Irish Rail - Risk of Strike Action

BoatMad

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Again you show your very simple understanding of issues.

Let me explain in simple terms, a company is a legal entity, if a company is wound up and liquidated it is no longer a legal entity (doesn't exist and has no assets) , a new company is an entirely different legal entity and can take who and what they wish in terms of employees.

not quite that simple, there are loads of anti-phoneix clauses in Irish corporate law

It would require custom legislation to circumvent several aspects of corporate law, to reestablish a new rail operator over night ( taxes on asset transfers etc , employees transfers of undertaking etc ) , see Aerlings and Team for plenty of examples and issues

KomradeBishop

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Oh right so you can use the point that Ireland has a high cost of living to justify the level of pay for IR drivers, but I cannot point out the inherent flaws if your argument?

Move the goalposts much ????? :P:P:P:P

Simple fact, Swiss train drivers living in the most expensive country in EU are paid less than Irish drivers who are living in the 14th most expensive or in other words Irish train drivers are grossly overpaid. No matter how you try and change the goalposts and ask me to provide information (considering you have provided nothing yet) it doesn't change that simple fact even if you wish really hard it will stay the same fact.

Even in simple silly land economics sure I agree let the train drivers have their restoration of pay, I've no problems with that but they must join the long list of workers a lot more deserving than them who should be dealt with first, they will be waiting a long time.

You haven't shown any inherent flaw in my argument, and neither have you shown me 'moving the goalposts' - you brought up workers in different countries, it's up to you to justify/explain how they are comparable, not for me to take that at face value, when it's highly likely there's more to it than just the raw wages.

So, lets hear your argument, on how the low wages of Swiss workers is justified - if you think that should be brought over here...


I simply don't agree with your 'race to the bottom' logic there.

cython

KomradeBishop wrote: »

As inefficient (in both financial and social benefit interpretations) as that spending was, it's a fact that that money was paid to people, who then respent it into the economy, thus boosting the private economy.

That's still a bad waste of productivity - it should have been spent doing something better - but it's still a mathematical fact, that it boosted the amount of money flowing through the private economy.

You are right that if an excessive amount of the money goes into imports (the 'foreign sector'), that diminishes the boost to the private economy. Ireland currently exports way more than it imports though.

I would imagine very little of what was paid to consultancies abroad (and a hell of a lot of what was spent was spent in this manner) was respent in the Irish economy. This does nothing to boost the private economy in Ireland, and boosting it in the US or wherever is irrelevant in this discussion.

And just because we export extensively at the moment, this is not justification for wastefully imports at the public' expense. Regardless, at least you are starting to qualify your statements to be a bit less fallacious.

Ctrl Alt Delete

BoatMad wrote: »

not quite that simple, there are loads of anti-phoneix clauses in Irish corporate law

It would require custom legislation to circumvent several aspects of corporate law, to reestablish a new rail operator over night ( taxes on asset transfers etc , employees transfers of undertaking etc ) , see Aerlings and Team for plenty of examples and issues

Thanks for posting. I am aware its not as simple as I describe but I really didn't want to begin explaining that in depth to a poster when they seem to have a complete lack of the basic understanding of what they are talking about.

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

I simply don't agree with your 'race to the bottom' logic there.

That's really the nub of your point. You don't agree and that's perfectly fine to not agree despite clear figures showing the contrary point.

But the facts speak for themselves and you have provided none so far, other than a quick reference to cost of living that was so quickly ripped apart you have changed the goalposts on it

BoatMad

just to be aware , that KomradeBishop is right , government surpluses take money out of the economy and cause a rise in private debt. its not a good idea to run surpluses especially increasing surpluses. steady state deficit budget spending is best

There is no doubt that the government should be expanding useful productive spending at this point in time, but is severely limited by Merkal-ism.

KomradeBishop

cython wrote: »

I would imagine very little of what was paid to consultancies abroad (and a hell of a lot of what was spent was spent in this manner) was respent in the Irish economy. This does nothing to boost the private economy in Ireland, and boosting it in the US or wherever is irrelevant in this discussion.

