Unions, is it time to move on?

bloggs

Ok, this is the 21st Century as people love to phrase things. Do you think the Unions have a place in a modern fast paced world? Mainly in regard to Ireland, anytime we hear of the unions, it's about a strike and the rest of us are feeling the pain of their protest.

Recently the unions in Aer Rianta brought Dublin Airport to a standstill, even after been told that their jobs were save. Business people, holiday makers and others were affected. The way i see it is that the unions wish to keep everything as it is, and to hell with competivness. Some companies have been forced to close due to inflexible union demands.

There is word that the government want to privatise dublin bus, surely a pilot program of certain routes can't be any harm, and if it fails then the idea can be scraped. Instead the unions plan to go on strike just incase? :mad:

This madness must end.

Moriarty

Theres certainly a place for unions in our society. Workers do need a voice and unions seem to be the best way to facilitate that.

On the other hand, I think that the vast majority of unions are now deluded and drunk on power. Unions must realise that there are times when redundancys, pay cuts or changes in work practicies are necessary for the survival of the company/sector. Hard-line unions (the ASTI pops into my head here) are doing their members and society at large a huge disservice by being so stubborn - these unions have utterly failed to realise that with a union comes a lot of responsibility.

I have conflicting (perhaps irreconcilable) outlooks on this wider picture. I believe that companys/etc should have the right to sack people if theyre dead weight or not productive without question. Companys are not an extension of the welfare state, no matter how much unions would like them to be. On the other hand, i also agree that workers need proper notice of redundancy with a decent redundancy package if at all possible. They should be 'guarenteed' their job (in as far as a company can guarentee a worker their job) if they do work hard and are an asset to the company.

bloggs

Originally posted by Moriarty
Theres certainly a place for unions in our society. Workers do need a voice and unions seem to be the best way to facilitate that.

On the other hand, I think that the vast majority of unions are now deluded and drunk on power. Unions must realise that there are times when redundancys, pay cuts or changes in work practicies are necessary for the survival of the company/sector. Hard-line unions (the ASTI pops into my head here) are doing their members and society at large a huge disservice by being so stubborn - these unions have utterly failed to realise that with a union comes a lot of responsibility.

I have conflicting (perhaps irreconcilable) outlooks on this wider picture. I believe that companys/etc should have the right to sack people if theyre dead weight or not productive without question. Companys are not an extension of the welfare state, no matter how much unions would like them to be. On the other hand, i also agree that workers need proper notice of redundancy with a decent redundancy package if at all possible. They should be 'guarenteed' their job (in as far as a company can guarentee a worker their job) if they do work hard and are an asset to the company.

I fully agree! I work in the IT sector, and as we have done well over the past few years, things are certainly a lot worse now. I have taken both pay cuts and wage freezes since 2001, and have accepted it. I find it strange and bewildering how many public sector workers can get automatic pay rises which aren't linked to productivity. The unions seem to just demand rises, even during these crisis times, while employers are foced to cough up, or there will be industrial action. I think a common sense approach is required.

invincibleirish

not at all,unions are there to look out for their members interests and as such they have to fight for their interests no matter how much it may affect poor old big business,the power that they have is legitimate for the simple reason they are representing the largest single group of people in the partnership,besides considering that the present government is the most right wing in this nations history and ibec seems to hold more sway these days the unions dont have as much sway as some would like.
privitization is a proven failure and is a genuine threat to cie workers jobs and work conditions and as such they has every right to implement the novel strike action that they did.

bloggs

Please explain the logic in where a person in the private sectors wage is linked to productivity, and where a person in the public sector is linked to what the unions can demand.

I support Ryanair on this in regard to the strike at dublin airport, the staff just jumped up and went to a meeting, with total disregard to the general public, it wasn't even a strike! When unions act in this way, they are only making the public their enemy.

ZENER

You seem to be a little confused bloggs. Unions demand for their workers a wage that keeps track with inflation rates, surely this is reasonable and you would not deny a hard working person - wheather a union member or not - a wage that he/she can live on.

