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
Comments
-
Those bus drivers are a disgarace as is BE as a company. The amount of bad experiences I have had with there drivers is unreal especially on the Carlow route.0
-
If you work over the normal contract hours that is overtime, doesn't matter how often.
But in a well fun company that should not be happening as often as it is in BE. It's clear that as a percentage of the salary bill overtime is far too big since else a small cut would not be making such a big impact.Even if you contracted people for 45 hours you are still going to have to pay them for those hours,
Indeed but the company would save money rather than the unsustainable way they are going on at the moment where they are losing money.It would also be inherently unfair if the driver contracted for 38 hours received overtime rates after 38 hours whilst the 45 hour contract guy would not get that rate till he had worked over 45 hours.
Nobody is forced to agree to contracts they don't like when they start working somewhere. It is the job of a company to offer contracts to it's employees that make best use of company resources to cover the hours they need worked in the most economical way for the company that also provides sufficient salary to attract the standard of employees needed.
Constantly paying overtime every time to a large number of staff members when money could be saved by offering new employees hours nearer the average hours actually worked is bad management of financial resources in a company, especially when that company is losing money Overtime should not be relied on for core hours to the degree it s in BE. It's a sign of bad management. and resource usage.As hard as it is for you guys to get your head around this, transport work is not regular 9 to 5, it involves overtime sometimes overtime you the employee neither sought nor wanted. If you are driving from A to B and the bus breaks down or an accident closes the road for an hour or 2 you end up working overtime, it is the nature of the job.
Your points would be backed up a lot more if you told us what involvement you have in the industry since anyone can come on here and post anything from the back of their head, doesn't make it true though.
If you are driving from A to B and the bus breaks down and an accident occurs that is indeed true overtime since it was a factor that was not pre-scheduled and that is what overtime should be used for.
What I am talking about is the overuse of overtime for foreseen regular average run of the mill days where staff are earning extra money for doing something they would do on a regular basis, rather than something that is a one off, or happens occasionally. This is not sustainable.And 90% of the population have somewhere to go and heat, eat said meal and wash their hands go to the toilet.
I presume the 7 euro is to compensate for the difference they are likely to have to pay for a meal, compared to what they would have to pay in a subsidised staff canteen.
You will find these days a lot of people don't get a subsdised canteen and nobody gets it done so to the tune of 7 euro unless they are in a company that has crazy amounts of money. But this company is loss making so there has to be some costs cut down in some areas and to be quite honest if people are moaning about losing 35 euro a week in meal allowances there is no wonder nobody can get a settlement since they're not budging one bit.You are presuming the labour court deal was rejected over that issue, it is highly unlikely that was the reason for rejection since a BE employee has informed us that the vast majority of BE staff do not receive that payment.
Nobody knows what has happened for sure, neither you or Me unless you are on the inside as such, if so if you want to declare that here it would be transparent for us all to see and we would know to take your information with that in mind, until then everything on this forum is he said or she said and different opinions unless it can factually be backed up.0 -
-
listermint wrote: »This is how it goes and I have examples of the same in private enterprise
'Hi Guys you know that staff canteen we've had for the last 15 years'
'well unfortunately its costing us X to run in annually' 'We either ditch it or start sacking people' 'the alternate is everyone is let go and we shut down'
This is generally how it goes. See what you have there is called 'a perk' in private enterprise but some how youve managed to wrangle it into 'the norm'
So company is losing money, management offers staff a solution, everyone agrees and all is happy. How is this different to what I said, offer solutions, get agreement to cuts, all move on.
This week in BE, to stretch your example, we got a sign on the door saying 'Canteen closed except to a few, who'll be having gourmet from now on. Tough! '
Edit : Actually change that last bit to 'Canteen closed except for the VIP section, however the VIP break time will now be reduced by 5 minutes in respect of our financial circumstances' - seems a more accurate comparison0 -
Well at 7 euro for a lunch allowance then I'd say they'd be eating pretty decent food since I doubt most people who buy their lunch spend that much in the private sector. You can get a sandwich and a drink for maximum a fiver in almost all places. If they want to spend any more they should pay themselves. If there is an argument for keeping the allowance, which I'm not sure there really is, seven euro is far too high. It should be capped at a fiver max.0
-
Advertisement
-
But in a well fun company that should not be happening as often as it is in BE. It's clear that as a percentage of the salary bill overtime is far too big since else a small cut would not be making such a big impact.
