Unions warn of train strike as staff demand pay increase

Hilly Bill

Working class heroes wrote: »

Who got a 7% pay rise a few years ago? Drivers?

Signalmen.

Hilly Bill

devnull wrote: »

You are the one that said those in the public sector who are paying high tax were paying their own wages and supplementing those who were on the dole, not me, let me remind you of that.



Generally when a company doesn't have money for a pay rise, which Irish Rail don't by the way, it's normal for the company to say that they can only offer a rise if there are changes to work practices and efficiency measures that are made which allow savings in other areas to free up funds for a pay rise.

The simple fact is Irish Rail cannot afford to give you a 3.5% pay rise just because you want it because it doesn't have the funds to do so.

Care to point out the bit that i said others should be thankful?. Also while you are searching, keep an eye out for the bit that i said that i was looking for a pay rise.

devnull

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Care to point out the bit that i said others should be thankful?.

You stated that people paying high tax were paying their own wages and supplementing those who were on the dole which leaves me with the logical conclusion that you are saying that they are doing something good for others.

Also while you are searching, keep an eye out for the bit that i said that i was looking for a pay rise.

Are you saying that you don't want a pay rise?

Because honestly from your posts over the last few pages I wouldn't gain that impression.

Hilly Bill

devnull wrote: »

You stated that people paying high tax were paying their own wages and supplementing those who were on the dole which leaves me with the logical conclusion that you are saying that they are doing something good for others.



Are you saying that you don't want a pay rise despite arguing that people should get a rise for the last several pages?

A bit like saying since you pay tax the staff in Irish rail should thank you for paying their wages. With your logic then they are self employed.
Have a gander again as to where i mentioned they should get it.
I'm not looking for a pay rise but i wouldn't refuse one either. I wouldn't be wasting time in the lrc either nor be looking to strike.
I'm not one for impressions.

Infini

Honestly I get tired of these threads sometimes as there cant be any reasonable debate from some its just hate, begrudgery and hypocrisy. The most spiteful ones are usually of the same theme:

"oh they get paid more than me and are looking for a pay rise why should they when I'm on a lower wage than them?!"

Honestly if one hasn't looked lately there's a massive inflation of the rental sector as well as skyrocketing house prices as well. On top of that wage's have been frozen for a decade that's a very long time without any pay rise no matter what anyone else says. Not everyone is actually out for a pay rise either there's others like trying to hold onto their jobs and terms and conditions that a seriously distrusted management are trying to undermine. That can also be a motivator for a strike as well not just pay.

goingnowhere

Facts are the issue at hand

Average wages well given employers PRSI, pensions, redundancy payments etc its hard to work out, its not really relevant. There are no other railway companies to compare against

Despite the problems, increments were paid, so annual wage increase based solely on service and not on merit. So every single member of staff on the front line on a permanent contract got an increase every year, bar when the across the board reduction was introduced (which has since been reversed)

Irish Rail's subsidy is down 67 million 2016 vs 2007

The free travel payment is 14 million and has not changed since 2007

Passenger numbers in 2016 were 42 million vs the peak of 46 million in 2007

end of the road

murphthesmurf wrote: »

35k for what though? An 'operative' yes, it's too much. A train driver maybe a small rise.
In the private sector to get 35k you would need qualifications and experience in a skilled trade.
It is the tax payer who will end up funding these pay rises through increased public transport grants. Private sector employees have to EARN any pay rises they might get through up skilling, doing extra tasks, increased productivity. I was given a raise recently which is linked to KPI's if I don't acheive them, I don't get the extra money.
Yet EI, BE, and the tram drivers just come with their little pot like Oliver asking for more money just 'because'. Out of some kind of entitlement. That we the private sector tax payers will eventually pay for through our taxes and increased rail fare.
You will get it though, as the government lacks the back bone to do anything. If you assembled all of the vertebrae you could find in the dall you still couldn't assemble a single spine. We should take the hit now and let it sink. Then build a better rail company free from jobs worths and excessive unjustified salaries. No where in the private sector in any job in any company working any hours would an operative earn 35k.

whatever the rail company, the wages paid to staff would be around the same.

murphthesmurf wrote: »