As an employee at Dublin Airport I fear for my job and my family's future. With over 20 years service and pension contributions I am now faced with losing both my job and my pension. My union cannot guarantee this will not happen, only keep me informed of my rights as a taxpayer in this country.

I have your idol Michael O'Leary to thank for this situation. I suspect you cannot see the woods for the trees. Mr. O'Leary would have you believe that all public services lose money and cost the taxpayer. In fact many of these services make a profit and contribute to the finances of the country. Aer Rianta for example pay a dividend of about €35M every year to the exchequer. Aer Lingus also in recent years have done likewise.

If trade unions did not exist in this country your wage rates would not be as good as they were pre 2001. The economy is now in a slowdown and all sectors - not just IT - are being hit hard. Union members also have to except pay freezes and unemployment everyday. Make no mistake a Union will not defend a worker who makes the workforce as a whole look unpreductive, I have seen this first hand.

As you are keen to point out Airport workers took one hour to hold a meeting to be informed about what Mr. Brennan intended to do to their jobs. For this hour many staff were still on duty at their posts doing their job ensuring operations proceeded as normal as possible under the circumstances. Mr. O'Leary will have you believe every staff member at Dublin Airport downed tools and walked off - not true - I myself was instructed to continue with my duties as normal by my union to ensure minimum disruption to customers.

Mr. O'Leary seems to blame all problems on state companies - even the severe fog last week was blamed on Aer Rianta ! Mr O Leary informed his customers that 20 of his planes could not fly due to restrictions imposed by Aer Rianta ! There were 25 flights cancelled or delayed that day that means only 5 other craft could not operate by other airlines. The truth of the matter is that Mr O'Leary will not pay for aircraft equipped with the instruments to enable them to fly in poor visibility but you wont read that anywhere because he holds the media to ransom by threatening to withdraw advertisements. Still respect Mr O'Leary ???

If it were not for trade unions employers would dictate to all employees their conditions of employment and we would be in a more serious situation than we are now.

Tinky

bloggs

Originally posted by tinky


If trade unions did not exist in this country your wage rates would not be as good as they were pre 2001. The economy is now in a slowdown and all sectors - not just IT - are being hit hard. Union members also have to except pay freezes and unemployment everyday. Make no mistake a Union will not defend a worker who makes the workforce as a whole look unpreductive, I have seen this first hand.

I don't trust O'Leary all the time, but he is providing a good service at a low cost, don't you remember about 10 years ago, when it would cost up to 300 punts to get a flight to London?

In regard to the comments above. I work for a private LTD, so the unions have had no effect on my wage, i have had to work hard to get extra pay, and demand benifits. I am not saying that in the past the unions did good things, but now them just try to stop progress. Do you think it's right that people who don't work hard should get the same pay rises as you do (i asume you work hard)? I think all pay rises should be linked to productivity. If you look at it, the private sector is freezing wages, while the public unionised sector is going ahead with rises when it's the private sector that mainly pay for these rises (taxation).

Do you think it was right that your union brought Dublin airport to a halt a few weeks ago on a whim that jobs might be lost? This wasn't even a strike over job losses, it was just a snub to the general public as to say, we don't give a damn about you. These type of union actions have turned me against the likes of SIPTU and MANDATE, who would rather see a company collapse or be bailed out by the tax payer then to compremise.

bonkey

Originally posted by tinky
You seem to be a little confused bloggs. Unions demand for their workers a wage that keeps track with inflation rates, surely this is reasonable and you would not deny a hard working person - wheather a union member or not - a wage that he/she can live on

....

If it were not for trade unions employers would dictate to all employees their conditions of employment and we would be in a more serious situation than we are now.

Fair point. On the other hand, I know that a union in one of the ESB generating stations went on strike a few years ago because they were offered more money to work less hours, with a guarantee that there would be no decrease in the workforce if they accepted the offer.

