Unions warn of train strike as staff demand pay increase

fxotoole

120 kmh? LOL

Not on your Nelly.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

GM228 wrote: »

The pay rise had nothing to do with mentoring though, the 1.15% was specifically for past productivity.

Which was what exactly as opposed to the rest of us?

A lot of legacy issues going back 10 years such as full implementation of OPO, extra work, de-manning of stations etc.

Hilly Bill

GM228 wrote: »

A lot of legacy issues going back 10 years such as full implementation of OPO, extra work, de-manning of stations etc.

What extra work? A lot of staff are doing extra work, what's so special about the drivers?

GM228

gooddarts10 wrote: »

Why doesn’t the company pay Balfour Beatty OTM Drivers to train the drivers they have the route knowledge and the trainees have the unit experience probably would only have to get extra monitoring from a DTE

Something like that could never happen, imagine a machinery operator who goes no more than 40/50MPH training drivers on 100MPH passenger trains?

OTM drivers are "operators" as opposed to drivers and there is a large body of EU law and industry standards which would never allow it.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

How long is the drivers training course? They will already know how to drive and what to do or not to do. The mentor is basically a Co driver and will hardly tell the newbie to forget what the school told them and to try it their way. It's a cop out by the company if they want to blame a mentor for mistakes made when the mentor wasn't even there. If the DTE thinks the newbie is companent to drive solo then it's on him if mistakes are made later.

Drivers do not learn how to drive until they are mentored.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

What extra work? A lot of staff are doing extra work, what's so special about the drivers?

I don't have the specifics to hand, but extra work amongst the other things were verified (independently) and the LC felt a 1.15% pay rise was appropriate.

devnull

dermo888 wrote: »

The mainstream media may have their own agenda to portray the Union spokesman in the most unreasonable, greedy, and militant style possible. Thats been the agenda of the right for the past 40 years and the public have fallen for it.

I think that the union heads speak for themselves - I myself tend not to listen to what the media says and base my opinions on the unions on what I hear coming from their members, general secretaries, and spokespeople both via their official channels and also via the press - sometimes the unions don't help themselves though, such as the argument about the gift voucher.

Its a vocation more than a job, bearing more similarities to the military in terms of rigid application of rules and regulations. Thats whats ensured the safety of Iarnrod Eireann since the Cherryville disaster of 1983, and long may that continue. 

Many questions have been asked in relation to the safety culture in Irish Rail over the last number of years by the railway safety regulator, the most recent being only a few months ago when the CRR stated that there are issues with the organisational culture in Irish Rail which is effecting the safety culture in the company.

MOH

Rootsblower wrote: »

It’s true unfortunately. As I said in one of my previous posts I know of 2 drivers disciplined over trainee mistakes.

During or shortly after mentoring, or a long time later?

dermo888 wrote: »

Not everyone is cut out to be a train driver. Its a vocation more than a job, bearing more similarities to the military in terms of rigid application of rules and regulations. Thats whats ensured the safety of Iarnrod Eireann since the Cherryville disaster of 1983, and long may that continue. 
Lets put that into perspective - since then over 10,000 people have died on Irish Roads, and there have been 0....ZERO fatalities on the railway network in Ireland.

Apart from being laughable, that's clearly not true. There have been plenty of fatalities on the Irish rail network. I'm assuming though you mean zero due to train crashes, but even that's untrue, although I'll concede Wikipedia isn't necessarily a reliable source.

Even apart from that, sheer blind luck is the only thing that prevented mass casualties. Unless you consider running trains across a collapsing viaduct good practice.

Hilly Bill

GM228 wrote: »

Drivers do not learn how to drive until they are mentored.

Will it be the first time they have been at the controls of a train on the network? Will the mentor have to tell them what to do and how to move or stop the train? Or is it a case of just keeping an eye on them in case they mess up?

Hilly Bill

GM228 wrote: »

I don't have the specifics to hand, but extra work amongst the other things were verified (independently) and the LC felt a 1.15% pay rise was appropriate.

What extra work as opposed to the rest of us that justifies the extra 1.15%.?

Hilly Bill

devnull wrote: »

I think that the union heads speak for themselves - I myself tend not to listen to what the media says and base my opinions on the unions on what I hear coming from their members, general secretaries, and spokespeople both via their official channels and also via the press - sometimes the unions don't help themselves though, such as the argument about the gift voucher.



Many questions have been asked in relation to the safety culture in Irish Rail over the last number of years by the railway safety regulator, the most recent being only a few months ago when the CRR stated that there are issues with the organisational culture in Irish Rail which is effecting the safety culture in the company.

It's all health and safety in the company.

Hilly Bill

MOH wrote: »

During or shortly after mentoring, or a long time later?


Apart from being laughable, that's clearly not true. There have been plenty of fatalities on the Irish rail network. I'm assuming though you mean zero due to train crashes, but even that's untrue, although I'll concede Wikipedia isn't necessarily a reliable source.

Even apart from that, sheer blind luck is the only thing that prevented mass casualties. Unless you consider running trains across a collapsing viaduct good practice.

To be fair, the viaduct was collapsing as the train was going across, he didn't decide to give it a lash for the fun on it. Did you want him to stop and reverse back?

kingshankly

Hilly Bill wrote: »

To be fair, the viaduct was collapsing as the train was going across, he didn't decide to give it a lash for the fun on it. Did you want him to stop and reverse back?

