fake TUI document

BeardyFunzo

Received this via email today. Curious as to what people think.

EDIT: As requested by RiskyMove in post #5, I emailed the person who send the email containing the following for clarification as to whom authored the document. I have yet to receive this information, and so am beginning to suspect that the author may not be acting in an official manner for the TUI and that the document is being sent around to suit the intentions of some.

Second EDIT: Following on from EURO_Kraut's post that the TUI know nothing of this, I have removed it. I intended this to be a discussion on an official stance, not the options of an individual.

ei.sdraob

BeardyFunzo wrote:

Curious as to what people think

Hi BeardieFuzzy

I think yee should go on all out strike

petrol bombs and all, make sure to burn down the banks while you at it

Cheers

Riskymove

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

Received this via email today. Curious as to what people think.

i think it shows how the big issue here is the complete breakdown of trust between employer and employee

there is nothing to back up these claims other than a complete mistrust and refusal to accept that the Government is sincere in this agreement.

Scarab80

How could any member be expected to think and vote rationally on the Croke Park Deal when they are being sent this kind of vicious propoganda from the union leadership. There is so much biased and unfounded opinion in that release that it would put some of the most deluded posters on these boards to shame.

The more you read it the more it sounds like the communist manifesto.

Riskymove

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

Received this via email today. Curious as to what people think.

can you clarify who it is from...I doubt it is from TUI HQ

waster81

Scarab80 wrote: »

How could any member be expected to think and vote rationally on the Croke Park Deal when they are being sent this kind of vicious propoganda from the union leadership. There is so much biased and unfounded opinion in that release that it would put some of the most deluded posters on these boards to shame.

The more you read it the more it sounds like the communist manifesto.

And there is no propaganda from the governement side!!

dan_d

Not what you'd call a balanced piece of literature...

Scarab80

waster81 wrote: »

And there is no propaganda from the governement side!!

The only deal the government reneged on was the towards 2016 deal (or 2116 according to the TUI) and that was an absolute no brainer. Did you really expect the taxpayer to continue giving public and civil servants payrises on top of increments while the economy descended into meltdown?

The offer is simple, achieve cost savings through greater flexibility or through further pay cuts.

The TUI apparently want to go for the third option, no flexibility, reversal of pay cuts implemented so far and pay for it through borrowing.

waster81

dan_d wrote: »

Not what you'd call a balanced piece of literature...

Is it not balanced o maybe its accurate?

Riskymove

waster81 wrote: »

Is it not balanced o maybe its accurate?

It is not accurate at all.....it has nothing to base its claims on

yet it attempts to denegrate the proposed agreement on the basis that there is no concrete backing up of its provisions

oh the irony!! etc

waster81

Scarab80 wrote: »

The only deal the government reneged on was the towards 2016 deal (or 2116 according to the TUI) and that was an absolute no brainer. Did you really expect the taxpayer to continue giving public and civil servants payrises on top of increments while the economy descended into meltdown?

The offer is simple, achieve cost savings through greater flexibility or through further pay cuts.

The TUI apparently want to go for the third option, no flexibility, reversal of pay cuts implemented so far and pay for it through borrowing.

Oh couldnt be bothered with the site, its clear private sector are sore and want pay cuts get their pound of flesh.

I said the government spin with their propoganda, and you head off on oh cut the public service wages, reform is what we need. Reform had been negotiated in December, and everyone was up in arms over 12days, ie short term in pivate sector.

Scarab80

waster81 wrote: »

Oh couldnt be bothered with the site, its clear private sector are sore and want pay cuts get their pound of flesh.

I said the government spin with their propoganda, and you head off on oh cut the public service wages, reform is what we need. Reform had been negotiated in December, and everyone was up in arms over 12days, ie short term in pivate sector.

The point was that the TUI don't trust the government because they reneged on the 2016 deal, i just pointed out that this was inevitable and any other course of action would have been both unfair to the taxpayer and detrimental to the country. Therefore they have no reason to suspect the authenticy of this deal.

What do you mean by government propoganda?

BeardyFunzo

Riskymove wrote: »

can you clarify who it is from...I doubt it is from TUI HQ

It was sent to the staff list by a SIPTU rep. The original doc list 'ITT' as the author but I've requested clarification from the sender.