It is not just a cut to overtime though is it ? sunday rate, bank holiday rate, shift allowance.
48 hour maximum working week so they can't be doing more than 10 hours overtime a week. And the average wage of 45k suggests most aren't doing an awful lot of overtime.Indeed but the company would save money rather than the unsustainable way they are going on at the moment where they are losing money.
No they wouldn't they would still have to pay for those hours but they would also be contracted to pay them when they did not need them, so I doubt there would be any saving.Nobody is forced to agree to contracts they don't like when they start working somewhere. It is the job of a company to offer contracts to it's employees that make best use of company resources to cover the hours they need worked in the most economical way for the company that also provides sufficient salary to attract the standard of employees needed.
Constantly paying overtime every time to a large number of staff members when money could be saved by offering new employees hours nearer the average hours actually worked is bad management of financial resources in a company, especially when that company is losing money Overtime should not be relied on for core hours to the degree it s in BE. It's a sign of bad management. and resource usage.
But these people already have contracts they are not just joining the job, and it is a roster, people don't work over their contract hours every week.
What you want is to contract them to work a longer than normal working week, but not pay them for doing so, or to pay them less than people contracted to work a normal 38 hour week.
sorry that is nonsense.
If you are driving from A to B and the bus breaks down and an accident occurs that is indeed true overtime since it was a factor that was not pre-scheduled and that is what overtime should be used for.
What I am talking about is the overuse of overtime for foreseen regular average run of the mill days where staff are earning extra money for doing something they would do on a regular basis, rather than something that is a one off, or happens occasionally. This is not sustainable.
No all hours over your contracted hours are overtime there is not special overtime and normal overtime.
I will try and explain it as best I can
Lets say Driver A does a run that takes 2 hours 15 minutes so out and back he has done 4:30 so he has his break and we send him out again when he is outside now he had done 6:45, so he only has 1 hour 15 minutes left to his 8 hour day, 2 options bring him back in out of service to finish before his 8 hours are up. or get him to work back in and it is a 9 hour day. Which is less efficient ? paying him an hours overtime or wasting fuel and drivers paid time driving the bus back empty? Now on some rosters he may work 32 hours next week with the 45 he did this week it balances out as they take an average over a number of weeks. but that is not always possible so you end up with rostered overtime.You will find these days a lot of people don't get a subsdised canteen and nobody gets it done so to the tune of 7 euro unless they are in a company that has crazy amounts of money. But this company is loss making so there has to be some costs cut down in some areas and to be quite honest if people are moaning about losing 35 euro a week in meal allowances there is no wonder nobody can get a settlement since they're not budging one bit.
Who said they are moaning about it ? I haven't heard anyone saying it is all out till we get to keep our meal allowance. Have you ? the drivers here were explaining to you why it is paid. And TBH it is perfectly reasonable while many companies don't have canteens many do and if by the nature of a drivers work they sometimes are unable to use their staff canteen and have to purchase a meal elsewhere it is perfectly reasonable they would be compensated for the cost difference.Nobody knows what has happened for sure, neither you or Me unless you are on the inside as such, if so if you want to declare that here it would be transparent for us all to see and we would know to take your information with that in mind, until then everything on this forum is he said or she said and different opinions unless it can factually be backed up.
No it is simple logic a BE driver has told you the vast majority of BE drivers don't get it, it is expressway drivers that sometimes get it depending on where they have to have their meal break.
So common sense will tell you the meal allowance is not what has them out at the gate. More likely the cut in shift allowance and Sunday and Bank Holiday rates which affect them all.
