The Labour Party v The Unions

meditraitor

Many of the posters on this forum have used labours traditional relationship with the unions to highlight why the labour party should not be in government. Obviously the Unions played a part in the runaway public spending of the last 10 years, the crazy public sector pay and pensions increases under the FF government are in part down to the unions negotiating.
Now it is obvious that the unions have buried their heads in the sand and will not contribute to any rescue attempt of our economy, all those wafflers will do is incite industrial action and further delve our economy in strife, the government needs to reduces PS working numbers and pay to meet the new realities..... Ireland is broke and we cannot keep the gravy train rolling.

One thing I will point out before I make my point is that Labour didnt put the unions in the position they are in right now, holding the country to ransom, that was FF (bertie mainly)

With that said I would be of the opinion that Labour are by far the best party to deal with these union nutcases, they have the relationship and they know how the union leaders work.
FF have shown their inability to it, FG are in an even worse predicament as the Unions despise them so that leaves Labour. If you are of the same opinion as me and you think labour stand for integrity and common sense then it is not a massive leap of faith to think that if labour were in power they could grapple with the unions and force them to see sense.

Anyway, what do you think?

FlutterinBantam

meditraitor wrote: »

Many of the posters on this forum have used labours traditional relationship with the unions to highlight why the labour party should not be in government. Obviously the Unions played a part in the runaway public spending of the last 10 years, the crazy public sector pay and pensions increases under the FF government are in part down to the unions negotiating.
Now it is obvious that the unions have buried their heads in the sand and will not contribute to any rescue attempt of our economy, all those beardy wafflers will do is incite industrial action and further delve our economy in strife, the government needs to reduces PS working numbers and pay to meet the new realities..... Ireland is broke and we cannot keep the gravy train rolling.

One thing I will point out before I make my point is that Labour didnt put the unions in the position they are in right now, holding the country to ransom, that was FF (bertie mainly)

With that said I would be of the opinion that Labour are by far the best party to deal with these union nutcases, they have the relationship and they know how the beardies work.
FF have shown their inability to it, FG are in an even worse predicament as the Unions despise them so that leaves Labour. If you are of the same opinion as me and you think labour stand for integrity and common sense then it is not a massive leap of faith to think that if labour were in power they could grapple with the unions and force them to see sense.

Anyway, what do you think?

No kidding, better tell Gilmore to get off the fence then.

Everybody knows that 55 out and 35 in don't compute

Even Ogle on RTE today seems to have accepted that.

Croke park agreement will have to be re visited and the cost of running the country, mainly due to the incompetence of Bartholemew A. will have to be reduced.


Simple simple.

evercloserunion

FlutterinBantam wrote: »

Simple simple.

Lol. No it's not. It might be simple to say that we need to fix the problem, but fixing it is another story entirely.

imme

The beardies:D

Have we not gone away from name calling

There was a sticky on boards to say that Union heads were not to refered to a beardies or beards more spec.

I was going to post a thread in recent days about the influence of the Trade unions on public policy in Ireland over the last 20'years, ever since social partnership in fact. I feel they´ve had a massive influence on the direction of our country.

No, OP, I don´t see why Labour in particular would be any better than any other party to talk tough to the unions. Labour can´t seem to talk tough on much really.:rolleyes:

Het-Field

High ranking Union officials are Labour Party members, or De Facto Labour Party members. Jack O Conner has been a member of Labour's National Executive, while Blair Horan of the CPSU was a member of The Workers Party, who's members subsequently performed a successful reverse takeover of the Labour Party in the form of Democratic Left. These people were at the table when the shambles that was social partnership was taking place.They lobbied for unsustainable wage agreements, which are consistently bing waved in the face of employers, in spite of the fact that their profit margin is razor thin, or is in negative.

As such, the Labour Party has a role to play in Ireland's blunt competitive edge. A word in the ear of SIPTU (which has huge links to the Labour Party) by Pat Rabbitte and R Quinn stating that wage agreements, minimum wages etc were unsustainable could have been useful. Of course the Labour party were never going to agree to that.

