Irish Rail - Risk of Strike Action

KomradeBishop

lxflyer wrote: »

The bottom line in terms of where the company is currently from a financial perspective is that the revenue from passengers dropped significantly in a very short space of time, while at the same time costs did not fall in the same manner.

PSO funding fell as a result of the passenger numbers dropping - that's a fact of life.

I get the impression some people want to have their cake and eat it.

IE should be able to operate in a cost effective manner, and with best commercial practices - that is what, as a taxpayer, I would expect. Doing that, should result, after PSO funding is taken into account, in the company at the very least breaking even.

It certainly should not be a bottomless pit in which to shovel state funding.

The 'bottomless pit' and 'black hole' nonsense is just hyperbole from you and others - nobody with any sense considers properly funding a public service, with the money it needs to function properly, as a waste of money!

You don't speak for taxpayers as a whole, so don't pretend you do - I expect a properly funded public transport service, not this half-funded nonsense where all the blame for the effects of lack of funding gets placed on the actual service, instead of on government.


Fact is this is not like a private company (in any sense other than a technicality) - it is effectively an arm of government, and it is up to government to fund it properly.

Hilly Bill

CosmicJay wrote: »

Hilly Bill wrote: »

It would appear that you don't, you still haven't actually given a valid reply to my original point.

:pac:

I have , now go back to google and come up with more fun facts of the day for us.

KomradeBishop

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

So says you, but funnily enough the majority of people in this thread (and elsewhere seem to think differently)

You don't speak for a magical 'majority' of anyone - if you claim you hold a majority view, provide stats to provide it - otherwise the claim is just bollocks.

It's funny how many of the people pushing the defence of cuts - something that is hugely unpopular in this country - claim to have a 'majority' view on anything, as well as claim their opponents in debate are Irish Rail employees...

Hilly Bill

Peppa Pig wrote: »

So they striked (stroke?) and are now back at work.
Assuming neither side budges do the unions have a mandate already for another strike or have they to go back to ballot again?

There is another one planned for the 6th of november .

KomradeBishop

BoatMad wrote: »

and it would seem we are paying quite a lot for what we are getting.

Any proof of this? What do you know about their accounting? All I've seen in this thread are just simplistic armchair-tabloid-reader type views, regarding the economics of Irish Rail.

CosmicJay

Hilly Bill wrote: »

CosmicJay wrote: »

I have , now go back to google and come up with more fun facts of the day for us.

I'm afraid not, you stated 'it still doesn't count towards their weekly salary now does it? plus its not a gimmie that you can get on a bus for free.''

Anyone in the private sector has to pay for public transport passes, the ability to use any form of public transport for free is a non - cash item of remuneration.

Again as in my previous posts your ignorance to the way things work is not a valid rebuttal.

I think you need to google non - cash items and remuneration. Revenues website is fairly good, lots of reading materials on the matter.

KomradeBishop

lxflyer wrote: »

Sorry, but the drop in PSO subsidy is not the real reason for this. It would not make up the difference. It's a convenient smokescreen. The bottom line is that company costs remained too high while passenger revenue tanked, and the costs were not cut quickly enough - people may not want to hear it, but that is the reality. And in any company the biggest cost is normally payroll.


I'm not sure how you can quite blame management for not seeing the recession coming - no one did. But most companies responded rapidly to it. IE had to go through rounds and rounds of protracted negotiations for several years, while losses continued to mount, and nothing happened on that front until 2014. That simply is nonsensical, and to me, as someone who did take a large reduction in pay in 2009 in order that I might still have a job to go to, and as a taxpayer, it frankly is not acceptable.


CEOs don't normally attend HR negotiations - but of course they will ultimately have the final say - that's their job.

Here we go treating Irish Rail like a company again - in no sense other than a technicality, is Irish Rail a company - it is effectively an arm of government, which will never survive without guaranteed public funding.

Irish rail does not operate on the economics of a company, but on the economics of government - and it should never operate on the economics of a company.

Ctrl Alt Delete

Peppa Pig wrote: »

So they striked (stroke?) and are now back at work.
Assuming neither side budges do the unions have a mandate already for another strike or have they to go back to ballot again?

Open to correction on exact date but they are mandated for at least one more in or around the 4th November

KomradeBishop

BoatMad wrote: »

which outside Dublin , isn't financially justifiable given the poor reach of railways, the dismal numbers travelling and the general ineffectiveness of the service , track standards and infrastructure in many places, a system that takes 2 hours to run from Dublin to gorey is not delivering value for money in any respect.


The fact is state run railways are too expensive for a sparse populated island like ireland, all we are seeing is its death throes

You fund public services based on what is socially justifiable - you never run public/government services, with finances being the priority - that's not how government works, neither should it ever be.

