No to the deal (betrayal)

dean21

Unions ( got us nothing) We now seem to have 2 Employers the Government
and ICTU
All of the below are pay cuts through the backdoor-if the numbers are
going to be less and the work load greatly increased that is a pay cut.
The trade unions, for their part, have agreed to implement extensive
reforms in work practices and conditions of employment throughout the
entire public service.
Are the UNIONS now taking on the role of Government- Message to the union leaders here "this is not your role."

Pay Cuts
The first thing Unions were told to do and said they would do was to
reverse the pay cuts or no deal.
The deal, which now has to be presented to union members in ballots,
does not contain specific guarantees on reversing pay cuts that were put
in place in the Budget last December.

Nothing done on pensions
The deal says that the issue of how pension increases for current staff
and those who have already retired are determined - whether they will
continue to be based on rises awarded to serving personnel - will be
considered in the context of the review of pay policy next Spring.

Recruitment.
It says the current Government moratorium on recruitment and promotion
will continue to apply until numbers employed in each sector have fallen
to the levels set out in these new employment control frameworks.

Redeployment-
The deal says flexible re-deployment of staff is necessary to sustain
the commitment to job security within the public service. It says the
parties have agreed to the re-deployment of staff, within and across
each sector.
Reducing numbers
Unions have argued for years that this is not going to work on the
ground- now look what you have agreed to-
The deal says that to maintain the delivery of public services at the
same time as reducing numbers, the parties accept “efficiencies will
need to be maximised and productivity in the use of resources greatly
increased through revised work practices and other initiatives”.
Unified Public Service TOTAL CHANGE OF OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT.
It also maintains the Government will move to dismantle barriers to the
development of a unified public service labour market and, to the
greatest extent possible, there will be standardised terms and
conditions of employment across the public service.
ETC ETC
If this were to be passed we would now be in a much worse position than
before the talks started.

tunney

dean21 wrote: »

Unions ( got us nothing) We now seem to have 2 Employers the Government
and ICTU
All of the below are pay cuts through the backdoor-if the numbers are
going to be less and the work load greatly increased that is a pay cut.
The trade unions, for their part, have agreed to implement extensive
reforms in work practices and conditions of employment throughout the
entire public service.
Are the UNIONS now taking on the role of Government- Message to the union leaders here "this is not your role."

Pay Cuts
The first thing Unions were told to do and said they would do was to
reverse the pay cuts or no deal.
The deal, which now has to be presented to union members in ballots,
does not contain specific guarantees on reversing pay cuts that were put
in place in the Budget last December.

Nothing done on pensions
The deal says that the issue of how pension increases for current staff
and those who have already retired are determined - whether they will
continue to be based on rises awarded to serving personnel - will be
considered in the context of the review of pay policy next Spring.

Recruitment.
It says the current Government moratorium on recruitment and promotion
will continue to apply until numbers employed in each sector have fallen
to the levels set out in these new employment control frameworks.

Redeployment-
The deal says flexible re-deployment of staff is necessary to sustain
the commitment to job security within the public service. It says the
parties have agreed to the re-deployment of staff, within and across
each sector.
Reducing numbers
Unions have argued for years that this is not going to work on the
ground- now look what you have agreed to-
The deal says that to maintain the delivery of public services at the
same time as reducing numbers, the parties accept “efficiencies will
need to be maximised and productivity in the use of resources greatly
increased through revised work practices and other initiatives”.
Unified Public Service TOTAL CHANGE OF OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT.
It also maintains the Government will move to dismantle barriers to the
development of a unified public service labour market and, to the
greatest extent possible, there will be standardised terms and
conditions of employment across the public service.
ETC ETC
If this were to be passed we would now be in a much worse position than
before the talks started.

Whinge, whinge, moan, moan. Whats the weather like in LA-LA Land?

dean21

tunney wrote: »

Whinge, whinge, moan, moan. Whats the weather like in LA-LA Land?

you tell me as it is the private sector that have a degree in moan moan and moan and need to go to specsavers

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

MaceFace

dean21 wrote: »

Unions ( got us nothing) We now seem to have 2 Employers the Government
and ICTU
All of the below are pay cuts through the backdoor-if the numbers are
going to be less and the work load greatly increased that is a pay cut.
The trade unions, for their part, have agreed to implement extensive
reforms in work practices and conditions of employment throughout the
entire public service.
Are the UNIONS now taking on the role of Government- Message to the union leaders here "this is not your role."