The meal allowance is just a little hobby horse for some people to jump on that is all.0 -
Well at 7 euro for a lunch allowance then I'd say they'd be eating pretty decent food since I doubt most people who buy their lunch spend that much in the private sector. You can get a sandwich and a drink for maximum a fiver in almost all places. If they want to spend any more they should pay themselves. If there is an argument for keeping the allowance, which I'm not sure there really is, seven euro is far too high. It should be capped at a fiver max.
See what you fail to grasp is that this is not an office 9 to 5 and you will be home for your dinner job. These guys can be working 13 hour spreads and more. Do you really want your driver who left home at 5 am this morning and is driving you now at 6 or 7 in the evening to have just had a sandwich all day ?0 -
See what you fail to grasp is that this is not an office 9 to 5 and you will be home for your dinner job. These guys can be working 13 hour spreads and more. Do you really want your driver who left home at 5 am this morning and is driving you now at 6 or 7 in the evening to have just had a sandwich all day ?
No point even trying to explain to these people they think drivers are robots and should have no rights and get paid buttons oh and it's an easy job anyone could do it so they say:rolleyes:
Sure let them all go they may actually be better off on the dole and get free medical card, Rent allowance/free housing, expenses, jsa or some other payment etc etc.0 -
miller50841 wrote: »No point even trying to explain to these people they think drivers are robots and should have no rights and get paid buttons oh and it's an easy job anyone could do it so they say:rolleyes:
Sure let them all go they may actually be better off on the dole and get free medical card, Rent allowance/free housing, expenses, jsa or some other payment etc etc.
How do drivers working for private companies survive without all the extras that Bus Éireann employees believe they are entitled to?
Maybe the answer is to let them go and rehire drivers at the current going rate.0 -
48 hour maximum working week so they can't be doing more than 10 hours overtime a week. And the average wage of 45k suggests most aren't doing an awful lot of overtime.
Well f someone by your own admission is losing 10k then he must be doing a lot of overtime or getting a lot of premium payments. I'd say overtime is a big chunk of that money and if it was reformed it could save quite a few million but obviously neither of us have the figures unless an established driver on here wishes to post their payslip.No they wouldn't they would still have to pay for those hours but they would also be contracted to pay them when they did not need them, so I doubt there would be any saving.
Yes but the balance is clearly not right at the moment is it. They may have to pay them for these hours, but they would be at standard rate rather than paying them at much higher rates if it happens to be on a Sunday or worse still overtime on the Sunday they ere needed. Therefore saving the company money and still covering the required hours.
By looking at rosters and historical overtime patterns, it's possible to predict a number to do this using models, for example looking at a route and seeing the average working hours per week per staff member and seeing how many on average will work over the 40 hours and tying this in with the contracts. It saves money which the company needs to do.
You then offer existing staff the chance to have extra hours since of course this will mean extra pay because it will be assured and by your own admission people wouldn't work these hours every week when they are not contracted so allowing them to apply for a role with more contracted hours gives them assurance of income. However it reduces their chance to get overtime but as you say this doesn't happen that much then it should be win win for them unless they would prefer to have less chance of extra hours since they are hanging back and hoping for overtime rates where they can cash in more.
I don't expect staff or front line workers to like the fact that the company is looking after it's financial health but a company should be planning itself to a degree where it makes the most of it's workforce in a cost effective way which is not happening at the moment.What you want is to contract them to work a longer than normal working week, but not pay them for doing so, or to pay them less than people contracted to work a normal 38 hour week.
They have an hourly rate. They work more hours they are paid more hours. That is generally how wages work in almost all other sectors. You earlier defined that a longer than normal working week is defined in the contract as 38 hours hence why anything over it should be overtime, now when I extend that contract to 45 hours you change your definition to being 38 hours and no longer linked to what is in their contract.
