Dublin Bus strike from Sunday 04/08 [called off - service resumes 07/08]

CreepingDeath

July 12 th... Siptu votes to strike if cost cutting measures introduced

July 26th... NRBU in favour of strike if cost cutting measures introduced

July 29th (Yesterday)... Dublin bus to implement cost cutting measures this Sunday

Just advance warning that there "might" be disruptions...
I've no more information or insider knowledge than those 3 public news links.

Stevek101

I'd imagine the drivers will walk out on Sunday, possibly unofficially. SIPTU hasn't received a letter from DB regarding the changes being implemented but CEO Paddy Doherty has told SIPTU rep Bill McCamley that they are being implemented. There won't be an official response until the snail mail is delivered.

I would also hazard a guess no one will pass the picket for fear of being stoned for their sins

liger

Well at least its happening on the bank holiday weekend, 2 days of not much interuption and then agree to sit down and talk in time for everyone to make it to work on Tuesday.

It will be a lot of Huffing and Puffing and not much else. Neither side has the Nuts to hold out for long.

lil5

liger wrote: »

Well at least its happening on the bank holiday weekend, 2 days of not much interuption ...

Tell that to the people who rely on the bus to go to work on the weekend ...

Stevek101

liger wrote: »

Well at least its happening on the bank holiday weekend, 2 days of not much interuption and then agree to sit down and talk in time for everyone to make it to work on Tuesday.

It will be a lot of Huffing and Puffing and not much else. Neither side has the Nuts to hold out for long.

I'm not too sure on this one. Can't see there being as much leeway as there was with the BÉ deal. A good few million more with this one. Also there is a fair few schedule changes attached to the deal.

cdebru

Stevek101 wrote: »

I'm not too sure on this one. Can't see there being as much leeway as there was with the BÉ deal. A good few million more with this one. Also there is a fair few schedule changes attached to the deal.

I think liger is right, this is just pantomime much like the BE fiasco, couple of days all night talks minor change and a 4% pay cut for management, job done.
The details of what will be agreed will only become clear weeks or months later.

hytrogen

Well if privatising 10% of DB routes will cut costs what's the problem? Bringing competition into an already mafia'd market, means more businesses opening & business opportunities which should bring more employment right?

cdebru

hytrogen wrote: »

Well if privatising 10% of DB routes will cut costs what's the problem? Bringing competition into an already mafia'd market, means more businesses opening & business opportunities which should bring more employment right?

Brilliant except for one thing, it has nothing to do with the 10%.

end of the road

hytrogen wrote: »

Well if privatising 10% of DB routes will cut costs what's the problem?

the problem is that most likely it either won't cut much costs at all and we'l still be paying the same subsidy, also more then likely it will be badly implamented

hytrogen wrote: »

Bringing competition into an already mafia'd market, means more businesses opening & business opportunities which should bring more employment right?

can't see most of that happening, about all we may get is more customers riding the busses, but i suppose you never know

rx8

There are too many unknowns in the Labour Court recommendations, for the drivers to vote yes to.

The Company cannot be trusted to stick to Labour Court time lines, of resolving the remaining issues within 3 months,they have shown this in the past with other recommendations.

When it suits to ignore them, they do, and when it suits them to implement them, they force drivers to take action that nobody wants.

Drivers are not living in cloud cuckoo land, they realise that some sacrifices have to be made in order for the company to get back on a sound financial footing and are quite prepared to accept most of the conditions, as we knew we wouldn't remain untouched, but, this agreement, according to the LC, is supposed to be for a 19 month period, but the company have stated that after 19 months, things will stay as they are.

Also, they want carte-blanche on what schedules will be changed or cut, and how many part-time staff will be hired, if any.

What ultimately will be required, is going to be a 10% pay cut by management.

I don't want to be striking next week, but unless there are guarantees of sacrifices at the top, then everyone will suffer.

n97 mini

rx8 wrote: »

What ultimately will be required, is going to be a 10% pay cut by management.