And just because we export extensively at the moment, this is not justification for wastefully imports at the public' expense. Regardless, at least you are starting to qualify your statements to be a bit less fallacious.

You're trying to cherry-pick a public spending example, so you focus only on bits that go to the foreign sector.

I have not claimed that no money will go to the foreign sector upon an increase in public spending, but it would be ridiculous to pretend that a huge or majority portion of it would.

This debate, doesn't change the fact, that public spending (note how this is not stating 'public spending solely aimed at foreign consultants'...) boosts the flow of money going through the private economy, which is my original claim.

end of the road

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Again you show your very simple understanding of issues.

because its a very simple issue. if you think IE can be wound up and replaced with a new operator within 24 hours you are mistaken.

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

Let me explain in simple terms, a company is a legal entity, if a company is wound up and liquidated it is no longer a legal entity (doesn't exist and has no assets) , a new company is an entirely different legal entity and can take who and what they wish in terms of employees.

yes, and? still doesn't change the fact that winding up and replaceing with a new rail operator and all that goes with it cannot be done within 24 hours. IE can simply be wound up and with the same staff and management could be back operating within a small time frame but that would be an action of complete stupidity.

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

They are two entirely different things, so again apart from showing your complete lack of knowledge of something you are posting about, you still haven't answered any questions put to you on this thread.

i answered your questions, your getting no more on them. i absolutely understand how it works and i've given you the fact that it cannot simply be done as you suggest.

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're trying to cherry-pick a public spending example, so you focus only on bits that go to the foreign sector.

I have not claimed that no money will go to the foreign sector upon an increase in public spending, but it would be ridiculous to pretend that a huge or majority portion of it would.

This debate, doesn't change the fact, that public spending boost the flow of money going through the private economy, which is my original claim.

On average 30% of Public Sector tenders are won by foreign companies every year. Here is another nice chart showing what countries that 30% goes to

Ctrl Alt Delete

end of the road wrote: »

i answered your questions, your getting no more on them. i absolutely understand how it works and i've given you the fact that it cannot simply be done as you suggest.

Oh really, do you want to provide a link to where you answered the questions about claiming Irish Rail drivers were above the EU standards and how they have better training.

Because I never saw you reply to that claim of yours

KomradeBishop

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

On average 30% of Public Sector tenders are won by foreign companies every year. Here is another nice chart showing what countries that 30% goes to

Eh - again you're trying to explicitly cherry-picking your arguments to focus on the foreign sector....tendering is only one component of overall public spending.

Note as well, that I am explicitly arguing against tendering (i.e. 'privatization-by-stealth') policies.

cython

KomradeBishop wrote: »

You're trying to cherry-pick a public spending example, so you focus only on bits that go to the foreign sector.

Nope, just asking you to make accurate claims, and pointing out that the below unqualified statement is not actually true:

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Actually all public spending boosts the economy - that is an inherent mathematical fact about national accounting - public spending, inherently flows into the private economy (and it is not 1:1 funded, through taxes, as nearly all governments run a deficit).

If you can't see that there is a distinction, then I'd have to question how insightful the majority of your comments are. The devil is in the details, after all.

Stranger Danger

donkeyoaty0099 wrote: »

If the government went completely mental and decided to disband IR and cancel all trains, Dublin would grind to a halt. The roads are knackered as is, can you imagine adding countless more commuters onto them? It'd be an absolute catastrophe.

I think you're confusing yourself.

Dublin, Galway, Cork all suffer from traffic congestion. This is traffic within the city.

However our inter-city motorways are all well below capacity. In fact they have more than enough spare capacity to cope with the extra traffic if everyone currently using IR for an inter-city journey was to transfer to bus tomorrow morning.

Madness that we're State-funding two forms of transportation to compete against each other for inter-city transportation.
It's even more especially mad when it's obvious that road transportation is by far the superior form of transport for a country our size that doesn't share land boarder with other larger European countries.

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Eh - again you're trying to explicitly cherry-picking your arguments to focus on the foreign sector....tendering is only one component of overall public spending.

Note as well, that I am explicitly arguing against tendering (i.e. 'privatization-by-stealth') policies.