They weren't holding out for more money. I'm not entirely sure what they were holding out for....but it seemed to be some sort of "conspiracy claim" that ESB would make undue demands on them in return, or that they would be expected to do too much work within the working hours.

In other words, the union went on strike because the new deal meant its workers might be asked to work during more of the hours they were employed for, and would have less time to slack off.

Anyone can come up with examples of unions doing good things. This doesn't prove that all unions are good, or that unions in general are still a good idea in their current implementation.

jc

Zombrex

Originally posted by bonkey
Anyone can come up with examples of unions doing good things. This doesn't prove that all unions are good, or that unions in general are still a good idea in their current implementation.

Anyone can come up with examples of unions doing bad things. This doesn't prove that all unions are bad, or that unions in general are now a bad idea in the current implementation.

I think unions on a whole are a good thing, they protect workers rights. Of course they are lead by humans so they are naturally going to be some stupid, manipluative union leaders. But without the history of unions in Ireland very few of us would have any form of job security.

The problem arrises when unions try to protect their workers against the companies "improvements." I think unions should be more flexable when it comes to necessary changes in industry, but at the same time they should still guard against money making downsizing that benifits only the shareholders. If business wants unions to be more socially responsible then it is also necessary for business to be more socially responsible.

I would ask bloggs does he have an idea of what would take the place of unions? How would you protect the interests of the workers without unions?

BTW I can't help but think of the classic Simpson episode when Homer leads the power plant on a strike

Homer - How much does this pay
Carl - Nothing ...
Homer - D'oh
Carl - .. unless you are crooked
Homer - Woohoo !!

Turnip

Originally posted by tinky

Mr. O'Leary seems to blame all problems on state companies - even the severe fog last week was blamed on Aer Rianta ! Mr O Leary informed his customers that 20 of his planes could not fly due to restrictions imposed by Aer Rianta ! There were 25 flights cancelled or delayed that day that means only 5 other craft could not operate by other airlines. The truth of the matter is that Mr O'Leary will not pay for aircraft equipped with the instruments to enable them to fly in poor visibility but you wont read that anywhere because he holds the media to ransom by threatening to withdraw advertisements.

Can you expand a little on this and give some more information? What special instruments are required?

Victor

Yes they have a place, however they need to reform and bring themselves up to the reality of new business and social models. The only time we hear about unions is not just about strikes. Unions have tools short of strikes. Unions take part in workplace committees (canteen, Health & Safety, etc.). Unions negotiate in national agreements. In fact in the last 10-15 years Irish unions have been defined by their not striking rather than by their striking.

There is word that the government want to privatise dublin bus, surely a pilot program of certain routes can't be any harm, and if it fails then the idea can be scraped.

No they don't. Can you provide any evidence of this?

Bloggs, I can only assume your post is deliberately inflamatory.

Originally posted by tinky
As an employee at Dublin Airport I fear for my job and my family's future. With over 20 years service and pension contributions I am now faced with losing both my job and my pension.

How are you going to loose your pension if the money is in a separate fund to which your employer has no direct access? Yes, I understand the Aer Rianta pension fund is marginally underfunded at the moment, as are many pension funds, but to say you won't have any pension is nonsense. What sort of gobsh!1tes do you take us for?

Originally posted by tinky
Mr. O'Leary will have you believe every staff member at Dublin Airport downed tools and walked off

tinky, you point at the nasty Mr. O'Leary and his half-truths, when you appear to be propagating them yourself - I have heard no one suggest (O'Leary might have, but I ahaven't seent eh comments - link?) that everyone downed tools when the police & fire brigade went to their meeting(s). Aircraft movements cannot take place without the fire brigade being available. That the union is so incompetent (sue me!) that it can't schedule meeting(s) afterhours is ludicrous. That it is malicious enough (sue me!) to withdraw fire brigade support is more so.

