Recession 'used as a ploy to axe shop staff'

97i9y3941

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/recession-used-as-a-ploy-to-axe-shop-staff-2152363.html

major retail companies are using the recession as a ploy to drive down wages and cut staff, a union official said yesterday.

And this is despite the companies' healthy profits, the General Secretary of Mandate, John Douglas said yesterday.

The majority of Mandate's 40,000 members are in low-paid employment, and delegates at the union's biennial conference in Galway heard Mr Douglas give instances of companies trying to take advantage of the downturn:

* A leading outlet was attempting to cut wages at the top of the scale by more than 15pc, while reducing holiday pay and Sunday allowances by 25pc.
* A prominent grocery and drapery store was attempting to suspend allowances for late, early and overtime work.
* Another company was introducing a redundancy scheme that enabled it to replace workers on a higher pay scale with workers on much lower wages.

Mr Douglas said: "Feedback from our members suggests that right across the sector most retail workers have lost approximately eight to 12 hours per week as a result of cutbacks."

New research had revealed that the average wage for a sales assistant in Dublin in 2008 was €22,000, while in Cork, Galway and Limerick it was €17,500.

Union President Joan Gaffney said the Government and employers were mistaken if they thought that Mandate would stand by and allow its members carry the burden for the greed of others.

"We will together face up to multi-million profitable companies like Tesco, who hide behind facades of non-disclosure of profits, to protect each Mandate member," she said.

im not surprised with this,open to abuse like the shambolic work placement scheme we have.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

RichardAnd

Plenty of companies do need to cut back but I wouldn't be surprised if there are plenty of others cutting their staff wages for no good reason. It's just typical Ireland, abusing every opportunity that comes along, just the the FAS WPP as you stated.

ei.sdraob

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I would love to see the unions try to run a company(ies) or a country

oh wait :eek:

johnnyjb

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Why do some people not see the reality of things in front of them. Yes there is a recession but not every one is in it. Peolpe are being taken advantage of by big and even small business owners. I cant imagine (for example) tesco being happy that dunnes reduced the wage and are obviously make bigger profits. They all follow the gravy train.

Obvious FF er

ei.sdraob

johnnyjb wrote: »

Peolpe are being taken advantage of by big and even small business owners.

proof?

beside the obviously unbiased "Union"-ist "survey

Tipp Man

johnnyjb wrote: »

Why do some people not see the reality of things in front of them. Yes there is a recession but not every one is in it. Peolpe are being taken advantage of by big and even small business owners. I cant imagine (for example) tesco being happy that dunnes reduced the wage and are obviously make bigger profits. They all follow the gravy train.

Obvious FF er

Ah you do realise that Ireland is one of the most expensive countries in the world to hire staff, what with our ridiculously high minimum wage, high PRSI rates and excessive labour and Health and Safety laws. Do you have any idea how much it costs to hire staff in this country these days??

Can you please explain to me how this country is going to get back to being internationally competitive if we can't get our wage rates down for both private and public sector??

How is the cost of living going to fall if wages don't fall?? How would you do it??

amacachi

Companies are trying to make as much profit as they can, they're not pensions providers. Yes they can probably get away with cutting staff now easier than they could a few years ago, but even back then it would've made sense to have less workers.

average_runner

RichardAnd wrote: »

Plenty of companies do need to cut back but I wouldn't be surprised if there are plenty of others cutting their staff wages for no good reason. It's just typical Ireland, abusing every opportunity that comes along, just the the FAS WPP as you stated.

So is Ireland the only country in the world to do this????:D

If you dont abuse an opportunity you can never get the full potential from a opportunity!!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

biko

This is the best time for them to cut staff or replace higher paid staff with lower paid.
People are less inclined to cause a ruckus because of the recession.

It doesn't say what retailers this is about but Chief executive Terry Leahy said Tesco had "weathered the economic storm well" and claimed the retail giant's business was stronger than before the recession.
Dunnes doesn't tell anyone about their profit but the UK branch showed profit last year.