Thus, while Labour are not as culpable as some of those in Government, they were part of the process in the form of the Unions, who seek to drag Ireland into the dark ages with their socialist rhetoric, and their lack ofa sound economic platform.

Eliot Rosewater

meditraitor wrote: »

Anyway, what do you think?

I think that we've been negotiating with Public Sector Unions for years and this has culminated in a huge public deficit with only very mediocre services to show for it. We negotiated with the Unions in the recession and we gave them the overly-favourable Croke Park Deal, only to have many of the trade unionists reject it. Simply put, many of these unionists just aren't interested in the good of the country; it's about looking after themselves at the expense of the average taxpayer and the economic health of Ireland.

How are Labour going to negotiate a better deal that will actually be tenable in the long run? And why would Labour even want to? The Trade Unions are represented at Labour's conferences; they're a major vested interest that Labour is extremely interested in pleasing. When it comes to choosing between the average taxpayer and the average trade unionists, it's clear who's side Labour will come down on.

The best course of action, in my opinion, is to simply cut them out. We've tried negotiation, and it has failed. At this stage it's looking like ignoring them is the only way to save the economy. They'll strike, and there'll be havoc for a while, but in the long run this economy might actually be saved. FB mentioned that 55 - 35 does not compute. And the equation of this country's finances won't compute as long as we throw so much money at the Public Sector Unions, in my opinion.

meditraitor

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

The best course of action, in my opinion, is to simply cut them out. We've tried negotiation, and it has failed. At this stage it's looking like ignoring them is the only way to save the economy. They'll strike, and there'll be havoc for a while, but in the long run this economy might actually be saved. FB mentioned that 55 - 35 does not compute. And the equation of this country's finances won't compute as long as we throw so much money at the Public Sector Unions, in my opinion.

Some days I feel like this is probably the right answer but on days like today (payday, friday) when Im not so mad at these useless fecks I kind of think we need to deal with the unions less in a Tatcherite manner and more in a partnership type way, make them aware of the need for change and cost reduction. As you pointed out, labour are in a good position to have a quick word in the ear of these people.

imme

meditraitor wrote: »

Some days I feel like this is probably the right answer but on days like today (payday, friday) when Im not so mad at these useless fecks I kind of think we need to deal with the unions less in a Tatcherite manner and more in a partnership type way, make them aware of the need for change and cost reduction. As you pointed out, labour are in a good position to have a quick word in the ear of these people.

There is a cross polination if you will, between the Unions and Labour, they are ´brothers´, why do you think a word from your brother will make you change your ways.

meditraitor

imme wrote: »

There is a cross polination if you will, between the Unions and Labour, they are ´brothers´, why do you think a word from your brother will make you change your ways.

Its certainly better coming from a brother than an enemy!

murphaph

meditraitor wrote: »

Some days I feel like this is probably the right answer but on days like today (payday, friday) when Im not so mad at these useless fecks I kind of think we need to deal with the unions less in a Tatcherite manner and more in a partnership type way, make them aware of the need for change and cost reduction. As you pointed out, labour are in a good position to have a quick word in the ear of these people.

We can all see that costs need to be cut to bring us into line with our income. They just don't want their costs cut.

Idbatterim

With the croke park agreement, the unions have ensured that the needy's and vulnerable services will be cut, and those with secure jobs and pensions wont be. Basicly unions are a business, and their goal is to get as much money for as little work as possible. Any money spent in one area, means its being taken away from another area. I would honestly love to now what percentage of the population have a clue of the situation we are actually in. I would love to hear pensioners opinions on where the cuts should be made!

FlutterinBantam

Eliot Rosewater wrote: »

I think that we've been negotiating with Public Sector Unions for years and this has culminated in a huge public deficit with only very mediocre services to show for it. We negotiated with the Unions in the recession and we gave them the overly-favourable Croke Park Deal, only to have many of the trade unionists reject it. Simply put, many of these unionists just aren't interested in the good of the country; it's about looking after themselves at the expense of the average taxpayer and the economic health of Ireland.