People in the private sector get paid for what they can do, and how much they do. Unlike in the public sector where a wage is considered an entitlement in the private sector it is earned.
If you work as an operative in the private sector you will NEVER reach 35k. A warehouse operative for someone like Lidl would be quite well paid for that role, at around 25k for a 40 hour week. I've seen the adverts for the warehouse they have in Mullingar. An assistant manager in a Lidl store would get 35k.
This idea you have that everyone in the private sector just 'settles' for it is absolute nonsense. You get the going rate, end of. You can cry and protest all you like, the only place you will go is out the door. As an operative you are very easily replaced. Not that being an operative is a bad thing, I have worked as a warehouse operative myself in the past. To get 35k in the private sector you need skills/qualifications/experience.
What does someone in a IE operative position do? Is it just general duties around the station? In the private sector this would probably be minimum wage.

public sector workers earn their wage. if the job wasn't worth the wage the wage wouldn't be paid. if station staff's duties were worth minimum wage then minimum wage is what would be paid. they aren't worth minimum wage, but the wage they are paid, hence they are paid the wage.

devnull

goingnowhere wrote: »

Average wages well given employers PRSI, pensions, redundancy payments etc its hard to work out, its not really relevant.

Actually PRSI, retirement costs and redundancy costs are not included in the wages section of the company report that I have used for my calculations, I purposefully left out the pensions, PRSI and redundancy costs because we are talking about employee pay not total staff costs.

From the 2016 accounts:
Wages and salaries are €208,861,000
Social Insurance costs are €19,327,000
Retirement benefit costs are €26,058,000
Gross staff costs of €252,246,000

A note on the accounts states that all figures exclude restructuring costs.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Working class heroes wrote: »

Who got a 7% pay rise a few years ago? Drivers?

Signalmen.

Just CTC Signalmen (not all signalmen) got an incremental 6% pay rise, this was in relation to extra traffic volumes and issues related to the KRP and was granted to that grade specifically through mediation, your notion of "ignoring an agreed pay rise of around 7%which was only paid to a certain few a few years ago whilst the rest are still waiting" is misleading as it is suggestive that all were granted a pay rise and only some received and the rest are awaiting this agreed rise - which is totally incorrect.

GM228

Infini wrote: »

Honestly I get tired of these threads sometimes as there cant be any reasonable debate from some its just hate, begrudgery and hypocrisy. The most spiteful ones are usually of the same theme

Every thread of a similar discussion (LUAS, DB, BE etc) has produced the same effect.

devnull

end of the road wrote: »

if the job wasn't worth the wage the wage wouldn't be paid. if station staff's duties were worth minimum wage then minimum wage is what would be paid..

Your argument is that people are paid no more than their job is worth?

In that case then nobody could possibly be overpaid at all using that theory.

Does this apply to management and bankers too?

Working class heroes

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Signalmen.

All of them?
Edit : answered up thread.

GM228

devnull wrote: »

Your argument is that people are paid no more than their job is worth?

In that case then nobody could possibly be overpaid at all using that theory.

Does this apply to management and bankers too?

Now now, I'm surprised, have you not learned anything from EOTR over the various LUAS, DB and BE threads Devnull? The "market" has decided that nobody is overpaid, they are paid what they are paid because that's the correct pay for the job, if it wasn't the correct pay then they wouldn't be paid that pay.....end of. :D

eeguy

GM228 wrote: »

Now now, I'm surprised, have you not learned anything from EOTR over the various LUAS, DB and BE threads Devnull? The "market" has decided that nobody is overpaid, they are paid what they are paid because that's the correct pay for the job, if it wasn't the correct pay then they wouldn't be paid that pay.....end of. :D

Is it a market if there's absolutely no competition?

end of the road

eeguy wrote: »

Is it a market if there's absolutely no competition?

there is competition and a market in terms of driving jobs in the form of railways in other countries. there is also northern ireland railways. the relevant rules for those operators will have to be learned of course.

Working class heroes

end of the road wrote: »

there is competition and a market in terms of driving jobs in the form of railways in other countries. there is also northern ireland railways. the relevant rules for those operators will have to be learned of course.

This is the most dilusional post you have made around here and that's saying something.

end of the road

Working class heroes wrote: »

This is the most dilusional post you have made around here and that's saying something.

not at all. competition doesn't have to be in the 1 exact area for it to be competition. it can be internal or external, homegrown or foreign.

eeguy

end of the road wrote: »

there is competition and a market in terms of driving jobs in the form of railways in other countries. there is also northern ireland railways. the relevant rules for those operators will have to be learned of course.

But surely you can't really benchmark wages against those in other countries.

I get paid much less than my equivalent in the US. But then I'm not saddled with 100k of college debt.
I get paid more than my continental europe equivalents, but they have a lower cost of living.

What's the average wage of a UK rail worker?