It's not a recession for everyone. The people that still has secure jobs doesn't feel the pinch and in fact are happy that prices are going down.

jprender

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It's out now ! You've been rumbled

ixoy

A company's aim is to get as much profit as possible. It is not to provide a social service.
One of the things that it tries to do is reduce costs, including labour costs. In the so-called Celtic Tiger years it was difficult to reduce this base cost because then you wouldn't get anyone. Now you can so you can cut down on surplus staff, excessive wages. If they cut too low, their staff walk - but that's not happening right now.
In the broader scheme of things, it could be a good move. Other companies may now feel it possible to follow suit and that could save them from going under entirely. In fact if it had a ripple effect it could lower labour costs in many areas, increasing Ireland's attractiveness to foreign companies.
It'd be interesting to see at what point the balance will come in - and how SW rates affect it.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Cookie_Monster

biko wrote: »

It doesn't say what retailers this is about but Chief executive Terry Leahy said Tesco had "weathered the economic storm well" and claimed the retail giant's business was stronger than before the recession.
.

they also layed off nearly 300 head office staff and a lot of store staff in the process. I was one of those 300.


they god rid of office building and reduced store opening hours and total working hours available to store. not saying they were totally wrong to do this, but its one of the main reasons profit did better than expected this year, huge reduction is wages and salaries and to a lesser degree rent

johnnyjb

ei.sdraob wrote: »

proof?

beside the obviously unbiased "Union"-ist "survey

How can provide proof of experience over the internet

Its not all got to do with wages being high, its about people being lied to and the powerful get more powerful.I cant see why people defend big corparations (uneless they worked in the higher ranks of one). This stupid statement of provide proof is totally over used and seems your assumed guitly before proven innocent.

Keep on supporting the elite and rich and maybe they might give ya a job counting their millions if your good. Ive nothing got to do with a union either, they played their part making this recession longer and harder too by being stubborn and greedy

average_runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Tlaking about food prices, Tesco has increase alot of its prices in the last two months, especially their meat section.


But i Know what you mean

Tipp Man

johnnyjb wrote: »

How can provide proof of experience over the internet

Its not all got to do with wages being high, its about people being lied to and the powerful get more powerful.I cant see why people defend big corparations (uneless they worked in the higher ranks of one). This stupid statement of provide proof is totally over used and seems your assumed guitly before proven innocent.

Keep on supporting the elite and rich and maybe they might give ya a job counting their millions if your good. Ive nothing got to do with a union either, they played their part making this recession longer and harder too by being stubborn and greedy

Its is all company's interests to keep wages down, both large multinationals and the fella working from his garage with some casual labour.

And its better for the whole country if wages fall as it attracts foreign companies here, makes it a little easier for indigineous companies to get off the ground, thereby prompoting employment, getting people off the dole, lowering the cost of living, losing the "rip off Ireland" tag etc etc etc

Its basics

johnnyjb

Tipp Man wrote: »

Its is all company's interests to keep wages down, both large multinationals and the fella working from his garage with some casual labour.

And its better for the whole country if wages fall as it attracts foreign companies here, makes it a little easier for indigineous companies to get off the ground, thereby prompoting employment, getting people off the dole, lowering the cost of living, losing the "rip off Ireland" tag etc etc etc

Its basics

But there is companies letting staff go and have less staff doing more work for even less wages.If we all go by your methods we would just be all rounded up like sheep and work for penneys just to speed up the proccess of big companies maximising profits. Every company would have people work for a euro a week if they were left. I dont see the point in helping them achieve this.

I am aware of competitiveness but we have to look out for ourselves aswell

Tipp Man

johnnyjb wrote: »

But there is companies letting staff go and have less staff doing more work for even less wages.If we all go by your methods we would just be all rounded up like sheep and work for penneys just to speed up the proccess of big companies maximising profits. Every company would have people work for a euro a week if they were left. I dont see the point in helping them achieve this.

