CIE Unions Pathological Strike Culture

fxotoole

Infini wrote: »

Havent a clue atm about this because I've heard nothing about it. All I've heard is what's been posted here by other people who are drivers and have said basically that its a liability issue. That's the core problem with the mentoring in the first place: It's the company trying to force driver's to take new drivers out and make them liable for any mistakes the mentor make regardless of how much time as passed.

Driver's said no because
1) its voluntary and
2) they dont trust the company if something goes wrong so the only thing they can do is stay away from it.

Edit: I also wish some poster's would stop using the "I'm a taxpayer" angle as an "argument". Regardless of the fact that EVERYONE here is a taxpayer thank you very much (unless your living in malta! :P ), it seems to be overused as an excuse to come across as self important rather than an actual argument. EVERYONE has problem's we can only deal with them as they come along.

So as a taxpayer with a stake in public services, you’re OK with your taxes being wasted, inefficiency in public services, poor service, public-facing staff with very bad attitudes, and resistance to any sort of effort to change these issues and modernise the service?

sharper

Stephen15 wrote: »

But pay and conditions are an internal matter for CIE management which is appointed by the minister for transport that's the only connection between the Minister for Transport and his civil servants and CIE. It's an entirely separate entity from the department of transport as they delegate responsibility for CIE and their companies away from the DoT.

Why do the unions keeps insisting the minister get involved in these internal matters?

LeinsterDub

sharper wrote: »

Why do the unions keeps insisting the minister get involved in these internal matters?

Because the Minster can give them more money. CIÉs stated position of we are flat broke lads is kinda hard to negotiate around.

sharper

LeinsterDub wrote: »

Because the Minster can give them more money. CIÉs stated position of we are flat broke lads is kinda hard to negotiate around.

Sure, makes sense. I don't think it's reasonable to argue it both ways though - it's an internal matter and nobody's business but also the taxpayer should pay up every time to resolve these disputes.

CIE are semi-state and rely heavily on the taxpayer, therefore the opinion of taxpayers matter.

LeinsterDub

sharper wrote: »

Sure, makes sense. I don't think it's reasonable to argue it both ways though - it's an internal matter and nobody's business but also the taxpayer should pay up every time to resolve these disputes.

CIE are semi-state and rely heavily on the taxpayer, therefore the opinion of taxpayers matter.

I'm not entirely sure so am open to correction here but under EU law a cash injection is illegal. You'll notice BÉ get money for PSO routes, DB get buses which remains the property of the NTA and GA have also gotten this to keep the playing field level. IÉ now have an separate division who maintain the rails.

trellheim

That's the core problem with the mentoring in the first place: It's the company trying to force driver's to take new drivers out and make them liable for any mistakes the mentor make regardless of how much time as passe

And I've asked repeatedly - how the hell do you think it should work - that there should be no comeback on the mentor for anything ?

Infini

trellheim wrote: »

And I've asked repeatedly - how the hell do you think it should work - that there should be no comeback on the mentor for anything ?

The whole driver mentoring thing should fall under a DTE or an actual driver training grade/job IMO (ie. someone whos job is specifically training and taking out new drivers not asking one of the regular drivers to watch the newbie and be responsible for their feck ups). If theres so many liabilities involved or theres issues about regular drivers being on the hook for mentee mistakes then it should be a designated trainer who should be looking after this.

Colonel Claptrap

Infini wrote: »

The whole driver mentoring thing should fall under a DTE or an actual driver training grade/job IMO (ie. someone whos job is specifically training and taking out new drivers not asking one of the regular drivers to watch the newbie and be responsible for their feck ups). If theres so many liabilities involved or theres issues about regular drivers being on the hook for mentee mistakes then it should be a designated trainer who should be looking after this.

How long would it take 1 trainer to train 30 drivers? He would have to take them out individually, while the other trainees sat around drinking cups of tea.

Also, what does the trainer do next year when everyone is eventually trained up? I sure hope he likes tea.

Companies in the real world would go bust with this sort of waste. When a new guy starts in my job, he gets trained up by people on his team. Nobody complains that it's not in their contract. Its common sense. People just get on with it.

Rootsblower

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

How long would it take 1 trainer to train 30 drivers? He would have to take them out individually, while the other trainees sat around drinking cups of tea.

Also, what does the trainer do next year when everyone is eventually trained up? I sure hope he likes tea.

Companies in the real world would go bust with this sort of waste. When a new guy starts in my job, he gets trained up by people on his team. Nobody complains that it's not in their contract. Its common sense. People just get on with it.

In most workplaces the new guy your training hasn’t got the ability to endanger the lives of a few hundred people by his mistakes and the guy training him carrying the can for it.

end of the road

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

How long would it take 1 trainer to train 30 drivers? He would have to take them out individually, while the other trainees sat around drinking cups of tea.

Also, what does the trainer do next year when everyone is eventually trained up? I sure hope he likes tea.

Companies in the real world would go bust with this sort of waste. When a new guy starts in my job, he gets trained up by people on his team. Nobody complains that it's not in their contract. Its common sense. People just get on with it.

what goes on in your company is not comparible to a rail operator who must operate to the absolute bar in terms of health and safety, who have to cary a few hundred or more passengers safely to their destination.