How are Labour going to negotiate a better deal that will actually be tenable in the long run? And why would Labour even want to? The Trade Unions are represented at Labour's conferences; they're a major vested interest that Labour is extremely interested in pleasing. When it comes to choosing between the average taxpayer and the average trade unionists, it's clear who's side Labour will come down on.

The best course of action, in my opinion, is to simply cut them out. We've tried negotiation, and it has failed. At this stage it's looking like ignoring them is the only way to save the economy. They'll strike, and there'll be havoc for a while, but in the long run this economy might actually be saved. FB mentioned that 55 - 35 does not compute. And the equation of this country's finances won't compute as long as we throw so much money at the Public Sector Unions, in my opinion.

Absolutely correct, and progress that onto the myriad of vested interest groups in this fair land and you have the reason we are in the hole we are in.

rightwingdub

The thought of Labour been in government with their union mates:mad::mad:

Idbatterim

I would be alot more terrified with Labour in government than FF! the only good thing I could see from Labour getting into government is, that they would probably totally finnish the country off, and by doing so, would inevitably result in us calling in the ECB or IMF, and that would destroy the ones in society they most want to protect! Oh the irony of it, its the stuff of dreams!

nuac

Labour were afraid to comment on the Croke Park Agreement - they will cave in at the first strike threat.

rightwingdub

nuac wrote: »

Labour were afraid to comment on the Croke Park Agreement - they will cave in at the first strike threat.

They are spineless wimps espcially Gilmore who is full of horse manure.

Gilmore was a hurler on the ditch when it came to the Croke Park Agreement.

Shea O'Meara

Taking into account all the opinions above it seems the fear is Labour and the unions are pretty much in bed together and the country will be doomed if they get in.
The fears listed range from the unions crippling the country for their own selfish gain and Labour being fine and dandy with that as long as the unions are happy. That's how it reads to me, if I'm wrong I apologise in advance.
I'd like to make a few points on these possible fears to come should the spectre of 'the left' descend upon our fair nation;

It's a fact that FFail and to a lesser extent the P.D.'s coupled more recently with the in-action of the Greens have already run the country into the ground. It is also a fact that the FFail led government favour bailing out failed businesses such as the banks in a supposed effort to help the guy on the street, pretty far from capitalism by the way;) It is also a fact that so far we keep shovelling money into this effort as small businesses suffer due to the banks not being forth coming with lines of credit, as we were promised.

So getting back to these possible fears. It seems that our choices are the right, in bed with the banks, private vested interests, who have no claim to giving two f***s about the man on the street.
Or Labour who have a supposed vested interest in keeping the unions sweet, (who claim to represent the common worker) regardless of how it affects the man on the street, taking into account your current union gripes are FFail related.

The main differences I can see are that joining a union is open to everyone, getting on the board of directors of a major bank or having a FFail TD in your pocket is not.
FFail & Co. have proved incompetence and doomed us for the long term, Labour have not had a chance to be judged one way or the other.

So why the big scare? I disagree with the tired old knee-jerk reaction of the unions will ruin us if Labour get in and to suggest sticking with FFail just to be safe is ludicrous.

rightwingdub

Shea, there are genuine fears about Labour been in government, FF are the party that have nearly ruined this country, a lot of people fear that Labour could push the country over the edge thanks to their close links with the public sector unions. Labour are nicknamed "The Public Sector party" and rightly so. Also I don't believe Labour will win 35% of the vote in the next election, gilmore is full of crap worse than Cowen or Kenny.

Idbatterim

What exact areas is Gilmore going to target to reduce spending?

rightwingdub

Idbatterim wrote: »

What exact areas is Gilmore going to target to reduce spending?

