Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Bus Eireann strike - services have resumed (Read first post)

Options
1…1516182021…24

Comments

  • Options
    #512
    Tarabuses
    Registered Users Posts: 725 ✭✭✭Tarabuses


    Vahevala wrote: »
    Not everyone is in a position to work from home and not everyone can drive so a sympathy strike could effect a hell of a lot of people so I am desperately hoping this does not happen.

    Is a "sympathy" strike legal?


  • Options
    #513
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    ixoy wrote: »
    The minister's sort of comment is pointless and inflammatory. It's like a red rag to an already enraged bull. Not sure what he was thinking.

    You do realise the other side were trying to do exactly that when they started talking about sympathy strikes. That basically translated as do a deal or we will make things worse

    There is another word for that too.....


  • Options
    #514
    Problem123456
    Registered Users Posts: 290 ✭✭Problem123456


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    It's called not backing down and giving in to the strikers. Exactly what this country need. If the militant unions realise they cannot hold the country to ransom ix the knowledge they will always win as the other side will give in first hopefully they will do it less often

    It's about time someone showed some back bone and I congratulate the government on doing so. Had this happened in previous governments then the country would be in a far less bad state and the unions power would be reduced

    Well done Leo
    Yeah but they should be calling a truce until june...
    When college exams are over


  • Options
    #515
    gbob
    Registered Users Posts: 522 ✭✭✭gbob


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    You do realise the other side were trying to do exactly that when they started talking about sympathy strikes. That basically translated as do a deal or we will make things worse

    There is another word for that too.....

    .... you mean blackmail, as in "we're going to illegally force a pay cut on you or you'll be out of a job"


  • Options
    #516
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    devnull wrote: »
    Technically the service is not part of the BE service, it's just a service provided by another operator that BE are helping market and have some revenue share agreement with in most likeliness. It is a GoBus service.

    The whole service is operated with non Bus Eireann staff, vehicles, vehicle storage depots on a non Bus Eireann PSV license on a non Bus Eireann route license.

    The Translink services however are a little difference since they operate jointly on a route, so I'd have thought they would be a bigger target than this.

    BE were claiming it as a service when they said 5% of their services were operating.

    Why translink was not targeted could be a couple of reasons,

    A it was a local decision in Cork, not a national policy

    B there may be an understanding between the unions in BE and Translink regarding industrial action on either side.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #517
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    gbob wrote: »
    .... you mean blackmail, as in "we're going to illegally force a pay cut on you or you'll be out of a job"

    If the company goes bust staff will be out of a job it is because the company is losing money and cannot sustain it any more.

    The company is losing money anyway so it is hardly blackmail.it's only blackmail if you threaten to do something if you do not get your own way. That thing is already happening anyway.

    Or do you think the company will try and commit suicide to spite the drivers and sacrifice their own jobs to spite them as they hate them so much.

    Get real.


  • Options
    #518
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    They were supposed to give 7 days notice the first time

    Actually the company had more than 7 days notice. Notice was served in January that action was suspended when BE agreed to return to the labour court. When BE unilaterally withdrew from those talks the suspension of the action in January was lifted. Just like the sunday monday strike was suspended to allow talks for 48 hours. No need to serve notice or ballot again to resume.


  • Options
    #519
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    Funny how a certain two posters that are towing the union line only ever online at the same time. A moderator should look into tha.


  • Options
    #520
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    cdebru wrote: »
    Actually the company had more than 7 days notice. Notice was served in January that action was suspended when BE agreed to return to the labour court. When BE unilaterally withdrew from those talks the suspension of the action in January was lifted. Just like the sunday monday strike was suspended to allow talks for 48 hours. No need to serve notice or ballot again to resume.

    I don't think any member of the public buys that.
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Funny how a certain two posters that are towing the union line only ever online at the same time. A moderator should look into tha.

    Report them so, no need to post anything here.


  • Options
    #521
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    They didn't withdraw from the court. What happened in that process is the unions rejected the recommendation despite the fact management watered down the original proposals. They threw this toys out thepram and could not get their own way

    Management agreed to make concessions as recommended by the court but the unions played hard call and have ever since saying their way or not at all up to this weekend.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #522
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    I don't think any member of the public buys that.

    Union propaganda glad someone else can see through it

    Shane that conflict of interest thread is not around.


  • Options
    #523
    NinjaTruncs
    Registered Users Posts: 2,468 ✭✭✭NinjaTruncs


    I for one hope BE don't bend to the unions demands, it will set a bad precedent for future negotiations for other semi-states/departments with unions.

    I think Ireland has gone far to long without a strike, which to me indicates we have been bending to the unions demands for far too long.

