CROKE PARK AGREEMENT:THE BIENNIAL delegate conference of the trade union Impact has rejected calls to urge a No vote in the ballot on the Croke Park agreement on public service pay and reform.
In an emergency motion, the union’s National Education and Welfare Board branch had proposed the conference should recommend to members that they reject the deal.
However, following a lengthy debate, the conference rejected the emergency motion.
Amanda Richards, Health and Safety Authority branch, said she had been involved in the trade union movement for a number of years, but she had never seen a deal which resulted in a four-year pay freeze and an uncertain reversal of pay cuts presented as “a major achievement”.
Shelly Healy of Dún Laoghaire/Rathdown branch said that by accepting the agreement “we would be shackling ourselves as trade union members and activists”. She said it would adversely affect the pay, promotional opportunities and working conditions of members as well as being detrimental to the union movement.
Willie Cumming of the Architectural and Heritage branch disagreed that there was no alternative to the deal. He said: “There is an alternative – no deal and we deal with each issue bit by bit as they are thrown up to us.”
Phil McFadden of the Dublin North branch said the Croke Park agreement was the “only deal in town”. He said if somebody had a better idea “they should get up and tell me”.
Incoming Impact general secretary Shay Cody said the vote on the Croke Park agreement was “not a referendum on Seán FitzPatrick or the Government because if it was we would all be at one”.
“Seán FitzPatrick should be in shackles,” he said, “and the Government should be gone.”
Separately, the conference overwhelming rejected a proposed motion of no confidence in the out-going general secretary Peter McLoone for his stewardship of the union over the past 18 months.
The motion was considered in private session but informed sources said that only two speakers spoke in favour of the motion while about 20 opposed it. Some speakers were angry that the motion was on the conference agenda.
At the conclusion of the debate on the motion, the conference gave Mr McLoone a standing ovation.
