Lufthansa Airmotive workers can feck off!!

Clytus

So the Lufthansa Airmotive workers basically told their bosses in Germany to F*** Off...that they deserve to be paid more than their counterparts in Germany.
I reckon if the Germans take the attitude "Sod the Paddys" and close up shop here...none of the Airmotive workers should get Jobseekers allowance because they more or less forced the plant to close.

Same applied to the SR Tecniques lads...they all figured theyd get a nice cushy redundecy package...but got the land of their lives when the Big Wigs in Zurich handed them a bucket of cash and said thats it....divey it up as yiz please!!

The Irish Trade Union movement has caused more damage in recent times than 10 life times of Financial crises...its time we told them where to go.

spoonbadger

Have fun living in a country without trade unions.

SC024

+1 I think your 100% right there.... It's about time they stopped running this country as if it were a full owned subsidary of siptu/ICTU

bleg

wasn't it the workers who took a ballot on this? dunno how you can blame the trade unions for the stupidity of the workers voting against cost cutting measures that will save their jobs. and i wouldn't be the trade unions' biggest fan either.

SEPT 23 1989

Fritz :work a bit harder for a few quid less and we will keep you employed
for the next fifteen years

Paddy:no thanks shut down the plant and we will go on the dole


Gob****es of the highest order:mad:

Mr Benevolent

Have fun living in a country without trade unions.

Trade unions caused this problem in the first place.

Terry

I know a dude who works there.
I must ask him about this.

robinph

I'm pretty sure that you cannot claim anything for a good while if you walked out of your job for any reason, certainly sounds along the lines of what they have done to themselves.

Terry

robinph wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that you cannot claim anything for a good while if you walked out of your job for any reason, certainly sounds along the lines of what they have done to themselves.

I remember it being 6 weeks, but that was years ago. I don't know if it's still the same.
I know they made a lot of changes to the welfare system over the last ten years.

Clytus

bleg wrote: »

wasn't it the workers who took a ballot on this? dunno how you can blame the trade unions for the stupidity of the workers voting against cost cutting measures that will save their jobs. and i wouldn't be the trade unions' biggest fan either.

On the day of the ballot I distinctly remember hearing a Siptu Rep on the radio....and then another T.U rep ( cant remember which Union it was)...but she came across as a hardliner...militant..and very aggressive towards the management.
The issues seemed to be along the lines of a reduced premium for overtime...so lets say double time reduced to time +1/2 and sending lads home early when there wasnt enough work......all of which seems fair &reasonable given the times we are in...yet this "looney" makes claims about Management being liars and cheats....but seems to be forgetting that these are the same people that pay her salary!

brianthebard

Clytus wrote: »

On the day of the ballot I distinctly remember hearing a Siptu Rep on the radio....and then another T.U rep ( cant remember which Union it was)...but she came across as a hardliner...militant..and very aggressive towards the management.
The issues seemed to be along the lines of a reduced premium for overtime...so lets say double time reduced to time +1/2 and sending lads home early when there wasnt enough work......all of which seems fair &reasonable given the times we are in...yet this "looney" makes claims about Management being liars and cheats....but seems to be forgetting that these are the same people that pay her salary!

I'm going to take a wild guess and say that 'looney' knows more about the company and its condition than you do.

ShooterSF

robinph wrote: »

I'm pretty sure that you cannot claim anything for a good while if you walked out of your job for any reason, certainly sounds along the lines of what they have done to themselves.

I severly doubt it. Two parties (employer and employee) agreed terms for one to work for the other. This is a contract. One party wanted to negotiate a new contract but the other wasn't happy to. They are perfectly with in their rights to do so (1 party can't change a contract between two). The employer now may terminate the current deal. That my friend is redundancy.