Pay Cuts
The first thing Unions were told to do and said they would do was to
reverse the pay cuts or no deal.
The deal, which now has to be presented to union members in ballots,
does not contain specific guarantees on reversing pay cuts that were put
in place in the Budget last December.

Nothing done on pensions
The deal says that the issue of how pension increases for current staff
and those who have already retired are determined - whether they will
continue to be based on rises awarded to serving personnel - will be
considered in the context of the review of pay policy next Spring.

Recruitment.
It says the current Government moratorium on recruitment and promotion
will continue to apply until numbers employed in each sector have fallen
to the levels set out in these new employment control frameworks.

Redeployment-
The deal says flexible re-deployment of staff is necessary to sustain
the commitment to job security within the public service. It says the
parties have agreed to the re-deployment of staff, within and across
each sector.
Reducing numbers
Unions have argued for years that this is not going to work on the
ground- now look what you have agreed to-
The deal says that to maintain the delivery of public services at the
same time as reducing numbers, the parties accept “efficiencies will
need to be maximised and productivity in the use of resources greatly
increased through revised work practices and other initiatives”.
Unified Public Service TOTAL CHANGE OF OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT.
It also maintains the Government will move to dismantle barriers to the
development of a unified public service labour market and, to the
greatest extent possible, there will be standardised terms and
conditions of employment across the public service.
ETC ETC
If this were to be passed we would now be in a much worse position than
before the talks started.

I pretty much agree with your post as it is merly presenting facts rather than opinion.

However, can you give an opinion on why you think the Union negotiators agreed to put these terms to their membership?

ParkRunner

dean21 wrote: »

Unions ( got us nothing) We now seem to have 2 Employers the Government
and ICTU
All of the below are pay cuts through the backdoor-if the numbers are
going to be less and the work load greatly increased that is a pay cut.
The trade unions, for their part, have agreed to implement extensive
reforms in work practices and conditions of employment throughout the
entire public service.
Are the UNIONS now taking on the role of Government- Message to the union leaders here "this is not your role."

Pay Cuts
The first thing Unions were told to do and said they would do was to
reverse the pay cuts or no deal.
The deal, which now has to be presented to union members in ballots,
does not contain specific guarantees on reversing pay cuts that were put
in place in the Budget last December.

Nothing done on pensions
The deal says that the issue of how pension increases for current staff
and those who have already retired are determined - whether they will
continue to be based on rises awarded to serving personnel - will be
considered in the context of the review of pay policy next Spring.

Recruitment.
It says the current Government moratorium on recruitment and promotion
will continue to apply until numbers employed in each sector have fallen
to the levels set out in these new employment control frameworks.

Redeployment-
The deal says flexible re-deployment of staff is necessary to sustain
the commitment to job security within the public service. It says the
parties have agreed to the re-deployment of staff, within and across
each sector.
Reducing numbers
Unions have argued for years that this is not going to work on the
ground- now look what you have agreed to-
The deal says that to maintain the delivery of public services at the
same time as reducing numbers, the parties accept “efficiencies will
need to be maximised and productivity in the use of resources greatly
increased through revised work practices and other initiatives”.
Unified Public Service TOTAL CHANGE OF OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
EMPLOYMENT.
It also maintains the Government will move to dismantle barriers to the
development of a unified public service labour market and, to the
greatest extent possible, there will be standardised terms and
conditions of employment across the public service.
ETC ETC
If this were to be passed we would now be in a much worse position than
before the talks started.

I can't see this getting through at all..especially with

Strikes or other forms of industrial action by trade unions, employees or employers are precluded in respect of any matters covered by this Agreement, where the employer or trade union concerned is acting in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement.

The implementation of this Agreement is subject to no currently unforeseen budgetary deterioration.

The Government are basically being given carte blanche to change terms and conditions on pay, pensions and working conditions without any threat of industrial action.

frodos63

OP you would rather have all the hospitals close old age pensions cut and whatever else can be cut so that you can take 2/3rds of the tax take for your wages.

Tail Wagger

Hey Guys,

Nice to hear you still get up in the morning to go to work, I suppose the next thing you'll want is traveling time.

you should be happy that your not one of the 400,000 unemployed trying to make ends meet week after week.

