THE GARDA REPRESENTATIVE Association (GRA) and the independent chairperson of rostering talks are embroiled in a war of words over the accuracy of information being shared about the discussions.

In a letter to the GRA’s Interim General Secretary, seen by The Journal, chairperson Sean McHugh accused the GRA of circulating “inaccurate, misleading and incorrect” information about the discussions.

McHugh’s letter states that the current proposals do not amount to “immediate pay cuts” for large numbers of gardaí.

GRA President Brendan O’Connor said it was unfortunate that the private correspondence had become public and took issue with some of the content of the letter.

The GRA formally rejected the proposed rosters late last month. It said the changes would “seriously inhibit proactive work-life balance and work predictability” for rank and file gardaí.

In his letter, McHugh writes that he had intended to remain silent during an eight-week balloting period, which is due to take place, however he felt compelled to comment due to “inaccurate, misleading and in some case (sic) entirely incorrect information” circulating in the media and on other platforms.

“It is disturbing that such reports include a number of communications purported to come from sources or agents on behalf of the Garda Representative Association,” McHugh said.

The letter highlights “specific inaccuracies” including the claim that McHugh’s recent proposal was “what garda management had sought at the outset of roster negotiations.”

He labels this claim “plainly wrong”, saying that the representative associations worked with management representatives to amend original proposals and reduce any potential loss of earnings for gardaí.

“The proposal does not contain immediate ‘pay cuts for large numbers’ of An Garda Siochána,” McHugh wrote, adding that the rosters being proposed have “largely retained, or improved, the earning capacity of members of the force.”

The chairperson said he is concerned that the inaccuracies reported in the media and communicated to GRA members do not appear to have been corrected by the association.

“I am requesting that this be done without delay,” McHugh concluded.

O’Connor said the GRA is “absolutely satisfied” that all information it has circulated is correct and accurate.

“We certainly would refute some of the assertions, if not all the assertions, in the letter and we would take issue with some of the content,” O’Connor told RTÉ’s Saturday with Katie Hannon.

“We’re absolutely satisfied that the information we circulated is correct and accurate. And we certainly stand over anything that is issued from the GRA in relation to this very emotive and difficult issue for our members, which is causing a lot of disquiet and unrest for them,” the GRA president added.

Rostering row

The long-running dispute centres around work times which would see specialist gardaí, such as detectives, move to an office-based role working nine to five daily.

Gardaí affected by the change are unhappy with an arrangement which would see them working for seven straight days before receiving two rest days.

The issue is around so-called “non-core” units which make up specialist gardaí such as detectives and community policing. In the new roster, they would work six days on/three days off, then seven days on/two day off and then seven days on/three days off.  

There are also concerns about the possible loss of allowances for working unsociable hours because they would not be expected to perform night duty.

O’Connor said today the proposal was strongly rejected by GRA members when they saw how it would impact their earnings or work-life balance.

“They have said to us: ‘Don’t come near us.’ They couldn’t comprehend that any trade union would put such a negative proposal to them,” he said.

While the roster was rejected by the GRA, the Association of Garda Sergeants and Inspectors (AGSI) have been conducting briefings for members on the proposal and it is set to ballot its members on it in the coming weeks.

However, The Journal reported this week that AGSI members in various parts of the country have already voted to reject the proposal.