There is no indication that - based on social benefit - the railways are too expensive; none at all!

In fact, it's the opposite - we need way more railway projects and services, with proper funding, not less.

CosmicJay

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Here we go treating Irish Rail like a company again - in no sense other than a technicality, is Irish Rail a company - it is effectively an arm of government, which will never survive without guaranteed public funding.

Irish rail does not operate on the economics of a company, but on the economics of government - and it should never operate on the economics of a company.

That does not give Irish Rail free reign for wanton spending, if it is to be based on the economics of government they should retrospectively apply wage cuts and voluntary redundancies similar to the Public Servants.

Captain Chaos

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Open to correction on exact date but they are mandated for at least one more in or around the 4th November

Friday 6th, same 3 hour window as today.

end of the road

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You don't get to decide what constitutes 'excessive' amounts of money - what do you know about their accounting?

It's the same talking point people use again and again: No matter how many cuts there are, no matter how much funding has been reduced, there will always be many uninformed people bleating on about 'inefficiencies' and 'excessive' spending - because they think economics can safely be reduced to a false 'balanced budget' understanding of how things should be funded.


The whole idea that you have to starve a public service to fix 'inefficiencies' (usually mythical inefficiencies which you can't even quantify, only provide anecdotes on) is stupid.

Your whole definition of 'efficiency' seems to revolve around a balanced-budget - that's actually inefficiency, because we're not going to have a public transport rail service efficiently providing social benefit, on a balanced-budget.


Efficiency is defined here, as providing social benefit - it is not defined as having balanced economic turnover.

Cheap and efficient in this case, are mutually exclusive - one or the other, not both - good quality public transport is inherently expensive.

no matter how much you tell them they will not listen. all they need do is look at the uk railway. while a lot bigger and different in many ways the mindset over its history of nationalization and subsiquent privatization is in my view very similar.

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You don't speak for a magical 'majority' of anyone - if you claim you hold a majority view, provide stats to provide it - otherwise the claim is just bollocks.

It's funny how many of the people pushing the defence of cuts - something that is hugely unpopular in this country - claim to have a 'majority' view on anything, as well as claim their opponents in debate are Irish Rail employees...

Do you see the majority of people in this thread defending or rallying against the drivers?

I'll also correct you on your second point I'm an ex Irish Rail employee. I also don't need to prove that, but if you really want I can discuss in depth with you the highly different technical requirements for diesel fuel tanks on rolling rail stock compared to one on a car because the average user on an internet forum loves to go off and read mainly redundant information like that :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Infini

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Here we go treating Irish Rail like a company again - in no sense other than a technicality, is Irish Rail a company - it is effectively an arm of government, which will never survive without guaranteed public funding.

Irish rail does not operate on the economics of a company, but on the economics of government - and it should never operate on the economics of a company.

Agree with you on this. The rail is effectively an infrastructure not a for profit company but people will think of it as such.

KomradeBishop

CosmicJay wrote: »

There's nothing to indicate that they aren't being paid too much, as BoatMad above said its a dying, aging, horribly inefficient state run body who needs to hand the keys over to a state body or company that can actually do the job.

You're just trying to flip the burden of proof here: If you want to advocate cuts - including maintaining current cuts - you have to provide proof of your claims used as backing in arguing for that.

Ireland needs a massive expansion of public transport services - this is widely acknowledged throughout the whole country - so obviously that blows away any arguments for cuts or for maintaining current cuts.

KomradeBishop

CosmicJay wrote: »

That does not give Irish Rail free reign for wanton spending, if it is to be based on the economics of government they should retrospectively apply wage cuts and voluntary redundancies similar to the Public Servants.

You haven't shown 'wanton spending' - you're just claiming that - you're the same as any other poster who will never be happy with current funding levels, but will advocate 'cuts cuts cuts!' until the service is gone or privatized.

Why on earth should Irish Rail employees let the government screw them, the same way the government screwed the rest of the public services?

Fúck that - they should strike instead and put up a fight.

CosmicJay

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're just trying to flip the burden of proof here: If you want to advocate cuts - including maintaining current cuts - you have to provide proof of your claims used as backing in arguing for that.

Ireland needs a massive expansion of public transport services - this is widely acknowledged throughout the whole country - so obviously that blows away any arguments for cuts or for maintaining current cuts.

Ireland does indeed massive expansion of its public transport system, however, we shouldn't put money into the hands of people who we've managed to confirm as greedy and who hold nothing but contempt for the country. If we give more money to Irish Rail I sincerely think it will be squandered as it already has been.

Secondly, were still running a budget deficit, lower taxes help stimulate the tax take so it is a valid expense.

Putting additional yoyo's into the hands of already overpaid train drivers is not.

KomradeBishop

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Do you see the majority of people in this thread defending or rallying against the drivers?