Seth Brundle

Rootsblower wrote: »

In most workplaces the new guy your training hasn’t got the ability to endanger the lives of a few hundred people by his mistakes and the guy training him carrying the can for it.

end of the road wrote: »

what goes on in your company is not comparible to a rail operator who must operate to the absolute bar in terms of health and safety, who have to cary a few hundred or more passengers safely to their destination.

What exactly would be going on there that the driver couldn't be overseeing the newbie, ready to take control?
It sounds like a completely phoney excuse!

Rootsblower

kbannon wrote: »

What exactly would be going on there that the driver couldn't be overseeing the newbie, ready to take control?
It sounds like a completely phoney excuse!

Mostly no dual controls on trains(except mk4 and De Dietrich services) unlike aircraft/car used by driving instructor. Also as stated numerous times on this and other threads if after trainee has been trained up drivers that performed mentoring duties can be held to account if post training mistakes occur.

IE management are mostly interested in assigning blame instead of getting to the root cause of any incidents. It’s called arse covering.

LeinsterDub

Infini wrote: »

If theres so many liabilities involved or theres issues about regular drivers being on the hook for mentee mistakes then it should be a designated trainer who should be looking after this.

So drivers being on the hook indefinitely is out the the window? Drivers are only responsibly while supervising , this seems perfectly reasonable. Does IÉ have a training simulator?

LeinsterDub

Rootsblower wrote: »

Also as stated numerous times on this and other threads if after trainee has been trained up drivers that performed mentoring duties can be held to account if post training mistakes occur.

Been stated but surprisingly absent from the media and the NBRU website.

Losty Dublin

Colonel Claptrap wrote: »

How long would it take 1 trainer to train 30 drivers? He would have to take them out individually, while the other trainees sat around drinking cups of tea.

Also, what does the trainer do next year when everyone is eventually trained up? I sure hope he likes tea.

Companies in the real world would go bust with this sort of waste. When a new guy starts in my job, he gets trained up by people on his team. Nobody complains that it's not in their contract. Its common sense. People just get on with it.

My Dad worked in Irish Rail and was responsible for training staff. While he is long gone out of the company and I can't give you the exact 2018 training practices, this may go some of the way to answering you.

It takes approximately one year to train in a driver. At one stage it took 80 weeks. That is one year of 40 hour weeks of training, some of which is in the classroom (Signalling, what to do in the event of a crash, a working knowledge of diesel and electrical engineering,how train brakes work and how they can fail, fire fighting, first aid, rule book knowledge of railway operational practices and procedures, etc ), some of which was on the tracks (Basic principles of how to maintain track and how to work safely on the lines, hooking up carriages.) and some of which was on the engines themselves.

Class sizes were about 1 instructor to 8 trainees for drivers. Add in different types of trains as well and it's takes a lot longer than you would think; less for DART drivers. He spent a great many Saturday's in one to one classes and exams with trainees; he spent some Sunday's doing this as well.

Also, there are other grades to train up as well. Train guards, yard shunters, track layers, signalmen all need to learn their jobs. Even the men and women who work in sheds and yards or clipping tickets on the platforms need training in Personal Track Safety (PTS) in order to be able to safely walk the lines; this is pretty much all of the company bar the office and clerical grades. All grades need refresher courses and updates as new procedures or tools or rolling stock comes into operation. And there are office duties, exam marking, signing off on results, liaising with management on training needs; paperwork as it's called.

In conclusion; he got at best 15 minutes a day to drink tea but some days it would go cold on him

Cookie_Monster

To add to the above, there is, surely, regular re-training for all staff in various tasks to contend with, no?
PTS must lapse after 2-3 years like a fire warden cert??

All assumption; but a trainer or 2 or 3 would easily be kept busy in Irish rail, through large intakes of people, natural replacement in 1s or 2s, basic retraining, retesting, advanced retraining where issues are noted, never mind the ever increasing H&S burden being placed on everyone in the modern world. I don't think it's exactly outlandish that IE would have a few trainers on staff, assuming basic policies and procedures are in place to support their continued use throughout the business (mandatory retraining and testing for example in driver grades every X years or similar)

Losty Dublin

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

To add to the above, there is, surely, regular re-training for all staff in various tasks to contend with, no?
PTS must lapse after 2-3 years like a fire warden cert??

All assumption; but a trainer or 2 or 3 would easily be kept busy in Irish rail, through large intakes of people, natural replacement in 1s or 2s, basic retraining, retesting, advanced retraining where issues are noted, never mind the ever increasing H&S burden being placed on everyone in the modern world. I don't think it's exactly outlandish that IE would have a few trainers on staff, assuming basic policies and procedures are in place to support their continued use throughout the business (mandatory retraining and testing for example in driver grades every X years or similar)

PTS is renewed every two years; I know that for a fact as I have one myself. That's a day in the classroom for a couple of thousand staff, contractors included. Other staff receive refreshers as well for driving, signalling, shunting etc.