If they need to work genuine overtime that is unforeseen they should get overtime rates to reflect that, genuine overtime should be genuine rates, but you once again are looking at this from a drivers earnings point of view and not one of the company, the company is losing money and this is what I am looking at, making the company more efficient which clearly needs to be done looking at the picture as a whole and saving the company going forward to make better usage of it's resources.Lets say Driver A does a run that takes 2 hours 15 minutes so out and back he has done 4:30 so he has his break and we send him out again when he is outside now he had done 6:45, so he only has 1 hour 15 minutes left to his 8 hour day, 2 options bring him back in out of service to finish before his 8 hours are up. or get him to work back in and it is a 9 hour day. Which is less efficient ? paying him an hours overtime or wasting fuel and drivers paid time driving the bus back empty? Now on some rosters he may work 32 hours next week with the 45 he did this week it balances out as they take an average over a number of weeks. but that is not always possible so you end up with rostered overtime.
All of us can create examples to suit our agenda, they are very easy to do, I could work out one myself where the company saves lots of money as there will always be scenarios where some systems with regards to pay work better than other, there is no perfect solution but what I am trying to say is the current situation is completely broken which is why we have a strike and a dispute in the first place and there needs to be a system going forward this is both sustainable, gives the drivers a fair rage which does not undervalue them by putting them at rates which are vastly lower with comparable roles, but also ensuring the survival of the company and allowing it to perform the best of it's ability.And TBH it is perfectly reasonable while many companies don't have canteens many do and if by the nature of a drivers work they sometimes are unable to use their staff canteen and have to purchase a meal elsewhere it is perfectly reasonable they would be compensated for the cost difference.
I don't know of any private sector place where that happens. I know of many places that don't have onsite food at all also and just have vending machines and go across the road to the local shop and buy their own lunch, they don't go and moan then that their employer should pay for it and neither should the employer do so. You can offer employees all terms and conditions that they like, but if the company finances can't sustain them, then these things need to be cut back, like a number of perks have been cut back in my role to stop the drain on the company finances.No it is simple logic a BE driver has told you the vast majority of BE drivers don't get it, it is expressway drivers that sometimes get it depending on where they have to have their meal break. The meal allowance is just a little hobby horse for some people to jump on that is all.
That is your opinion at the end of the day and what I have is mine and we are both entitled to have our say. However I have no connection to any union or transport company and such my views are completely objective when it comes to this situation and am just giving my views as part of the public. What are you and what is your connection with the CIE group and it's unions?0 -
Advertisement
-
See what you fail to grasp is that this is not an office 9 to 5 and you will be home for your dinner job. These guys can be working 13 hour spreads and more. Do you really want your driver who left home at 5 am this morning and is driving you now at 6 or 7 in the evening to have just had a sandwich all day ?
They can buy more out of their own money if they want to can't they? Or are they still mummies boys that need to be told when they need to be fed? Come on. They can also bring food in from home? If they are breaking in the garage they can get some food? I'm sure they'll see some garage at some point during those 13 hours.
Anyway, I can't be bothered to argue the same points over and over again since I have better things to do, but if anyone wants to add something positive to the discussion maybe I'll join in again. Lets just say my sympathy has well and truly gone. Lets just say my hearts really bleed for you guys surely have to be in some of the worst situation in the country with absolutely no perks and are treated like slaves and really are right at the top of list of people who had lost out from the recession. I'm sure that absolutely no people would want to swap with you since you have it so bad.0 -
They can buy more out of their own money if they want to can't they? Or are they still mummies boys that need to be told when they need to be fed? Come on. They can also bring food in from home? If they are breaking in the garage they can get some food? I'm sure they'll see some garage at some point during those 13 hours.
Maybe you are deliberately trying to not understand ? It is a compensatory payment to assist them to buy a decent meal when they are out on the road all day and they won't have a meal break in a company facility. It is to compensate between the difference in what they would pay for a meal in a company facility or that they could bring their own meal and heat it up etc and what they have to do when on the road.
It is not rocket science it only applies to a few drivers in limited circumstances, it is 7 euro cop on.0 -
-
-
Maybe you are deliberately trying to not understand ? It is a compensatory payment to assist them to buy a decent meal when they are out on the road all day and they won't have a meal break in a company facility. It is to compensate between the difference in what they would pay for a meal in a company facility or that they could bring their own meal and heat it up etc and what they have to do when on the road.