I am aware of competitiveness but we have to look out for ourselves aswell

Well the way that you look out for yourself is give up the job you have and find something better. Improve your own position by upskilling etc. You get nowhere by standing still. Are you afraid to work hard for the money you earn??

Of course given the huge social welfare this country pays too many people can give up the job and live more comfortably on welfare than working but this another argument

Floppybits

Tipp Man wrote: »

Its is all company's interests to keep wages down, both large multinationals and the fella working from his garage with some casual labour.

And its better for the whole country if wages fall as it attracts foreign companies here, makes it a little easier for indigineous companies to get off the ground, thereby prompoting employment, getting people off the dole, lowering the cost of living, losing the "rip off Ireland" tag etc etc etc

Its basics

Not only wages have to drop but the cost of services such as electricity, gas, telecoms and other such services also need to come down. I know they are starting to come down but they are still amongst the highest in europe. This is only happening now. People can't take wage cuts until the prices of utilities come down once that happens it makes taking a wage cut a lot less bitter to take people wont see to much of an impact of their wage.

There is a lot more that needs to happen to make this a low cost ecomony than just the easy short term of slashing people and wages. The government need to get the finger out in all the other services mentioned above and start reducing the cost there also.

Tipp Man

Floppybits wrote: »

Not only wages have to drop but the cost of services such as electricity, gas, telecoms and other such services also need to come down. I know they are starting to come down but they are still amongst the highest in europe. This is only happening now. People can't take wage cuts until the prices of utilities come down once that happens it makes taking a wage cut a lot less bitter to take people wont see to much of an impact of their wage.

There is a lot more that needs to happen to make this a low cost ecomony than just the easy short term of slashing people and wages. The government need to get the finger out in all the other services mentioned above and start reducing the cost there also.

Oh i agree completly, I was only focusing on wages as that was the theme of this thread.

But you are completly correct, anything that has the governments nose stuck in it is costing way too much money. Like you highlight the utilites are far too expensive in this country, for both households and business, and are also a huge factor in our uncompetitivness

Nijmegen

Two things relevant to this discussion:

Firstly, we need costs in the overall economy to come down. This is a result of wage cuts. It's not nice, but it needs to happen. The money a shop shelf stacker gets affects the money an IT manager gets.

Secondly, companies are there to maximise profits. That's how the free market economy works, and through this cut throat method of working we've got a lot richer than anybody who ever tried to make socialism the be all and end all of how they run their country. A company only owes you according to your value to driving profits, profits drive job creation, they drive wealth creation, and sometimes people get screwed in the middle. That's tough luck, and they can pick themselves back up and have another go rather than sitting around crying for someone to give them a handout.

ei.sdraob

johnnyjb wrote: »

How can provide proof of experience over the internet

Its not all got to do with wages being high, its about people being lied to and the powerful get more powerful.I cant see why people defend big corparations (uneless they worked in the higher ranks of one). This stupid statement of provide proof is totally over used and seems your assumed guitly before proven innocent.

Keep on supporting the elite and rich and maybe they might give ya a job counting their millions if your good. Ive nothing got to do with a union either, they played their part making this recession longer and harder too by being stubborn and greedy

wait what?

i am the one who assumed "guilty until proven innocent" ?? (remember that its the companies who are being accused of unfair dismissal, i asked for proof)

hahahaha


btw I am not "defending corporations", im defending common sense (something in short supply lately), i worked at the bottom of a supermarket and large companies before, so dont give me that crap

alias141282

ei.sdraob wrote: »

I would love to see the unions try to run a company(ies) or a country

That would be called Anarcho-syndicalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

johnnyjb

ei.sdraob wrote: »

wait what?

i am the one who assumed "guilty until proven innocent" ?? (remember that its the companies who are being accused of unfair dismissal, i asked for proof)

hahahaha


btw I am not "defending corporations", im defending common sense (something in short supply lately), i worked at the bottom of a supermarket and large companies before, so dont give me that crap