What ultimately is required is that no entity can hold the travelling public to ransom every time they feel aggrieved.

If privatisation solves this problem, bring it on.

bmaxi

rx8 wrote: »

Also, they want carte-blanche on what schedules will be changed or cut, and how many part-time staff will be hired, if any.

While I would sympathise with a lot of what you say, I can't see what is unreasonable about this. Management have to be allowed to manage, why should employees have a veto on what services are or aren't provided or whether a company should employ part time staff?
I reckon the vibes from the Government have been pretty clear on the CIE issue, there are going to be cuts and they don't care how they're achieved.

end of the road

n97 mini wrote: »

What ultimately is required is that no entity can hold the travelling public to ransom every time they feel aggrieved.

claptrap, their not holding the traveling public to ransom as their are many options to get round if a strike goes ahead, yeah it might mean getting up and leaving the house a little earlier or either driving or getting a taxi rather then the bus but if striking as a last resort means that all options are examined for cuts rather then the staff just being the first port of call because its easier then thats what has to happen.

n97 mini wrote: »

If privatisation solves this problem, bring it on.

not a good enough reason for privatisation, and i can't see it ending strike action anyway, no strike clauses should be illegal

bmaxi

n97 mini wrote: »

What ultimately is required is that no entity can hold the travelling public to ransom every time they feel aggrieved.

If privatisation solves this problem, bring it on.

As long as it's regulated privatisation and we don't have a great track record there. Too many powerful people in each other's pockets.

end of the road

bmaxi wrote: »

Too many powerful people in each other's pockets.

sums up ireland perfectly

n97 mini

end of the road wrote: »

claptrap, their not holding the traveling public to ransom as their are many options to get round if a strike goes ahead, yeah it might mean getting up and leaving the house a little earlier or either driving or getting a taxi rather then the bus but if striking as a last resort means that all options are examined for cuts rather then the staff just being the first port of call because its easier then thats what has to happen.

not a good enough reason for privatisation, and i can't see it ending strike action anyway, no strike clauses should be illegal

Suggesting people can just go get a taxi shows little grip on the reality of the value of money, and I'm sure the people with no cars and no options in outlying areas will not appreciate that advice one bit.

Stevek101

Summer schedules up on the site now.

cdebru

n97 mini wrote: »

Suggesting people can just go get a taxi shows little grip on the reality of the value of money, and I'm sure the people with no cars and no options in outlying areas will not appreciate that advice one bit.

Its not a strike it is an illegal attempt by one party to a contract to alter that contract unilaterally, it is a clear breach of contract law. Any one working under those conditions would be de facto accepting the new conditions which would then become their new contract of employment.

The only real question is why the unions in Dublin bus don't just get an injunction preventing Dublin bus from making unilateral changes to a contract.

"Changes to your contract of employment
Changes to your contract of employment can occur due to a change in the law, but otherwise, changes must be agreed between your employer and yourself. The requirement for both the employer's and the employee's consent to changes in the terms of the contract is part of contract law."

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/contracts_of_employment/contract_of_employment.html

Any DB employees here should ask their trade union why they are not trying to enforce their legal rights before the courts instead of dragging you onto a picket where you will just lose more money on top of any money you will lose in the eventual agreement which we all know will happen.

starlit

Do i have a reason to freak out?! im travelling a lot over weekend or is it dublin city buses only and or bus eireann affected?

cdebru

Stevek101 wrote: »

Summer schedules up on the site now.

it goes to show the contempt that DB management have for the people working in the company that they put these up on their website before they even show them to their staff that they expect to work these.

cdebru

doovdela wrote: »

Do i have a reason to freak out?! im travelling a lot over weekend or is it dublin city buses only and or bus eireann affected?

