C.
The Chairman said there appeared to have been misunderstandings and commented as follows on what had been said :
(a) there had to be a preliminary period for
aċministrative reasons, but the period was reasonably elastic. Pay retrospectivity was normally restricted to about twelve months as this was considered long enough for full consultations to have taken place ;
(E)
(c)
(2)
the Official Side was not attempting to force the issue by proposing a dato in May 1977, for ending the preliminary period. There had been consultations for more than eight months, agreement had been reached with properly constituted Committees of both Units, new Committees had now taken over from the first Committees but had so far not brought forward persuasive fresh evidence in support of a better nackane. As the two Unit Committees had indicated they now wished to bring forward fresh evidence he was prepared to consider extending further the preliminary period until this evidence had been received and had been given adequate consideration by the official fide in consultations with the Staff side. l'owever, the prelimirary period could not drag on indefinitely:
both Unit Committees were recognised by the Official Vide an properly constituted and as fully representative of their Members ;
consultations between the official side and the present Unit Committees need not be confined to matters discussed with the two previous Committees. Matters for consultation could include proposals made in earlier petitions and proposals still to be made; however, there had to be a limit on the number of times old around could be gone over before the decision to proceed was made :
(e)