As far as im concerned your either on the side of the emplyee or the employer and im on the side of the emplyee.Ive worked for big supermarkets aswell.The impression your giving me is if you were being shafted you would not care and just tell yourself its acceptable cause companies need to make more profits. Multinationals arent our friends and are kicking us to the curb after many years of "Friendship" during the boom when we spent our money in there supermarkets and such.

ei.sdraob

johnnyjb wrote: »

As far as im concerned your either on the side of the emplyee or the employer and im on the side of the emplyee.Ive worked for big supermarkets aswell.The impression your giving me is if you were being shafted you would not care and just tell yourself its acceptable cause companies need to make more profits. Multinationals arent our friends and are kicking us to the curb after many years of "Friendship" during the boom when we spent our money in there supermarkets and such.

My dear friend

Ive been both and employee and employer (and right now my left arm is employing my right arm )

I understand that:
without profit there is no business, without business there is no jobs

If a business can not pay its employee costs (any costs for that matter, there's nothing special about employees except extra paperwork and regulation btw) the a business has 2 choices:
1. let someone go, preferably the most under-performing (ie chop the fat)
2. close shop altogether (forget about it all)

You are up in arms about business choosing option 1, while ignoring that the only alternative is option 2, which aint pretty

We do not live in some communist paradise where the "worker" is placed above all, and neither do we want too

I asked quite reasonably for some proof of what's being alleged by an obviously biased party. You paint businesses as some cold entities who are "out to get ya" but you forget that they nothing more than a legal entity that are often (but not always of course) run by people with more experience and dedication than you, who would not like the idea of firing people unless its a last resort.

WalterMitty

alias141282 wrote: »

That would be called Anarcho-syndicalism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

Oh it would be anarchy allright.

dean21

I have said this all along and I am not surprised as it was the private sector employers greed that F****D up Ireland in the first place.
Make no mistake private sector workers, you will be screwed by your employer so they can keep there profits.
There are loads of employers gone to the wall, and I feel sorry for them but those that are surviving are letting workers go, because it is the fashion these days, and if the public sector get another pay cut your fat cat employer in the private sector will double it for you.
Private sector workers were warned about this (that ff were driving it) but you did not listen and just moaned and moaned about the public sector.
Yes some wages have to be cut to keep your jobs, but a job is not much good if it dose not keep the bills at bay and the roof over your head
Even if we go back to the boom time in the future the private sector worker will be working harder for less, all in the aid of private sector greed

ei.sdraob

dean21 wrote: »

I have said this all along and I am not surprised as it was the private sector employers greed that F****D up Ireland in the first place.
Make no mistake private sector workers, you will be screwed by your employer so they can keep there profits.
There are loads of employers gone to the wall, and I feel sorry for them but those that are surviving are letting workers go, because it is the fashion these days, and if the public sector get another pay cut your fat cat employer in the private sector will double it for you.
Private sector workers were warned about this (that ff were driving it) but you did not listen and just moaned and moaned about the public sector.
Yes some wages have to be cut to keep your jobs, but a job is not much good if it dose not keep the bills at bay and the roof over your head
Even if we go back to the boom time in the future the private sector worker will be working harder for less, all in the aid of private sector greed

translation:


private sector workers of Ireland UNITE!

into one big trade union!

where you can show "em" (whoever "em" might be?) the will of the workers

:P

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kVdVTVR-j0Q

WalterMitty

dean21 wrote: »

I have said this all along and I am not surprised as it was the private sector employers greed that F****D up Ireland in the first place.
Make no mistake private sector workers, you will be screwed by your employer so they can keep there profits.
There are loads of employers gone to the wall, and I feel sorry for them but those that are surviving are letting workers go, because it is the fashion these days, and if the public sector get another pay cut your fat cat employer in the private sector will double it for you.
Private sector workers were warned about this (that ff were driving it) but you did not listen and just moaned and moaned about the public sector.
Yes some wages have to be cut to keep your jobs, but a job is not much good if it dose not keep the bills at bay and the roof over your head
Even if we go back to the boom time in the future the private sector worker will be working harder for less, all in the aid of private sector greed

Do you have any clue about labour market economics and broader macroeconomics?

alias141282

ei.sdraob wrote: »

translation:

private sector workers of Ireland UNITE!

into one big trade union!