FlutterinBantam

Clytus wrote: »

On the day of the ballot I distinctly remember hearing a Siptu Rep on the radio....and then another T.U rep ( cant remember which Union it was)...but she came across as a hardliner...militant..and very aggressive towards the management.
The issues seemed to be along the lines of a reduced premium for overtime...so lets say double time reduced to time +1/2 and sending lads home early when there wasnt enough work......all of which seems fair &reasonable given the times we are in...yet this "looney" makes claims about Management being liars and cheats....but seems to be forgetting that these are the same people that pay her salary!

I heard her too buddy and you are right.

You see these people make a living around this type of shyte.
That's what happened out in SRT, you have these warhorses prancing around with no realistic view on how to survive in business.
It's dark ages stuff with these people fuelled by the loony left in the workforce who want the money mailed home to them without even coming in!!

B Ahearne supported this stuff.."Aaah now sure give a bit here take a bit there ,we'll agree to sort out productivity"

NEVER HAPPENS NOTHING CHANGES!!!!!

And the cost base just goes up, which in times of plenty can be survived,but when the chill winds of recession blow..... well, you see what's happening.

Watch Aer Lingus.... there's a tip watch Aer Lingus.... big shít further down the line.

Clytus

ShooterSF wrote: »

I severly doubt it. Two parties (employer and employee) agreed terms for one to work for the other. This is a contract. One party wanted to negotiate a new contract but the other wasn't happy to. They are perfectly with in their rights to do so (1 party can't change a contract between two). The employer now may terminate the current deal. That my friend is redundancy.

Im afraid your view in such matters is flawed. The trading conditions in which the original "contract" was drawn up under have changed more than anyone could ever have imagined....so the contract has to become redundant.

Businesses have to trade profitably or else make changes if losses are recorded....theres no alternative.

gerrycollins

What about Jack O'Connor of SIPTU threathening the government about the social partnership deal or the private sector will strike.


Dunno bout you but I fancy hanging on to my private sector job abd will cross any stupid striking line to keep my job.

ShooterSF

Clytus wrote: »

Im afraid your view in such matters is flawed. The trading conditions in which the original "contract" was drawn up under have changed more than anyone could ever have imagined....so the contract has to become redundant.

Businesses have to trade profitably or else make changes if losses are recorded....theres no alternative.

To use that excuse then say I sell a customer a PC on credit we sign a contract and we agree he has to pay me 50 a month for 2 years. I decide 6 months in that my business is suffering so I decide to change the contract to trade profitably and let the customer know he's now to pay 80 a month quoting your legally sound advice "The trading conditions in which the original "contract" was drawn up under have changed more than anyone could ever have imagined....so the contract has to become redundant."

Contracts do not become redundant based on trading conditions. If they wanted to do that they should have paid by commission.

Fozzie Bear

They have a pretty cushy number as it is. I have been in this plant through my own job and witnessed the working conditions they have.

They recondition and repair aircraft and there engines. As a result they have to work in stress free conditions as they are working on airplanes and obviously a stressed worker may make mistakes or forget to tighten a bolt. So they can take breaks whenever they want, go read a newspaper, play some pool have a fag, scratch their balls basically doss and piss about. There are few or no dead lines and its a very relaxed atmosphere. I have never witnessed anywhere like and I can tell you if I had a job there I'd be bending over right now and telling Fritz and Hans to do whatever they wanted to me as long as they don't take my cosy job away to Eastern Europe.

I am absolutely shocked and amazed that the workers are doing what they are doing in the depths of the worst recession we have seen in modern times. Absolute greedy miopic fúcking idiots. They deserve to be unemployed.

thelordofcheese

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

I heard her too buddy and you are right.

You see these people make a living around this type of shyte.
That's what happened out in SRT, you have these warhorses prancing around with no realistic view on how to survive in business.
It's dark ages stuff with these people fuelled by the loony left in the workforce who want the money mailed home to them without even coming in!!

B Ahearne supported this stuff.."Aaah now sure give a bit here take a bit there ,we'll agree to sort out productivity"

NEVER HAPPENS NOTHING CHANGES!!!!!

