Union density declines to around a third

According to official statistics published in September 2005, trade union membership in Ireland rose by around 20% from 1994 to 2004, to stand at 521,400. However, union density as a proportion of all employees fell from 46% to 35% , with private sector union density now standing at around 21%. A range of factors are thought to be influencing this trend, not least the impact of global economic forces.

Data on unionisation produced by the Central Statistics Office (CSO) in September 2005 indicate that just under 35% of employees in Ireland are now in a trade union compared with 46% 10 years ago, with the decline being most acute among young people. The CSO data are contained in a Quarterly National Household Survey (QNHS) special module on trade union membership. Together, the QNHS, and the previous 1994-7 Labour Force Survey, provide the most authoritative estimation of trade union trends in Ireland.

The CSO data are particularly important at a time when there continues to be disagreement over the true level of trade union density, particularly in the private sector, with commentators professing different opinions. In recent years, a private sector density figure of 23% has begun to gain currency but, soon after he was elected as the Services Industrial Professional and Technical Union (SIPTU) general secretary late in 2002, Joe O’Flynn claimed that 29% of private sector workers were trade union members. Most recently, in a presentation to a Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development/European Association for Personnel Management conference in May 2005, consultant Paul Mooney went as far as to claim that unions now only represent as little as 10%-15% of the private sector workforce.

CSO figures

Given that there is such disagreement over the level of unionisation in Ireland, the latest CSO data bring some much needed clarity. The CSO uses the measure of union members as a proportion of employees in paid employment, excluding the self-employed, very few of who are union members. According to the latest CSO data, the total number of employees in paid employment in Ireland (excluding the self-employed) in the second quarter (Q2) of 2004 stood at 1,507,100. Of these, 1,168,500 were employed in the private sector, and 338,600 in the public sector (including the commercial and non-commercial semi-states). According to CSO estimates, union membership in Q2 2004 stood at 521,400 out of the total of 1,507,100 employees in paid employment, with 910,500 employees not being in a union.

This compares with a lower level of union membership back in 1994 (432,900), but a higher union density figure of 45.8%, with 481,700 employees not in a union 10 years previously. This paradox can be explained by the fact that the number of employees has increased dramatically, from 945,000 in April 1994, to 1,507,100 in early 2004. Therefore, although union membership has increased by almost 100,000 in the last 10 years, union density has fallen by about 10 percentage points as total employment has risen sharply by 562,100 - and commentators argue that there are few signs that the unions will be able to overturn this large decline in density. On the basis that it is reasonable to assume that overall trade union density in the public sector is in the region of 80% (the figure often given by many industrial relations experts and practitioners) - this gives a total of 270,800 public sector union members (80% of 338,600 public sector employees).

This leaves a total of 250,600 private sector union members out of 1,168,500 private sector employees. From this it can be calculated that union density in the private sector stands at 21.4% (250,600/1,168,500). (In contrast, if a lower public sector density figure of 75% were to be assumed, then private sector density would stand at 22.8%. If a higher public sector density figure, say 85%, were assumed, private sector density would be lower, at 19.9%.) Therefore, 51.9% of all union members are now employed in the public sector, with 48.1% in the private sector. For the first time, public sector union membership is thus outstripping private sector membership. This reflects the fact that unions have been gaining members in the public sector as employment there has expanded, but losing members in the private sector.

The 21.4% private sector density figure is lower than the abovementioned SIPTU calculation of 29% and the 23% figure that had gained currency, but much higher than the 10%-15% estimated by Mr Mooney. Since the mid-1990s, the rate of union membership growth has failed to keep track with a very strong rate of employment growth, the result being therefore that density levels have decreased to 34.6% today. This is important, in the sense that in the past union density has tended to increase during periods of economic growth, and the Irish economic boom at the start of this century has been unprecedented. The CSO sectoral figures indicate that this downward trend applies to practically all areas of the private sector, and it is only in the public sector that the level of unionisation has remained solid.

Of serious concern for the trade union movement is a much lower level of unionisation among young people: 8.1% in the 15-19 age group, 21.7% in the 20-24 age group and 29.5% in the 25-34 age group. The respective figures for these age groups in 1994 were 20%, 32.8% and 46.8%.