Dublin bus only

Stevek101

cdebru wrote: »

it goes to show the contempt that DB management have for the people working in the company that they put these up on their website before they even show them to their staff that they expect to work these.

After a year of negotiation something has to give.

rx8

cdebru wrote: »

it goes to show the contempt that DB management have for the people working in the company that they put these up on their website before they even show them to their staff that they expect to work these.

The links are not working, atm , but you are right. ....utter contempt is what management have for the staff.
The f**king cheek of them.

Stevek101

rx8 wrote: »

The links are not working, atm , but you are right. ....utter contempt is what management have for the staff.
The f**king cheek of them.

Links working fine here. IP block on drivers But in all seriousness this is working out to be pretty contentious.

cdebru

Stevek101 wrote: »

After a year of negotiation something has to give.

well it shouldn't be the law, which is quite clear, agreement of both parties is needed to change a contract. If you want to toss aside contract law that is fine but it would have much bigger implications than this dispute.

cdebru

rx8 wrote: »

The links are not working, atm , but you are right. ....utter contempt is what management have for the staff.
The f**king cheek of them.

they have been sitting on them for months and then throw them up on the website with out a by or leave to their staff as to how it will affect them.

Shows what you are dealing with.

starlit

cdebru wrote: »

Dublin bus only

That's ok thanks.

Gatling

Is this going ahead for definite

rx8

SIPTU are busy organising picket rosters, as of this evening.

Hotblack Desiato

cdebru wrote: »

well it shouldn't be the law, which is quite clear, agreement of both parties is needed to change a contract.

Try telling that to all the civil and public servants who had legislation brought in to unilaterally change their contracts.

Infini

ninja900 wrote: »

Try telling that to all the civil and public servants who had legislation brought in to unilaterally change their contracts.

They shouldve all walked out on strike tbh. As it stands though this is all down to bad management appointed by the same lads running the government for the last few years they want to make changes that only benefits themselves and only themselves.

One thing to watch is if Irish Rail join in now as well because management over there are trying the same thing there too, Unions over there are already voting on their own agreement and its a general consensus with the employees that theyve had enough. Theyre just taking the companies one at a time because all those managment and the goverment would be scared $hitless if all 3 companies went on strike at once triggering a perfect $hitstorm for them.

They got BE in a new agreement but its not impossible if IR and DB went on strike that they could be called out too and thats the thing to watch for.

Heisenberg1

Infini2 wrote: »

They shouldve all walked out on strike tbh. As it stands though this is all down to bad management appointed by the same lads running the government for the last few years they want to make changes that only benefits themselves and only themselves.

One thing to watch is if Irish Rail join in now as well because management over there are trying the same thing there too, Unions over there are already voting on their own agreement and its a general consensus with the employees that theyve had enough. Theyre just taking the companies one at a time because all those managment and the goverment would be scared $hitless if all 3 companies went on strike at once triggering a perfect $hitstorm for them.

They got BE in a new agreement but its not impossible if IR and DB went on strike that they could be called out too and thats the thing to watch for.

Just curious about the part in bold can you outline the changes they want to make.

cdebru

ninja900 wrote: »

Try telling that to all the civil and public servants who had legislation brought in to unilaterally change their contracts.

perhaps you missed the quote, a contract can only be changed by legislation or agreement, DB can not pass legislation and they have no agreement. So they are unilaterally breaking a contract which they legally can not do.

cdebru

Infini2 wrote: »

They shouldve all walked out on strike tbh. As it stands though this is all down to bad management appointed by the same lads running the government for the last few years they want to make changes that only benefits themselves and only themselves.

One thing to watch is if Irish Rail join in now as well because management over there are trying the same thing there too, Unions over there are already voting on their own agreement and its a general consensus with the employees that theyve had enough. Theyre just taking the companies one at a time because all those managment and the goverment would be scared $hitless if all 3 companies went on strike at once triggering a perfect $hitstorm for them.