Now you're talking.

alias141282

WalterMitty wrote: »

Do you have any clue about labour market economics and broader macroeconomics?

Dou you have any clue about anarcho-syndicalism?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

dean21

WalterMitty wrote: »

Do you have any clue about labour market economics and broader macroeconomics?

Not a clue and dont plan to spend the evening read it
But I know what the Irish employer is like
If they can’t rip off there customer, they will screw there employer
The one good thing is that the private sector employers / staff have discovered customer relations again.
Well done

galway2007

god help them
Are profits down???

Nijmegen

galway2007... What do you think pays for everything you've ever owned?

Profits. That's what.

Profits push enterprise which creates jobs for people who pay taxes and consume things.

God love you the day profits do dry up. People who think companies shouldn't try and get every penny they can out of the system are deluded as to how we pay for things like our social welfare state.

The entire Irish economy is built on foreign direct investment and exports... All of which are sugar coated by our tax breaks on profits.

johnnyjb

ei.sdraob wrote: »

My dear friend

Ive been both and employee and employer (and right now my left arm is employing my right arm )

I understand that:
without profit there is no business, without business there is no jobs

If a business can not pay its employee costs (any costs for that matter, there's nothing special about employees except extra paperwork and regulation btw) the a business has 2 choices:
1. let someone go, preferably the most under-performing (ie chop the fat)
2. close shop altogether (forget about it all)

You are up in arms about business choosing option 1, while ignoring that the only alternative is option 2, which aint pretty

We do not live in some communist paradise where the "worker" is placed above all, and neither do we want too

I asked quite reasonably for some proof of what's being alleged by an obviously biased party. You paint businesses as some cold entities who are "out to get ya" but you forget that they nothing more than a legal entity that are often (but not always of course) run by people with more experience and dedication than you, who would not like the idea of firing people unless its a last resort.

You dont need to be more intelligent than an employee to run a business. Your over complicated answers dont actually give proof. And the end of the day after all our debate people need jobs companies need employees and couldnt care less about employees welfare. Every one knows this including yourself.

My whole point was that i wouldnt break my back for lousey money if i knew i was being took advantage of more than i really needed to be. Im not saying i wont get outta bed for less than 200 a day but this recession is being used by some as excuse to rip off employees

ei.sdraob

johnnyjb wrote: »

You dont need to be more intelligent than an employee to run a business.

You need more skills (and drive) than others, otherwise the employee/whoever can go and start their own.

johnnyjb wrote: »

Your over complicated answers dont actually give proof.

If you find my answer "complicated" then I despair :rolleyes:

johnnyjb wrote: »

And the end of the day after all our debate people need jobs

Yes yes they do (unless they go make their own, goto point 1)

johnnyjb wrote: »

companies need employees and couldnt care less about employees welfare.

A companies objective is to make profit, not to provide worker welfare, that's a secondary concern in most cases, no profit > no company > no work for workers

do you find the above sentence "complicated"

johnnyjb wrote: »

My whole point was that i wouldnt break my back for lousey money if i knew i was being took advantage of more than i really needed to be.

then dont work
is someone holding a gun to your head and making your work (ironically this is exactly what happens in worker "paradises")

johnnyjb wrote: »

Im not saying i wont get outta bed for less than 200 a day but this recession is being used by some as excuse to rip off employees

Im still waiting on any proof of this that is not from a biased source such as a trade union

danman

I've read this thread and I'm very dissappinted.

Not one referance to the "Race to the Bottom".

Has no one got a union handbook with them today?