He's not e'll wave a magic wand while he's fast asleep and think everything will be fine. Then the next morning he'll wake up and realise its all a dream and he's back in reality where he's going to have to p**s off a lot of people through necessary spending cuts:D

Callan57

Isn't it amazing the number of people who get so worked up at the possibility of a Labour Government, because they have links to the Unions, yet they have no such concerns at the 'hand in glove' arrangement of builders, bankers & big business with FF/PD govts ... now I wonder why that is? :eek:

rightwingdub

Callan57 wrote: »

Isn't it amazing the number of people who get so worked up at the possibility of a Labour Government, because they have links to the Unions, yet they have no such concerns at the 'hand in glove' arrangement of builders, bankers & big business with FF/PD govts ... now I wonder why that is? :eek:

I'm appalled at the crap that the bamkers and the developers got up to but at least FF are trying to rectify the budget deficit, with Labour they'll just opt for tax increases and pander to the public sector unions.

Callan57

rightwingdub wrote: »

I'm appalled at the crap that the bamkers and the developers got up to but at least FF are trying to rectify the budget deficit, with Labour they'll just opt for tax increases and pander to the public sector unions.

Oh yea ... and I'm sure they will do as good a job rectifying it as they & their buddies did creating it

Shea O'Meara

Idbatterim wrote: »

What exact areas is Gilmore going to target to reduce spending?

It's nice to get beyond scare mongering and get down to facts.

I'm no labour policy aficionado but everything seems to be here;

http://www.labour.ie/policy/

rightwingdub

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

It's nice to get beyond scare mongering and get down to facts.

I'm no labour policy aficionado but everything seems to be here;

http://www.labour.ie/policy/

I read their education document and given the state of the public finances such increases in expenditure are simply pie in the sky.

Secularise the entire education system, what braindead nonsense and even better Labour seem to believe that it will be at no cost to the state, what do they propose to seize the land of the religious orders.

A state bank, how is tghat going to be financed to provide loans to businesses, more pie in the sky stuff from Labour. Banks can't lend to SMES at the moment because Elderfield has ordered them to build up their working capital ie that is resources to protect against any future crisis in the banking sector.

The health service should be privatised, statist healthcare doesn't work in Ireland and given the fact that Ireland has an ageing population there going to have to ditch their socialized healthcare ideas.

evercloserunion

Just goes to show, people will bitch and whine about FF until it looks like an alternative could be in with a chance of putting them out, then they flock back to Bertie and co, sure they weren't that bad really. :rolleyes:

You'll all go out and vote FF for fear of an alternative getting in, then you'll be outraged when FF get back in and f*ck you over again!

Callan57

evercloserunion wrote: »

Just goes to show, people will bitch and whine about FF until it looks like an alternative could be in with a chance of putting them out, then they flock back to Bertie and co, sure they weren't that bad really. :rolleyes:

You'll all go out and vote FF for fear of an alternative getting in, then you'll be outraged when FF get back in and f*ck you over again!

Everyone up and down the country is demanding change & as soon as anyone suggests anything that might change any part of the status quo they scurry back to the 'safety' of the familiar. We want change all right but change back to how things were 5 years ago. :mad:

Eliot Rosewater

Callan57 wrote: »

Isn't it amazing the number of people who get so worked up at the possibility of a Labour Government, because they have links to the Unions

It's not amazing at all. The biggest challenge this country faces is the massive government deficit, and the public sector unions are the biggest impediment to that deficit's reduction.

(And before you mention bankers, it's worth noting that the combined social welfare/public service bill is €40 billion per year, which, over a ten year period, is enormous compared to the cost of the bank bailouts.)

Callan57 wrote: »

yet they have no such concerns at the 'hand in glove' arrangement of builders, bankers & big business with FF/PD govts ... now I wonder why that is?

Who has "no such concerns"? People are nearly universally annoyed at the bank-builder-government nexus and, as such, your statement is nothing more than straw-manning.

murphaph

evercloserunion wrote: »

Just goes to show, people will bitch and whine about FF until it looks like an alternative could be in with a chance of putting them out, then they flock back to Bertie and co, sure they weren't that bad really. :rolleyes:

You'll all go out and vote FF for fear of an alternative getting in, then you'll be outraged when FF get back in and f*ck you over again!