As the train types in service lessen and automation and working practises change, training needs change; 2017 was the first time in years where applications for train guards were invited while few signalmen need to be trained in the old ETS and mechanical equipment. I'm not too sure how many trainers are employed by Irish Rail on railway training but I'd be shocked if it was less than a dozen.

salonfire

end of the road wrote: »

it's not.



if you want 5 minute darts, then you know what you have to do. get as many like minded people together and call for the required infrastructure. it will cost but as a tax payer myself i will say it would be worth the cost. write to local politicians, ministers, NTA, whoever. we all deserve it to happen.

You are opposed to water charges and property taxes, yet here you say you are willing to pay more tax.

Should the government of the day run it by you which tax and for which purpose to introduce?

salonfire

end of the road wrote: »

what goes on in your company is not comparible to a rail operator who must operate to the absolute bar in terms of health and safety, who have to cary a few hundred or more passengers safely to their destination.

Imagine if a doctor is not available for you because there was no one to mentor any new doctors because of safety.

You would be ok with this though, won't you?

Stephen15

salonfire wrote: »

Imagine if a doctor is not available for you because there was no one to mentor any new doctors because of safety.

You would be ok with this though, won't you?

You're not comparing like with like there for a start. Do you think a qualified doctor would be happy to take the blame for any mistakes made by a trainee doctor. Get a grip.

Seth Brundle

Stephen15 wrote: »

You're not comparing like with like there for a start. Do you think a qualified doctor would be happy to take the blame for any mistakes made by a trainee doctor. Get a grip.

It depends on what the mistake is but if you are showing someone how to do something and they make a mistake then you as the qualified mentor are responsible. If a qualifoed doctor is standing beside a trainee and the trainee goes to administer a wrong dosage, the qualified doc should be watching and ready to intervene.
Is it that different training a new train driver?

salonfire

Stephen15 wrote: »

You're not comparing like with like there for a start. Do you think a qualified doctor would be happy to take the blame for any mistakes made by a trainee doctor. Get a grip.

Yes.

If that doctor advised a trainee inadequately who subsequently makes a mistake.

Would you like to go to a hospital that absolves senior doctors of all responsibility of trainees?

Stephen15

salonfire wrote: »

Yes.

If that doctor advised a trainee inadequately who subsequently makes a mistake.

Would you like to go to a hospital that absolves senior doctors of all responsibility of trainees?

I would like to think that the person treating me or a loved is qualified to the job likewise when I take a train I would to think the person driving the train is qualified to do so.

salonfire

Stephen15 wrote: »

I would like to think that the person treating me or a loved is qualified to the job likewise when I take a train I would to think the person driving the train is qualified to do so.

Hypocrite.

I would say you would be delighted to have a doctor that was mentored by someone senior save the life of a loved one.

Yet, you think that train drivers are justified in refusing to mentor as part of their job.

magentis

salonfire wrote: »

Hypocrite.

I would say you would be delighted to have a doctor that was mentored by someone senior save the life of a loved one.

Yet, you think that train drivers are justified in refusing to mentor as part of their job.

To take on the responsibility of another person's mistakes for a pay increase they should have already?

Seth Brundle

magentis wrote: »

To take on the responsibility of another person's mistakes for a pay increase they should have already?

If the qualified doctor, train driver or whatever is carefully watching what the trainee is doing then there should be no reason for an accident. If they are not watching the trainee then they should be accountable for anything that may happen.

LeinsterDub

magentis wrote: »

To take on the responsibility of another person's mistakes for a pay increase they should have already?

Isn't optional to take on the responsibility and hasn't a pay increase already occurred?

trellheim

mentoring = responsibility; thats what it means. Argue the toss folks if you like but thats what it means.

Should there be a time limit - perhaps - depends on the offence, wouldnt it. I'd hardly go back to my driving instructor after all these years, and neither would the cops.

bebeman

Reading back on old discussions when DB/IE/BE went on strike , they are full of posters bitching about how they have been screwed over by the recession, have taken pay cuts, taken on extra responsibility and extra work for no extra money.
So as a DB driver i can tell you what happen to us, well there was no pay cut, we did not give up holidays, did not have to take on extra jobs, we get paid for over time, not forced to do any over time, and just last month we got the last payment in a 12% pay rise in about 14 months.
How so you ask incredulously, well it was the Unions that done this impossible task, so now ask yourself why the hell am i not in a union getting these benefits?

By the way as you non unionised workers head into another year without a pay rise, would that be year 5,6 or 7? the unions will be starting negotiations for a new pay deal for DB.

Cookie_Monster

The above is a perfect example of why unions are bad, not good. No reality involved, no acceptance that falling CPI should lead to devaluation and pay cuts, not allowing BE/DB/IE to shed surplus staff when services were cut due to lower demand and now, despite being on overvalued terms already they're preparing to stick out their brass necks and ask for demand even more for all staff regardless of competence, attitude or ability instead of allowing those who do a good job to be rewarded and those that don't cut free like the dead wood that they are.

All the while the customer and tax payer pick up the ever increasing tab while the service level remains abysmal. Yay!! :rolleyes: