Irish Rail - Risk of Strike Action

LXFlyer

Infini2 wrote: »

Id agree it would be a bit ridiculous to think drivers wanted pay for driving longer trains unless there was something else like safety involved.

Another thing to note is the fact the company wants the drivers to work longer hours but infact theres not enough drivers as it is and the dart drivers are already on 48hrs (something to note but afink theyre not allowed work more than that due to EU safety legislation) to cover the whole 10 minute service the company wants. Others want to get out and retire as well but they cant leave.

If you were to ask about how the companys run from the ground staffs point of view you would find most would agree with you that they feel the companys badly managed. Decisions are long fingered almost all the time until it gets ridiculous. Even the whole negotiations were a case of the driver side looking to agree to something only for the company side to go away and come back with something different. I mean if Franks is gonna flip the table at everything why isnt he in the room and just say so and actually TALK? It would save a ton of time as well. Instead he seems to be afraid to even come into the room and just rejects everything over the phone with no reason why. This is how people get pissed off and relations break down to the point the staff strike out of sheer frustration.

CEOs do not take part in negotiations - they never do. That's what HR staff are there for.


But the CEO will always have the final say - as he is the person responsible ultimately for the running of the company.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

It was pure Greed from the unions, it was for longer trains no if and's or but's about it.

it wasn't greed. it was about the new trains and whatever new arrangements that went with them. not simply longer trains.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The company should of been shut down in 2009 and cleared out and all staff re employed on acceptable T&C's.

so how long would the loss of service have been for to allow that nonsense to happen and be sorted out? years?

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Any one remember the clear out Aer Lingus got and look where they are today....

what clear out. a lot of staff probably took redundantsy but i don't believe they're was a clear out as such

Jamie2k9

it wasn't greed. it was about the new trains and whatever new arrangements that went with them. not simply longer trains.

Rubbish pure greed as they were transporting more passengers, new trains make the live of drivers easier than old ones. Don;t believe the 22 fleet required an increase......

so how long would the loss of service have been for to allow that nonsense to happen and be sorted out? years?

Weeks, very easy to prepare for a % who will leave and a % who will return.

what clear out. a lot of staff probably took redundantsy but i don't believe they're was a clear out as such

hundreds of staff were got rid off and a sizable amount re employed on new contracts.

The simple fact here is the unions are greedy, Dublin Bus are next in line once this concludes.

end of the road

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Rubbish pure greed as they were transporting more passengers

not rubbish, no greed.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

Weeks, very easy to prepare for a % who will leave and a % who will return.

years i'd say. not worth the hassle. i would not have been willing to lose my service over some pointless clear out which would have lead to god knows what.

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

hundreds of staff were got rid off and a sizable amount re employed on new contracts.

got a generous redundantsy package more like it

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

The simple fact here is the unions are greedy, Dublin Bus are next in line once this concludes.

the simple fact here is the unions are not greedy, IE refused to honour an agreement with its staff. i don't see why dublin bus will be brought into this unless they have made agreements with staff which they plan to not honour.

Jamie2k9

not rubbish, no greed.

Justify why not? New trains is not a justification.

the simple fact here is the unions are not greedy, IE refused to honour an agreement with its staff. i don't see why dublin bus will be brought into this unless they have made agreements with staff which they plan to not honour.

Not to do with this but both unions will be demanding money form DB in a dispute in the coming weeks.

Jamie2k9

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/1029/738383-rail-dispute/

Unions representing train drivers at Iarnród Éireann have said they accept that drivers will have to drive more, and some jobs could be lost, if they are to achieve a shorter working week and better pensionable pay.

However, in a joint SIPTU/NBRU bulletin to drivers, the unions accuse management of attempting to divide and conquer with "unhelpful spin" by claiming that a pay rise of 7.9% over three years was on offer to drivers.

The drivers staged a three-hour stoppage last Friday and are due to take similar industrial action on Friday 6 November.

Talks at the Workplace Relations Commission aimed at averting the stoppages broke down last Thursday.

In the bulletin, NBRU General Secretary Dermot O'Leary and SIPTU Assistant Organiser Paul Cullen say that in order for any monies from the 7.9% increase to be made available to drivers, the drivers themselves would have to generate such monies through being more productive.

Irish Rail has consistently argued that the drivers' demand for a shorter working week would increase the overall drivers' pay bill and require the recruitment of up to 45 additional drivers.

They have also claimed any such moves would have to be covered by realisable cost savings and efficiencies.

However, the union negotiators contend that the reduction in working hours recommended by an External Review Group, coupled with a longstanding commitment from the company in relation to realigning contract and rostered hours could form the basis for a solution.

They say they have even offered to measure how that could be achieved, and accepted that driver numbers would be reduced - but warn they will not give the company a blank cheque on rostering.

They say an agreed ceiling on driving hours, taking account of various factors could over time deliver an increase in services, a reduction in driver numbers, a reduction in the payroll bill, and an improvement to drivers' terms and conditions.

