Stoppage by bus workers next Wednesday is deferred

steveblack · 19-07-2014 11:59pm #1

First i heard about it.

irishtimes.com/news/stoppage-by-bus-workers-next-wednesday-is-deferred-1.1871188

Slippin Jimmy · 20-07-2014 12:09am

First I heard off it too, but I haven't being following the news much lately. I did see a notice on the bus today looking for people to support the nbru against privatisation.

hmmm · 21-07-2014 8:29am

I find it ironic that they are thinking of striking as a means to protest privitisation. The very reason that the government has support to go ahead with privitisation is the publics anger at being held to ransom by previous strikes. Striking, and drawing attention to them being on strike, just seems to be a counterproductive tactic.

Arthur Beesley · 21-07-2014 8:34am

hmmm wrote: »

I find it ironic that they are thinking of striking as a means to protest privitisation. The very reason that the government has support to go ahead with privitisation is the publics anger at being held to ransom by previous strikes. Striking, and drawing attention to them being on strike, just seems to be a counterproductive tactic.

You are trying to apply logic. That isn't how trade unions work - they go with blackmail and short termism. And trade unions are immune to public opinion. Although they forget that the government isn't.

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 10:15am

Hey, how they dare they try to keep their jobs, pay and conditions. They should just bow down and take it up the ass from the glorious free market.

Even if transport strikes inconvenience me(and they have in the past), I always support the workers.

the government has support to go ahead with privitisation

I really really think it is not that clear cut.

hmmm · 21-07-2014 10:53am

TheBandicoot wrote: »

Hey, how they dare they try to keep their jobs, pay and conditions. They should just bow down and take it up the ass from the glorious free market.

I'm not arguing with that. I'm arguing with their choice of striking as a weapon, because all this does is inconvenience the public and increase the likelihood that politicians are put under pressure to remove the DB monopoly.

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 10:59am

Striking is only coming as a last resort, and as the thread's OP article states, it is not even happening yet, in favour of more measures and discussions to try to avoid it. Nobody wants to strike, and it's not as though the workers and unions are not aware of the potential for it to generate bad will. It is a trump card, and an essential right for all workers(I'm aware some institutions in this country are not allowed to strike; I disagree with that), and will be used if necessary, but all parties want to avoid it of course .So I'm not sure what your point is.

Can I ask what you suggest the unions/workers should do if the negotiations to not work and the company unilaterally implements changes, if they shouldn't strike?

EDIT: the OP article is not even about a strike, it is a 90minute stoppage! So really, I don't know what your point is.

hmmm · 21-07-2014 12:07pm

TheBandicoot wrote: »

EDIT: the OP article is not even about a strike, it is a 90minute stoppage!

From a customer point of view (you know, the actual customer), it makes no difference what you want to call it.

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 12:10pm

hmmm wrote: »

From a customer point of view (you know, the actual customer), it makes no difference what you want to call it.

I am a customer, and there is a big difference between a 90minute stoppage that I can plan around versus an all-day, indefinite duration strike.

And what other type of customer is there than 'actual'?

markpb · 21-07-2014 12:15pm

TheBandicoot wrote: »

EDIT: the OP article is not even about a strike, it is a 90minute stoppage! So really, I don't know what your point is.

So they're refusing to work for 90 minutes - isn't that what most people would call a strike?

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 12:21pm

markpb wrote: »

So they're refusing to work for 90 minutes - isn't that what most people would call a strike?

To my mind, a strike is a longer period of prolonged activity that lasts until some agreement/compromise is made. You could call the stoppage a strike, I accept that. Why does everybody focus on my edit and not the core of my post- that I am sure nobody wants to strike, but at some point that becomes the only option in the face of negotiation breakdown? And answer the question, what should they do if they shouldn't strike?

markpb · 21-07-2014 12:42pm

TheBandicoot wrote: »

why does everybody focus on my edit and not the core of my post- that I am sure nobody wants to strike, but at some point that becomes the only option in the face of negotiation breakdown? And answer the question, what should they do if they shouldn't strike?

Because you have your pro-worker opinion, others have their anti-striking opinion and never the two shall meet. I'm fairly sure this has been done to death

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 12:45pm

Good point.