And the cost base just goes up, which in times of plenty can be survived,but when the chill winds of recession blow..... well, you see what's happening.

Watch Aer Lingus.... there's a tip watch Aer Lingus.... big shít further down the line.

It's funny how you can write an insightless and cliché ridden diatribe about the "looney left" when you've got nothing to do with the place.

Amazing really.

mikemac

Terry wrote: »

I remember it being 6 weeks, but that was years ago. I don't know if it's still the same.
I know they made a lot of changes to the welfare system over the last ten years.

9 weeks.

Jim236

Clytus wrote: »

Same applied to the SR Tecniques lads...they all figured theyd get a nice cushy redundecy package...but got the land of their lives when the Big Wigs in Zurich handed them a bucket of cash and said thats it....divey it up as yiz please!!

The Irish Trade Union movement has caused more damage in recent times than 10 life times of Financial crises...its time we told them where to go.

Bit of advise Clytus, stfu about things you know nothing about. Its easy for you to sit there at your computer and bullsh*t away at how SR Technics workers got what they deserved in redundancy, but the fact is they didn't. My uncle was one of the people laid off by those shower of swiss wan*ers, and he was told by SRT when they took over FLS that he should transfer his pension over to SRT from Aer Lingus(as it was Team Aer Lingus prior to FLS), because he would get more that way. Now not only did he get a crap redundancy package, he got no pension, which is a fu*kin disgrace because hes put over 20 years into that company and those sh*theads in Zurich who told him he'd get a bigger pension with them have robbed him of what he deserves, and had he kept it with Aer Lingus he'd have a good pension now.

And its those same management, that you seem to think are trying their best to give the best deal possible, that forced the company to close it's operations in the first place. They purposely gave the Dublin operation all the crap contracts such as Gulf Air who had Boeing 767s that were rusted as fu*k and completely unflyable and which they'd make no money on because of the scale of overhaul involved, while the Zurich operation got all the good contracts that were simple maintenence that they made a lot of money from. It was all about protectionism, keeping jobs in Switzerland. Though personally I wouldn't put past them to have bought the FLS operation just to close it down and give it's contracts to Zurich from the start, regardless of any recession.

handsomecake

Jim236 wrote: »

Bit of advise Clytus, stfu about things you know nothing about. Its easy for you to sit there at your computer and bullsh*t away at how SR Technics workers got what they deserved in redundancy, but the fact is they didn't. My uncle was one of the people laid off by those shower of swiss wan*ers, and he was told by SRT when they took over FLS that he should transfer his pension over to SRT from Aer Lingus(as it was Team Aer Lingus prior to FLS), because he would get more that way. Now not only did he get a crap redundancy package, he got no pension, which is a fu*kin disgrace because hes put over 20 years into that company and those sh*theads in Zurich who told him he'd get a bigger pension with them have robbed him of what he deserves, and had he kept it with Aer Lingus he'd have a good pension now.

And its those same management, that you seem to think are trying their best to give the best deal possible, that forced the company to close it's operations anyway. They purposely gave the Dublin operation all the crap contracts such as Gulf Air who had Boeing 767s that were rusted as fu*k and completely unflyable and which they'd make no money on, while the Zurich operation got all the good contracts that were simple maintenence to make a lot of money from. It was all about protectionism, keeping jobs in Switzerland. Though personally I wouldn't put past them to have bought the FLS operation just to close it down and give it's contracts to Zurich from the start, regardless of any recession.

i agree with a lot of your post. id like to add this though. i work in the business and it was blatantly obvious that this company (and shannon aerospace) are extremely top heavy with middle management top management etc.far too many people in offices as opposed to actually down fixing planes etc

handsomecake

Jim236 wrote: »

Bit of advise Clytus, stfu about things you know nothing about. Its easy for you to sit there at your computer and bullsh*t away at how SR Technics workers got what they deserved in redundancy, but the fact is they didn't. My uncle was one of the people laid off by those shower of swiss wan*ers, and he was told by SRT when they took over FLS that he should transfer his pension over to SRT from Aer Lingus(as it was Team Aer Lingus prior to FLS), because he would get more that way. Now not only did he get a crap redundancy package, he got no pension, which is a fu*kin disgrace because hes put over 20 years into that company and those sh*theads in Zurich who told him he'd get a bigger pension with them have robbed him of what he deserves, and had he kept it with Aer Lingus he'd have a good pension now.