Last words - It's called a difference of opinion - boards.ie is a discussion forum and people may have different views from you - if you don't like it you don't have to post here, nobody is right or wrong at the end of the day but people will have differing views.
There are people who are working on minimum wage, barely able to keep their head above water and feed their family and have far worse terms and conditions than you in their workplace and have to pay for their lunch every day but have to stay there, yet people who are earning over double the wages they are are trying to justify having their lunch paid for our of the taxes of people who have far less and have to pay for their own.
Quite simply it's morally disgusting and wrong, and then the same people come on here and then moan about management not taking their fair share of the cuts and it should be across the board when they expect every man and woman in this country who are struggling to keep their head above water to contribute to such things that they can only dream of. It's clear that they think people above them should take some of the hit, as long as it only applies to people on higher levels, but they still expect worse off people to prop them up by taking cuts but still contributing to their lunch, but don't want to take cuts to prop up people higher up the food train.
As I said completely disgusting and you've had it far too cushy for far too long, a sense of reality and to gain a grip is needed and until you get that don't come crying when you are out of work or have to take bigger cuts later on, it'll be your own fault.0 -
Well f someone by your own admission is losing 10k then he must be doing a lot of overtime or getting a lot of premium payments. I'd say overtime is a big chunk of that money and if it was reformed it could save quite a few million but obviously neither of us have the figures unless an established driver on here wishes to post their payslip.
Yes but the balance is clearly not right at the moment is it. They may have to pay them for these hours, but they would be at standard rate rather than paying them at much higher rates if it happens to be on a Sunday or worse still overtime on the Sunday they ere needed. Therefore saving the company money and still covering the required hours.
By looking at rosters and historical overtime patterns, it's possible to predict a number to do this using models, for example looking at a route and seeing the average working hours per week per staff member and seeing how many on average will work over the 40 hours and tying this in with the contracts. It saves money which the company needs to do.
You then offer existing staff the chance to have extra hours since of course this will mean extra pay because it will be assured and by your own admission people wouldn't work these hours every week when they are not contracted so allowing them to apply for a role with more contracted hours gives them assurance of income. However it reduces their chance to get overtime but as you say this doesn't happen that much then it should be win win for them unless they would prefer to have less chance of extra hours since they are hanging back and hoping for overtime rates where they can cash in more.
I don't expect staff or front line workers to like the fact that the company is looking after it's financial health but a company should be planning itself to a degree where it makes the most of it's workforce in a cost effective way which is not happening at the moment.
They have an hourly rate. They work more hours they are paid more hours. That is generally how wages work in almost all other sectors. You earlier defined that a longer than normal working week is defined in the contract as 38 hours hence why anything over it should be overtime, now when I extend that contract to 45 hours you change your definition to being 38 hours and no longer linked to what is in their contract.
If they need to work genuine overtime that is unforeseen they should get overtime rates to reflect that, genuine overtime should be genuine rates, but you once again are looking at this from a drivers earnings point of view and not one of the company, the company is losing money and this is what I am looking at, making the company more efficient which clearly needs to be done looking at the picture as a whole and saving the company going forward to make better usage of it's resources.
All of us can create examples to suit our agenda, they are very easy to do, I could work out one myself where the company saves lots of money as there will always be scenarios where some systems with regards to pay work better than other, there is no perfect solution but what I am trying to say is the current situation is completely broken which is why we have a strike and a dispute in the first place and there needs to be a system going forward this is both sustainable, gives the drivers a fair rage which does not undervalue them by putting them at rates which are vastly lower with comparable roles, but also ensuring the survival of the company and allowing it to perform the best of it's ability.
I don't know of any private sector place where that happens. I know of many places that don't have onsite food at all also and just have vending machines and go across the road to the local shop and buy their own lunch, they don't go and moan then that their employer should pay for it and neither should the employer do so. You can offer employees all terms and conditions that they like, but if the company finances can't sustain them, then these things need to be cut back, like a number of perks have been cut back in my role to stop the drain on the company finances.