Idbatterim

ok yes there are dodgy employers, who are looking to maximise profit regardless the cost to the employees. But what about the colossal number of useless employees, do you feel bad for the employer in this regard? Look the system isnt perfect, but please propose one that it. The high cost high wage economy is to the detriment of the vast majority of us!

alias141282

ei.sdraob wrote: »

You need more skills (and drive) than others, otherwise the employee/whoever can go and start their own.

In most cases you need capital to start your own business. This is what makes the system inherently unfair. You need money to make money.

ei.sdraob

alias141282 wrote: »

In most cases you need capital to start your own business. This is what makes the system inherently unfair. You need money to make money.

then you go to the bank for money


if it was as simple as the "needing capital" then the State's (who usually control the printing presses) could be starting all the enterprise they want, but I don't need to point out that State Enterprises almost always end-up a failure

alias141282

ei.sdraob wrote: »

then you go to the bank for money

And how much would the bank give you? You need assets as collatoral to get any significant loan.

ei.sdraob wrote: »

if it was as simple as the "needing capital" then the State's (who usually control the printing presses) could be starting all the enterprise they want, but I don't need to point out that State Enterprises almost always end-up a failure

Yes and this is why the State is a driving force behind innovation and growth.

The State invests in research and development because only the state can put up enough capital for a long enough period of time to develop break through technologies. Fundamentally new innovations, new technologies. Thats where information technology came from - Computers and the Internet. The came from the U.S. state system -- research, development, procurement, other devices -- before they were finally handed over to private enterprise for profit-making. Ditto electronics, pharmaceuticals and the new biology-based industries. And that's the picture pretty much for the core of the economy.The Irish govt. invests billions in R&D, undertaken in the universities and IoTs, for these reasons.

The state sector is innovative and dynamic. It's true across the board from electronics to pharmaceuticals to the new biology-based industries. The real radical breakthroughs happen in the universities arising from publicly funded research. The idea is that the public is supposed to pay the costs and take the risks, and ultimately if there is any profit, you hand it over to private tyrannies, corporations. If you had to encapsulate the economy in one sentence, that would be the main theme. When you look at the details of course it's a more complex picture, but that's the major theme.

For example this guy Professor Luke O'Neill of Trinity College Dublin has been funded by the State to undertake research since the early 80's.

Basically he discovered what are called Toll-like receptors, which are like the initial triggers for the immune system to begin defending itself. It has implications for all kinds of infectious and autoimmune diseases. This was the fruition of more than 20 years of publicly funded research.

Professor O'Neill then set up a company called Opsana Therapeutics with private investors and it has since gone from strength to strength. In their last funding round they raised €18 million in venture capital.

Its a classic example of how break through innovation happens. The real radical stuff happens in the universities (in the State sector), and it takes many years and a lot of public money, and then it gets transferred to the private sector through spinouts, collaborations, licencing, etc. The private sector develop it, commercialise it and sell it.

http://www.biotechnologyireland.com/...newsart_315948

ei.sdraob

alias141282 wrote: »

And how much would the bank give you? You need assets as collatoral to get any significant loan.

Then you work hard and save enough to start a business, I did it, With your negative outlook on enterprise I don't think you will

alias141282 wrote: »

Yes and this is why the State is a driving force behind innovation and growth.

It ****ing better be, after sucking up billions from productive enterprises and people, and then wait for it, only spending a small fraction of this on "innovation" with rest going to welfare and public services

alias141282 wrote: »

The State invests in research and development because only the state can put up enough capital for a long enough period of time to develop break through technologies. Fundamentally new innovations, new technologies. Thats where information technology came from - Computers and the Internet. The came from the U.S. state system -- research, development, procurement, other devices -- before they were finally handed over to private enterprise for profit-making. Ditto electronics, pharmaceuticals and the new biology-based industries. And that's the picture pretty much for the core of the economy.

Actually the real driving force behind above innovations (as ever) is war and having the need to have a military advantage.

alias141282 wrote: »

The Irish govt. invests billions in R&D, undertaken in the universities and IoTs, for these reasons.