SIPTU and the NBRU also tell their members that at last week's talks, the management argued that a previous funding proposal to address problems with the company pension scheme means that no pensionable increases can be awarded to any group of workers before 2023.

Mr O'Leary and Mr Cullen say this position was neither tenable nor sustainable.

They describe it as ironic that those who are sent out to negotiate have 100% pensionable salaries, while the pay of train drivers and other frontline operational staff is only 80% pensionable.

They say around 1,290 staff earning between €55,000 and €100,000 have salaries that are 100% pensionable.

They say there are around 700 predominantly clerical staff seeking pay rises who also have 100% pensionable pay.

However, they note that around 1,000 frontline operational staff only have a proportion of their pay factored into calculating their pensions.

They acknowledge that many of those with fully pensionable pay are covered by longstanding agreements exclusive to their grades.

Unions also seem to be back in reality: More Work = More Pay = Less Jobs to cover that pay.

Is the union's agenda slowing becoming undone, now they will happy give drivers the boot and has IE's offer taken the sting out of the dispute among drivers.

devnull

In the bulletin, NBRU General Secretary Dermot O'Leary and SIPTU Assistant Organiser Paul Cullen say that in order for any monies from the 7.9% increase to be made available to drivers, the drivers themselves would have to generate such monies through being more productive.

Isn't that quite obvious though, really, you contribute to improving the efficiency of the company which means it saves the company costs which means they are in a position to pay more?

It's like OMG we may have to actually do something to get that increase.

devnull

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2015/1029/738383-rail-dispute/Is the union's agenda slowing becoming undone, now they will happy give drivers the boot and has IE's offer taken the sting out of the dispute among drivers.

The junior drivers will probably be the ones to get the boot, and I'd wager that the people who are most in favour of industrial action and this dispute in the company are the more senior staff who are happy to sacrifice some jobs of the junior drivers to protect themselves.

I often wonder if those who advocate "improvements in efficiency" actually think it through!
We are seeing more and more incidences of major disruption caused by minor incidents, for example when one slightly delayed train causes a major ripple effect through the system, something that would become more pronounced if the rotas are tightened up.

Reliability in any system requires a bit of "slack" that can be called on to minimize disruption if there are problems elsewhere.

A good non-rail example is multi drop courier services that have eliminated the "spare time" between deliveries, all it needs is for a crash to happen somewhere on the road network which delays the driver and because there is no slack, a delivery is missed!

end of the road

more services with less drivers, no chance that will happen. we haven't even got the stock anyway

Ctrl Alt Delete

I'd say let them have their reduced working hours, if it means some will lose their jobs.

Might actually make them show the willingness of their convictions at least. Of course the problem will be that the higher paid drivers will be kept and the lower paid will be dumped out

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

more services with less drivers, no chance that will happen. we haven't even got the stock anyway

I'd far prefer they don't improve the timetable and instead stop the four car DARTS. But that will never happen and they'll be here to stay for a long time to come.

The moment they started slapping grab handles in the 81xx class rather than simply using the 26+ spare carriages they have every single peak showed you the direction they were heading in.

It would be far more efficient to just have longer trains.

Stranger Danger

devnull wrote: »

It would be far more efficient to just have longer trains.

It would be more efficient to have no trains.

Completely ridiculous that we are funding an inter-city railway system that mirrors what our motorways do but at more cost.

end of the road

Stranger Danger wrote: »

It would be more efficient to have no trains.

what a load of old rubbish. that nonsense was peddled in the 60s, it failed. time to move on

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Completely ridiculous that we are funding an inter-city railway system that mirrors what our motorways do but at more cost.

no it isn't. trains offer another method of public transport giving choice and competition in methods of public transport. its what any country worth its salt offers and ensures exists. if you think people are going to your precious bus if the trains were removed well, history doesn't seem to back you up i'm afraid. for now at least, the railway is going nowhere. i'd suggest you except it and complain about something that actually is worthwhile complaining about.

Stranger Danger

end of the road wrote: »

what a load of old rubbish. that nonsense was peddled in the 60s, it failed. time to move on

Said the guy with the vested interest in keeping the gravy-trains running.:rolleyes:


Taxpayers should be demanding answers of Govt. ministers as to why we are spending Billions of our euros on a transportation system that is outmoded, eye-wateringly expensive and completely unnecessary.


Keeping you feather-bedded in the cosy unionised lifestyle you've grown accustomed to doesn't count as a good reason in my book.

end of the road

devnull wrote: »

I'd far prefer they don't improve the timetable and instead stop the four car DARTS. But that will never happen and they'll be here to stay for a long time to come.

The moment they started slapping grab handles in the 81xx class rather than simply using the 26+ spare carriages they have every single peak showed you the direction they were heading in.