And its those same management, that you seem to think are trying their best to give the best deal possible, that forced the company to close it's operations in the first place. They purposely gave the Dublin operation all the crap contracts such as Gulf Air who had Boeing 767s that were rusted as fu*k and completely unflyable and which they'd make no money on because of the scale of overhaul involved, while the Zurich operation got all the good contracts that were simple maintenence that they made a lot of money from. It was all about protectionism, keeping jobs in Switzerland. Though personally I wouldn't put past them to have bought the FLS operation just to close it down and give it's contracts to Zurich from the start, regardless of any recession.

the pension dabacle is a disgrace. i would assault someone over that

brianthebard

Fozzie Bear wrote: »

They have a pretty cushy number as it is. I have been in this plant through my own job and witnessed the working conditions they have.

They recondition and repair aircraft and there engines. As a result they have to work in stress free conditions as they are working on airplanes and obviously a stressed worker may make mistakes or forget to tighten a bolt. So they can take breaks whenever they want, go read a newspaper, play some pool have a fag, scratch their balls basically doss and piss about. There are few or no dead lines and its a very relaxed atmosphere. I have never witnessed anywhere like and I can tell you if I had a job there I'd be bending over right now and telling Fritz and Hans to do whatever they wanted to me as long as they don't take my cosy job away to Eastern Europe.

I am absolutely shocked and amazed that the workers are doing what they are doing in the depths of the worst recession we have seen in modern times. Absolute greedy miopic fúcking idiots. They deserve to be unemployed.

WTF, so because they do the work as they are told to, they are greedy ****ing idiots? Sounds more like you are a jealous fool.

Jim236

handsomecake wrote: »

i agree with a lot of your post. id like to add this though. i work in the business and it was blatantly obvious that this company (and shannon aerospace) are extremely top heavy with middle management top management etc.far too many people in offices as opposed to actually down fixing planes etc

Ah yeah sure they had more middle management doing office work at the time of the job losses than when they took over FLS, despite having less contracts. I can understand why there needs to be a lot of middle management because every bit of maintence carried out has to be documented, but SRT let it get out of control and had they curtailed they amount of middle management, they would've saved a lot of money. But it still came back to the type of contracts they were giving Dublin, no matter what sacrifices workers made nothing would make the operation profitable with contracts like the Gulf Air one.

handsomecake

Jim236 wrote: »

Ah yeah sure they had more middle management doing office work at the time of the job losses than when they took over FLS, despite having less contracts. I can understand why there needs to be a lot of middle management because every bit of maintence carried out has to be documented, but SRT let it get out of control and had they curtailed they amount of middle management, they would've saved a lot of money. But it still came back to the type of contracts they were giving Dublin, no matter what sacrifices workers made nothing would make the operation profitable with contracts like the Gulf Air one.

true. the contracts were pants.

wylo

anyone got any details of what these guys are being asked of salary wise, how do we know its not some insane pay cut that would make it pointless working there.

If its only something small they are being very very stupid about this whole thing, they probably thought they were invincible

mikemac

Sorry for the hijack OP

I've heard and read several reports of the poor redundancy package that workers are getting.
Well one poster here calls it crap.

Can I ask what is the package, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, 6 weeks? What is it?
Just interested to know as if all the coverage that RTE gave to the protest they never once announced this

handsomecake

mikemac wrote: »

Sorry for the hijack OP

I've heard and read several reports of the poor redundancy package that workers are getting.
Well one poster here calls it crap.

