suggests that an overall framework for managing staff transfers needs to be
developed. The Report re-states the commitment to the use of a CAF process to try and
accommodate those staff staying in Dublin with their preferences for re-assignment.
6.
The Group recommends a separate CAF process for the health sector jobs announced in July.
7.
The Group recommends that information about ICT posts should be included in the CAF as
soon as possible.
The text of the Second Report of the Flynn Implementation Group on Decentralisation is available through the Department
of Finance web site at the following address:
http://www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=2468&CatID=48&StartDate=1+January+2004&m=c
18\decent\Flynn report