LXFlyer · 21-07-2014 12:50pm

Of course all of this is somewhat moot.

There has been no suggestion anywhere that people will lose their jobs.

It is quite possible that:
DB may retain some/all of the routes
Business will increase on other DB routes that will require additional staff

This is the unions putting the cart before the horse and just objecting for objectings sake.

AlekSmart · 21-07-2014 12:57pm

hmmm wrote: »

I find it ironic that they are thinking of striking as a means to protest privitisation. The very reason that the government has support to go ahead with privitisation is the publics anger at being held to ransom by previous strikes. Striking, and drawing attention to them being on strike, just seems to be a counterproductive tactic.

In this case the proposed Protest action was indeed "Productive".

Would the unusual decision of the Labour Relations Commission to intervene,(In advance of any ACTUAL Labour Relations issue) have occurred if the Staff had not voiced any dissenting opinion or threatened to protest ?

The involvement of the NTA in the process is also highly interesting,as it has in the past sought to maintain a distance from being "Operationally Involved" in the provision of services.

With the ongoing (and VERY relevant) Greyhound dispute continuing to rumble on,the issues surrounding TUPE and similar "guarantees" are becoming of more interest to ordinary folk.

So...for the moment,the postponed Protest Action HAS achieved a result

AlekSmart · 21-07-2014 1:03pm

lxflyer wrote: »

Of course all of this is somewhat moot.

There has been no suggestion anywhere that people will lose their jobs.

It is quite possible that:
DB may retain some/all of the routes
Business will increase on other DB routes that will require additional staff

This is the unions putting the cart before the horse and just objecting for objectings sake.

Afraid not Lxf.

The company has issued a very precise letter to Staff,outlining some 350 Staff who will be surplus to requirements IF the full 10% of tendered routes is lost.

This involves ALL grades of staff and has been broken down to illustrate this.

The Company is quite clearly stating it's case from the outset,and not allowing any room for if's,but's or maybe's (Which I believe is a good thing)

The Company letter also makes oblique reference to the current lack of any mechanisms to redeploy these staff.

From my perspective,the NTA are being drawn further into the hands-on area of Industrial Relations,whether they like it or not.

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 1:05pm

Any chance of a (redacted if need be)scan of this letter appearing anywhere online? Would only help the cause.

Slippin Jimmy · 21-07-2014 2:49pm

I remember a couple of years ago the drivers refused to take fares over some protest. Would this not be a better option?

Dravokivich · 21-07-2014 3:02pm

Duffff-Man wrote: »

I remember a couple of years ago the drivers refused to take fares over some protest. Would this not be a better option?

This had been stated during the last time they were on strike. If it's in regards to employment conditions, working even in a reduced capacity (such as not taking fares) is considered agreement to the change in employment conditions.

the_syco · 21-07-2014 3:11pm

Duffff-Man wrote: »

I remember a couple of years ago the drivers refused to take fares over some protest. Would this not be a better option?

I think that strike was against the company. It keeps public on their side, but hurts the company as they get no money.

As for the 90 minute strike, if that 90 minutes took place at rush hour, people would be late to work, and cause massive disruption. As the strike hasn't really been publicised most people would probably assume a strike in the morning meant an all day strike, and thus massive loss to business.

Boulevardier · 21-07-2014 3:16pm

The Dublin Bus workers have seen what happens after privatisation. In one word: Greyhound.

That is why I will probably back them as far as they think necessary.

the_syco · 21-07-2014 3:29pm

If Dublin Bus does fully privatise, I can see a number of it's routes disappearing, especially the ones where the buses are targeted by stone throwing yobs.

LXFlyer · 21-07-2014 3:45pm

the_syco wrote: »

If Dublin Bus does fully privatise, I can see a number of it's routes disappearing, especially the ones where the buses are targeted by stone throwing yobs.

There has been no suggestion anywhere that that is going to happen.

the_syco · 21-07-2014 4:45pm

lxflyer wrote: »

There has been no suggestion anywhere that that is going to happen.

My bad, misread the article.

IMO, if DB is in a bad state of affairs now regarding the amount of money being generated, getting rid of some "choice" bits off it's network now may lead to more bits being taken off it at a later stage if someones self-fulfilling prophecy comes true

Boulevardier · 21-07-2014 5:08pm

In any case, lets all hope that it is never put to the test and that DB remains publicly owned.

end of the road · 21-07-2014 6:16pm

Boulevardier wrote: »

The Dublin Bus workers have seen what happens after privatisation. In one word: Greyhound.

