What the hell is wrong with the Unions in this Country ??

Mr. Incognito

Before we open another can of worms on the Public Sector, Private Sector divide, can I just ask what the hell is wrong with the Unions in this country.

Anyone who has had any experience of the public sector both within and without knows that morale is on the floor. It's not just pay. It's because people are promoted based on time served not ability. It doesnt matter if you do a sterling job or sit around and make tea and browse Facebook promotion will swing by or not just the same or not.

Instead of trying to lobby for actual change in Ireland the Union heads negotated lower salaries for newer entrants. It was the Unions's kite that they negotated to protect the current staffs inflated wages.

Lets just be clear on the actual hardship endured on this country.

No one in any Public Service position lost their Jobs. Thousands and Thousands in the Private Sector lost jobs, emigrated.

The cut in the Public Service was felt by the new entrants who got frozen out and absolutely screwed. The unions did that to them, now they are turning two faced and pointing out how unfair it is even though these weasels sold out the new entrants . And to be fair, no one got their pay increases and they had to pay a bit for their pension, but no where near what that pension is worth to a private sector worker who would have to pay for an equivalent pension.

Unions are an archiac hangover from the Industrial era. They are not required in the modern Employment Legisation World They are entitled by law to attend work disciplinary meetings butif they dont actually know anything about workers rights and then can they turn around and shrug and say, hey, whoops. Lawyers are insured. If they are negligent you can sue. Unions are not professionals or trained. Its basically taking in the lad down the pub with you.

The comments from Jack O Connor Jack O'Connor "]today [/URL] just show how out of touch these cretins are.

The Country is being run at a Deficit and these lads are just throwing out soundbites to justify their own hundred thousand euro pay packets

topper75

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The Country is being run at a Deficit

Yes that is the serious material fact at the centre of this.

The realpolitik of it though is these guys will push it, simply because they can.

Ted111

Comrade Incognito, the plight of the working man vis a vis the capitalist system puts the individual in the chains of the bourgeois vis a vis the means of production.

Arcade_Tryer

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Before we open another can of worms on the Public Sector, Private Sector divide

No one in any Public Service position lost their Jobs. Thousands and Thousands in the Private Sector lost jobs, emigrated.

Can of worms officially opened.

Unions are an archiac hangover from the Industrial era. They are not required in the modern Employment Legisation World

Can of blissful ignorance officially opened.

suicide_circus

A few points.

1. "Pay Restoration". Restoring pay to levels seen when the country was paying people more than it was taking in is a foolhardy and irresponsible concept. If we want the books to balance and for equal pay for equal work to exist, the uncomfortable fact is that a lot of older civil servants need to take a substantial pay cut. We also need to not only keep the USC but actually widen the net so that more people contribute income tax.

2."There is no more money". Yes there is. Its just concentrated in the koffers of a tiny minority of people. The working poor bicker over the scraps from the tables of our betters like dogs.

Hammer89

I was about to launch an impassioned defence of Irish onions before realising.

ChikiChiki

We need to wait till Britain triggers article 50 and Trumps America comes to the fore before we start giving out further pay rises from tax payer funds. Then we need to analyse the impact.

It would be idiotic in my opinion. Enda Kenny should go. The recovery narrative they ran with to get elected was incompetence at its best.

jimmy blevins

The term "pay restoration" really grinds my gears, the previous levels of pay were the product of a bubble.

diomed

This is the plan

(1) bring the lower paid in the public service up to the level of the higher paid
(2) higher paid then get increases to restore the gap over the lower paid.

suicide_circus

diomed wrote: »

This is the plan

(1) bring the lower paid in the public service up to the level of the higher paid
(2) higher paid then get increases to restore the gap over the lower paid.

"Dig up, stupid!"

tayto lover

Everything is geared to ensuring that the Big Man stays big and the small man stays small.
Unions are very necessary as I found out years ago working in a non-union job.

end of the road

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Unions are an archiac hangover from the Industrial era.

no they aren't. they are a necessary force for many and good enforcers of employment law and workers rights.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

They are not required in the modern Employment Legisation World

they are required otherwise they wouldn't exist. employment law on it's own isn't enough, one needs the facility to look after their rights and a union is ultimately the best option. nobody has to join if they don't want to but those who wish to are entitled to.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The comments from Jack O Connor Jack O'Connor "]today [/URL] just show how out of touch these cretins are.

they are not cretins.