That is your opinion at the end of the day and what I have is mine and we are both entitled to have our say. However I have no connection to any union or transport company and such my views are completely objective when it comes to this situation and am just giving my views as part of the public. What are you and what is your connection with the CIE group and it's unions?
Where did I say anyone was going to lose 10K, show me the post ?
if you are just going to lie and make stuff up not much point in debating with you.
You don't know any private sector company where people get sudsidised food ? seriously ? maybe you should get out more.
I created an example to explain to you how it works, as obviously you have no idea.
The company is not losing money, the government cut the PSO and the management is trying to make up the difference by cutting staff wages. So effectively you want the workers to subsidise the PSO. This in a company where they have already stripped out 30 million in costs since the downturn by agreements between the unions and the company.
And what next year when the government again cut the PSO again, back to the well again and bleed some more out of the workers ?
I sometimes think the best thing that could happen is the end of the semi state transport sector because a private company would tell the government were to go if they demanded a 25% cut in payments for the same service.0 -
Last words - It's called a difference of opinion - boards.ie is a discussion forum and people may have different views from you - if you don't like it you don't have to post here, nobody is right or wrong at the end of the day but people will have differing views.
There are people who are working on minimum wage, barely able to keep their head above water and feed their family and have far worse terms and conditions than you in their workplace and have to pay for their lunch every day but have to stay there, yet people who are earning over double the wages they are are trying to justify having their lunch paid for our of the taxes of people who have far less and have to pay for their own.
Quite simply it's morally disgusting and wrong, and then the same people come on here and then moan about management not taking their fair share of the cuts and it should be across the board when they expect every man and woman in this country who are struggling to keep their head above water to contribute to such things that they can only dream of. It's clear that they think people above them should take some of the hit, as long as it only applies to people on higher levels, but they still expect worse off people to prop them up by taking cuts but still contributing to their lunch, but don't want to take cuts to prop up people higher up the food train.
As I said completely disgusting and you've had it far too cushy for far too long, a sense of reality and to gain a grip is needed and until you get that don't come crying when you are out of work or have to take bigger cuts later on, it'll be your own fault.
And there are people in Bangladesh working for 10 dollars a week so should we tell those on the minimum wage here they have it cushy as well?
people like you won't be happy till everyone is on the minimum wage or has the same ****ty conditions to work in as you apparently do. It is called the race to the bottom. And quite frankly it is disgusting.
Take money out of peoples pockets all you are doing is ****ing this country up more. Austerity does not work it just makes the majority of people poorer.0 -
-
You don't know any private sector company where people get sudsidised food ? seriously ? maybe you should get out more.
.
Not wishing to get involved in this BE debate but a great many companies, both private and public sector, do provide subsidised canteens for their staff and sub agents.0 -
Maybe you are deliberately trying to not understand ? It is a compensatory payment to assist them to buy a decent meal when they are out on the road all day and they won't have a meal break in a company facility. It is to compensate between the difference in what they would pay for a meal in a company facility or that they could bring their own meal and heat it up etc and what they have to do when on the road.
It is not rocket science it only applies to a few drivers in limited circumstances, it is 7 euro cop on.
I spent many years as a truck driver and never got a single penny for meal allowance, nor did I have canteen facilities to heat up food or toilet facilities.
I brought a packed lunch every day and drank water or juice, I peed where I could and relied on the hospitality of others when no.2s were required and I certainly wasn't unique.
If I were a BE driver I'd be more concerned to be getting a wage packet every week than a few euro meal allowance, I think the Government are determined this is going to be a last stand and BE may not exist this time next year.0 -
Advertisement
-
Then the workers there should organise shouldn't they ? If you don't orrganise then you get pissed on that is the lesson more people should learn it.
I am not in a union and am paid a fair wage from a company that an afford my wages and other perk.
So you think everyone should organise a union to ensure perks, job security etc even if the company is gone/going bust and propped up by pso?0 -
Did I hear that the BE strike may extend to all of CIE ?0
-
Then the workers there should organise shouldn't they ? If you don't organise then you get pissed on that is the lesson more people should learn it.