That is why I will probably back them as far as they think necessary.

me as well, i always side with the workers and always will

Peppa Pig · 21-07-2014 7:19pm

end of the road wrote: »

me as well, i always side with the workers and always will

Even if they are wrong?

magentis · 21-07-2014 7:27pm

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Even if they are wrong?

Shame those workers for standing up for their jobs,how dare they.

Peppa Pig · 21-07-2014 7:31pm

magentis wrote: »

Shame those workers for standing up for their jobs,how dare they.

My question was that if EOTR didn't believe the workers were correct would he show blind loyalty to them either.
I didn't comment specifically on this issue.

end of the road · 21-07-2014 8:16pm

Peppa Pig wrote: »

Even if they are wrong?

i don't believe they are wrong, i believe they are right, i believe striking workers in general are right if they feel there is an issue, nobody strikes unless there is a genuine issue and all other avenues have been exausted

markpb · 21-07-2014 8:41pm

AlekSmart wrote: »

The company has issued a very precise letter to Staff,outlining some 350 Staff who will be surplus to requirements IF the full 10% of tendered routes is lost.

The Company letter also makes oblique reference to the current lack of any mechanisms to redeploy these staff.

If some bus routes in Dublin are being re-contracted by NTA from Dublin Bus to another operator, wouldn't standard TUPE regulations cover that, just like it would for any other industry. Unless I missed something, not only do DB have a way to transfer those staff, they have a legal obligation to transfer them and for the new operator to maintain their existing pay and conditions.

The cynic in me wonders if that carefully worded letter was written with the intention of stirring up the unions so they'd protest the route transfer and DB could sit back, see their territory defended and not have anything to do. Of course, that's just me being cynical and I'm probably wrong.

TheBandicoot · 21-07-2014 11:36pm

In case you missed it, there is currently a big hoo-haa with Greyhound relating to 'legacy' staff and TUPE. So if I were a DB driver I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that.

AlekSmart · 21-07-2014 11:53pm

Boulevardier wrote: »

The Dublin Bus workers have seen what happens after privatisation. In one word: Greyhound.

That is why I will probably back them as far as they think necessary.

Not far off the mark Boulevardier....

Oddly enough the Greyhound saga has been running for quite some time now,and some of the elements bear a revisit....

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/shane-ross-stench-as-rubbish-firm-wins-26820749.html

That article is from 2012 and followed by the latest piece from Senator Ross.....

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/shane-ross/jack-is-right-greyhounds-gone-to-the-dogs-30425063.html

All VERY interesting stuff,particularly when one is faced with companies quite deliberately seeking to reduce their exposure to the Irish Public's gaze.

It must also be of historical importance in that the situation has prompted Senator Ross into AGREEING with SIPTU's President,Jack'O Connor...now THAT really does take some doing !!

The TUPE issue which many portray as a magic-bullet in such cases,is being shown to have some potential shortcomings in this instance,particularly in the Pensions area.

However,what is being strongly avoided by the participants is any attempt to suggest that we (Dublin) need a substantial EXPANSION of Bus Services...of the order of 10% I would suggest.

There is already some precedent for this suggestion,as the broad spectrum Commission on Public Transport which reported to Mary O'Rourke back in 2000,suggested 1,500 vehicles as an optimum Fleet Size for the services then proposed.

At that time the BAC fleet stood at just over 1,000 vehicles and the (agreed) proposal was for a phased INCREASE of 10% per anum over a 5 year period,with a set ratio of Public to Private as an integral part of the process.

That report has disappeared from view,possibly due to the then new Minister for Transport Seamus Brennan deciding to bin-it,something which new Ministers tend to do,in case their predecessor's achievements might just trump their own !!

NB: The total number of Bus Atha Cliath staff whose status is at risk is 315 with the majority (>200) ,being from the driving grade.

AlekSmart · 22-07-2014 12:08am

TheBandicoot wrote: »

In case you missed it, there is currently a big hoo-haa with Greyhound relating to 'legacy' staff and TUPE. So if I were a DB driver I wouldn't be comfortable relying on that.