You won't get any sympathy around here for your complaining, while other people are scrambling for scraps off the Bankers rich table...

Keep your head down, work hard and be happy you have a job..........

MagicSean

Anyone who expected the pay cuts to be reversed was not living in the real world. We got the best we could, a guarantee our pay won't be cut and our increments will remain. There will also be no compulsory redundancies. All we have to do is deliver savings and get more efficient, which should be happening anyway. Personally I've always been frustrated by some of the waste I see. This deal gives us the option to help the economy without putting more pressure on our home lives.

RobbieTheRobber

Tail Wagger wrote: »

Hey Guys,

Keep your head down, work hard and be happy you have a job..........

I am sick of this line, be happy to have a job :rolleyes:


That essentially means that a worker should bend over and take whatever but be happy that at least they have a job.

Silly silly response to everything, your not saying anything at all.

I seen Supervalu were trying to get graduates to work for free, so unemployed people should take those jobs and be happy that at least they have a job, should they?

Uriel.

k_mac wrote: »

Anyone who expected the pay cuts to be reversed was not living in the real world. We got the best we could, a guarantee our pay won't be cut and our increments will remain. There will also be no compulsory redundancies. All we have to do is deliver savings and get more efficient, which should be happening anyway. Personally I've always been frustrated by some of the waste I see. This deal gives us the option to help the economy without putting more pressure on our home lives.

A Guarantee with a very big Get out clause for the Government.

The realistic people will be happy with most of the deal I would imagine. But there's a hell of a lot of people who for some unbeknown reason expected a reversal of paycuts. I really can't figure out those people at all, they are so so far from reality.

However, I think the biggest issue that may arise (when/if the dust settles) is the 45km redeployment of staff measure. According to what I've seen it will be initially on a voluntary basis but should there not be enough volunteers then it'll be employees will be selected by managment on the basis of seniority (lack thereof) and will be LIFO'd - that I think, could have huge ramiifications for people - i.e. possibility of being moved from a city centre office to say Navan.

It won't be so much the new work/differnt work issue, but simply the huge geographical/commuting issues.

I can't see the likes of the CPSU going for the deal - where does that leave things?

RobbieTheRobber

k_mac wrote: »

Anyone who expected the pay cuts to be reversed was not living in the real world. We got the best we could, a guarantee our pay won't be cut and our increments will remain. There will also be no compulsory redundancies. All we have to do is deliver savings and get more efficient, which should be happening anyway. Personally I've always been frustrated by some of the waste I see. This deal gives us the option to help the economy without putting more pressure on our home lives.

I agree with you on reform it is something that has always annoyed me about the civil service and I work there, so I will be happy if things do change this time.

However though the ICTU really didn't get any assurances on pay.

I can understand CPSU members feeling let down by their union, they were gung-ho at the start that they wanted pay reductions cancelled and they didn't get that so they didn't achieve what they set out to.

doc_17

The renegoiation of the contracts is a big thing for the teachers and will lead to this deal being rejected by the TUI and probably the ASTI imo.

bamboozle

k_mac wrote: »

Anyone who expected the pay cuts to be reversed was not living in the real world. We got the best we could, a guarantee our pay won't be cut and our increments will remain. There will also be no compulsory redundancies. All we have to do is deliver savings and get more efficient, which should be happening anyway. Personally I've always been frustrated by some of the waste I see. This deal gives us the option to help the economy without putting more pressure on our home lives.

its comforting to read a reasonable comment from a public sector worker.

as a matter of interest i was wondering as there is such an amount of public sectors at middle mgt level who if they're earning more than 35k will they be incentivised to become more efficient?
my point being if its only those on less than 35k who stand to benefit if savings are made is there any motivation for others to become more productive?

OMD

bamboozle wrote: »

my point being if its only those on less than 35k who stand to benefit if savings are made is there any motivation for others to become more productive?

So few people are on less than 35K that as a group they are not particularly worth talking about as a source of savings. Even the lowest paid can often expect to be earning over 35K before the age of 40.

bamboozle

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

I am sick of this line, be happy to have a job :rolleyes:


That essentially means that a worker should bend over and take whatever but be happy that at least they have a job.