Meh

Originally posted by tinky
The truth of the matter is that Mr O'Leary will not pay for aircraft equipped with the instruments to enable them to fly in poor visibility but you wont read that anywhere because he holds the media to ransom by threatening to withdraw advertisements.

So what's stopping the story from appearing on the BBC?

mike65

http://www.rte.ie/news/2003/0808/airport.html

http://www.dublin.ie/index.asp?locID=398&docID=572

so its not a media conspiracy.....

Mike.

bloggs

Originally posted by Victor
Yes they have a place, however they need to reform and bring themselves up to the reality of new business and social models. The only time we hear about unions is not just about strikes. Unions have tools short of strikes. Unions take part in workplace committees (canteen, Health & Safety, etc.). Unions negotiate in national agreements. In fact in the last 10-15 years Irish unions have been defined by their not striking rather than by their striking.

No they don't. Can you provide any evidence of this?

Bloggs, I can only assume your post is deliberately inflamatory.

Ok sorry i have re-read that, what i should have said was that if Dublin Bus privatised some routes on a trial run, and if the were unsuccessful the idea could be scraped.

bloggs

Originally posted by Wicknight
I would ask bloggs does he have an idea of what would take the place of unions? How would you protect the interests of the workers without unions?

Well i know a man who took up with his union an issue of expenses that he was meant to have been paid. The union wouldn't listen to him and after a number of letters to even the head of the union (SIPTU), he ended up taking his employer to court and paying a laywer to do the job of the union. He won his expenses and asked to be cut out of union dues...

sceptre

Originally posted by bloggs
he ended up taking his employer to court and paying a laywer to do the job of the union.

You want to replace unions with lawyers?

I can only assume that's what you mean, given the part of Wicknight's post that you quoted. I just want to be sure before I reply

bloggs

Im just saying that in that case the Union were worth nothing and a lawyer was the only way of progressing. I think there is enough employment legislation to deal with most problems.

ZENER

Quote:

---

How are you going to loose your pension if the money is in a separate fund to which your employer has no direct access? Yes, I understand the Aer Rianta pension fund is marginally underfunded at the moment, as are many pension funds, but to say you won't have any pension is nonsense. What sort of gobsh!1tes do you take us for?


To say the pension fund at Aer Lingus / Aer Rianta is marginally under funded is an understatement. Most pensions rely on a ratio of 20:1 between employees paying in to those taking out in order to be viable. A ratio of 6:1 exists at the moment in the airport. The streamlining of Aer Lingus meant early retirement for a large number of their staff along with redundancies etc. I'm not sure of the figures but I believe Aer Lingus have released up to 25% of its workforce. This means a lot less people contributing. If Brennan succeeds with his plan and Dublin Airport is left with over €800M in debt then staff will be let go and this ratio will get less.

Quote:
So what's stopping the story from appearing on the BBC?

I would imagine if this had happened at Heathrow Airport we would have heard about it on SKY. A few days after Minister Brennan announced his plan to break up Aer Rianta the Irish Times published an article from a well respected economist which basically said the ministers plan could not possibly work. Other articles also appeared commenting on Mr O'Leary's attitude to the plan and Aer Rianta in general. The Irish times were told by by Mr O'Leary that he was withdrawing advertisement from the paper for 6 months if they published any more pro Aer Rianta articles !!

Quote:
Do you think it's right that people who don't work hard should get the same pay rises as you do (i asume you work hard)? I think all pay rises should be linked to productivity. If you look at it, the private sector is freezing wages, while the public unionised sector is going ahead with rises when it's the private sector that mainly pay for these rises (taxation).

Of course I dont agree with slackers benefiting from my hard work. I have seen first hand slackers getting sacked while the unions did not intervene to help them, they dug their own grave and didn't deserve help and good riddance to them !

Pay at Aer Rianta / Aer Lingus has always been productivity driven. In 1981 when I started at Dublin Airport there was only 1 pier and a shack called pier A. The section I work in had 50 staff. 2 million passangers went through the airport that year. There are now 3 large busy piers 15 million plus passangers and 12 less staff in my dept. It therefore follows that 38staff have to work harder now at what we do to keep the Airport operational .

