end of the road Registered User
#76

Colonel Claptrap said:
Which of these is true?

Unions will not accept 10 minute DART because it is incompatible with intercity services?

Unions will not accept 10 minute DART because older members refuse to mentor new entrants?


pop an email off to the union and ask them.

LeinsterDub said:
My understanding is all the infrastructure required for 10 minute DARTs is in place. If it runs very well or not isn't the drivers concern.


the signalling is in place yes. however the concern is in relation to whether there is enough contingentsy in terms of track capacity.

Stephen15 Registered User
#77

tabbey said:
The problem was one created by the two governments between 2008 and 2013. A case of divide and rule.


But the government doesn't have a say in pay deals sought by workers in semi state bodies

1 person has thanked this post
LeinsterDub Registered User
#78

end of the road said:



the signalling is in place yes. however the concern is in relation to whether there is enough contingentsy in terms of track capacity.


Who's concern? Drivers are paid to drive as we are so often reminded. If only there was a way to find out if we have enough capacity like I don't know running the trains to a 10 minute schedule?

2 people have thanked this post
Working class heroes Registered User
#79

end of the road said:
pop an email off to the union and ask them.


the signalling is in place yes. however the concern is in relation to whether there is enough contingentsy in terms of track capacity.


Pc@siptu.com is it?

Stephen15 Registered User
#80

I generally take a neutral view when it comes to arguments about industrial disputes regarding CIE companies but I have to say I think there might be a certain element of jealousy coming from certain people who are jealous that CIE workers have strong unions that are willing to fight for a pay rise for them.

Then some complain saying that they "would gladly drive a bus/train for the money those lads are on" but yet DB and BE have recruited for drivers on numerous ocassions in recent years and unless these people who constantly complain on here and in comments sections are the ones applying which I somehow doubt as I believe uptake for these positions isin't that high I'm sure you near fill every DB, IE and BE driving position with everyone who has said that at this stage.

They really should stop saying they'd happily do the job whenever there is a strike or if they are going to say then maybe they should look at getting a D licence and applying for a job as a driver for DB or BE whenever they come or they're just pure and utter hypocrites.

3 people have thanked this post
Colonel Claptrap Registered User
#81

Come off it. The only reason we are giving out is because of begrudgery?

I am a customer of IE. I am also a taxpayer. It infuriates me to see this sort of carry on because I am directly effected by It, not because I'm jealous of their cushy number.

Further to your point, I would not want to work in a closed shop with a hive mind of union members. I previously worked in 2 jobs with overbearing union heads on power trips. I didnt stick around for long. I improved my "terms and conditions" by upskilling and getting the hell out of there.

11 people have thanked this post
Flex Registered User
#82

Colonel Claptrap said:
Come off it. The only reason we are giving out is because of begrudgery?

I am a customer of IE. I am also a taxpayer. It infuriates me to see this sort of carry on because I am directly effected by It, not because I'm jealous of their cushy number.

Further to your point, I would not want to work in a closed shop with a hive mind of union members. I previously worked in 2 jobs with overbearing union heads on power trips. I didnt stick around for long. I improved my "terms and conditions" by upskilling and getting the hell out of there.


Indeed the begrudgery line is refuge of the lazy and ignorant. If I own shares in a company where staff is paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance I would be equally disgusted and demand results before withdrawing my investment in said company

As a tax payer I have a stake in these companies and I fund them through my income taxes and so on. I cant withdraw my taxes from the government so my only means of retort when I see staff paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance is to demand the government to take a harder line.

I don't have a lobby group (in the form of trade unions) to represent me in strike debates/demands, and I am at a huge disadvantage because these same staff have 'jobs for life' (further vexing, as this privilege is funded by taxpayers and used a tool to gouge those same taxpayers further) so there is effectively absolutely no downside for this bad attitude and sense of entitlement; the result is I have to hand over more of my money through taxation than I would otherwise. Beyond that, theres simple fact we have such mediocre public services in Ireland due to the fact the high unionisation means the services are viewed as a means of employing people who would otherwise be unemployed, so those services are ran for the benefit of the staff, rather than the public, which as a socially left-wing individual I find very frustrating

4 people have thanked this post
brokenarms Registered User
#83

Flex said:
Indeed the begrudgery line is refuge of the lazy and ignorant. If I own shares in a company where staff is paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance I would be equally disgusted and demand results before withdrawing my investment in said company

As a tax payer I have a stake in these companies and I fund them through my income taxes and so on. I cant withdraw my taxes from the government so my only means of retort when I see staff paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance is to demand the government to take a harder line.

I don't have a lobby group (in the form of trade unions) to represent me in strike debates/demands, and I am at a huge disadvantage because these same staff have 'jobs for life' (further vexing, as this privilege is funded by taxpayers and used a tool to gouge those same taxpayers further) so there is effectively absolutely no downside for this bad attitude and sense of entitlement; the result is I have to hand over more of my money through taxation than I would otherwise. Beyond that, theres simple fact we have such mediocre public services in Ireland due to the fact the high unionisation means the services are viewed as a means of employing people who would otherwise be unemployed, so those services are ran for the benefit of the staff, rather than the public, which as a socially left-wing individual I find very frustrating


Yet the very post you deny begrudgery , you exhibit it in the next paragraph?

1 person has thanked this post
Stephen15 Registered User
#84

Colonel Claptrap said:
Come off it. The only reason we are giving out is because of begrudgery?