Silly silly response to everything, your not saying anything at all.

I seen Supervalu were trying to get graduates to work for free, so unemployed people should take those jobs and be happy that at least they have a job, should they?

Super value are not forcing people to work for free, people can choose to do so.
well in fairness those lucky enough to be in permanent jobs should be happy to have the job, if they are not happy they can quit and look for work elsewhere.

Ben_Dover

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

I agree with you on reform it is something that has always annoyed me about the civil service and I work there, so I will be happy if things do change this time.

However though the ICTU really didn't get any assurances on pay.

I can understand CPSU members feeling let down by their union, they were gung-ho at the start that they wanted pay reductions cancelled and they didn't get that so they didn't achieve what they set out to.

Glad to here you like the reform bit- please let your boss know and he\she will outsource your job straight away. There is any amount of money available to outsource but none to recruit.
When you speak about reform in public service , this has been ongoing for years-eg Revenue,Motor Taxation, Agriculture,Education, Plnning etc etc all on line services with reduced wait time,the only area in trouble is health because of HARNEY!!!!

Uriel.

Ben_Dover wrote: »

Glad to here you like the reform bit- please let your boss know and he\she will outsource your job straight away. There is any amount of money available to outsource but none to recruit.
When you speak about reform in public service , this has been ongoing for years-eg Revenue,Motor Taxation, Agriculture,Education, Plnning etc etc all on line services with reduced wait time,the only area in trouble is health because of HARNEY!!!!

Not really, yeah some improvements have been made, no doubt. But there are so many places across the Civil and Public Service where there is:

1. Shortages of staff - leading to poor accessibility/availability of services and/or poor quality of service.

2. Gross oversupply of staff - leading to people doing very little work etc...

This has been the case for decades probably and has never been addressed.

Recruitment to the C/PS could be kept to a minimum for years to come if staff/unions would agree to redeployment (even within the same Department / Geographical area).

In my experience - outsourcing happens due to mainly two factors:

1. Certain expertise is required.

2. There is not enough resources (usually human) to do the job "inhouse".

A large amount of inroads could be made to reduce outsourcing related to point 2 above if staff didn't trot out the "that's not my job / I didn't get paid to do that" etc... lines.

Senior management might also be happy to allow their staff assist other sections/departments during quiet times if they are guaranteed to have resources available for when their own section is busy.

But the way it is now is that Senior management won't give up staff for fear that they will be left understaffed in the future for upcoming projects/schemes etc...

MagicSean

bamboozle wrote: »

its comforting to read a reasonable comment from a public sector worker.

as a matter of interest i was wondering as there is such an amount of public sectors at middle mgt level who if they're earning more than 35k will they be incentivised to become more efficient?
my point being if its only those on less than 35k who stand to benefit if savings are made is there any motivation for others to become more productive?

Yes. They keep their jobs and don't get more paycuts. The selfish people in the public service might whine a bit but anyone with a brain can see that reform will be needed if they don't want more cuts in December.

MagicSean

Uriel. wrote: »

A Guarantee with a very big Get out clause for the Government.

The realistic people will be happy with most of the deal I would imagine. But there's a hell of a lot of people who for some unbeknown reason expected a reversal of paycuts. I really can't figure out those people at all, they are so so far from reality.

However, I think the biggest issue that may arise (when/if the dust settles) is the 45km redeployment of staff measure. According to what I've seen it will be initially on a voluntary basis but should there not be enough volunteers then it'll be employees will be selected by managment on the basis of seniority (lack thereof) and will be LIFO'd - that I think, could have huge ramiifications for people - i.e. possibility of being moved from a city centre office to say Navan.

It won't be so much the new work/differnt work issue, but simply the huge geographical/commuting issues.

I can't see the likes of the CPSU going for the deal - where does that leave things?

Of course they have to have a get out clause. Theyve given a five year deal. If the banks don't recover and the insurrance industry follows, we'll be lucky to have a public service by next year. If the economy starts to recover we don't have to worry about pay cuts. If it doesnt I think our pay will be the least of our worries.

Uriel.

yeah it makes sense to most people.

But What I am saying is that the Unions received a mandate from their members - reverse pay cuts etc...

They will now have to go back to their members with essentially nothing and ask them to accept that. And I genuienly can't see it happening especially lower grade representative Unions like the CPSU.