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The Country is being run at a Deficit and these lads are just throwing out soundbites to justify their own hundred thousand euro pay packets

that the members decided they should earn. if they aren't worth the money they won't be paid that amount and will be replaced with a new leader who is.

_Brian

I think it's important to understand the function of a Union.

Their remit is to get the best possible pay and conditions for their members. Unions will always take any chance to open negotiations with employers for pay increases for employees. That is what they are doing, the government signalled that pay rises were backnon the table for public servants by awarding themselves pay increases and double pay increases in the case of ministers.

So on the back of that they are out to undo pay cuts and enforce pay rises going forward.

Unions have no social conscience, their responsibilities are to members only.

Arcade_Tryer

_Brian wrote: »

Unions have no social conscience, their responsibilities are to members only.

Employers have no social conscience; their responsibilities are to shareholders only. Unions act as a counterbalance to protect labour from being exploited amidst the never-ending pursuit by business for profit maximisation and efficiency.

riclad

Look at america where some companys have no unions,
people have to work for 60 plus hours a week,
wages are low,
Basic health and safety rules are ignored .
Look at train crashes in the us and crashes involving truck drivers .
Unions mean people work x hours ,they get breaks ,
they get time to go to the toilet .
Drivers in the eu can only drive for a limited time ,
driving hours are recorded and checked .
Theres more accidents in the us because workers work long hours ,
and a tired driver is a danger to everyone.
Yes theres a problem in the public service ,
wheres you work for years you get a promotion,
whether your work is good or mediocre .
Just google top level civil servants pensions,
its crazy what they get .
look at the us ,wages for most people have hardly gone up since 2000,
this is because the unions are weak.
i,d prefer the irish system to the american way.

Guy:Incognito

riclad wrote: »

Drivers in the eu can only drive for a limited time ,
driving hours are recorded and checked ..

Unionised drivers ? Or all drivers..................................?

end of the road

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Unionised drivers ? Or all drivers..................................?

all drivers, thanks to the unions

P_1

The current unions are ineffective and the old effectively shafted the young. Time to get rid of the O'Connors, Beggs and the rest and replace them with people who actually know how the modern world works. They have lost touch with the people they are supposed to represent.

Fleawuss

As long as capitalism exists there will be a need for unions. Both of them are necessary evils.

Charles Babbage

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Before we open another can of worms on the Public Sector, Private Sector divide, can I just ask what the hell is wrong with the Unions in this country.

Anyone who has had any experience of the public sector both within and without knows that morale is on the floor. It's not just pay. It's because people are promoted based on time served not ability. It doesnt matter if you do a sterling job or sit around and make tea and browse Facebook promotion will swing by or not just the same or not.

Instead of trying to lobby for actual change in Ireland the Union heads negotated lower salaries for newer entrants. It was the Unions's kite that they negotated to protect the current staffs inflated wages.

Lets just be clear on the actual hardship endured on this country.

No one in any Public Service position lost their Jobs. Thousands and Thousands in the Private Sector lost jobs, emigrated.

The cut in the Public Service was felt by the new entrants who got frozen out and absolutely screwed. The unions did that to them, now they are turning two faced and pointing out how unfair it is even though these weasels sold out the new entrants . And to be fair, no one got their pay increases and they had to pay a bit for their pension, but no where near what that pension is worth to a private sector worker who would have to pay for an equivalent pension.

Unions are an archiac hangover from the Industrial era. They are not required in the modern Employment Legisation World They are entitled by law to attend work disciplinary meetings butif they dont actually know anything about workers rights and then can they turn around and shrug and say, hey, whoops. Lawyers are insured. If they are negligent you can sue. Unions are not professionals or trained. Its basically taking in the lad down the pub with you.

The usual rant.
Nobody lost their jobs in the public service because they were doing something people needed. People whose services were not in demand lost their jobs.

New entrants did get a lower rate in the bust, this was a reasonable step at the time. It is not reasonable to continue this.