The CSO figures compare negatively with data provided by the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment. According to the Department figures, there were 632,580 union members in the Irish Republic in 2004. These membership figures are based on 'negotiating licence' returns at the end of each year. However, the problem with these figures is that they are likely to include large numbers of people officially calculated as being union members, but who may be lapsed or inactive members, or retired. It is difficult to put a precise figure on the number of lapsed, inactive or retired union members who are included in the total figure. However, it seems clear that the figure of 632,580 is an overestimation of the true level of union membership.

Factors driving density slide

Turning to the reasons behind the decline in union density, it appears that a number of interrelated factors are significant (IE0102164F). First, in recent times, traditionally heavily unionised - often labour-intensive - manufacturing sectors have witnessed heavy job losses. Given that manufacturing has been one of the traditional heartlands of trade unionism, job losses, in what often tend to be large plants, are obviously a concern for unions. Observers argue that it will be difficult, if not impossible, for private sector unions to make up for the closure of medium to large-sized traditionally unionised plants. At the same time, many new employments - in the new growth areas of manufacturing and services - have tended to be non-unionised, and unions often find it difficult to organise in the new workplaces, in many cases facing stiff opposition from employers.

Multinationals not recognising unions

A survey (IE0403201N) by Industrial Relations News (IRN) of new large-scale job announcements (of 100 or more jobs) between 2001 and 2003 found that just one of 17 new multinational companies setting up in Ireland recognised trade unions - a Japanese-owned firm in Drogheda called Ryusyo. Not only that, of the 22 companies announcing expansions of existing facilities, just four recognised unions. Therefore, out of 39 new large-scale job announcements, only five were in plants recognising unions. A similar survey undertaken by IRN in 1996 - examining 51 new job announcements in 1994/5 - found that two out of 32 new companies recognised unions, while 10 out of 18 announcing expansions provided for recognition. This survey took a very similar sample of Industrial Development Agency (IDA) assisted firms announcing 100 or more new jobs.

This indicates that not only are unions finding it hard to organise the larger new multinational firms, they are also finding it hard to ensure unionisation in new jobs in existing companies that already recognise unions, particularly if the new jobs are in a different plant. Similarly, a recent study by University of Limerick academics adds weight to evidence that there is a growing tendency for many multinationals to either adopt a twin-track approach to union recognition - the parallel adoption of both union recognition and 'union avoidance' options in plants owned by the same parent - or else, not to recognise unions at all. In particular, unions have found it extremely difficult to secure members in sectors largely dominated by USA-based investors, particularly in computers and electronics, call centres and financial services.

Workforce more diverse

At the same time, the nature of the labour market has also been changing, with a growth in 'atypical' forms of employment such as part-time and contract work, and an increasingly diverse labour force. In the past, the workforce was largely made up of male Irish nationals working in male-dominated industries, whereas now more and more females and immigrants are entering the labour force, which has expanded considerably. The unions are faced with the challenge of how to organise and represent these new interest groups.

Anti-union trend

The above factors would also appear to have coincided with a general hardening of ideological attitudes among some employers against trade unions and collective bargaining - displayed in its most extreme form in current union recognition disputes at Ryanair and Ashford Castle- and the increased presence of non-union forms of employment regulation and human resource management practices and, in some workplaces, no discernible employment relations strategy. Indeed, a patchwork quilt of employment relations practice is emerging, according to commentators, whereas traditionally collective bargaining was the dominant form of job regulation. At the same time, there has also been a major shift in state policy towards trade unions, in the sense that it is no longer a fundamental tenet of state policy to encourage incoming multinationals or new indigenous companies to recognise, and bargain with, unions - the state traditionally encouraged industrial relations 'pluralism'. As a result, the Irish institutional context has become more open to the diffusion of different models of employment relations - including non-union models.

One of the reasons for Ireland’s historically high trade union density was the success of unions in the earlier period of industrialisation (from the late 1950s to the 1970s) in achieving recognition across much of the multinational sector - with multinationals gently encouraged at the time to do so by the IDA and the apparatus of the state. However, with the growth of new industries, combined with a marked shift in business attitudes against trade unions, and an increasingly competitive market for international investment, it has become harder and harder for the IDA, and the state generally, to nudge incoming firms in the direction of unions.