Can I ask what is the package, 4 weeks, 5 weeks, 6 weeks? What is it?
Just interested to know as if all the coverage that RTE gave to the protest they never once announced this

i know this for a fact. its .84 of a weeks wages for every year worked.
one guy got 38000 for 20 years service.****e

mikemac

Man, that is terrible.

I know our company gave 6 weeks per years service.
Now that's above and beyond and yes, anything above statuatory minimum is extra

But 0.84 weeks is harsh.
And maybe the workers need to get that message out if they want some sort o of public support.
Because I read articules, watched TV and heard the radio and never once was that figure given.
Your post changed my view on their actions and their protests.

handsomecake

mikemac wrote: »

Man, that is terrible.

I know our company gave 6 weeks per years service.
Now that's above and beyond and yes, anything above statuatory minimum is extra

But 0.84 weeks is harsh.
And maybe the workers need to get that message out if they want some sort o of public support.
Because I read articules, watched TV and heard the radio and never once was that figure given.
Your post changed my view on their actions and their protests.

crazy. i know a few lads there who are mid twenties like myself. no pension. they own houses and cars and said the redunancy would not even clear their credit card.also its a specialised industry. these guys invested time and money to become qualified,a lot of them dont know how to work at anything else

Terry

mikemac wrote: »

9 weeks.

Is that right?
I suppose it makes sense in the current climate.
You really don't want to walk out of a job when there is very little else out there. You should just be happy you have a job (not that employers should take advantage of that either).

I'm not going to look for the quote now, but there was a Taoiseach in the 70's who said that if unemployment ever reached above 100,000 in Ireland that the government of the time should step down immediately.

Now we know from the 80's that it never happened that way and FF and FG kept screwing things up and that it just keeps getting worse.

mikemac wrote: »

Man, that is terrible.

I know our company gave 6 weeks per years service.
Now that's above and beyond and yes, anything above statuatory minimum is extra

But 0.84 weeks is harsh.
And maybe the workers need to get that message out if they want some sort o of public support.
Because I read articules, watched TV and heard the radio and never once was that figure given.
It's changed my view on their actions and their protests.

0.84 weeks is a bit of a joke.
The last union job I had (early 90's) paid 2 weeks per year worked.
I really don't think that should be changed for either voluntary or forced redundancy.
Anyone fighting against that is in the right.

1 of 465

To all of you "experts" on the situation of LTAI please note the following;
A total 465 people work in LTAI. Of that total almost 1/3 of the workforce are non unionised staff and had no vote in yesterday's ballot. In the end there was only 17 votes in the difference between the yes and no camp. Effectively we have a situation where 148 workers are holding 317 colleagues to ransom! We live in a democracy and those who voted to reject the labour court recommendation felt they had their reasons for doing so which was their right!
We are not all "gob****es" as some of you referred to us. Most of us want to keep our jobs and are willing to work with the company's terms to secure our livelihoods. We do not all have a cushy number and the vast majority of us work hard for our wages. Until you work in here or actually have some genuine knowledge of the way our company is run I suggest you keep your "opinions" to yourselves. Not every member of LTAI has voted themselves out of a job and some of your comments are just rude and unfounded!

Mr Benevolent

Gah, the font!

Most posters here are not calling you a gobsh*te, their problem is with the 148 that voted no. So in essence they're saying the same as you.

1 of 465

most of us in here are worried about our jobs.... the font in my post is the least of my worries!
what we are asking is that you don't tar us all with the same brush as those you term gob****es, don't compare us to SRT (every case is different) and don't write us off just yet. As i'm sure all workers who have faced redundancy know, this is a very upsetting time and people making assuptions who do not fully understand our predicament does not help. Have a little consideration please!