I won't. FG are not my dream ticket by any means, but I will be voting FG 123 at the next election to both get FF out and keep Labour out.

We need a Conservative Party in Ireland. We are not a bunch of downtrodden peasants anymore. FG are the closest thing to that, though far from ideal.

FG have also promised to introduce a list system (much smaller than I would like, but a start). As far as I know no other mainstream party has that in their manifesto and although Irish people are happy to moan about "the system" being at fault, when a party offers to change that system most people don't even realise what a fundamental change to Irish politics it would mean to introduce a list.

PRSTV has NOT served us well as a people.

Eliot Rosewater

murphaph wrote: »

I won't.

Many of the Labour party threads on Boards have had similar features. One overwhelming one has been the tendency of Labour supporters to construe any criticism of their party to be support of FF. They've also argued that people should vote for Labour on the basis that they aren't FF. Both points are fallacious, but it's convenient for Labour supporters, because they can deflect all blame away from themselves.

murphaph wrote: »

PRSTV has NOT served us well as a people.

I think that the current voting/government system isn't great. I live in a 3 seater constituency that, next election, will be filled by either 1 FF, 2 FG or 2 FF, 1 FG. Judging by the last election results, any other permutation is highly unlikely. So basically, I get to go out once every five years and decide whether that last seat will go to FF or FG, two parties who aren't fundamentally dissimilar. That's all the accountability I get for the national government.

newmug

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would be alot more terrified with Labour in government than FF! the only good thing I could see from Labour getting into government is, that they would probably totally finnish the country off, and by doing so, would inevitably result in us calling in the ECB or IMF, and that would destroy the ones in society they most want to protect! Oh the irony of it, its the stuff of dreams!

Hmmmmm. Well they're here now. I wonder what Gilmore has to say.

Shea O'Meara

Idbatterim wrote: »

I would be alot more terrified with Labour in government than FF! the only good thing I could see from Labour getting into government is, that they would probably totally finnish the country off, and by doing so, would inevitably result in us calling in the ECB or IMF, and that would destroy the ones in society they most want to protect! Oh the irony of it, its the stuff of dreams!

In recent years a lot of FFail diehards whistled this tune.....
It was, 'Labour would ruin the economy'. Then as it began to be be ruined, it was 'it would be worse under Labour'.
After recent days may people put aside the Labour boogeyman myth as regards ruining the economy? How about in the least going back to the 'no better' line? It would be something:rolleyes:

jimmycrackcorm

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

In recent years a lot of FFail diehards whistled this tune.....
It was, 'Labour would ruin the economy'. Then as it began to be be ruined, it was 'it would be worse under Labour'.
After recent days may people put aside the Labour boogeyman myth as regards ruining the economy? How about in the least going back to the 'no better' line? It would be something:rolleyes:

Anyone with a handful of brain cells can see that we will have to make major cuts to the PS and and SW. Labour are refusing to acknowledge this reality which is why they could very likely make things worse. Gilmore thinks reform will fix things - what reform can possibly do that in the education budget with 70% spent on wages?

meglome

meditraitor wrote: »

Some days I feel like this is probably the right answer but on days like today (payday, friday) when Im not so mad at these useless fecks I kind of think we need to deal with the unions less in a Tatcherite manner and more in a partnership type way, make them aware of the need for change and cost reduction. As you pointed out, labour are in a good position to have a quick word in the ear of these people.

I originally thought partnership was the way to go. But little did I realise that partnership meant the unions getting exactly what they wanted and any talk of productivity was just that, talk.

I'm not party political but labour worry me a lot. The PS, PS wages, PS pensions and SW will need to be cut. Simple maths, I have nothing against the PS or SW recipients. I cannot see labour doing this, they won't even mention it as a possibility. As it stands anyone who even considers voting for them is playing fast and loose with all our futures. I'll be very glad to be rid of FF but I need to know that whomever comes after them is fully willing to do whatever it takes.