It would be far more efficient to just have longer trains.

oh i completely agree. however with the stock we have the time table couldn't be improved any more anyway even with short trains. at least dart has enough carriges for long trains if IE were forced to use them, and suburban definitely would if some of their carriges weren't taken away to operate long distance services on the connolly side. but you are right, nothing will change anytime soon if at all

end of the road

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Said the guy with the vested interest in keeping the gravy-trains running.

ah jaysus. vested interest, coming from your good self? pot, kettle

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Taxpayers should be demanding answers of Govt. ministers as to why we are spending Billions of our euros on a transportation system that is outmoded, eye-wateringly expensive and completely unnecessary.

why would i as a tax payer demand an answer as to why we are spending a few million on a transport system which is very modern and offers another method of transport and transport competition when i all ready know the answer as to why that is? such transport competition is very necessary as it ensures a method for as many different people as possible which is a good thing and must continue. i'd hardly call it "eye-wateringly" expensive considering rail will always be more expensive to the user then other methods, all though i would like to see more extras being provided both on trains and at stations like go car type deals to both make the experience on trains better and make the fares better value for money.

Stranger Danger wrote: »

Keeping you feather-bedded in the cosy unionised lifestyle you've grown accustomed to doesn't count as a good reason in my book.

well seeing as i'm not a member of a union, don't work for CIE, never mentioned that as a reason, then i'd suggest you withdraw that little rant and get over it that the railway is here to stay

Ctrl Alt Delete

I'll just leave this link here

Richard tea

Ctrl Alt Delete wrote: »

I'll just leave this link here

Well? Have you a question? My apologies if I have missed an earlier discussion.

Ctrl Alt Delete

edited to the proper link this time

Mycro

With the risk of strike action looming again for this week, could someone clarify for what past productivity the drivers are seeking recognition?

Infini

Mycro wrote: »

With the risk of strike action looming again for this week, could someone clarify for what past productivity the drivers are seeking recognition?

Probably gonna go ahead if not escalate. The whole productivity thing is a difficult thing for me to describe it could be down to changes in rosters or taking on duties of previously other grades for example. Whole problem is the issues have been left to fester too long till they explode. Government is apparently getting involved now by sending in their top negotiator to try and find some ground. Dont know if anything will happen though in the next 2 days tho.

Mycro

Infini2 wrote: »

The whole productivity thing is a difficult thing for me to describe it could be down to changes in rosters or taking on duties of previously other grades for example.

What sort of additional duties? Have the additional duties resulted in more hours at work for the same pay?

Infini

Mycro wrote: »

What sort of additional duties? Have the additional duties resulted in more hours at work for the same pay?

Yeah its something like that its in part because of the gutting of staff levels. Means people have to take more on for nothing. People agreed to do things like this in return for recognition and then the company backs out.

Problem as well is that the company side has been rather belligerrent and alot of it seems to be down to franks trying to railroad through his agenda (no pun intended).

Then hes sending out letters to the drivers homes (again) saying they should agree to this. This is only gonna make things worse as that looks like its the company trying to intimidate the drivers by making their families worry. If anything not only is it rather dirty but it ends up polarising and militising the issues.

If things escalate then it could mean work to rule next. If that happens certain sevices wont run and their will be little notice because it will mean drivers refusing to work overtime. Thats when things get ugly.

Mycro

What is the increase in hours per week that has gone unpaid as a result of the past productivity improvements?

Wild Garlic

Infini2 wrote: »

Yeah its something like that its in part because of the gutting of staff levels. Means people have to take more on for nothing. People agreed to do things like this in return for recognition and then the company backs out.

Problem as well is that the company side has been rather belligerrent and alot of it seems to be down to franks trying to railroad through his agenda (no pun intended).

Then hes sending out letters to the drivers homes (again) saying they should agree to this. This is only gonna make things worse as that looks like its the company trying to intimidate the drivers by making their families worry. If anything not only is it rather dirty but it ends up polarising and militising the issues.

If things escalate then it could mean work to rule next. If that happens certain sevices wont run and their will be little notice because it will mean drivers refusing to work overtime. Thats when things get ugly.

What extra duties did the drivers get?

GLaDOS

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/government-to-intervene-in-irish-rail-dispute-703979.html

Government officials are set to make a last ditch effort to prevent Friday's planned dispute involving Irish Rail drivers from taking place.

It is understood that representatives for Transport Minister, Paschal Donohoe, are set to try and broker a deal to try and prevent the planned stoppage from going ahead.

Kieran Mulvey of the Labour Relations Commission is also set to invite union officials to crunch talks in the Workplace Relations Commission in a bid to prevent Friday's strike.

Any chance of the strike being averted? Doesn't seem very likely at this stage.

kidneyfan

Stranger Danger wrote: »

It would be more efficient to have no trains.

Completely ridiculous that we are funding an inter-city railway system that mirrors what our motorways do but at more cost.

I love trains but Ireland shouldn't have any trains.

end of the road

kidneyfan wrote: »

I love trains but Ireland shouldn't have any trains.

yeah. seriously, time to move on from this 1960s nonsense. tried, didn't work. been there done that as they say

kidneyfan

end of the road wrote: »

yeah. seriously, time to move on from this 1960s nonsense. tried, didn't work. been there done that as they say

I love trains but they don't suit Irish settlement patterns or national culture.