I'll amend OP with info when i get it.

Riskymove

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

It was sent to the staff list by a SIPTU rep. The original doc list 'ITT' as the author but I've requested clarification from the sender.

I'll amend OP with info when i get it.

thanks

based on the content I imagine its authorship rests with disgruntled members rather than TUI leaders

I cannot see any official TUI statement along these lines

zootroid

So, your union tells you how you should vote, and then you vote?

By the way, the amount of rubbish in that article is unreal.

Personally, I hope the croke park deal is rejected. I can't see the state saving any money when it agrees to having no further redundancies or pay-cuts.

BeardyFunzo

zootroid wrote: »

So, your union tells you how you should vote, and then you vote?

By the way, the amount of rubbish in that article is unreal.

Personally, I hope the croke park deal is rejected. I can't see the state saving any money when it agrees to having no further redundancies or pay-cuts.

Strictly speaking they 'recommend'. You'll notice how alot of the unions recommended rejecting the agreement at first but they didn't try to oust the people that negotiated it.

You would get savings by not replacing staff and staffing levels decreaseing by natural wastage.

Riskymove

zootroid wrote: »

So, your union tells you how you should vote, and then you vote?

The executive of the union usually recommends a yes or no and gives reasons for it...it does not 'tell' people how to vote

Personally, I hope the croke park deal is rejected. I can't see the state saving any money when it agrees to having no further redundancies or pay-cuts.

no 'compulsory' redundancies....but it commits to reducing numbers significantly

the other reforms agreed to will also result in savings

zootroid

BeardyFunzo wrote: »

Strictly speaking they 'recommend'. You'll notice how alot of the unions recommended rejecting the agreement at first but they didn't try to oust the people that negotiated it.

You would get savings by not replacing staff and staffing levels decreaseing by natural wastage.

Given how unions are prone to hyperbole and use of emotive language, its "recommendations" to me sound like they are telling people how they should vote.

Union members would be better served getting an objective and balanced opinion of any deal put forward to them, so they could make their own mind up

Riskymove

zootroid wrote: »

Union members would be better served getting an objective and balanced opinion of any deal put forward to them, so they could make their own mind up

from whom?

BeardyFunzo

zootroid wrote: »

Union members would be better served getting an objective and balanced opinion of any deal put forward to them, so they could make their own mind up

Given that the only way to do that is to read the agreement and the clarifications in full, you can be sure that most people won't do that*. The union recommendation does carry weight with people as you are supposed to trust them- that's why you are part of a union right*?

(* i did, and I made up my own mind about what way I'll vote)
(** that said, i don't trust my union reps)

Euro_Kraut

I contacted TUI head office today about this. This text did not come from them.

It is the work of a disgruntled member acting alone most probably.

OP, probably not fair to present this as the TUI's opinion on the clarification. Although they are still against the deal there is no way they would present it in such amateurish fashion.

Have you actually confirmed a source for this? You said you got it of your SIPTU branch sec. Did someone email him/her and ask them to send this on? It would be usual for a Union to distribute the views of an ordinary member of another union to the entire membership. As a Branch Secretary in another Union I would consider this to be a bit an abuse of the mailing list to dumping bolloks like this into people boxes and presenting it as the 'view with the TUI'.

BeardyFunzo

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

I contacted TUI head office today about this. This text did not come from them.

It is the work of a disgruntled member acting alone most probably.

OP, probably not fair to present this as the TUI's opinion on the clarification. Although they are still against the deal there is no way they would present it in such amateurish fashion.

Have you actually confirmed a source for this? You said you got it of your SIPTU branch sec. Did someone email him/her and ask them to send this on? It would be usual for a Union to distribute the views of an ordinary member of another union to the entire membership. As a Branch Secretary in another Union I would consider this to be a bit an abuse of the mailing list to dumping bolloks like this into people boxes and presenting it as the 'view with the TUI'.

I am in complete agreement with you on this, as I have still not received a reply from the person that sent this to the staff list in my employment and the whole thing stinks.

MODS if possible could you edit the title/lock/delete this thread? My intention was not to have the views of an individual discussed and i should have known better (considering my last post).

dan_d

Glad to hear that's not a union document....it's an appalling piece of writing and if it had been a union, would have been extremely unprofessional.