Driver did exceptionally well felt his train swaying knocked of power and let the train coast to safety then made a very calm emergency call which is actually used as an example of best practices by train companies world wide

MOH

Hilly Bill wrote: »

To be fair, the viaduct was collapsing as the train was going across, he didn't decide to give it a lash for the fun on it. Did you want him to stop and reverse back?

kingshankly wrote: »

Driver did exceptionally well felt his train swaying knocked of power and let the train coast to safety then made a very calm emergency call which is actually used as an example of best practices by train companies world wide

I'm wasn't specifically talking about the particular train that crossed just before it went. My point was that allowing the viaduct to degrade to that state while still running trains over it, despite having been warned about it over a decade previously, is the most high profile example I could think of demonstrating that the lack of a serious incident in recent years is as much down to sheer blind luck than any military-style levels of training and procedures.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

What extra work as opposed to the rest of us that justifies the extra 1.15%.?

As I said.....

GM228 wrote: »

I don't have the specifics to hand

But I think extra work was only a small mention in the overall past productivity argument.

gooddarts10

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Will it be the first time they have been at the controls of a train on the network? Will the mentor have to tell them what to do and how to move or stop the train? Or is it a case of just keeping an eye on them in case they mess up?

No The 8 DART trainee drivers have all completed 2 weeks driving all be it with an out of service train with their course instructors and a fully qualified driver. This equates to around 4hours actual driving for each of the 8 trainees

Hilly Bill

GM228 wrote: »

As I said.....



But I think extra work was only a small mention in the overall past productivity argument.

I still can't see a legitimate reason for extra pay rise as opposed to anyone else.

Hilly Bill

kingshankly wrote: »

Driver did exceptionally well felt his train swaying knocked of power and let the train coast to safety then made a very calm emergency call which is actually used as an example of best practices by train companies world wide

Ye, did very well. I know him, he's a good lad.

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

What extra work as opposed to the rest of us that justifies the extra 1.15%.?

I take it you wouldn't bring up the subject with any drivers themselves, I wouldn't either:)

Jamie2k9

dermo888 wrote: »

Thats a case of a publicity exercise. Its also that, the likes of civilians, including myself, generally don't have a clue with the job of driving a train entails, and the various parameters involved. It LOOKS easy, but its a precision art to stop a 200 Meter long, 300 tonne train, going at 120kmh and bring it to a 'clean' safe stop in the right distance. They are quite content to take it for granted that everything works, without knowing why it works. They don't need to know. When they don't know - they criticise.
The mainstream media may have their own agenda to portray the Union spokesman in the most unreasonable, greedy, and militant style possible. Thats been the agenda of the right for the past 40 years and the public have fallen for it. 
Not everyone is cut out to be a train driver. Its a vocation more than a job, bearing more similarities to the military in terms of rigid application of rules and regulations. Thats whats ensured the safety of Iarnrod Eireann since the Cherryville disaster of 1983, and long may that continue. 
Lets put that into perspective - since then over 10,000 people have died on Irish Roads, and there have been 0....ZERO fatalities on the railway network in Ireland.

They do a good job lets not overstate how good they are. One could argue signalers are more important when it comes to safety or those in charge of infrastructure.

As for the safety record, drivers were not so long ago whinging about various safety changes IE brought in because of the requirements.

Hilly Bill

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I take it you wouldn't bring up the subject with any drivers themselves, I wouldn't either:)

I have ::) they are only drivers not big scary monsters.

GM228

gooddarts10 wrote: »

WRC talks have been scheduled for the 15th so you never know it might actually get sorted out

Pushed forward to tomorrow morning.

https://www.rte.ie/news/2018/0208/939362-irish-rail-wrc/

Jamie2k9

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I have ::) they are only drivers not big scary monsters.

So why didn't you ask them what the rise is about, mind you there will be some who haven't a clue. People in CIE are great as long as you agree with them.

Hilly Bill

I did, they couldn't answer it.

GM228

Hilly Bill wrote: »

I did, they couldn't answer it.

Here's the issues of the past productivity for which the 1.15% was recommended.

http://nbru.ie/index.php/final-report-to-the-wrc-from-the-independent-assessors/

http://nbru.ie/index.php/joint-notice-to-members-reports-from-independent-assessors/

GM228

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0209/939510-wrc-rail-unions/

Sounds to me like the NBRU are trying to distance themselves from a potential industrial relations minefield.

On his way in to the talks Dermot O'Leary of the NBRU said the company was accusing unions of something that they were not responsible for.

This especially.

He said there is an onus on the company as well as drivers to resolve the situation.

Very unusual for the unions to put the onus for a resolution on staff, usually they put the onus on whatever company is involved in a dispute, are they trying to save face?

trellheim

He said there is an onus on the company as well as drivers to resolve the situation.

Shock horror union takes reasonable position

kingshankly

There is a 0% chance of an all out strike

Jamie2k9

GM228 wrote: »

https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2018/0209/939510-wrc-rail-unions/

Sounds to me like the NBRU are trying to distance themselves from a potential industrial relations minefield.

On his way in to the talks Dermot O'Leary of the NBRU said the company was accusing unions of something that they were not responsible for.

This especially.

He said there is an onus on the company as well as drivers to resolve the situation.

Very unusual for the unions to put the onus for a resolution on staff, usually they put the onus on whatever company is involved in a dispute, are they trying to save face?

Dermot is probably sick of defending the undefinable at this stage. Time for the unions to apply pressure for some movement.

You never know the next CEO may not be as flexible as Franks letting such issues run.

Hilly Bill

GM228 wrote: »

Here's the issues of the past productivity for which the 1.15% was recommended.

http://nbru.ie/index.php/final-report-to-the-wrc-from-the-independent-assessors/

http://nbru.ie/index.php/joint-notice-to-members-reports-from-independent-assessors/

More money for less hours? 😀