Your comment about public sector taking money from you holds no validity. This is another peice of mis-information Mr O'Leary likes to spout about Aer Rianta. Aer Rianta has for the last 30 years paid a dividend totalling over €400M to the government. In that 30 years the government has never put its hand in your pocket to help Aer Rianta. All capital spending was achieved by borrowing from commercial banks and repaid in the same way your employer would pay.

I agree that 10 years ago flying was overpriced. Ryanair filled a gap in the market that any of the other budget airlines - easyjet - GO - etc would have filled sooner or later. I would prefer to see healthy competition at the airports where a number of lowcost companies competed for your custom - this is true competition - instead we have a monopoly called Ryanair dictating the rules of low frills services. Since they have cornered the market in low cost fares I dont think the customer is getting good value. Credit card supplements of €6 - decrease of baggage allowancws - excess baggage charges - no € accepted on their flights - no refund of taxes if you don't take your flight.

In truth if Ryanair were the last airline flying away from a neuclear bomb I would rather stay and die. Check out the other forums on boards for reasons why.

Tinky

bonkey

Originally posted by Wicknight
Anyone can come up with examples of unions doing bad things. This doesn't prove that all unions are bad, or that unions in general are now a bad idea in the current implementation.

Sure...

except that in society, you can do wonderful acts all your life, and then break the law once....that makes you a criminal, not a do-gooder.

I'm not saying that all unions are bad...I'm saying that there is enough evidence to show that many unions are abusing their privileges....even if said unions also do good things.

Now, take an analagy....if many but not all people were drunk-driving, or stealing from the state, or, or, or....you would generally hear people say that the system needs reform. Indeed, you hear it every day about exactly those things...."something needs to be done".

So...given that there is no shortage of evidence to show that many unions are taking unfair advantage of various situations, there is....on the same basis....grounds to say that something needs to be done...the system needs reform.

Saying "my union has done well by me, and is a good union" in no way mitigates that....whch was the original stance I was responding to. It would be like saying "No, the system doesn't need reform. I don't drive when drunk, so everything is obviously fine."

jc

Originally posted by : tinky
Your comment about public sector taking money from you holds no validity. This is another peice of mis-information Mr O'Leary likes to spout about Aer Rianta. Aer Rianta has for the last 30 years paid a dividend totalling over €400M to the government. In that 30 years the government has never put its hand in your pocket to help Aer Rianta. All capital spending was achieved by borrowing from commercial banks and repaid in the same way your employer would pay.

I don't see why the government should be putting public money into Aer Rianta or Aer lingus. They should stand on their own feet, to sink or swim ie let demand and supply take over.
you could argue of course that, that €400M you speak of has been re invested many times over in infrastructure that benefits the Airports, so it's not as if Aer Rianta has had to lie down as a result.
mm

bonkey

Originally posted by Man
I don't see why the government should be putting public money into Aer Rianta or Aer lingus.

I agree.

All semi-state bodies are supposed to not run a loss. THey don't always manage this, but thats the basic criteria that they are supposed to meet.

If ESB, for example, want to build a new powerstation, they borrow the money, and pay it back with interest...just like a regular business.

Why should Aer Rianta be any different? The only possible argument as to why it should receieve anything from the government is if it can be shown to be financially unviable.

Like any business, semi-states can have good and bad years. Like any business, expecting the government to come in and fund the bad year is a joke.

The only reason there should be funding is if it can be shown that it is impossible not to run a consistent loss, and that the service is pubically necessary (and therefore cannot be withdrawn).

Does Aer Rianta meet these criteria? No, not in my book.

jc

surfboy

Originally posted by Meh
So what's stopping the story from appearing on the BBC?