ROFL, as someone who was on the "coalface" of govt funded research here, i wouldn't call it investment but "waste" in quite alot of cases, with some research (Enterprise Funded and all) i seen first-hand going as far as calling "fraud", the good investments are very far between

alias141282 wrote: »

The state sector is innovative and dynamic. It's true across the board from electronics to pharmaceuticals to the new biology-based industries. The real radical breakthroughs happen in the universities arising from publicly funded research. The idea is that the public is supposed to pay the costs and take the risks, and ultimately if there is any profit, you hand it over to private tyrannies, corporations. If you had to encapsulate the economy in one sentence, that would be the main theme. When you look at the details of course it's a more complex picture, but that's the major theme.

You've really been drinking some kool aid, i recommend you come down to the real world and take a look for yourself

alias141282 wrote: »

For example this guy Professor Luke O'Neill of Trinity College Dublin has been funded by the State to undertake research since the early 80's.

Basically he discovered what are called Toll-like receptors, which are like the initial triggers for the immune system to begin defending itself. It has implications for all kinds of infectious and autoimmune diseases. This was the fruition of more than 20 years of publicly funded research.

Professor O'Neill then set up a company called Opsana Therapeutics with private investors and it has since gone from strength to strength. In their last funding round they raised €18 million in venture capital.

Its a classic example of how break through innovation happens. The real radical stuff happens in the universities (in the State sector), and it takes many years and a lot of public money, and then it gets transferred to the private sector through spinouts, collaborations, licencing, etc. The private sector develop it, commercialise it and sell it.

http://www.biotechnologyireland.com/...newsart_315948

Good for him, one breakthrough out of billions spend

Now why dont we produce more breakthroughs per euro spend as compared to other major research institutions in US with major industry links and funding?

You want companies to innovate? Instead of them paying corporation and employee taxes have them spend that money on r&d, but now you can kiss good buy then to an income stream that can be used to fund various government excesses that have nothing to do with "innovation"

RichardAnd

alias141282 wrote: »

Its a classic example of how break through innovation happens. The real radical stuff happens in the universities (in the State sector), and it takes many years and a lot of public money, and then it gets transferred to the private sector through spinouts, collaborations, licencing, etc. The private sector develop it, commercialise it and sell it.

http://www.biotechnologyireland.com/...newsart_315948

In computing, all of the major developments, by and large, come from privately owned companies. The technology of USB was developed by Intel who are anything but a state company. Google gave us their fantastic search engine. IBM developed Deep Blue, a computer that could beat world Chess champions and Sun created the Java environment and programming language which is huge in industry.

I'm not trying to be little you or anything but saying that universities are responsible for the great leaps forwards is plainly not true.

Count Dooku

alias141282 wrote: »

The State invests in research and development because only the state can put up enough capital for a long enough period of time to develop break through technologies. Fundamentally new innovations, new technologies. Thats where information technology came from - Computers and the Internet. The came from the U.S. state system -- research, development, procurement, other devices -- before they were finally handed over to private enterprise for profit-making.

BTW, Pentagon is funding most of research in US. Directly or indirectly.

alias141282 wrote: »

The state sector is innovative and dynamic. It's true across the board from electronics to pharmaceuticals to the new biology-based industries.

Not dynamic and not effective because nobody think about efficiency
“Absence of result is also result”
Most of results can go directly to bin or will require huge amount to work to make them affordable for people

alias141282 wrote: »

For example this guy Professor Luke O'Neill of Trinity College Dublin has been funded by the State to undertake research since the early 80's.

And compare with results of any pharmaceutical company, which design hundreds of drugs each year

DublinWriter

I had an interesting conversation with a sales rep from a BWM dealership in Dublin (won't mention which of the two it was).

I asked him about sales and he said that 2009 was a very bad year due to the fact that most of their customers were business people and they couldn't ask staff to take pay freezes/cuts and then drive in with an 09 Beemer.

He said that sales picked up in 2010.

Nijmegen

The US defence example is a good one: The US Defence spending is somewhere just shy of $700 billion a year, a great majority of it spent on research and development and the production of gear, rather than salaries and other payroll costs. They spend beyond that $700 billion in other related defence fields.