Mr. Incognito

riclad wrote: »

Look at america where some companys have no unions,
people have to work for 60 plus hours a week,
wages are low,
Basic health and safety rules are ignored .
Look at train crashes in the us and crashes involving truck drivers .
Unions mean people work x hours ,they get breaks ,
they get time to go to the toilet .
Drivers in the eu can only drive for a limited time ,
driving hours are recorded and checked .
Theres more accidents in the us because workers work long hours ,
and a tired driver is a danger to everyone.
Yes theres a problem in the public service ,
wheres you work for years you get a promotion,
whether your work is good or mediocre .
Just google top level civil servants pensions,
its crazy what they get .
look at the us ,wages for most people have hardly gone up since 2000,
this is because the unions are weak.
i,d prefer the irish system to the american way.

This is because of the Working time Directive.

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=706&langId=en&intPageId=205

Nothing to do with unions. As is most workers benefits. Its through legislation. Law. Not unions

Jawgap

Somewhat ironic that discussion on this topic will take place over one of the greatest outputs to come from organised labour and unions......the "weekend."

Unions are just doing what they are always doing - looking after their members - that's what they're paid to do.

But the OP is right, the PS needs reform, but the people keep voting in politicians who have zero appetite to take on meaningful reform. The governments over the years have struck 'bad' deals (or great ones in you're a public servant) and now efforts are being made to hold them to them.....I'd imagine if the situation was reversed and the unions were trying to wriggle free of the agreements there'd be hell to pay, so don't blame the unions for being good negotiators and now taking advantage of circumstances to advance their members' interests, blame the politicians who agreed these deals in the first place, and who used the term 'financial emergency' to justify their actions - didn't they realise that at some point the emergency was going to pass?

Oh, and it might be worth noting that while the focus has shifted to 'greedy' PS workers, it was the private sector Luas drivers who kicked it all off for this round.

Jawgap

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The usual rant.
Nobody lost their jobs in the public service because they were doing something people needed. People whose services were not in demand lost their jobs.

New entrants did get a lower rate in the bust, this was a reasonable step at the time. It is not reasonable to continue this.

Bit of a myth that - plenty lost their jobs in the rush to reduce headcount......it was just achieved through means other than redundancy

There are a lobby group just like any other lobby group except with a bit of added ideology.

Winterlong

mariaalice wrote: »

There are a lobby group just like any other lobby group except with a bit of added ideology.

And (in some cases) with the power to bring the country to a standstill.

I am all for sharing the wealth but not until the country is actually operating a surplus. No private company operating at a deficit would be giving pay rises.

Jawgap

Winterlong wrote: »

And (in some cases) with the power to bring the country to a standstill.

I am all for sharing the wealth but not until the country is actually operating a surplus. No private company operating at a deficit would be giving pay rises.

Countries are not companies, nor are they households, so the twee wisdom of commerce and domesticity does not apply in the fiscal realm

granturismo

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

This is because of the Working time Directive.

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=706&langId=en&intPageId=205

Nothing to do with unions. As is most workers benefits. Its through legislation. Law. Not unions

Rubbish. EU advisory committees are comprised of various interest groups including union nominees from member states.

Do you think there was no workplace safety legislation for the majority of Irish workplaces until 1989 because of benevolent EEC parliamentarians? The Factory Act 1956 was the only safety legislation in Ireland until 1989, it didnt apply to all workplaces and the 1989 Irish Safety legislation was only enacted on the basis of an EU directive.

EU workplace directives are initiated by stakeholders including unions.

Shenshen

As a non-Irish person (hailing from a country where unions and strikes are allowed in all sectors except for public servants), I have to ask why it is that unions here seem to have the biggest impact in the sector with the most well-protected jobs? Is it because it's so easy to organise against a single employer, but unions just can't be bothered to negotiate with hundreds of them as would the case in most areas of the private sector?

Winterlong

Jawgap wrote: »

Countries are not companies, nor are they households, so the twee wisdom of commerce and domesticity does not apply in the fiscal realm

I dont understand the principled difference. Why would it not be ok for a private company to give pay rises when operating at a deficit but it would be ok for a country?

Stealthfins

Everybody has a choice, I was laughed at by people in the private sector for taking a job in the public sector
It Was 1999 and the lads were on way better money than I.