    Like it or not, the country is broke and doesn't have the money to keep paying high wages in lose making services. Like others have said liquidate BE, then see how quickly the unions and workers will agree to these pay cut proposals, I very much doubt the BE workers will like the prospect of being on the dole and not having a nice fat redundancy package to collect.

    4.3kWp South facing PV System. South Dublin



  • Options
    #524
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    They didn't withdraw from the court. What happened in that process is the unions rejected the recommendation despite the fact management watered down the original proposals. They threw this toys out thepram and could not get their own way

    Management agreed to make concessions as recommended by the court but the unions played hard call and have ever since saying their way or not at all up to this weekend.


    They did they were in negotiations, and the company withdrew and said they would act unilaterally to cut wages.
    This is actually illegal as one side can not alter a contract it has to be by agreement.


  • Options
    #525
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,593 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    The other side (unions) refused to make any concessions though from what it seems so I don't blame management from withdrawing as the other side simply were not willing to make any compromises.

    After all those talks management made some concessions as advised by the labour court and conceded some ground. The unions were not willing to make any concessions to their demands at all.

    By the way negotiations normally happen with both parties moving from their starting position to meet somewhere between the two to a deal that is mutually acceptable, it seems whilst management watered down their demands, unions were not willing to give any ground.

    That's not negotiating, that is simply saying our way or not at all.


  • Options
    #526
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Funny how a certain two posters that are towing the union line only ever online at the same time. A moderator should look into tha.


    If that comment is directed at me, you should report your suspicions to the moderator.

    And for the record my opinion is that the union were wrong to call a strike their first port of call should have been to the courts to seek an injunction preventing the company from breaching their employees contracts.

    For what it is worth I wouldn't trust the NBRU or siptu, I think the deal is already done and they are just softening up their members to accept the deal. A couple of days with no wages and you will be far more likely to accept whatever the final deal is.

    While various posters here like to harp on about militant unions the truth is that top brass in most unions are all too cosy with management and government, it's mostly just posturing for your audience we see. (think SF and
    decommissioning)


  • Options
    #527
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,593 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    Video of the interview here:
    http://www.rte.ie/news/2013/0515/392318-talks-to-resolve-bus-eireann-dispute-set-to-resume/


  • Options
    #528
    starviewadams
    Registered Users Posts: 6,116 ✭✭✭starviewadams


    Would LUAS workers also strike if DB and IR vote in favour of a sympathy strike?


  • Options
    #529
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    Not a hope they live in the real world not the public sector bubble


  • Options
    #530
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    devnull wrote: »
    The other side (unions) refused to make any concessions though from what it seems so I don't blame management from withdrawing as the other side simply were not willing to make any compromises.

    After all those talks management made some concessions as advised by the labour court and conceded some ground. The unions were not willing to make any concessions to their demands at all.

    By the way negotiations normally happen with both parties moving from their starting position to meet somewhere between the two to a deal that is mutually acceptable, it seems whilst management watered down their demands, unions were not willing to give any ground.

    That's not negotiating, that is simply saying our way or not at all.


    Odd how do you know what concessions the unions were willing to make ?

    I think the leadership of the unions were and are very willing to compromise, but they can be as willing as they like if they can't get 50%+1 of their members to agree it ain't going anywhere.

    What we are seeing is the unions and management working together to get the desired result. I believe an across the board x% wage cut for all staff and management will be the outcome, and after a few days without pay more people are likely to agree to it than before.


  • Options
    #531
    devnull
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 11,593 Mod ✭✭✭✭devnull


    They said at the weekend they would not accept any cuts to any conditions that effected pay - true on Monday they changed their wording a little bit, but that was what they were saying. I just quote what I read the union have said.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #532
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    What is your connection for someone who claims not to be involved you are backing the unions and lot

    You say you think but have nothingness back that up. As I said propaganda.


  • Options
    #533
    Vahevala
    Registered Users Posts: 1,681 ✭✭✭Vahevala


    starviewadams wrote: »
    Would LUAS workers also strike if DB and IR vote in favour of a sympathy strike?

    Why would they? They have nothing to do with CIE.


  • Options
    #534
    foggy_lad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,373 ✭✭✭✭foggy_lad


    cdebru wrote: »
    Odd how do you know what concessions the unions were willing to make ?

    I think the leadership of the unions were and are very willing to compromise, but they can be as willing as they like if they can't get 50%+1 of their members to agree it ain't going anywhere.