I actually wasn't cherry picking anything I was merely providing information to help the discussion between you and another poster, but seeing as how you want to take this point up, your completely way off the mark.

Public Procurement is the main component of public spending not just one. Beside which each EU member country is fully and legally bound by EU Directive 24/2014 (or more specifically in the case of Irish rail 25/2014) so there is no getting around that unless they want to go in front of the EU commission.

If you want to argue against those directives you will want to have a better argument than what your putting up, because they are there for multiple reasons not least transparency and good governance as well as the protection of workers (TUPE in particular).

I'd really love to hear you argue this one away, I'll get great fun from it but I hope you know these directives inside out before you do All public spending does not boost the economy either.

end of the road

Stranger Danger wrote: »

I think you're confusing yourself.

he's not one bit

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Dublin, Galway, Cork all suffer from traffic congestion. This is traffic within the city.

which will be added to upon the destruction of the railway.

Stranger Danger wrote: »

However our inter-city motorways are all well below capacity. In fact they have more than enough spare capacity to cope with the extra traffic if everyone currently using IR for an inter-city journey was to transfer to bus tomorrow morning.

well as they won't be transferring to bus but to car, its more doubtful. they will still add to congestion somewhere, so adding to that just to suit some agenda is pointless.

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Madness that we're State-funding two forms of transportation to compete against each other for inter-city transportation.

its not. choice and competing modes are good for all. the only ones who would disagree are the road lobbiests and anti-rail brigade.

Stranger Danger wrote: »

It's even more especially mad when it's obvious that road transportation is by far the superior form of transport for a country our size that doesn't share land boarder with other larger European countries.

the only road transport that is superior to rail is the private car where dispite having to drive it, you get your own space. rail users will not be transferring to busses because of a shut down of rail, they will go to the car. people will not be bullied into using a method of transport that does not meet their needs, especially to suit some agenda.

KomradeBishop

cython wrote: »

Nope, just asking you to make accurate claims, and pointing out that the below unqualified statement is not actually true:



If you can't see that there is a distinction, then I'd have to question how insightful the majority of your comments are. The devil is in the details, after all.

Yes, public spending into the foreign sector doesn't boost the private economy - except by and large public spending does tend to predominantly go into the private economy.

That's true to such an extent, that outside of edge-cases, you can consider net-increases in public spending as synonymous with boosting the private economy.

GM228

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I think given the fact I actually went to the trouble of posting figures, you could at the very least provide a link to back that up no ????

Take the UK for example.

https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/advice/planning/jobprofiles/Pages/TrainDriver.aspx

Qualified train drivers can earn upto £60,000 (yes pounds) for a 35 hour week (some UK operators are still on a 37 hour week but very few). And another thing is a lot of rail companies operate on a 4-day working week for train drivers with Sundays as an extra payment bringing their pay up even more, something which isn't the case here.

An interesting read here on train drivers salaries.
http://www.traindriver.org/train-operating-companies-depots--contact-details.html

35 hours is the average working week for train drivers in the EU, Google it for each country and you will find it.

By comparison IE train drivers earning upto €55,000 for a 48 hour week proves they are actually lower paid workers then their EU counterparts.

GM228

KomradeBishop

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I actually wasn't cherry picking anything I was merely providing information to help the discussion between you and another poster, but seeing as how you want to take this point up, your completely way off the mark.

Public Procurement is the main component of public spending not just one. Beside which each EU member country is fully and legally bound by EU Directive 24/2014 (or more specifically in the case of Irish rail 25/2014) so there is no getting around that unless they want to go in front of the EU commission.

If you want to argue against those directives you will want to have a better argument than what your putting up, because they are there for multiple reasons not least transparency and good governance as well as the protection of workers (TUPE in particular).

I'd really love to hear you argue this one away, I'll get great fun from it but I hope you know these directives inside out before you do All public spending does not boost the economy either.

Either state it as a percentage of the overall public spending, going to the foreign sector, or don't. Otherwise you aren't showing increases in public spending, goes disproportionately to the foreign sector.