Now I've climbed the ladder on the incremental scale and quite comfortable financially.

My job is outdoors mostly in all weather's,looking after gardens and grounds in National parks and historical site's.

I don't have the so called cushy number in a warm office.

I studied horticulture and got a job that wasn't as well paid as those who went out landscaping and designing gardens.

They had the same oppertunity as me but scoffed at the idea of lower pay etc.

I know my rights in the work place,unions know all about employment legislation and right's.

Without a union some bosses will lie,manipulate and abuse their staff.

If you're being bullied or treated unfairly not getting paid overtime,believe you me it's rampant in the private sector, and have no union on your side.
You'll pay a solicitor quite handsomely to help you out.
You'll pay him or her so much that it wouldn't be worth the hassle.

On the other hand you pay a union a small weekly fee and they'll help you out.
It's their job.
Could mean the difference between a fiver a week over a few meetings or thousands for litigation that's dragged out.

If you have a strong shop steward your sorted.

xxyyzz

riclad wrote: »

Look at america where some companys have no unions,
people have to work for 60 plus hours a week,
wages are low,
Basic health and safety rules are ignored .
Look at train crashes in the us and crashes involving truck drivers .
Unions mean people work x hours ,they get breaks ,
they get time to go to the toilet .
Drivers in the eu can only drive for a limited time ,
driving hours are recorded and checked .
Theres more accidents in the us because workers work long hours ,
and a tired driver is a danger to everyone.
Yes theres a problem in the public service ,
wheres you work for years you get a promotion,
whether your work is good or mediocre .
Just google top level civil servants pensions,
its crazy what they get .
look at the us ,wages for most people have hardly gone up since 2000,
this is because the unions are weak.
i,d prefer the irish system to the american way.

There is a happy medium though, yes I believe unions can be necessary when you look at things like zero hour contracts for retail workers etc which is a terrible practice however unions have gotten pissed with power particularly in the public service and seem to be willing to strike at the drop of a hat. The ability to hold a country to ransom like the transport unions or the teachers' unions can is not a good thing for the country. The civil service lives in la-la land and the sense of entitlement is something to behold.

RobbingBandit

They are digging their own graves thinking that strike action worked to get the LUAS workers paid, again it worked to get the bus workers paid, threatening to strike got the gardai paid, if the unions don't get rises for the other workers paying union dues maybe the fear is these workers will question where is my pay rise why am I paying these clowns if they aren't getting me paid so to speak.

So the unions are skipping ahead to ruffle some feathers in hopes of protecting their own interests and damned the expenses monetary or collateral damn them indeed.

Fratton Fred

jimmy blevins wrote: »

The term "pay restoration" really grinds my gears, the previous levels of pay were the product of a bubble.

If the unions really wanted "Pay Restoration" then they would be trying to get rid of USC, which hits everyone pretty hard, but they know that without USC, there isn't nearly enough going in to the coffers to pay for the bloated public sector.

When USC is abolished, then I have no problem with the public sector getting payrises, but quite simply, Ireland Limited isn't doing well enough to justify paying it's staff more.

RobbingBandit

Unions want pay restoration for their paying members abolition of the USC would help everyone in employment paying the charge not just union members, that's not good for business Jack.

Riskymove

Winterlong wrote: »

I am all for sharing the wealth but not until the country is actually operating a surplus. No private company operating at a deficit would be giving pay rises.

This doesn't make any sense

A deficit/surplus isn't down to the operations of the PS workforce like a company would be

If the Government chooses to have give away budgets for the next 30 years resulting in a deficit, then PS shouldn't have any rise and be 30 years behind in cost of living/inflation?

Jawgap

Winterlong wrote: »

I dont understand the principled difference. Why would it not be ok for a private company to give pay rises when operating at a deficit but it would be ok for a country?

Deficits are notional.....if you want to apply some universal wisdom, it's this....

"Profit is vanity - turnover is sanity - cash is reality."

Easy enough - as Enron thoroughly proved - to engage in a bit of creative accounting to show a loss/deficit or a profit/surplus.

Riskymove

RobbingBandit wrote: »

Unions want pay restoration for their paying members abolition of the USC would help everyone in employment paying the charge not just union members, that's not good for business Jack.