Sanjuro

While not as vitriolic, I do somewhat agree with the OP. Nobody wants to take a pay cut. We all think we deserve to be paid more than we earn. Whether this is true or not is a different matter. However, anyone who willingly and knowingly sabotages their own job (and the jobs of their colleagues) deserves little sympathy. I lose my job next week, and I'd gladly take a pay cut over unemployment, but unfortunately I don't have that option. These workers who voted to kill their own jobs are cutting off their nose to spite their face. I feel for those workers who had no voice.

Rented Mule

handsomecake wrote: »

crazy. i know a few lads there who are mid twenties like myself. no pension. they own houses and cars and said the redunancy would not even clear their credit card.also its a specialised industry. these guys invested time and money to become qualified,a lot of them dont know how to work at anything else

Not meant to hijack this thread, but:

1) mid-20s with cars, mortgage, no pension and credit card debt seems like they should have had a better understand of their own finaces.

2) a few years ago there was an article that came out and said that 70% of the irish population would be 'un-hireable' in the next 20 years unless they retrained themselves.


I am 40 years old and have had to change careers six or seven times during my working life. It is something that you have to do.

The days of getting a trade and working from one company and then collection a pension has gone the way of the dodo.

Situations like this need to be a huge wakeup call for everyone in the country.

dade

handsomecake wrote: »

i know this for a fact. its .84 of a weeks wages for every year worked.
one guy got 38000 for 20 years service.****e

sounds strange when the statutory amount is 2 weeks per year worked is it not?

handsomecake

Rented Mule wrote: »

Not meant to hijack this thread, but:

1) mid-20s with cars, mortgage, no pension and credit card debt seems like they should have had a better understand of their own finaces.

2) a few years ago there was an article that came out and said that 70% of the irish population would be 'un-hireable' in the next 20 years unless they retrained themselves.


I am 40 years old and have had to change careers six or seven times during my working life. It is something that you have to do.

The days of getting a trade and working from one company and then collection a pension has gone the way of the dodo.

Situations like this need to be a huge wakeup call for everyone in the country.

they did have pensions and SRT pissed it away.no money left in the pot.
yes they have a car and a house but they dont own mock georgian houses and bentleys.

i make decent cash myself and if i lost my job tomorrow i would be ****ed. the car etc doesnt pay for itself. thats my point. redundancy softens the blow(supposedly) the paltry sums they were given would not last a fortnight

handsomecake

dade wrote: »

sounds strange when the statutory amount is 2 weeks per year worked is it not?

yeah. its statutory plus .84 of a weeks wage. but the company can apparently get the government to contribute the statutory bit afaik.

all i know is that it was an abysmal package they got.

wicklori

Thank God someone is talking about this. My OH works there and the stress levels have been just up the walls-this is going on for months.

I have VERY red socks but F***ing hell! At one stage the attitude was that the staff would be better off with no job than to 'give in'!

What are the Unions thinking? Have they not looked outside the gate over there or what??? There are NO JOBS for these guys (mostly-some women I believe). Many of them have worked there for years and are pretty much unemployable in any other context.

Lufthansa is standing by, waiting to invest €30million. Ok, MAYBE they are jumping on the recesssion bandwagon BUT -they hold the cards! Voting down labour court recommendations is not going to 'teach them' or whatever the attitude is....:mad:

I work in public sector and have had a huge pay cut recently-but I thank God every night that I have a job at all. What is wrong with these people?!?!?!

Jip

wicklori wrote: »

What is wrong with these people?!?!?!

I think you will find that they are morons in that they're blindly following the idiotic unions chest beating. IMO unions are the problem with this county at the moment. They've no sense or reality, just look at the teachers last week, a PR disaster for them and done nothing to gain public support.