I am a customer of IE. I am also a taxpayer. It infuriates me to see this sort of carry on because I am directly effected by It, not because I'm jealous of their cushy number.

Further to your point, I would not want to work in a closed shop with a hive mind of union members. I previously worked in 2 jobs with overbearing union heads on power trips. I didnt stick around for long. I improved my "terms and conditions" by upskilling and getting the hell out of there.


When did I say begrudge. I said I think some people are jealous of CIE workers as they say they would gladly do the job for whatever money the CIE workers are on. I was not targeting this post at you you never said that I was targeting it at other people who they would gladly drive bus/train but never apply for a job as one.

1 person has thanked this post
StreetLight Registered User
#85

Colonel Claptrap said:
Come off it. The only reason we are giving out is because of begrudgery?

I am a customer of IE. I am also a taxpayer. It infuriates me to see this sort of carry on because I am directly effected by It, not because I'm jealous of their cushy number.

Further to your point, I would not want to work in a closed shop with a hive mind of union members. I previously worked in 2 jobs with overbearing union heads on power trips. I didnt stick around for long. I improved my "terms and conditions" by upskilling and getting the hell out of there.


Who mentioned begrudgery?

You view someone who works a full week with anti-social shifts (and sometimes with even more anti-social customers) on the average industrial wage as having a cushy number?

The politicians are laughing at you.

2 people have thanked this post
end of the road Registered User
#86

Flex said:
Indeed the begrudgery line is refuge of the lazy and ignorant. If I own shares in a company where staff is paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance I would be equally disgusted and demand results before withdrawing my investment in said company

As a tax payer I have a stake in these companies and I fund them through my income taxes and so on. I cant withdraw my taxes from the government so my only means of retort when I see staff paid significantly above market rates of pay and are returning mediocre outputs and obstructing improvements in efficiency, agility and performance is to demand the government to take a harder line.

I don't have a lobby group (in the form of trade unions) to represent me in strike debates/demands, and I am at a huge disadvantage because these same staff have 'jobs for life' (further vexing, as this privilege is funded by taxpayers and used a tool to gouge those same taxpayers further) so there is effectively absolutely no downside for this bad attitude and sense of entitlement; the result is I have to hand over more of my money through taxation than I would otherwise. Beyond that, theres simple fact we have such mediocre public services in Ireland due to the fact the high unionisation means the services are viewed as a means of employing people who would otherwise be unemployed, so those services are ran for the benefit of the staff, rather than the public, which as a socially left-wing individual I find very frustrating



on what basis are you claiming "staff are paid significantly above market rates of pay"
there is a difference in being paid over the market rate and not agreeing with their rate of pay. irish rail drivers for example are paid similar to the uk, so are paid within the european rail market rates of pay.
there are no jobs for life in the public service anymore.

Infini Registered User
#87

Jamie2k9 said:
Infini

Are existing DART drivers and unions refusing to cooperate with roster changes to enable a 10 minute DART....


Havent a clue atm about this because I've heard nothing about it. All I've heard is what's been posted here by other people who are drivers and have said basically that its a liability issue. That's the core problem with the mentoring in the first place: It's the company trying to force driver's to take new drivers out and make them liable for any mistakes the mentor make regardless of how much time as passed.

Driver's said no because
1) its voluntary and
2) they dont trust the company if something goes wrong so the only thing they can do is stay away from it.

Edit: I also wish some poster's would stop using the "I'm a taxpayer" angle as an "argument". Regardless of the fact that EVERYONE here is a taxpayer thank you very much (unless your living in malta! ), it seems to be overused as an excuse to come across as self important rather than an actual argument. EVERYONE has problem's we can only deal with them as they come along.

2 people have thanked this post
LeinsterDub Registered User
#88

Infini said:
make them liable for any mistakes the mentor make regardless of how much time as passed.



Can someone please post a link to this? I can't find it even on the NBRU site. All I found was

Our members have rejected the Recommendation which was designed to facilitate a move from the currently agreed voluntarist system of training new drivers, to one where it would become compulsory for all train drivers to mentor new colleagues.


http://nbru.ie/index.php/nbru-members-reject-labour-court-proposal-on-past-productivity-and-driver-training/

Jamie2k9 Registered User
#89

Infini said:
Havent a clue atm about this because I've heard nothing about it. All I've heard is what's been posted here by other people who are drivers and have said basically that its a liability issue. That's the core problem with the mentoring in the first place: It's the company trying to force driver's to take new drivers out and make them liable for any mistakes the mentor make regardless of how much time as passed.

Driver's said no because
1) its voluntary and
2) they dont trust the company if something goes wrong so the only thing they can do is stay away from it.

Edit: I also wish some poster's would stop using the "I'm a taxpayer" angle as an "argument". Regardless of the fact that EVERYONE here is a taxpayer thank you very much (unless your living in malta! ), it seems to be overused as an excuse to come across as self important rather than an actual argument. EVERYONE has problem's we can only deal with them as they come along.


Well one of the unions said a few months ago they would not co-operate with roster changes to allow the 10 minute schedule.

By right there should be 0 new DART drivers needed to facilitate but "resistance to change" is the problem and not wanting to give up shift/break patterns.

1 person has thanked this post
tabbey Registered User
#90

Stephen15 said:
But the government doesn't have a say in pay deals sought by workers in semi state bodies


The government had power to enact any legislation it chose prior to the 2016 election. It is also the owner of semi-state companies, with power to change the boards, and/or liquidate the companies. It could also abolish the NTA.

1 person has thanked this post

Want to share your thoughts?

Login here to discuss!