    What we are seeing is the unions and management working together to get the desired result. I believe an across the board x% wage cut for all staff and management will be the outcome, and after a few days without pay more people are likely to agree to it than before.
    An across the board pay cut does not address the grossly inflated "perks" which Bus Éireann drivers feel entitled to even though they are not and never have been part of their core salary. We all know of people who live in say Edenderry and get the meal allowance because they are working the 120 and have to take their lunch out in the "shed" in Edenderry despite only being a mile or two from home, they also get mileage allowances for starting work away from the base which would presumably be the bus depot at Broadstone even though they could fall out of bed into the bus they drove home the day before to Edenderry. most routes are the same.


  • Options
    #535
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Not a hope they live in the real world not the public sector bubble


    http://www.herald.ie/news/luas-drivers-want-23-extra-days-off-a-year-28848441.html

    Yup must be a different bubble they inhabit.


  • Options
    #536
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users Posts: 9,504 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    cdebru wrote: »
    I believe an across the board x% wage cut for all staff and management will be the outcome, and after a few days without pay more people are likely to agree to it than before.

    That hurts people that earn only basic more than people who are raking in premium payments though. Surely thats the opposite of what should happen.


  • Options
    #537
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    foggy_lad wrote: »
    An across the board pay cut does not address the grossly inflated "perks" which Bus Éireann drivers feel entitled to even though they are not and never have been part of their core salary. We all know of people who live in say Edenderry and get the meal allowance because they are working the 120 and have to take their lunch out in the "shed" in Edenderry despite only being a mile or two from home, they also get mileage allowances for starting work away from the base which would presumably be the bus depot at Broadstone even though they could fall out of bed into the bus they drove home the day before to Edenderry. most routes are the same.

    What over inflated perks ?

    How much is the Lunch allowance, what are the conditions for getting such an allowance ?
    What is the mileage rate ? Do all drivers working in Edenderry live within a mile or 2 of Edenderry?


    I expect specific examples of the over inflated perks, including rates and conditions for payment or I'll presume you are just talking the usual nonsense. thanking you and looking forward to your reply.


  • Options
    #538
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,998 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    It's called not backing down and giving in to the strikers.
    a deal will be reached, get over it.
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Exactly what this country need.
    no it isn't, we hardly ever have strikes in this country so 1 every few years is nothing, put up with it and get over it
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    If the militant unions realise they cannot hold the country to ransom
    what are you on about? our unions aren't "militant" nor do they "hold the country to ransom" stop dramatising things, if you really need to be somewhere you can get there, it might take longer in a strike situation but you will get there eventually
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    ix the knowledge they will always win as the other side will give in first hopefully they will do it less often
    less often? a strike every couple of years is hardly very often is it? the reason they "win" as you put it is through negotiations and most likely meeting half way.
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    It's about time someone showed some back bone
    really? is it? so making thick comments is backbone?
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    I congratulate the government on doing so.
    what backbone have they showed? saying they would rather a strike situation rather then a deal that won't make savings? a thick stupid comment from somebody who should know better.
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Had this happened in previous governments then the country would be in a far less bad state
    are you serious? really? you can't be surely? the ff government left us in this mess for god sake
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    the unions power would be reduced
    no it wouldn't, if they were going to do it they would have done it years ago
    SandyfordGuy wrote: »
    Well done Leo
    well done for what? saying he'd rather a strike situation? yeah, well done indeed

    ticking a box on a form does not make you of a religion.



  • Options
    #539
    SandyfordGuy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 450 ✭✭SandyfordGuy


    What do you expect these people do not know what the word premiums mean andpseem to think that overtime should be scheduled

    Someone told me once in another country how they gamed a similar system. Turned down a 40hour a week contract to take a lower one since forty hours restricted then from working much overtime

    They now work 30hours and around ten overtime with the extra hours at double time. This allows them to game a sizeable increase in pa when in really it should all be at a standard hourly rate.


  • Options
    #540
    ixoy
    Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 17,990 Mod ✭✭✭✭ixoy


    NinjaTruncs wrote: »
    Like others have said liquidate BE, then see how quickly the unions and workers will agree to these pay cut proposals
    Just a small thing here - not all BE workers are in the unions involved and, of those that are, not all voted for the current actions. I know for a fact not all BE workers support the current industrial action.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #541
    cdebru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,761 ✭✭✭cdebru


    runawaybishop wrote: »
    That hurts people that earn only basic more than people who are raking in premium payments though. Surely thats the opposite of what should happen.


    What? logic please ?

    How does an across the board cut hurt people earning a basic wage not working shifts more than those working shifts?

    since premium payments like sunday rate, overtime rate, shift allowance, bank holiday rate etc are based on the core rate a cut to across the board would reduce all those too.

    2011 wage costs were 130 million so a 4 or 5% cut would deliver 5 or 6 million saving.


Advertisement