MagicSean

Uriel. wrote: »

yeah it makes sense to most people.

But What I am saying is that the Unions received a mandate from their members - reverse pay cuts etc...

They will now have to go back to their members with essentially nothing and ask them to accept that. And I genuienly can't see it happening especially lower grade representative Unions like the CPSU.

Well we saw what happened when that happened in Aer Lingus. If a worker doesn't want to accept they should make the deal with those who do and the others can live with their decision, whatever that may lead to. The public service is way too big to be lumped together anyway. There should be different negotiations with different departments.

Nody

Uriel. wrote: »

But What I am saying is that the Unions received a mandate from their members - reverse pay cuts etc...

They will now have to go back to their members with essentially nothing and ask them to accept that. And I genuienly can't see it happening especially lower grade representative Unions like the CPSU.

And if the PS had given the mandate to get them a 500% increase with out any more taxes and they only got this deal the situation would still be the same. Either the workers are aware enough that this deal is better then what many people think it should be (see Aer Lingus, PS debates in general etc.) or they can vote against it and see what the government does next.

The union heads appear to be aware that they have lost their only real leverage of the government which was public support. Yes, the union can go on strike, yes the union can work to rule etc. but if they can't change the governments oppinion (because the government is turning with the wind which means if the public in general is against the union demands then so is the government in general) they gain nothing and risk everything.

Personally I hope the union members do vote down the deal; not because I think it is in their interest to do so but because I think the deal is unfair on the population in general and will be piss poor in implementation. I have no faith in the improvements being measured properly (bottom line EUR savings) instead of fluffy savings (we use 10% less time to handle this paper but still have 100% of the headcount that are now being more customer friendly).

Uriel.

k_mac wrote: »

Well we saw what happened when that happened in Aer Lingus. If a worker doesn't want to accept they should make the deal with those who do and the others can live with their decision, whatever that may lead to. The public service is way too big to be lumped together anyway. There should be different negotiations with different departments.

Well you've hit the nail on the head there really - the PS is massive (numbers, positions etc...) in comparison to Aer Lingus. They also provide essential services - so you can't compare the negotiations and processes involved in this instance.

noddy wrote:

And if the PS had given the mandate to get them a 500% increase with out any more taxes and they only got this deal the situation would still be the same. Either the workers are aware enough that this deal is better then what many people think it should be (see Aer Lingus, PS debates in general etc.) or they can vote against it and see what the government does next.

The union heads appear to be aware that they have lost their only real leverage of the government which was public support. Yes, the union can go on strike, yes the union can work to rule etc. but if they can't change the governments oppinion (because the government is turning with the wind which means if the public in general is against the union demands then so is the government in general) they gain nothing and risk everything.

Some of the unions will vote against it.

Not sure what happens then.

Just because you or I or 50% of the country thing it's a good deal doesn't mean that the workers will think it is.

OMD

Uriel. wrote: »

Some of the unions will vote against it.

Not sure what happens then.

Just because you or I or 50% of the country thing it's a good deal doesn't mean that the workers will think it is.

More to the point it doesn't matter if the public sector think it is a bad deal. It is the only deal.

Nody

Uriel. wrote: »

Some of the unions will vote against it.

Not sure what happens then.

Just because you or I or 50% of the country thing it's a good deal doesn't mean that the workers will think it is.

Of course, Aer Lingus has shown that the unions can vote differently to what is good for them.

What should happened though is that they announce cuts for all relevant departments equal to what the other unions saved +5% as the saving in next budget with out the option to join in on the deal; not that I expect the government to have enough balls for something like that.

Uriel.

OMD wrote: »

More to the point it doesn't matter if the public sector think it is a bad deal. It is the only deal.

That makes no odds to be honest. Just because it's the only deal being offered doesn't mean it will be accepted.

You're thinking outside of the box a lot of (Most) Union members don't do that.

Uriel.

Nody wrote: »

Of course, Aer Lingus has shown that the unions can vote differently to what is good for them.

What should happened though is that they announce cuts for all relevant departments equal to what the other unions saved +5% as the saving in next budget with out the option to join in on the deal; not that I expect the government to have enough balls for something like that.