1 of 465

Wicklori,

As your OH works in Lufthansa, I hope and I'm sure that you are fully aware that those who voted down the LC recommendation are actually a minority and do not fully represent the sentimenets of the workforce as a whole! Had the entire workforce been balloted, the result would have been quite different. This is the point that many onlookers do not realise & its a fact that needs to be appreciated. Spare a thought for those workers who did not have any say at all and have no control over their futures!

wicklori

1 in 465 you and the rest of the workers have my utmost sympathy. I also heard that many of those who voted against the proposals are the ones most likely to be 'last out'? My fellas a disaster for passing on info so I may be wrong.
It must be the worst postition to be in-to either have voted for the proposals and really want to keep your job; or to not have been in a position to vote at all.

Question-thought all workers over there had to be in a union?

1 of 465

Wicklori,
There are sections of the plant which are unionised and others which aren't. Almost 1/3 of the workforce are not memebers of a union and before people start going on about it being their own faults for not joining a union, please be aware that even if they opted to independely join a union, they would still not have qualified for a vote yesterday! there are a lot of inaccuracies out there about our situation so please everyone, bear in mind that the recommedation was rejected by the narrowest of margins and we're not all "morons following the unions".

wicklori

1 of 465 wrote: »

Wicklori,
There are sections of the plant which are unionised and others which aren't. Almost 1/3 of the workforce are not memebers of a union and before people start going on about it being their own faults for not joining a union, please be aware that even if they opted to independely join a union, they would still not have qualified for a vote yesterday! there are a lot of inaccuracies out there about our situation so please everyone, bear in mind that the recommedation was rejected by the narrowest of margins and we're not all "morons following the unions".

Well I'm glad my fella at least got to vote.

It's very tough that the opinions of one third of the workforce are not taken into account. I wonder if there's anything that could be done from that angle?

The one question I still have is did the Unions make a recommendation to their members as to whether to accept or reject the labour court recommendation? You probably aren't privvy to that kind of info.

The whole situation is desperate. This company is approching the plughole very quickly and it's only a small few idiots who have caused it in the end...

I hope the Union leaders over there sleep well at night... Doubtlessly better than the rest of us...

Jip

1 of 465 wrote: »

we're not all "morons following the unions".

I was commented on those that do, not the obviously sensible people like yourself

DubDani

Didn't take the company very long to respond. Very efficient and no nonsense these germans.

All the employees have been put on protective Notice, and up to a 150 people will be laid off from the end of the month.

http://breakingnews.ie/business/eyauqlidojcw/

tommu

I concur with your posting.
Added to the potential loss of employment at airmotive I would also add that the commercial engine overhaul business in Ireland would come to an end. The aviation business here has seen losses, this loss will adversely impact the employment of many other highly skilled trades and professionals. It's this type of business that Ireland needs to retain and grow. Lufthansa intended to put 40 million into the business for re-tooling to facilitate overhaul of more modern engines (P&W V2500 I believe).
Hope common sense prevails and your jobs plus a great business are saved.

FlutterinBantam

thelordofcheese wrote: »

It's funny how you can write an insightless and cliché ridden diatribe about the "looney left" when you've got nothing to do with the place.

Amazing really.

How do you know that??

If you took the time to read my post and not go off half cocked,you would see that my sentiments are corroborated by many other posters.

I have a lot of experience in commercial life, and quite frankly buddy, one place of work does not differ greatly from another.

walzer

Have to agree with the general opinion on this thread - those who voted against the cost savings are digging their own graves.

The management may be top heavy, maybe they couldn't care less, maybe they're treating the workers very unfairly. But on the other hand maybe they're looking at a particular market, with more and more competition coming from low cost countries like China, and they just have to find savings. Maybe it's that or else the whole company goes down.

I just feel many unionised workers in this country don't really have a feel for what a free market really is. There are NO guarantees - it's dog eat dog. There are no reasons whatsoever that we should be given jobs by multinationals before low cost countries, who's workers will willingly do very long hours for very little pay.

jimmycrackcorm

I've no doubt that companies are using the recession to squeeze wages, however now is not the time to attempt a losing battle.