They got BE in a new agreement but its not impossible if IR and DB went on strike that they could be called out too and thats the thing to watch for.

Won't happen unions have zero interest in fighting anything, it is all just a pantomime playing out. There will be tough talk alright but in the end they will roll over, if the union leadership had their way they would take the deal right now but they know their members wont take it so they need to soften them up a bit by taking a few days pay off you. Then some all night baloney and serve you up 99% of the same **** with a management pay cut and tell you its the best they can do.

Ask them why they are not trying to block it legally as the company have no right to force an unagreed change to your contract ???

Hotblack Desiato

cdebru wrote: »

perhaps you missed the quote, a contract can only be changed by legislation or agreement, DB can not pass legislation and they have no agreement. So they are unilaterally breaking a contract which they legally can not do.

Their shareholder can.

cdebru

ninja900 wrote: »

Their shareholder can.

But they haven't and it would be highly unlikely as they have displayed no interest in legislating to reduce large payments to CEOs of banks they own.
But bring it on as it would denude the government of the excuse they regularly roll out when some top dog in a bank or quango is revealed to be earning crazy money " there is nothing we can do he has a contract"

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

Ask them why they are not trying to block it legally as the company have no right to force an unagreed change to your contract ???

So on one hand you're arguing that unagreed changes to contract should not be allowed to be forced through and the unions should block it legally since the company has no right.

cdebru wrote: »

But bring it on as it would denude the government of the excuse they regularly roll out when some top dog in a bank or quango is revealed to be earning crazy money " there is nothing we can do he has a contract"

But on the other hand you're then arguing that the government should be able to force through unagreed changes to contracts and should have a right to do so.

So basically you want to apply different rules to different people.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

So on one hand you're arguing that unagreed changes to contract should not be allowed to be forced through and the unions should block it legally since the company has no right.



But on the other hand you're then arguing that the government should be able to force through unagreed changes to contracts and should have a right to do so.

So basically you want to apply different rules to different people.

no same rules for everyone, the company have no legal right to make unilateral changes to a contract.
it can only be changed by agreement or legislation,if the government chose to introduce legislation which i doubt they would, then at least they will have to do it for everyone not just busdrivers.
fairly simple.

LXFlyer

cdebru wrote: »

Won't happen unions have zero interest in fighting anything, it is all just a pantomime playing out. There will be tough talk alright but in the end they will roll over, if the union leadership had their way they would take the deal right now but they know their members wont take it so they need to soften them up a bit by taking a few days pay off you. Then some all night baloney and serve you up 99% of the same **** with a management pay cut and tell you its the best they can do.

Ask them why they are not trying to block it legally as the company have no right to force an unagreed change to your contract ???

Are you seriously suggesting that:

1) Further cost cutting measures are not needed?
2) Having endless negotiations lasting a year is an acceptable way of running a company?

No company can remain stagnant, they all need to constantly monitor costs, efficiencies etc.

While there are (I'm sure) cost reductions to be gained from cuts in management salaries (which for senior mangement should be at a higher percentage level than lower staff grades), they are going to be a drop in the ocean compared with the savings from changes in general staff pay costs. That is a reality down to the sheer numbers of people involved.

No one likes change, but nor can a company remain stagnant in terms of reviewing costs. That's something that should be constantly reviewed. Reading some of the posts here that seems to be going over some people's heads.

To me, this is a situation where the company has got to the point where they have decided that they need to force the issue to a resolution, based on the LRC arriving at a decision. Frankly, given these negotiations have lasted a year, I can't really blame them. I don't know of any company where that would be viewed as an acceptable length of time.

I am not in any way advocating that companies should have the right to change conditions of their employees without negotiation. Of course there should be, but at the same time there should be a realistic time limit on getting an agreed change. A full year of continuing with negotiations without achieving agreement (including an LRC proposal) is ludicrous. I think that people need to wake up to the economic realities that the good times are over. As someone who has had to endure changes in my own pay and conditions (all negative), I'm all too aware of that. But I've had to get on with it. The alternative was no job.