If the Unions have negotiated this and some or most agree to the provisions of the agreement then they need to spell out the consequences of not accepting the deal to their members - what they can expect etc... I am sure the Government (hopefully anyway) will have made it known to to the unions what would happen down the road if they didn't agree to deal.

The unions need to sell this. Although I cannot see how they can to be honest. But staying quiet about it and just putting it to their members without direction or commentary is a cop out. Guess though, that is expected of them at this stage.

RobbieTheRobber

Ben_Dover wrote: »

Glad to here you like the reform bit- please let your boss know and he\she will outsource your job straight away. There is any amount of money available to outsource but none to recruit.
When you speak about reform in public service , this has been ongoing for years-eg Revenue,Motor Taxation, Agriculture,Education, Plnning etc etc all on line services with reduced wait time,the only area in trouble is health because of HARNEY!!!!

Huh what?

Outsource me will they :rolleyes:
I do quite a specialised job within my area of work and it is not as simple as outsource me tomorrow and everything is ok.

If I leave I take with me knowledge, knowledge which it would take any replacement whether they come from internal promotions or outsourcing a lengthy time period to acquire.

As for the rest fo your post, again huh?

RobbieTheRobber

Uriel. wrote: »

Well you've hit the nail on the head there really - the PS is massive (numbers, positions etc...) in comparison to Aer Lingus. They also provide essential services - so you can't compare the negotiations and processes involved in this instance.




Some of the unions will vote against it.

Not sure what happens then.

Just because you or I or 50% of the country thing it's a good deal doesn't mean that the workers will think it is.

I beleive that as long as the majority of congress agree the deal will go ahead and the others unions will have to begin independant actions.

RobbieTheRobber

bamboozle wrote: »

Super value are not forcing people to work for free, people can choose to do so.
well in fairness those lucky enough to be in permanent jobs should be happy to have the job, if they are not happy they can quit and look for work elsewhere.

Eh ok so, the could still have a job, but a job that pays them nothing and then should they not be happy to have a job?

Im very

Tail Wagger

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

I am sick of this line, be happy to have a job :rolleyes:


That essentially means that a worker should bend over and take whatever but be happy that at least they have a job.

Silly silly response to everything, your not saying anything at all.

I seen Supervalu were trying to get graduates to work for free, so unemployed people should take those jobs and be happy that at least they have a job, should they?

Firstly @10.52am shouldn't you be working? or is this another perk in your job.
Maybe a month or two signing on and a drop in living standards,. just might perk up your appetite for work. So again be glad you have your joj,..still.

Uriel.

Tail Wagger wrote: »

Firstly @10.52am shouldn't you be working? or is this another perk in your job.
Maybe a month or two signing on and a drop in living standards,. just might perk up your appetite for work. So again be glad you have your joj,..still.

Ah, don't start coming up with sh1te like that... How do you know the poster's current situation - day off etc...

That kind of post only serves to antagonise people for the sake of it and doesn't offer anything constructive to a thread. Very childish post.

Tail Wagger

Uriel. wrote: »

Ah, don't start coming up with sh1te like that... How do you know the poster's current situation - day off etc...

That kind of post only serves to antagonise people for the sake of it and doesn't offer anything constructive to a thread. Very childish post.

Haven't addressed your post yet' are you on a day off also?

BOHSBOHS

maybe they should do an aer lingus on it
the unions that vote against it will have more pay cuts etc
the unions that vote for it no cuts and reforms implemented
that might change a few minds;)

RobbieTheRobber

Tail Wagger wrote: »

Firstly @10.52am shouldn't you be working? or is this another perk in your job.
Maybe a month or two signing on and a drop in living standards,. just might perk up your appetite for work. So again be glad you have your joj,..still.

You know I really want to tell you how I feel about how stupid a post this is but I'd rather not get banned for something as silly as responding to you in that way!

Still, how dare you question my commitment to work or the quality of my work when you know nothing about either subjects.

As for my living standards, again how dare you assume anything about that when you have nothing to go on, you dont know me or my conditions so lets not make either a topic for discussion here!

Your post is nothing but trolling!

OMD

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

You know I really want to tell you how I feel about how stupid a post this is but I'd rather not get banned for something as silly as responding to you in that way!

Still, how dare you question my commitment to work or the quality of my work when you know nothing about either subjects.