Moreso, given that Irish Rail is an Irish company, you're not going to show much of an increase there, going to the foreign sector...

Poulgorm

Inter city railways in this country should be closed down - we simply do not have the population centres to justify the huge expenditure to construct and run a modern, fast and safe service between our cities.

We wasted hundreds of millions on the Limerick - Galway line recently and the majority of the handful of people using it are pensioners. And you still have a pressure group in the West advocating (with a straight face), that the line should be extended to Sligo.

And then, you have the railway staff who feel that the country owes them a living. With their decades old work practices, refusal to implement changes that would improve the quality of service to the public - and the belligerent attitude that many of them display in their dealings with the public.

Commuter rail, from a radius of, say, 60 miles of Dublin, is where money should be invested.

And then, we have a road connecting two of our largest cities (Limerick and Cork) that resembles a boreen, for much of its length. And its upgrading is not even included in the recent 5 year capital programme that was recently announced.

What a country.

Jamie2k9

Drivers to lazy to get out of bed this morning and picket, says it all.......

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Drivers to lazy to get out of bed this morning and picket, says it all.......

They were not supposed to picket.

GM228

Jamie2k9

GM228 wrote: »

They were not supposed to picket.

GM228

Why?

Unions say have a lie in instead...

Ctrl Alt Delete

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Either state it as a percentage of the overall public spending, going to the foreign sector, or don't. Otherwise you aren't showing increases in public spending, goes disproportionately to the foreign sector.

Moreso, given that Irish Rail is an Irish company, you're not going to show much of an increase there, going to the foreign sector...

I'm sorry but you are clearly ignorant or trolling at this stage.

Exactly what part of my post that said 30% of spending together with a graph of countries where the spend goes to was unclear for you? Perhaps I should draw it out in crayon will that help?

KomradeBishop wrote: »

Yes, public spending into the foreign sector doesn't boost the private economy - except by and large public spending does tend to predominantly go into the private economy.

That's true to such an extent, that outside of edge-cases, you can consider net-increases in public spending as synonymous with boosting the private economy.

You also clearly haven't a clue with regards to public sector spending.

In fact I would be 100% certain you wouldn't have the slightest idea how it can occur that an increase in public sector spending can actually depress private economies.

Ctrl Alt Delete

GM228 wrote: »

Take the UK for example.

https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/advice/planning/jobprofiles/Pages/TrainDriver.aspx

Qualified train drivers can earn upto £60,000 (yes pounds) for a 35 hour week (some UK operators are still on a 37 hour week but very few). And another thing is a lot of rail companies operate on a 4-day working week for train drivers with Sundays as an extra payment bringing their pay up even more, something which isn't the case here.

An interesting read here on train drivers salaries.
http://www.traindriver.org/train-operating-companies-depots--contact-details.html

35 hours is the average working week for train drivers in the EU, Google it for each country and you will find it.

By comparison IE train drivers earning upto €55,000 for a 48 hour week proves they are actually lower paid workers then their EU counterparts.

GM228

much appreciated it's nice to have an actual reasoned discussion, will have a read of these on the train ride home before I actually respond :pac:

GM228 wrote: »

They were not supposed to picket.

If that's true, then that is equally pathetic. Not only not having conviction to lose a days pay, they didn't even have the conviction to have a picket.

GM228

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Why?

Unions say have a lie in instead...

Because it would bring other grades into the strike as most staff would not pass a picket, the unions will not involve other grades in the dispute as it is a driver only dispute.

GM228

Infini

GM228 wrote: »

Because it would bring other grades into the strike as most staff would not pass a picket, the unions will not involve other grades in the dispute as it is a driver only dispute.

GM228

Hes right. The other grades haven't been drawn into this so far because the dispute is a drivers based one.

The management side is the real issue here they were the ones to walk away 1st last night even though the union teams were still sitting in the room. They didn't find out till a few hour after after the management had decided to walk out. What does that tell you? This is all coming down to Franks its the way he seems to want to play ball. Unfortunately this isn't gonna solve anything but rather ESCALATE things.