Dont know why it's not appearing on BBC, this this is correct. They were talking about it on RTE radio a couple of days ago, apparently they have the 'Hardware' that glides planes in, but this only works on certain runways, and whichever the wind direction was at the time, they had to use a certain runway, but the equipment was installed to work only in one direction, which was unfortunately the wrong one...... they gave no reason for not having the equipment working in both directions on the runway..... They said it was "unfortunate"!

Sleipnir

Eircom has, wait for it
27 separate unions.
Unions are the reason nothing get's down in Eircom. The workers go on stike if their pencils break.
Unions bring the country to a standstill.
This is why the Dart to Greystones was delayed for a one entire year.
Any business that is heavily unionised usually makes a loss (telecom Eireann, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc)
They can be useful for disputes but have far too much of a stranglehold on the country at the moment.

sceptre

Originally posted by Kananga
Any business that is heavily unionised usually makes a loss (telecom Eireann, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc)

Not necessarily true. You can't get a job in Tesco or Dunnes without joining the union. Hence they're 100% unionised and making good profits.

bloggs

Just read on Examiner.ie that the Unions who represent the Air Traffic Control staff are planning on going on strike on the 15Sept, ahh wonderful :mad:

That will f*** up my holiday no end

bonkey

Originally posted by Kananga
Any business that is heavily unionised usually makes a loss (telecom Eireann, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc)

I could be wrong, but I don't believe ESB runs a loss.

jc

gombín

Kananga,

Where in the name of God did you get this info. eircom has 3 recognised unions CWU, Impact & PSEU. I cannot think of a single authority in the country (including civil service) that contains 27 unions.

None of TE, ESB, or Bord Gáis, were ever regular loss makers. If you do a bit of research, you'll find that the profits that eircom are making now pale into insignificance with what they were making in the 80s, when the co. was even more heavily unionised. I can only remember Bord Gáis making a loss on a couple of occassions. As for the ESB, well, it's a cash-cow, and the government wiuld be pure amadans if they sold it off.

Regards.

Originally posted by Kananga
Eircom has, wait for it
27 separate unions.
Unions are the reason nothing get's down in Eircom. The workers go on stike if their pencils break.
Unions bring the country to a standstill.
This is why the Dart to Greystones was delayed for a one entire year.
Any business that is heavily unionised usually makes a loss (telecom Eireann, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc)
They can be useful for disputes but have far too much of a stranglehold on the country at the moment.

bloggs

As far as i know Eircon, ESB and Bord Gais, are all semi-state and making good profits.

Well I have a mate whose BMI plane from Heathrow was diverted to Shannon because of that fog at Dublin airport two weeks ago, they couldn't land in the fog either.

It's not very often that fog disrupts an airport so it's understandable if a business owner doesn't feel it worthwhile to be investing in equipment to be immune to it.

I know many give out about Ryan air, but they shouldn't really.
They are a business and in the game that they are in, they are not far off the largest and most successfull in europe if not the world-kudos to an Irish company for that.
( also they paid Lisa Burke's(sky news weathergirl) wages for long enough )

If you want to fly on a more expensive airline then you can, if you want to fly business class, with all the frills, you can, but you pays for what you gets-thats the market working for you.

mm

Imposter

Originally posted by bloggs
Just read on Examiner.ie that the Unions who represent the Air Traffic Control staff are planning on going on strike on the 15Sept, ahh wonderful :mad:

They better get back before the 17th. If not it'll only be the 2nd time in 2 years I can't fly when I want to because of flippin' strikes.

sovtek

Originally posted by tinky
- excess baggage charges -

Check out the other forums on boards for reasons why.

Tinky

Yes I have a nice tale about this in the Rip-Off Ireland forum.

Victor

Originally posted by Man
I don't see why the government should be putting public money into Aer Rianta or Aer lingus.

They aren't, why are you insinuating they are (by saying they shouldn't).

Originally posted by Kananga
Eircom has, wait for it 27 separate unions.

List please?

Originally posted by Kananga
Unions are the reason nothing get's down in Eircom. The workers go on stike if their pencils break.