It's not just Drivers...the total includes Maintenance, Clerical,Supervisory and Executive grades of staff with differing Terms & Conditions of Employment,and particularly Pension entitlements.

It is also of some note that there is an ongoing Supreme Court appeal in relation to a High Court overturn of an Employment Appeals Tribunal ruling on a TUPE/Redundancy issue from 2009.

Until the SC rule on this matter I would suggest that any "Obligations" regarding TUPE may be open to debate ?

cdebru · 23-07-2014 4:54pm

Boulevardier wrote: »

The Dublin Bus workers have seen what happens after privatisation. In one word: Greyhound.

That is why I will probably back them as far as they think necessary.

Exactly if you sit quite and accept things then the employer just waits till you are divided and irrelevant, what greyhound shows is a strike that discommodes no one is a long drawn out strike with little prospect of success. The refuse employees are on strike but the bins are still collected so no one gives a **** and they can stay out and starve or accept a 35% pay cut as proposed by the "fair" Labour court. Strike while you have impact don't wait till you have none.

cdebru · 23-07-2014 5:52pm

markpb wrote: »

If some bus routes in Dublin are being re-contracted by NTA from Dublin Bus to another operator, wouldn't standard TUPE regulations cover that, just like it would for any other industry. Unless I missed something, not only do DB have a way to transfer those staff, they have a legal obligation to transfer them and for the new operator to maintain their existing pay and conditions.

The cynic in me wonders if that carefully worded letter was written with the intention of stirring up the unions so they'd protest the route transfer and DB could sit back, see their territory defended and not have anything to do. Of course, that's just me being cynical and I'm probably wrong.

Greyhound.

That's it ? Still for the life of me can't understand how a contract is a major barrier when it comes to taking bonuses away from executives in the health sector but apparently is not problem removing terms and conditions away from ordinary workers .why don't the unions do exactly what the dept of health was so worried about and threaten greyhound with court proceedings for breach of ontract????

steveblack · 23-07-2014 6:07pm

If you where to transfer over to a new employer, your pay and conditions are only guaranteed for a year and a day.
Then they can offer new terms of employment , take it or leave it. FxxK THAT!! The management wont be the ones taking a pay cut, only the workers.

LuckyLloyd · 23-07-2014 6:12pm

hmmm wrote: »

From a customer point of view (you know, the actual customer), it makes no difference what you want to call it.

Well this actual customer (who uses four different Dublin Bus Journeys a day) thinks that any privatisation of bus services will have an ultimately negative affect and fully supports any measures the DB drivers deem necessary in that regard. Let us all know when ye are downing tools lads, I'll work around it anyway.

Peppa Pig · 23-07-2014 8:11pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well this actual customer (who uses four different Dublin Bus Journeys a day) thinks that any privatisation of bus services will have an ultimately negative affect and fully supports any measures the DB drivers deem necessary in that regard. Let us all know when ye are downing tools lads, I'll work around it anyway.

I can't have an opinion on this as the last time I used DB was about a year ago so I would have an open mind on DB v Private.

Why do you think it would be detrimental?

AlekSmart · 23-07-2014 8:34pm

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Well this actual customer (who uses four different Dublin Bus Journeys a day) thinks that any privatisation of bus services will have an ultimately negative affect and fully supports any measures the DB drivers deem necessary in that regard. Let us all know when ye are downing tools lads, I'll work around it anyway.

You won't have too much working around to do methinks....:)

Today's meeting appeared to go just swimmingly...with a very rapid announcement of two Detailed meetings already arranged for 20th August and 17th September.

Personally,I am greatly heartened by this new found alacrity on the part of the Labour Relations mechanisms,which don't usually get their acts into gear until there is an ACTUAL Labour Relations dispute to intervene in.

So,in spite of there being NO actual dispute,the LRC manage an intervention,and schedule two further meetings at somewhat streteched timeframes,rather close to the deadline for the detailed Tender Documents to be publiched....;)

Now I'm far from a conspiracy theorist,but unless the LRC has a new Chief Executive by the name of Machiavelli,then this type of pre-emptive response is worthy of further close consideration.

Stoppage by bus workers next Wednesday is deferred

Comments