Your analysis of what will happen next is exactly what I think will happen, and that sums it up. The *game* (and that is what it is) will play out with some more concessions on both sides being agreed, after a day or two of no services, that will differ little from the existing proposal, but will be hailed as a victory by all sides.

The problem I have with all of this is that once again, as with Bus Eireann, the innocent party, the customer, will lose out, with a suspension of services for a day or two. That is unforgivable in the current economic climate.

The thing that people don't seem to be grasping is that the playing field is about to change in a big way with the the market being opened up - the companies need to have the ability to change and deal with that - otherwise they're not going to last.

SandyfordGuy

cdebru wrote: »

no same rules for everyone, the company have no legal right to make unilateral changes to a contract.
it can only be changed by agreement or legislation,if the government chose to introduce legislation which i doubt they would, then at least they will have to do it for everyone not just busdrivers.
fairly simple.

including tthe bankers? And the management of companies you moaned that the government did not cut?

seems to be as usual changes should be made long as they don't effect yourself

cdebru

lxflyer wrote: »

Are you seriously suggesting that:

1) Further cost cutting measures are not needed?
2) Having endless negotiations lasting a year is an acceptable way of running a company?

No company can remain stagnant, they all need to constantly monitor costs, efficiencies etc.

While there are (I'm sure) cost reductions to be gained from cuts in management salaries (which for senior mangement should be at a higher percentage level than lower staff grades), they are going to be a drop in the ocean compared with the savings from changes in general staff pay costs. That is a reality down to the sheer numbers of people involved.

No one likes change, but nor can a company remain stagnant in terms of reviewing costs. That's something that should be constantly reviewed. Reading some of the posts here that seems to be going over some people's heads.

To me, this is a situation where the company has got to the point where they have decided that they need to force the issue to a resolution, based on the LRC arriving at a decision. Frankly, given these negotiations have lasted a year, I can't really blame them. I don't know of any company where that would be viewed as an acceptable length of time.

I am not in any way advocating that companies should have the right to change conditions of their employees without negotiation. Of course there should be, but at the same time there should be a realistic time limit on getting an agreed change. A full year of continuing with negotiations without achieving agreement (including an LRC proposal) is ludicrous. I think that people need to wake up to the economic realities that the good times are over. As someone who has had to endure changes in my own pay and conditions (all negative), I'm all too aware of that. But I've had to get on with it. The alternative was no job.

Your analysis of what will happen next is exactly what I think will happen, and that sums it up. The *game* (and that is what it is) will play out with some more concessions on both sides being agreed, after a day or two of no services, that will differ little from the existing proposal, but will be hailed as a victory by all sides.

The problem I have with all of this is that once again, as with Bus Eireann, the innocent party, the customer, will lose out, with a suspension of services for a day or two. That is unforgivable in the current economic climate.

The thing that people don't seem to be grasping is that the playing field is about to change in a big way with the the market being opened up - the companies need to have the ability to change and deal with that - otherwise they're not going to last.

No I would suggest real negotiations with the game playing.

I would also suggest that a dose of reality regarding the free travel scheme would go a long way to resolving any financial difficulties the company is facing.
That however is not even mentioned and instead the staff are expected to cover the costs associated with having a third of the adult population entitled to travel for free.

I would also suggest that if the company were genuinely interested in meaningful negotiations that showing their employees their plans for summer schedules might be a start.

CreepingDeath

It's offical.

They've served strike notice TheJournal.ie Link

RTE Link

TRANSPORT SERVICES ACROSS the capital will be severely hit if a proposed strike by Dublin Bus staff goes ahead.

Workers at both the National Bus and Rail Union (NBRU) and SIPTU have served strike notice on the company, with workers set to down tools on Sunday.