When (date pelase) was the last time there was a strike in eircom? What with the employees owning a quarter to a third of the company.

Originally posted by Kananga
Any business that is heavily unionised usually makes a loss (telecom Eireann, ESB, Bord Gais etc etc)

Links please?

Originally posted by Victor

Originally posted by Man
I don't see why the government should be putting public money into Aer Rianta or Aer lingus.
They aren't, why are you insinuating they are (by saying they shouldn't).

Victor,have you been going to Yoda night classes:D
Let me extract my accent from what I typed...
I don't see why the government should put public money into Aer Rianta or Aer Lingus

Thats my ideology. They did at one point, theres no need to return to subsidies, when commercial reality means you will not be without a service or number of services at Irish airports.

mm

bloggs

From Examiner.ie

Talks continue as unions threaten to cause air crisis

Talks to try and prevent a strike by air traffic controllers are continuing between unions and the Irish Aviation Authority.

Planes could be grounded next month if the two sides fail to reach agreement in a row over the allocation of jobs to student controllers.

They've been told there will be no jobs for them when they qualify next month and controllers have voted in favour of strike action if they're dismissed.

If the strike goes ahead in mid-September, it would disrupt over 2,000 flights in and out of Ireland.


Surely the IAA can't put people into jobs if there are no jobs for them? Don't the union understand this, or is there more to this?

sovtek

Originally posted by bloggs


Planes could be grounded next month if the two sides fail to reach agreement in a row over the allocation of jobs to student controllers.

They've been told there will be no jobs for them when they qualify next month and controllers have voted in favour of strike action if they're dismissed.

IMHO this article doesn't provide enough information for you to come to that conclusion.
Who trains the controllers? How long ago were they brought into training and if there were going to be no jobs...why were they?
What circumstances have made them redundant?

Victor

Answer me this, every time there is discussion about the direction a state company is to take why do the unions have a hissy fit, followed by a politician having a hissy fit, followed by a private operator having a hissy fit. Would they be trying to manipulate us?

Originally posted by tinky
To say the pension fund at Aer Lingus / Aer Rianta is marginally under funded is an understatement. Most pensions rely on a ratio of 20:1 between employees paying in to those taking out in order to be viable. A ratio of 6:1 exists at the moment in the airport. The streamlining of Aer Lingus meant early retirement for a large number of their staff along with redundancies etc. I'm not sure of the figures but I believe Aer Lingus have released up to 25% of its workforce. This means a lot less people contributing. If Brennan succeeds with his plan and Dublin Airport is left with over €800M in debt then staff will be let go and this ratio will get less.

People work for circa 40 years of their life. They are retired for circa 10 years of their lives. This would imply a 4:1 ratio, at full pay (not the daft two thirds pay used by company pension funds). Ultimately what is important is how much money is in the fund, not how many are paying in. So how much is in the pension fund? Is this enough to pay existing committments? Nothing else matters.

So what's stopping the story from appearing on the BBC?

Originally posted by tinky
I would imagine if this had happened at Heathrow Airport we would have heard about it on SKY.

The point is the BBC don't take ad.s - they are funded by the licence fee and commercial operations.

Originally posted by tinky
Pay at Aer Rianta / Aer Lingus has always been productivity driven. In 1981 when I started at Dublin Airport there was only 1 pier and a shack called pier A. The section I work in had 50 staff. 2 million passangers went through the airport that year. There are now 3 large busy piers 15 million plus passangers and 12 less staff in my dept. It therefore follows that 38staff have to work harder now at what we do to keep the Airport operational .

If 75% of the staff can do 750% of the work (rather productivity), one has to ask questions.

sovtek

Originally posted by Victor
matters.The point is the BBC don't take ad.s - they are funded by the licence fee and commercial operations.

If I were an alien, and the BBC were my only source of info, then I wouldn't even know that the ROI existed.
Even the weather presenters ignore that little peice of land to the south.