Of course andhasten your demise as you squabble about things that are minor and then wonder why things in the company keep getting worse0 -
And there are people in Bangladesh working for 10 dollars a week so should we tell those on the minimum wage here they have it cushy as well?
people like you won't be happy till everyone is on the minimum wage or has the same ****ty conditions to work in as you apparently do. It is called the race to the bottom. And quite frankly it is disgusting.
Take money out of peoples pockets all you are doing is ****ing this country up more. Austerity does not work it just makes the majority of people poorer.
Do you have a connection to the socialist party or the United left alliance.
Nobody was asking you to go below minimum wage and we are talking about Ireland
As for as I am aware taxpayers do not pay for Bangladesh but maybe I am wrong.
You are not near the bottom
Spending money you do not have is not working.
Maybe you should try spending more than you have so you can't pay the bills
The repossession men will soon be around.0 -
-
One thing comes across loud and clear. Despite the recession greed is very much alive and well despite the fact the same people call othe people greedy they leach off the tax payers but then moan at others who do the same
Irony.0 -
SandyfordGuy wrote: »One thing comes across loud and clear. Despite the recession greed is very much alive and well despite the fact the same people call othe people greedy they leach off the tax payers but then moan at others who do the same
Irony.
public sector workers are employed to carry out work, which they do. it's hardly leeching as you call it. what a warped world view you have.0 -
Losty Dublin wrote: »Not wishing to get involved in this BE debate but a great many companies, both private and public sector, do provide subsidised canteens for their staff and sub agents.
This much is well known, They are called 'PERKS' Private industry provides these perks because the company is paying for it themselves out of their profits and its designed to attract top quality employees in. Im sure you also know, (and this has occured in my fathers job) that in private industry the first thing to be pulled is 'PERKS' and in my fathers place the subsidised canteen is gone. The room is still there only now there is some vending machines fully priced and tables etc to eat your own lunch. This happened because their profit margins took a plummet and rather than being forced to sack people PERKS were attacked first.
Now on the other side of the fence yes you have subsided canteens across all facets of public departments, yet the difference here is these PERKS are not attacked at all, they are seen as a right and entitlement just like this 7 Euro pay which as demonstrated at lengths here by some of the drivers that have exhausted themselves describing how these things are part and parcel of their package due to their long days and locations etc etc etc.
Frankly im sick of this bloody country, 'austerity doesnt work this' austerity doesnt work that' Well the truth is that EVERYBODYS taxes are going into these PERKS across every public department across the board. Our Austerity is going into paying these PERKS and the Banks and everybody else. So the truth be told perks like this need to be examined qualified and removed just as they are on the other side of the fence.
Every county council in the country seems to have subsidised canteens and frankly its ludicrous that they are increasing local business taxes, water taxes and property taxes to retain and pay for the likes of this crap. These things are perks they are not a right and they are not part and parcel of the package. If the good times come back then fair game you can have them back just like in private industry they are their to entice people into the job. But when the bad times are around snip snip snip thats how a dynamic business works.
We need everyone to face up to efficiencies that are required and that means examining everything in detail top to bottom. But this flies in the face of entitlement logic, doesnt it so you might aswell be blue in the face saying it.
Oh and the dail bar is another bloody perk that just the same needs to go. Everything needs to be looked at because its your money at play but thats for another thread.0 -
Oh and before this is described as some sort of public or semi state rant. Its not.
Its pointing the spot light as obvious savings that can be made if some people took a realistic examination of the deadly situation we are in as a country.
Good times - Good Treats
Bad Times - Cut backs
just like your household budget , you cant have those sweets this week. Its easy enough for a small child to understand.
Perhaps if BE removed many perks for all pay grades. peeled back their unnecessary sponsorship and advertised more efficiently coupled with utilising effective data mining on routing then drivers wouldnt need to take as much a paycut if any at all.
But hey im a dreamer....
And anyway this whole thing is about who is entitled what, rather than running and efficient and effective public transport system right ?0 -
Advertisement
-
Advertisement