I'll also correct you on your second point I'm an ex Irish Rail employee. I also don't need to prove that, but if you really want I can discuss in depth with you the highly different technical requirements for diesel fuel tanks on rolling rail stock compared to one on a car because the average user on an internet forum loves to go off and read mainly redundant information like that :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Oh a Boards thread is representative of the majority of the population all of a sudden? Right...

My second comment was about posters trying to tar me as an Irish Rail employee.

BoatMad

look this isn't about a particular issue , this or that

This is about relative power, who has the " upper hand"

in practice in monopoly state organisations , the workers are protected from direct unemployment and their job is protected from redundancy, even if the whole edifice around them is crumbling around them.

Hence the reasons every time you ask a state employee in such a situation to " do " something different , they raise the spectre of either refusing to do it or wanting more pay. Ive supplied tech into state organisations and seen whole groups refuse to use it, even though they know it makes they job easier, because they know their job position and rules means they can " use" the issue too look for more pay.

its the same in IR, these are just smoke screens to utilise the industrial muscle that , we the taxpayer, havent granted them.

In a commercial world, staff argue and also get pay rises, but the system is inherently self balancing , too much staff costs and a a business fails and the staff have to find other work often at lower salaries or doing different things

only the state employees have this cosseted arrangement and its why we have these strikes

CosmicJay

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You haven't shown 'wanton spending' - you're just claiming that - you're the same as any other poster who will never be happy with current funding levels, but will advocate 'cuts cuts cuts!' until the service is gone or privatized.

Why on earth should Irish Rail employees let the government screw them, the same way the government screwed the rest of the public services?

Fúck that - they should strike instead and put up a fight.

Because there are currently way too many people on the government payroll?

The government is not some endless money tree, the majority of its income comes from Income Taxes levied on private sector workers, Customs duty, VAT and other items.

Our government is very close to having a completely unsustainable public sector bill and a massive welfare overspend, yet people complain when we run massive deficits.

Taxes are already in the higher percentile of Europe so we should be easing taxes not increasing it.

I'm sure you are very careful with your own money, when you accidentally spend more than you make you cut costs, you don't go banging the door down shouting GIMMIE MORE MONEY to your employer.

KomradeBishop

CosmicJay wrote: »

Ireland does indeed massive expansion of its public transport system, however, we shouldn't put money into the hands of people who we've managed to confirm as greedy and who hold nothing but contempt for the country. If we give more money to Irish Rail I sincerely think it will be squandered as it already has been.

Secondly, were still running a budget deficit, lower taxes help stimulate the tax take so it is a valid expense.

Putting additional yoyo's into the hands of already overpaid train drivers is not.

The only logic you've provided, to try and portray these people as 'greedy' or overpaid, is that they haven't let themselves be fúcked over to the same extent that the rest of society allowed themselves to be shafted work-wise.

That's not 'greed', that's just begrudgery on the part of the accusers.

Public spending, by definition, helps boost the economy - and properly functioning public transport helps aid the economy as well.


You haven't established at all, that these drivers are overpaid, that they are greedy, or that they don't deserve a pay rise.

How many years of inflation have we had now, eating away at their wages, before their last raise? They are long overdue a rise in pay.

LXFlyer

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Here we go treating Irish Rail like a company again - in no sense other than a technicality, is Irish Rail a company - it is effectively an arm of government, which will never survive without guaranteed public funding.

Irish rail does not operate on the economics of a company, but on the economics of government - and it should never operate on the economics of a company.

What utter nonsense.

Of course it should operate as a company - as should every other semi-state.

They should operate in the most cost effective and efficient manner possible. When outside revenue and passenger numbers nose dive then costs need to be cut rapidly. Are you seriously suggesting that they should not be cost effective and efficient?

Otherwise you just end up with bottomless pits with taxpayer's money being squandered.

KomradeBishop

BoatMad wrote: »

look this isn't about a particular issue , this or that

This is about relative power, who has the " upper hand"

in practice in monopoly state organisations , the workers are protected from direct unemployment and their job is protected from redundancy, even if the whole edifice around them is crumbling around them.

Hence the reasons every time you ask a state employee in such a situation to " do " something different , they raise the spectre of either refusing to do it or wanting more pay. Ive supplied tech into state organisations and seen whole groups refuse to use it, even though they know it makes they job easier, because they know their job position and rules means they can " use" the issue too look for more pay.

its the same in IR, these are just smoke screens to utilise the industrial muscle that , we the taxpayer, havent granted them.

In a commercial world, staff argue and also get pay rises, but the system is inherently self balancing , too much staff costs and a a business fails and the staff have to find other work often at lower salaries or doing different things

only the state employees have this cosseted arrangement and its why we have these strikes

These are just theoretical claims about the motivations of the drivers - which you can't back in any way and are inherently speculative.