K back on topic....

bloggs

Originally posted by sovtek
IMHO this article doesn't provide enough information for you to come to that conclusion.
Who trains the controllers? How long ago were they brought into training and if there were going to be no jobs...why were they?
What circumstances have made them redundant?

I know lots of people who have gone on training courses and have ended up without a job. If the course lasts a year, things can change very quickly. Although i always thought the airline industry would be more the same year in year out, even after 9/11. Anyway to go on strike because there isn't a job, hmmmm what sort of solution can you find for that? Answers on a post card, to the usual address...

bonkey

Originally posted by Victor
People work for circa 40 years of their life. They are retired for circa 10 years of their lives.

Lest the pedants come out.....

Average life expectancy for men in Ireland is 73. For women it is 78. Taken from here

So a more accurate gender-neutral average, allowing for disparity in the ages would be retirement for about 15 years...but still leaving Victor's figures in the ballpark.

The 40:1 ratio only makes sense if you were to assume people were saving no more than 2.5 percent of their salary...with 0 inflation and 0 earnings on the fund value.....all of which is blatantly ridiculous.

jc

bloggs

I wonder if my fight is canceled due to the Airport strike, can i sue the union? Wouldn't that be great if the consumer could sue the union, that would stop them from striking

Victor

Originally posted by bonkey
Lest the pedants come out.....

Oi! thats my job

Originally posted by bonkey
Average life expectancy for men in Ireland is 73. For women it is 78. Taken from here So a more accurate gender-neutral average, allowing for disparity in the ages would be retirement for about 15 years...but still leaving Victor's figures in the ballpark.

Well If you retire at 65 and die at an average 75. I know average life expectancy at 65 is over 10 years (because all those who die younger are excluded), but people under 65 will have dies, but still contributed to the scheme (whole different argument). People tend not to work their entire lives from 18 to 65 - they go to college, are unemployed, take leave of absence, take temporary contracts ....

Originally posted by bonkey
The 40:1 ratio only makes sense

Who said 40:1?

sceptre

Originally posted by bloggs
I wonder if my fight is canceled due to the Airport strike, can i sue the union?

No. You can't sue the airline either (read the contract you agreed to)

Wouldn't that be great if the consumer could sue the union, that would stop them from striking

No it wouldn't. Might as well travel back to before the taft vale case if that was a possibility. It would also require substantial amendment of Irish employment legislation, rights legislation and possibly a constitutional amendment as the courts have indicated a number of times that union membership is one of the unenumerated rights in the constitution. It would result in a case to the european court of justice, which the union or prospective union members would win.

bonkey

Originally posted by Victor
Who said 40:1?

Oops.

No-one did.

My brain read 20:1 as 40:1. Dont ask how.

I'm off to debug it right now.

jc

sovtek

Originally posted by bloggs
I know lots of people who have gone on training courses and have ended up without a job.

I'd assumed that they were trained by the company.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/1243987?view=Eircomnet

Aer Rianta unions to ballot members on industrial action
From:ireland.com
Friday, 22nd August, 2003

Unions at Aer Rianta have notified the company of plans to ballot members for industrial action that could bring strike action at Dublin, Cork and Shannon airports.

Balloting is to start next week and it is thought a result will be known on by September 6th.

The unions, which represent almost 2,000 workers, are SIPTU, MANDATE, IMPACT and the TEEU.

The unions' decision is thought to have followed a meeting with Aer Rianta management earlier this week at which the company said it could not guarantee employees' pay or employment terms beyond the next 12 months.


There was an angry reaction by trade unions last month to the plan by the Minister for Transport, Mr Brennan, to set up the airports in Dublin, Shannon and Cork as independent entities owned by the State.

Mr Brennan has insisted that no jobs will be lost and says the privatisation of the airports is not on his agenda.

Stating that Dublin Airport would assume some €100 million in debt from Shannon and Cork, he presented the plan as an opportunity for the two airports to develop new business.