Have a read of this:

http://www.siptu.ie/media/media_19181_en.pdf

Jawgap

Btw, the PS is currently recruiting APs....

The Assistant Principal is a senior management grade in the Civil Service and is a critical post in terms of ensuring quality service delivery to the public.

The role of Assistant Principal is a hugely diverse one, the context of which can vary from one Department to another and from post to post.

Assistant Principals play a critical management role in implementing government policy in the economic, financial, international, environmental and/or social arenas.

.....the level I was previously at.....I'm in no rush to go back

Geuze

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

No one in any Public Service position lost their Jobs. Thousands and Thousands in the Private Sector lost jobs, emigrated.

Just to be clear that employment in the PS fell quite a lot.

It fell in councils by 25%.

But, yes, there weren't any compulsory redundancies.

But plenty of contracts not renewed.

riclad

I think theres eu rules on drivers of large trucks ,long distance drivers ,
they can drive x hours then they have to take a break,
They can only drive x hours per day.
This is recorded on a meter which can be checked by the police any time .
There are many serious accidents by truck and train drivers in the usa ,
as the drivers are not usually union members ,
Some drivers drive for 10 plus hours which is not safe for the public.
And if there are rules re mmax hours you can drive they are hardly enforced .They problem we will have now is the luas drivers got a good pay rise ,
now all the other public sector unions will expect a similar pay rise
as the wages of nurse,s teachers, gardai, civil servants are connected in some way ,at least when it comes to getting a pay rise.
Unions have a role in getting basic rights like break times , health and safety rules which provide a safe workplace .
They were maybe involved in getting rules on making most shops ,pubs
,retail stores bringing in non smoking rules .

Mr. Incognito

granturismo wrote: »

Rubbish. EU advisory committees are comprised of various interest groups including union nominees from member states.

Do you think there was no workplace safety legislation for the majority of Irish workplaces until 1989 because of benevolent EEC parliamentarians? The Factory Act 1956 was the only safety legislation in Ireland until 1989, it didnt apply to all workplaces and the 1989 Irish Safety legislation was only enacted on the basis of an EU directive.

EU workplace directives are initiated by stakeholders including unions.

This is a bizarre post.

Firstly, Most Irish employment legislation came about through EU Law.

Most Employment Legislation was fiercely resisted by Countries such as the UK.

Here's a handy list; http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/employment_rights_and_duties/employment_law_update.html

How EU Law is made is slightly more complicated.

https://europa.eu/european-union/law_en

In short the Commission prepares a report and it is passed by the Parliament and Council.

And Yes, Unions and Employer Groups are both consulted and their comments are recorded in the reports prepared by the Commission. Lets just take the Directive in Question, the Working Time Directive.
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52006DC0371&from=EN

You can see that Unions and Employer Groups both made comments and were canvased. To equate that to them somehow being responsible for employment legislation or the terms of same is disingenious.

But the point I am making is that Unions were around for 100 years in this country. Their contribution to Irish employment Legislation between the time of the foundation of the State when they were at their strongest to protect workers rights is.......... very little. Can you show me any legislation that unions have brought about? I cant find any.

Unions dont lobby for legislation. They never have. They are not NOW lobbying for legislation.

They beat the same simplistic tribal drum. Give us more more more. Even when the country/ employer cant afford it.

They want pay "restoration" to boom time hyperinflated levels when the country is running at a current budget deficit. This is by any measure outragiously greedy at best and ruinous at worst.

I am in favour of Unions in principle. Collective bargaining is a good idea.
But things like "Benchmarking" were a scam pure and simple and this idea of "Pay restoration" is unjustified and stupid.

Wanderer78

'Keep the recovery going'!

Dr. Kenneth Noisewater

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

people are promoted based on time served not ability. It doesnt matter if you do a sterling job or sit around and make tea and browse Facebook promotion will swing by or not just the same or not.

Just to get one this straight - the days of promotions based on seniority or service are gone, at least in the Civil Service. If you want promotion, you have to go through a long exam and interview process to get it, the best person for the job. Rightly so.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the unions really wanted "Pay Restoration" then they would be trying to get rid of USC, which hits everyone pretty hard, but they know that without USC, there isn't nearly enough going in to the coffers to pay for the bloated public sector.