As for my living standards, again how dare you assume anything about that when you have nothing to go on, you dont know me or my conditions so lets not make either a topic for discussion here!

Your post is nothing but trolling!

Public servants are not allowed use computers for personal reasons. Even when on a break. So we know you are not working.

Uriel.

Tail Wagger wrote: »

Haven't addressed your post yet' are you on a day off also?

:rolleyes:

Uriel.

OMD wrote: »

Public servants are not allowed use computers for personal reasons. Even when on a braek. So we know you are not working.

nesf

Less of the handbags ladies. Get back on topic.

OMD

nesf wrote: »

Less of the handbags ladies. Get back on topic.

Well surely it is on topic. Public servants are not allowed to use computers at work for personal reasons. Now either public servants are off work a lot or else they are using computers at work. Either way it is relevant to a debate re how hard public servants work and how hard done by they are with this deal.

nesf

OMD wrote: »

Well surely it is on topic. Public servants are not allowed to use computers at work for personal reasons. Now either public servants are off work a lot or else they are using computers at work. Either way it is relevant to a debate re how hard public servants work and how hard done by they are with this deal.

Yeah but making personal accusations about people not working etc is not acceptable.

Dozen Wicked Words

Obviously people are still oblivious to the wonders of Boards Mobile which you can happily use.

Boards Mobile, any place, any time, anywhere.

OMD

dooferoaks wrote: »

Obviously people are still oblivious to the wonders of Boards Mobile which you can happily use.

The future is HERE?!?!

During breaks

doc_17

OMD wrote: »

Public servants are not allowed use computers for personal reasons. Even when on a break.

Only partially correct. Many Public Servants are. Teachers for one. Can't speak to any other area (although I know VEC head office in my county are allowed internet access)

murphaph

I really don't care at this stage if the staff reject the proposal. I think the union leaders have been told that it'll be an Aer Lingus hatchet job if the deal is rejected and these union leaders fear a loss in subs more than ANYTHING as this is what pays their 150k salaries.

I'd personally like to see the unions crushed at this stage. I've had it up to here with these people looking out for a tiny group of protected workers and not giving a damn about the real economy. Let them strike and use up their warchests. Then make large swates of the PS redundant and redraw contracts and offer the decent ones their jobs back (on reduced terms like Aer Lingus). We have GOT to get costs down in line with the Eurozone and UK or we're finished.

FlutterinBantam

murphaph wrote: »

I really don't care at this stage if the staff reject the proposal. I think the union leaders have been told that it'll be an Aer Lingus hatchet job if the deal is rejected and these union leaders fear a loss in subs more than ANYTHING as this is what pays their 150k salaries.

I'd personally like to see the unions crushed at this stage. I've had it up to here with these people looking out for a tiny group of protected workers and not giving a damn about the real economy. Let them strike and use up their warchests. Then make large swates of the PS redundant and redraw contracts and offer the decent ones their jobs back (on reduced terms like Aer Lingus). We have GOT to get costs down in line with the Eurozone and UK or we're finished.

Agreed: these idiots will be rattling sabres all over Easter at the teachers conferences, when the dogs in the street know they have the cushiest jobs and least hours in this economy.

The Aer Lingus workers sucked up fairly sharpish when they saw for the first time real consequences to their actions.

Time we stood up to these people and said put up or shut up, if you are that unhappy jack it in.


Why should we have to listen to this unjustified whining for another year.

changes

murphaph wrote: »

I'd personally like to see the unions crushed at this stage.

Personally i'm going to vote for the agreement. Just so the country can move on.

The unions won't lose to many members imo.... I wouldn't trust this government as far as i could spit them.

doc_17

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

the dogs in the street know they have the cushiest jobs and least hours in this economy.

http://www.tui.ie/“working_harder_for_less_pay”_–_new_teacher_workload_survey/default.1176.html

In this case the dog in the street might not know what he or she is woofing about!!

ParkRunner

I'm surprised trade unions would agree to a deal which includes a clause prohibiting industrial action and promises no compulsory redundancies. The unions are basically taking themselves out of the equation until 2014, so why would anyone pay subs to them until then?

murphaph

From that TUI survey of their own members (pinch of salt stuff):

Teachers work an average between 43 and 46 hours a week during term time

So as far as I can see, teachers should have no problem making that their official hours? If they're doing it already, just make it official.