With that kind of money the US could run its own State run arms industry, rather than a good percentage of their funding (certainly not less than 10%) being margin for private companies.

Why don't they?

Because they recognise that for the best innovation, you need private companies rushing for profit.

I was reading some time back about drugs companies and their R&D efforts. Really, they could devote their billions anywhere, to any disease. But they go after the big winners, the diseases and ailments that the most people have, to make the maximum profit, and then they move down the list of R&D priorities not based on human suffering, but a mix of either big market or niche market where high cost drugs can be sold with effective margin.

Is that fair and humane? Probably not. Would we have the life saving drugs we have today if it was a state run system? Certainly not.

The market isn't fair, but without it you'd be a lot worse off.

daithicarr

while there are a large number of companys which need to restructure their workforce due to the economic climate there are alos companys with healthy profit margins exploiting the situation.

i know a good few people who work for retail outlets, most foregin owned which have been shown to charge far more for goods even taking higher running costs in to account,and other companys which are still turning over healthy profits.

yet they are being subject to things like compulsory un paid over time.
of course they dont have to do the job, but in the current market they have little or no choice, its not like most people are stupid enough to quit a job in the depth of one of the worst recessions we have ever faced.

should company be allowed treat their staff as they see fit? also if they keep reducing the amount of money they pay their staff will they not in effect reduce the amount of money people have to spend on their products? i know no high street store is going to look at the bigger economic picture, but isint that what employment regulation is supposed to do?

Nijmegen

daithicarr wrote: »

while there are a large number of companys which need to restructure their workforce due to the economic climate there are alos companys with healthy profit margins exploiting the situation.

i know a good few people who work for retail outlets, most foregin owned which have been shown to charge far more for goods even taking higher running costs in to account,and other companys which are still turning over healthy profits.

yet they are being subject to things like compulsory un paid over time.
of course they dont have to do the job, but in the current market they have little or no choice, its not like most people are stupid enough to quit a job in the depth of one of the worst recessions we have ever faced.

should company be allowed treat their staff as they see fit? also if they keep reducing the amount of money they pay their staff will they not in effect reduce the amount of money people have to spend on their products? i know no high street store is going to look at the bigger economic picture, but isint that what employment regulation is supposed to do?

Actually, we require an overall reduction in costs in the labour force to become more competitive. It's not up for discussion, and this is required of economic policy.

Also, where does it stipulate that a company owes you anything outside of what's written in the statute books? Companies are there to drive costs lower and margins higher, and the last time we in Ireland tried to meddle in the free market economy we went from being just as poor as everyone else to being the 'poorest of the rich' while everyone else got richer, from the people in slums up, in countries like the UK and the US.

The free market is a good thing, and profit drives the welfare state that I daresay those complaining about equality love so much.

No money grabbing bastard companies, no money.

alias141282

Count Dooku wrote: »

BTW, Pentagon is funding most of research in US. Directly or indirectly.

Yes, it is still public money.

Count Dooku wrote: »

Not dynamic and not effective because nobody think about efficiency
“Absence of result is also result”
Most of results can go directly to bin or will require huge amount to work to make them affordable for people

Yes that is the nature or research. You test a hypothesis. It may be true, it may not be true. Only after years of painstaking attention to detail is it likely that any fundamental breakthrough will be found which will be of use to society, but when it does the results are hugely important, like the vaccine for polio. If you have a better way of advancing scientific knowledge, please let us know.

Count Dooku wrote: »

And compare with results of any pharmaceutical company, which design hundreds of drugs each year

Yes but most of these drugs are iterations of the same thing, they are not radical breakthroughs. Whereas what Luke O'Neill discovered will lead to a wave of never-seen-before treatments for a whole host of different autoimmune diseases.

The fundamental basic research happens in the universities which leads to breakthroughs and the creation of new "platform technologies" like the internet, biotechnology, nanotechnology, etc.