When USC is abolished, then I have no problem with the public sector getting payrises, but quite simply, Ireland Limited isn't doing well enough to justify paying it's staff more.

I don't like the USC any more than the next person, but why would you want to get rid of the only progressive tax which everyone has to pay? Those who can afford to pay more have to do so, and everyone contributes something. Is it fairer that a Public Servant's wages have been slashed by €60 or €70 per week in the form of a 'Pension Levy' (which goes nowhere near their pension which they already pay into) than someone who earns €350 per week and pays €1.75 in USC?

RobbieTheRobber

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If the unions really wanted "Pay Restoration" then they would be trying to get rid of USC, which hits everyone pretty hard, but they know that without USC, there isn't nearly enough going in to the coffers to pay for the bloated public sector.

When USC is abolished, then I have no problem with the public sector getting payrises, but quite simply, Ireland Limited isn't doing well enough to justify paying it's staff more.

The USC raised around €4 billion last year for the state. Approximately €3 billion of that came from the top 20% of earners. So does this tax really hit hard?

Little CuChulainn

unions are necessary but they are too powerful in Ireland. This collective deal making is just not suitable. Gardaí should never have been in the same deal as civil servants. They should be in a deal with the likes nurses, firefighters and prison officers. Trying to please everyone with the same deal is a joke but the major unions won't have it any other way and the government won't stand up to them.

Guy:Incognito

Getting the highest wage possible isn't always whats best for employees. Not much point in earing huge wages if the employer goes bust.

Mr. Incognito

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

The cut in the Public Service was felt by the new entrants who got frozen out and absolutely screwed. The unions did that to them, now they are turning two faced and pointing out how unfair it is even though these weasels sold out the new entrants .

No. The unions did NOT do that to new entrants. The Government did. Let's be absolutely clear about that. The unions argued tooth and nail against two-tier pay but ultimately the government held a gun to their head and they had to accept it as an alternative to cutting the salary of existing members. You might claim that's looking after existing employees but they would say it is ensuring people who were given salary commitments and have existing expectations and expenses are not left in the lurch.

It always amuses me how people - like you - on the one hand give out to the unions for being too intransigent and then use this occasion when they DID compromise against them.

Lastly some unions including ASTI never accepted two-tier pay and their members have been punished for that by the government. That's one of the reasons for the current strikes. Given you are so upset about 'shafting' new entrants I assume you can confirm you are supporting them all the way?

Oodoov

At some stage over the last 20 years the unions stopped protecting societies least well off and decided to row in behind the establishment. How anyone on a wage of 50k plus in the PS can hold the country ( a broke country) to ransom so they have have what is in effect a pay rise is disgusting. Most of the private sector earned more than they are at present 10 years ago it's just the way it is.

El Tarangu

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The usual rant.
Nobody lost their jobs in the public service because they were doing something people needed.

- This is specious reasoning; show me the public servants who were made redundant when the dept that they worked in was abolished and I will buy you a drink.

evolving_doors

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

Before we open another can of worms on the Public Sector, Private Sector divide,...

Very sensible

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

....can I just ask what the hell is wrong with the Unions in this country.
...................

Doh!

snickerpuss

riclad wrote: »

Look at america where some companys have no unions,
people have to work for 60 plus hours a week,
wages are low,
Basic health and safety rules are ignored .
Look at train crashes in the us and crashes involving truck drivers .
Unions mean people work x hours ,they get breaks ,
they get time to go to the toilet .
Drivers in the eu can only drive for a limited time ,
driving hours are recorded and checked .
Theres more accidents in the us because workers work long hours ,
and a tired driver is a danger to everyone.
Yes theres a problem in the public service ,
wheres you work for years you get a promotion,
whether your work is good or mediocre .
Just google top level civil servants pensions,
its crazy what they get .
look at the us ,wages for most people have hardly gone up since 2000,
this is because the unions are weak.
i,d prefer the irish system to the american way.

Just RE: train drivers in Ireland. They are not subject to limited driving hours or the working time regulations. They are regularly rostered for 10 days straight and can do more than that if required. I think it's mad.