Inflation has been eating away at their wages for years, they are long overdue a raise.

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're just trying to flip the burden of proof here: If you want to advocate cuts - including maintaining current cuts - you have to provide proof of your claims used as backing in arguing for that.

Ireland needs a massive expansion of public transport services - this is widely acknowledged throughout the whole country - so obviously that blows away any arguments for cuts or for maintaining current cuts.

OK lets go for specifics then shall we. An Irish Rail driver earns approx. €52,000 - €55,000 a year (open to correction) or to make it comparable with the chart below €4,230 a month, which by my eyes and the data below in the chart makes them amongst the highest paid in Europe and makes them greedy as hell who should be thankful of their position of being amongst / if not the highest paid drivers in Europe

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Inflation has been eating away at their wages for years, they are long overdue a raise.

More like long overdue a serious paycut to give them a good hard dose of reality

KomradeBishop

CosmicJay wrote: »

Because there are currently way too many people on the government payroll?

The government is not some endless money tree, the majority of its income comes from Income Taxes levied on private sector workers, Customs duty, VAT and other items.

Our government is very close to having a completely unsustainable public sector bill and a massive welfare overspend, yet people complain when we run massive deficits.

Taxes are already in the higher percentile of Europe so we should be easing taxes not increasing it.

I'm sure you are very careful with your own money, when you accidentally spend more than you make you cut costs, you don't go banging the door down shouting GIMMIE MORE MONEY to your employer.

What proof do you have that there are 'too many people' on the government payroll? Sounds like just an uninformed opinion, based on a soundbite, more than anything else.

Again, you just appear to me, as among a class of posters who will never be happy with the current number of people on the government payroll - who will advocate 'cuts cuts cuts!' until services disappear or are privatized.

You're just spouting hyperbole here about 'unsustainable' public spending bills - while at the same time arguing for decreased taxes :rolleyes: - and yes, governments historically almost always run deficits, that's what governments are for, as it's typically the only way to fund many services.

Running a balanced budget or a surplus, is actually an extremely unusual thing for governments to do, and is the exception rather than the rule. Governments do no run like businesses, government finances are not like business or personal finances.

The problem with our government right now, is that it is not spending even nearly enough - mostly thanks to EU politics.

BoatMad

KomradeBishop wrote: »

These are just theoretical claims about the motivations of the drivers - which you can't back in any way and are inherently speculative.

Inflation has been eating away at their wages for years, they are long overdue a raise.

its an inherent part of the public sector mentality brought on the particular and some might say peculiar situations that has arise in monopoly state sector businesses Its not a reflection on the drivers individually , its a reflection in human nature

inflation has been extremely low in recent years , so thats not having much effect , certain costs have risen, but then so have these for all workers . none of that gives a monopolistic job proected workers group the right too exploit the system

by all means agitate to raise jones income, I accept that right , however it must be balanced by the right of the other side to make you redundant to save costs and hire anyone of a different salary scale.

The alternative is that the whole public service should be subjected to mandatory bargaining procedure and prevented by law from striking.

end of the road

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK lets go for specifics then shall we. An Irish Rail driver earns approx. €52,000 - €55,000 a year or to make it comparable with the chart below €4,230 a month, which by my eyes and the data below in the chart makes them amongst the highest paid in Europe and makes them greedy as hell who should be thankful of their position of being amongst / if not the highest paid drivers in Europe

they are not greedy and have no need to be thankful for earning their wages

GM228

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

OK lets go for specifics then shall we. An Irish Rail driver earns approx. €52,000 - €55,000 a year or to make it comparable with the chart below €4,230 a month, which by my eyes and the data below in the chart makes them amongst the highest paid in Europe and makes them greedy as hell who should be thankful of their position of being amongst / if not the highest paid drivers in Europe

What that chart dosn't take into account is the hours worked to gain that money-the average European driver works 12 hours less per week and are actually on a higher hourly rate and therefore making more money.

Also that chart includes "benefits", without knowing what the benfits are or how much they are it can't be used for conparison.

GM228

BoatMad

The problem with our government right now, is that it is not spending even nearly enough - most thanks to EU politics.

I agree, but that does not mean a state employee should simply get a pay rise. Most are well paid for what they do, we have some of most highest paid civil servants , teachers, policemen, rail works etc etc in the EU. this is because time and again, monies earmarked for service expansion and development are in effect siphoned off into increased salaries , health being a particular case

Ctrl Alt Delete

end of the road wrote: »

they are not greedy and have no need to be thankful for earning their wages

See my post above with actual facts and figures in comparison to your opinion.

I'm still waiting on even a basic answer to the questions I posed to you earlier or an admission you cannot answer them (which I know is closer to the truth)