Jamie2k9

Infini wrote: »

Honestly I get tired of these threads sometimes as there cant be any reasonable debate from some its just hate, begrudgery and hypocrisy. The most spiteful ones are usually of the same theme:

"oh they get paid more than me and are looking for a pay rise why should they when I'm on a lower wage than them?!"

Honestly if one hasn't looked lately there's a massive inflation of the rental sector as well as skyrocketing house prices as well. On top of that wage's have been frozen for a decade that's a very long time without any pay rise no matter what anyone else says. Not everyone is actually out for a pay rise either there's others like trying to hold onto their jobs and terms and conditions that a seriously distrusted management are trying to undermine. That can also be a motivator for a strike as well not just pay.

Lets not use the external factors as an excuse this time, if there as little inflation in the economy unions would still be demanding such rises.

You weren't quick giving back pay when all of the above dropped during the recession (every right to argue) but I am looking at it in principal based on the above comment about why pay should be raised.

I think we all get tired of the same topic annually however we always have the odd comment (not referring to you specifically) about how none of us know what it's like to work for IE and x, y, z but it's the same people who are not willing to share such problems they have either because they don't exist, part of a job or making excuses for big pay increases.

Jamie2k9

end of the road wrote: »

not at all. competition doesn't have to be in the 1 exact area for it to be competition. it can be internal or external, homegrown or foreign.

TBH some of the IE crowd wouldn't fit in well at NI Railways........firstly they don't strike annually :P

Seriously if they were given a choice I think IE would win hands down.

monument

Honestly, why do the unions go on with this type of thing?

Rail unions reject claim that ‘increments’ are pay hikes
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/rail-unions-reject-claim-that-increments-are-pay-hikes-460029.html

Tom Mann Centuria

monument wrote: »

Honestly, why do the unions go on with this type of thing?

Rail unions reject claim that ‘increments’ are pay hikes
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/rail-unions-reject-claim-that-increments-are-pay-hikes-460029.html

Well if they're at top of their incremental scale they don't get any more, so they haven't had a pay "hike". They say 80% are at the top of their scale and therefore haven't had any increase in their pay from that means.

No idea of the broader arguments but I think in this case the unions have a valid point.

devnull

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

Well if they're at top of their incremental scale they don't get any more, so they haven't had a pay "hike". They say 80% are at the top of their scale and therefore haven't had any increase in their pay from that means.

No idea of the broader arguments but I think in this case the unions have a valid point.

Seems to be some clever wording on behalf of Noone here.

On one hand he is saying that they have not had a pay rise in 10 years (in the past) and the article indicates that increments are not included in this calculation anyway and he then goes on to say that most staff have reached the top of their increments so increments does not (in the present) effect them. I suspect that many staff may have seen rises due to increments over the last 10 years but Noone has avoided saying this directly through clever wording.

It still doesn't help their cause that much because it just indicates staff are on higher wages for roles than claimed in the past, the scales for each grade are in the public domain via Freedom of Information request list of grades and their salary ranges, one of the arguments I've seen that the workers have had in the past is that people are wrongly assuming that a lot of staff are near the top of those ranges when they are not, which now appears to have been put to bed if we take the unions word for it.

See attached for salary scales

Infini

monument wrote: »

Honestly, why do the unions go on with this type of thing?

Rail unions reject claim that ‘increments’ are pay hikes
http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/rail-unions-reject-claim-that-increments-are-pay-hikes-460029.html

Thats the thing though in a literal sense the incriments arent pay hikes theyre based on lenght of service on a 10year scale in general. Once you hit the top of the scale it stops. If you get promoted to a higher grade i believe you would go onto the pay rate thats closest to your old grade (ie year 10 s11 = year 8 s06 for example). Think only clerical are on longer scales but on higher money and shorter hours.

Some arent gonna vote for a strike either as either they dont need the money or feel that management are deliberately engineering one by deliberately shytstirring and not bringing in realistic changes. Those that do vote for a strike are those that have familys and have costs to meet like morgages etc.

bebeman

Its not much money when you break it down.
The increase comes from the government,.
3.5% will be hit with tax/usc/prsi so straight away 50% is taken back by government.
So now its only a 1.75% pay rise.
Sure then when its spent vat takes 23% so its only a 1.35% pay rise.
People here are getting their knickers in a twist over 1.35% of a pay rise.
The cost of living is rising faster than that.

devnull

bebeman wrote: »

Its not much money when you break it down.
The increase comes from the government,.
3.5% will be hit with tax/usc/prsi so straight away 50% is taken back by government.
So now its only a 1.75% pay rise.
Sure then when its spent vat takes 23% so its only a 1.35% pay rise.
People here are getting their knickers in a twist over 1.35% of a pay rise.
The cost of living is rising faster than that.