'Arms-length' recognition

The above situation is illustrated by the reluctance of the government and the development agencies to introduce a statutory mechanism for trade union recognition and collective bargaining, much of this apparently attributable to a concern not to scare off foreign investment, particularly the larger US-based investors. Instead, under the Industrial Relations (Amendment) Act, 2001 (as amended in 2004), a compromise 'arms-length' right to bargain mechanism was introduced whereby the state dispute-resolution institutions may resolve disputes over trade union representation in non-union workplaces where collective bargaining arrangements are absent (IE0409204F).

The procedures do not give the Labour Court a remit to recommend in favour of formal union recognition for collective bargaining purposes, only providing for the possibility that trade unions may secure the right to represent members on pay and terms and conditions - with the possibility of a binding determination or Circuit Court enforcement if required. In practice, however, this is proving to be a fine line, and there may be certain instances where the parties engage in de facto collective bargaining over pay and conditions in all but name. After a slow start, the unions are now enjoying increasing success in ensuring that their members secure representation rights. However, this instrument cannot, of itself, provide sufficient impetus for raising density. Nor, indeed would a statutory recognition instrument, commentators argue.

Works council boost?

Faced by strong domestic opposition to statutory collective worker rights, the unions are increasingly turning to the EU for possible salvation. The government is in the process of transposing the the 2002 EU information and consultation Directive (2002/14/EC) (EU0204207F) into Irish law, but it is taking what commentators see as a 'minimalist' approach to implementation (IE0508203F). The Directive presents both opportunities and threats for unions. Larger non-union firms may have to set up consultation bodies or works councils, with many people in non-union firms having little experience with representative structures. The potential exists for trade unions to provide these new consultative structures with access to their considerable experience in this area, through advice and other assistance. While consultation bodies may not be as attractive to the unions as traditional recognition and collective bargaining, they would certainly be an improvement on their current status in such companies - ie unions are absent. However, if such opportunities are not grasped, these new consultative bodies may develop a 'life of their own' and block off any hope trade unions may have had of gaining a foothold in such employments, some observers suggest.

Union organising drives

In the last few years, unions have started to wake up to the reality that density is in decline in the private sector, and some have announced major organising drives in an attempt to stem the losses. For instance, since announcing its organising drive in 2003, SIPTU, Ireland’s largest union, has appointed its national industrial secretary, Noel Dowling, as national organiser, and a number of special organisers are now in place. Initially, the SIPTU organising team has been concentrating on the areas with greater prospects of success, with the construction, security, hotels/catering, cleaning, and nursing home sectors deemed to be particularly ripe for recruiting new members. It has enjoyed some success in this regard. For instance, a new partnership agreement between DHL Express (Ireland) and SIPTU provides for full union recognition in the company, which has about 1,000 staff in total IE0411201N

The Irish Bank Officials Association (IBOA) also commenced a new recruitment campaign in 2004, with the launch of two brochures designed to attract new members. The brochures - entitled IBOAplus: Value Added Benefits and IBOA Short Breaks- are seen by the union as two important aspects of its ongoing recruitment effort, which is headed by two new full-time recruitment officers. The Union of Retail, Bar and Administrative Workers (MANDATE) has also enjoyed success in boosting its membership base.

Commentary

While it is evident that some unions have managed to take some significant scalps in their battle for recognition, it is a moot question whether they can stem or reverse the decline in density. The combination of job losses in large traditional unionised manufacturing plants, and the fact that many new employments in the multinational and indigenous sectors are refusing to recognise unions, has meant that unions are finding it very difficult to even stand still, never mind actually increase density levels. The formidable challenges faced by the Irish union movement in reversing this decline in union density are not unique, being little different to those faced by most trade unions in the developed world. These challenges include: the proliferation of smaller more fragmented workplaces, which are more time-consuming to organise; the growth in so-called atypical transient jobs and employment contracts; lower interest in voluntary efforts outside work, on which unions depend heavily; a lack of contact between younger people and trade unions; and a general drift in society towards greater individualism and consumerism. (Tony Dobbins, Industrial Relations News)