Gatling

How many years has the company been hemorrhaging money 10 /12 years or is it longer ,
The free pass system needs a major overhall that's nothing new but I doubt it will solve the companies problems ,a company with little or no competition and yet can't make profits ,
I seem to remember a few years ago 140 drivers were taken on and trained to take new routes that never materialised and yet the unions insisted they all be kept on and used else where ,

LXFlyer

cdebru wrote: »

No I would suggest real negotiations with the game playing.

I would also suggest that a dose of reality regarding the free travel scheme would go a long way to resolving any financial difficulties the company is facing.
That however is not even mentioned and instead the staff are expected to cover the costs associated with having a third of the adult population entitled to travel for free.

I would also suggest that if the company were genuinely interested in meaningful negotiations that showing their employees their plans for summer schedules might be a start.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the free travel scheme - that is a matter for government policy, and is outside the remit of Dublin Bus. It is a completely separate issue.

The reality is that DB's cost base is too high and this has to change. I'm sorry to break this news to you, as you seem to be in denial - but that has to be addressed. I am saying this as someone who has worked in two companies over the last 10 years where we continually reviewed costs, and who has had to make not insignificant personal sacrifices to keep my job.

For negotiations to be ongoing for a full year with no agreement is nothing short of a disgrace, and suggests to me that the people involved don't seem to be grasping the seriousness of the situation. No company can operate with that sort of inability to change work practices, or review costs. As I said above - there have to be negotiations, but they have to have a defined time limit - really this has gone beyond a joke.

Jesus Wept

liger wrote: »

Well at least its happening on the bank holiday weekend, 2 days of not much interuption.

erm, not everyone leaves the city on the weekends/bank holiday weekends, it will cause lots of disruption.

end of the road

lxflyer wrote: »

the customer, will lose out, with a suspension of services for a day or two. That is unforgivable in the current economic climate.

but it was fine during the good times? people did need to use the busses then you know living in dublin if the busses go down your not completely stuck, inconvenienced maybe but one has to get on with it, there are other options

end of the road

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

including tthe bankers? And the management of companies you moaned that the government did not cut?

is that a problem? so such management shouldn't be cut then?

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

seems to be as usual changes should be made long as they don't effect yourself

thats not what he meant and you know it, but don't let your agenda against the ground staff working in the CIE companies stop you from twisting what he said to suit it

Bus drivers always seem to go on strike when i am banging on the door trying to get on the bus. They are masters of ignoring you.

LXFlyer

end of the road wrote: »

but it was fine during the good times? people did need to use the busses then you know living in dublin if the busses go down your not completely stuck, inconvenienced maybe but one has to get on with it, there are other options

It is not acceptable for customers to be affected at ANY time.

I think you are being rather blasé about the sacrifice customers will have to make. Many people do not have an alternative option, such as LUAS or rail. They rely completely on the bus. What is someone in Finglas or Templeogue, for example to do? Walk? I would hardly call that an "inconvenience".

Can you in all seriousness suggest that there is not something fundamentally wrong where negotiations have been ongoing for over a year and no agreement has been reached??

LXFlyer

Deleted User wrote: »

Bus drivers always seem to go on strike when i am banging on the door trying to get on the bus. They are masters of ignoring you.

That's a different matter.

Once a driver has closed the doors, they are focussing on the road and traffic - not on passengers who have just missed the bus.

From a road safety perspective, that is completely the right thing to do. Sorry to be harsh, but that's life.

Devilman40k

end of the road wrote: »

but it was fine during the good times? people did need to use the busses then you know living in dublin if the busses go down your not completely stuck, inconvenienced maybe but one has to get on with it, there are other options

Not in the vast majority of cases, yes if you live close to DART/Commuter rail lines or near Red or Green Line, outside of that you're pretty stuffed, unless you have a car or live within cycling distance

And if you use 2 buses to commute to work what then?...pay 30-50 per day in taxi's that gets very uneconomical VERY quickly.