Not only that but in other areas the Teachers are threatening to walk shutting down schools, the Nurses have reached breaking point and even the guards are getting annoyed themselves. I mean lets be honest people across the board are getting fed up. Even rail staff are saying not a single person was coming up complaining about the strike before it happened wheres before there were a few grumbles. Everyone in General is getting tired of this situation and not just those in the rail.

end of the road

Poulgorm wrote: »

Inter city railways in this country should be closed down - we simply do not have the population centres to justify the huge expenditure to construct and run a modern, fast and safe service between our cities.

We wasted hundreds of millions on the Limerick - Galway line recently and the majority of the handful of people using it are pensioners. And you still have a pressure group in the West advocating (with a straight face), that the line should be extended to Sligo.

And then, you have the railway staff who feel that the country owes them a living. With their decades old work practices, refusal to implement changes that would improve the quality of service to the public - and the belligerent attitude that many of them display in their dealings with the public.

Commuter rail, from a radius of, say, 60 miles of Dublin, is where money should be invested.

And then, we have a road connecting two of our largest cities (Limerick and Cork) that resembles a boreen, for much of its length. And its upgrading is not even included in the recent 5 year capital programme that was recently announced.

What a country.

intercity railways in ireland should in no circumstances be closed down and any attempt to do so should be faught by whatever means necessary. we have the population to justify spending the small amount we do to run a railway between our cities and towns and it needs to be increased. dispite the issues we have a nice little network which has potential to do way better. wasting money on the galway limerick line is 1 mistake and does not justify ripping up the lot, or ripping up others. those using the limerick galway line are students and many others. the line isn't doing as well as hoped but it is doing better then expected. a pressure group in the west advocating for something that isn't going to happen means absolutely nothing. any railway staff who feels the country owes them a living are in a very small minority. there are no decades old work practices now in irish rail. the only refusals are the staff rightly refusing to be walked over and shafted which is something the staff are right to fight against. while there are some staff there who wouldn't have the best manners and shouldn't be there the majority of IE staff are easy to deal with. all the network is where the money should be invested. the fact the motor way between cork and limerick isn't happening means nothing also, and it wouldn't happen if the railways beyond your 60 mile nonsense were destroyed to suit you.

end of the road

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

much appreciated it's nice to have an actual reasoned discussion, will have a read of these on the train ride home before I actually respond




If that's true, then that is equally pathetic. Not only not having conviction to lose a days pay, they didn't even have the conviction to have a picket.

fair play to them they decided to cause the minimum of disruption and should be commended

Jamie2k9

Hes right. The other grades haven't been drawn into this so far because the dispute is a drivers based one.

The management side is the real issue here they were the ones to walk away 1st last night even though the union teams were still sitting in the room. They didn't find out till a few hour after after the management had decided to walk out. What does that tell you? This is all coming down to Franks its the way he seems to want to play ball. Unfortunately this isn't gonna solve anything but rather ESCALATE things.

It tells you Irish Rail wanted to give customers a final decision, no use coming out of talks at midnight when everybody is in bed and say its called off.

Unions had no intention of calling it off.

LXFlyer

Infini2 wrote: »

Hes right. The other grades haven't been drawn into this so far because the dispute is a drivers based one.

The management side is the real issue here they were the ones to walk away 1st last night even though the union teams were still sitting in the room. They didn't find out till a few hour after after the management had decided to walk out. What does that tell you? This is all coming down to Franks its the way he seems to want to play ball. Unfortunately this isn't gonna solve anything but rather ESCALATE things.

Not only that but in other areas the Teachers are threatening to walk shutting down schools, the Nurses have reached breaking point and even the guards are getting annoyed themselves. I mean lets be honest people across the board are getting fed up. Even rail staff are saying not a single person was coming up complaining about the strike before it happened wheres before there were a few grumbles. Everyone in General is getting tired of this situation and not just those in the rail.

Let's be honest though - all those other categories of people have suffered pay restraint for four years. Irish Rail staff have not.

Interesting on the teachers - only a third of them voted on the ballot and their general secretary appears to be disagreeing with them.

It's not quite as black and white as you seem to suggest.