Speaking Points for Tánaiste on Occasion of the Launch on 8 September 1999 of the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission Annual Reports for 1998

I would like to thank the Labour Court and the Labour Relations Commission for inviting me to launch their respective Annual Reports for 1998.

Twelve years ago, in 1987, more than a quarter of a million days were lost due to strike action. Ten years on, in 1997, the number of workdays lost was less than 75,000 and last year the number was down to below 40,000.

These figures represent highly significant progress and the resulting increase in productivity mirrors the growth and increasing confidence in the Irish economy.

The message is clear; industrial peace is one of the major corner stones of Ireland's current economic and social progress. It is in the interests of all those who participate in this success that we continue to build on our recent track record in this respect. It is incumbent on all parties to use normal industrial relations procedures and structures, and where necessary or appropriate, the available machinery of the State, to resolve disputes where they arise.

Despite our progress, there is simply no room for complacency. We continue to have a number of high level disputes. I urge all parties to disputes to respect and co-operate with one another and where appropriate with the industrial relations agencies - the Labour Relations Commission and the Labour Court. This involves acknowledging the fairness of these procedures and honouring the results they produce. We can't afford to have an a-la-carte approach which involves utilising the procedures and then accepting the findings only when they suit us. The partnership approach which has been so evident at the national level should be reflected in industrial relations at all levels.

The continuing high level of dispute resolution at the Court and at the Commission is good: providing a quality service to employers, employees and trade unions is the raison d'etre for both organisations who continue to provide value for money.

It should be recognised that the vast majority of disputes are of course settled at enterprise level and it is only a small minority, albeit the most difficult, which end up with either the Labour Court or the Labour Relations Commission. A challenge facing all those involved in industrial relations is to increase the number of disputes resolved at local level and to change the culture of third-party dependency and a tendency to rely on outside intervention by essentially bodies of last, rather than first, resort.

I am pleased, too, that the content of the reports of both the Court and the Commission provide plenty of scope for reflection by those who in one way or another shape the emerging industrial relations climate and environment. In the case of the Labour Court I note the several issues which it will address in its review of its operations and procedures. It is instructive that both the Court and the Commission have identified as a key issue the emerging trend of balloting for strike action before a dispute has been through the full procedures, or threatening such action sometimes in advance of a ballot. I can only agree with those who express concern at such action and urge both sides in any dispute to adhere to agreed procedures and to allow the State's industrial relations machinery the space to bring about a settlement to the dispute.

I would like to compliment the Court and the Commission on the quality of each of their reports which I believe reflects the care and professionalism which each body brings to bear in its daily activities.

Some months ago you launched the 'Video & CD-ROM Information and Training pack' as a joint exercise. I noted at the time the co-operative approach adopted by both bodies and am delighted that the spirit continues between the Court and the Commission.