That's a completely mathematically flawed argument. You're also paying tax, USC and PRSI on your present salary are you not, just like anyone else who is working legally in this state.

You appear to be suggesting you'll use a gross figure to calculate your current pay but use a net salary figure for your new salary and calculate the increase between these two figures which of course will make the percentage look smaller because it's comparing two different things.

You either need to start comparing old net pay (pay - tax/usc/prsi) with new net pay (pay - tax/usc/prsi) or old gross (pay before deductions) with new gross (pay before deductions) to be able to come out with a correct pay rise percentage calculation.

bebeman

XPS_Zero wrote: »

Free Travel costs 0.7% of the national budget and is paid for by the DSP not CIE, recent research also suggests it is self funding in what it saves the healthcare system in both mental and physical health costs that's without getting into what it puts into local economies along rail and bus routes.  25% of passengers have them that is not "staggering", you are confusing anecdotal evidence of occasions where you personally saw a lot of people in a row with one with most people having them, 1/4 have them.  The numbers have been going up because of demographics in a trend that started in the late 80s , the population is getting older by average, that's all.
FT provides a big subsidy to CIE without which it would have to raise ticket prices to compensate and this would only be offset with a slight increase in fares from former FT users who would stop using it except for essential travel. 
The outside interference is the NTA who have dragged you kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

No one cares about the OAPs or disabled having free travel. Its the dreggs of society who have them and are going to be the down fall of the free travel.
First, exercise is the best treatment for many mental and physical ailements, if they had to walk more they would be better off.
Second, how 25% of the population can travel for free while everyone elses has to pay top dollar is not a national scandal in these economic times i will never know. People going to and from work paying their way cant get on packed buses, but the dregs going around for free, not paying a penny. Scandal!
Third, ticket prices are high as the fare paying passengers are subsiding massively the Free travel pass. Remember this when the tickets get the yearly increse in december.
If free travel was scrapped tomorrow and "from former FT users who would stop using it except for essential travel." DB/IE/BE would be rolling in money.
I dont know the minium fare on IE/BE but on DB it is €1.5, so if essential travel is a return trip once a week to collect dole/methadone thats €3 per week, for a yearly total of €156.
How much does the free travel scheme get a year? about half that for UNLIMITED travel.
How much is a return train ticket from Dublin to Galway?
How much is a return bus ticket from Dublin to Cork?
Fourth, many times down the years when someone finds out im a DB driver the first thing they say is "i dont know how you put up will the scum bags on the bus, i had to use the bus for work, i saved hard to get a car so i would not have to deal with the scum on the bus."
This you know to be true, look at the discussion about the Red line LUAS, the free travel pass Adidas/Nike wearing dregs are driving away paying passengers, those who remain have to pay incresed fares to keep the service going.
I would say 90% of the anti-social behaviour is from free travel pass holders, Fare paying passengers just want to get from A to B, have no interest in damaging the bus. widows scratched, kicked out , seats damaged, graffiti and so on. These repairs cost money, the fare paying passengers pick up the tab with incresed fares.
At the end of the day transport staff are going to get a weeks wage no matter who the passengers are, but those who pay can expect to pay higher fares to keep the free travel pass alive, and have the likes of anto and mary have a screaming argument while drunk as a lord at lunch time, while baby shakira screams away in a buggy, their journey paid for by you , the fare paying passengers.

bebeman

devnull wrote: »

That's a completely mathematically flawed argument. You're also paying tax, USC and PRSI on your present salary are you not, just like anyone else who is working legally in this state.

You appear to be suggesting you'll use a gross figure to calculate your current pay but use a net salary figure for your new salary and calculate the increase between these two figures which of course will make the percentage look smaller because it's comparing two different things.

You either need to start comparing old net pay (pay - tax/usc/prsi) with new net pay (pay - tax/usc/prsi) or old gross (pay before deductions) with new gross (pay before deductions) to be able to come out with a correct pay rise percentage calculation.

When you boil it down its a 1.35% of a pay rise. Thats all it will cost the state

tayto lover

I think a lot of workers are beginning to see the benefits of being in a Union.
Some obviously are angry that being Unionised has these benefits because they can't get the same rewards where they work.

Tom Mann Centuria

tayto lover wrote: »

I think a lot of workers are beginning to see the benefits of being in a Union.
Some obviously are angry that being Unionised has these benefits because they can't get the same rewards where they work.

Absolutely, a good union is a great asset to workers. That's why people pay their subs.