Phoenix Park tunnel: 4 trains per hour from 2016

XPS_Zero wrote: »

It's uttterly ridiculous that striking over new routes or tech is a thing at all. Pay and conditions are one thing but that?

They seem blissfully unaware that this kind of behaviour gives nothing but ammo to people who want to push privatisation

Just to correct you - they don't tend to strike over new routes per se - but rather new rosters, which like it or not are part of the "pay & conditions".

However if the new rosters are in compliance with agreed procedures then they haven't a leg to stand on.

end of the road

XPS_Zero wrote: »

It's uttterly ridiculous that striking over new routes or tech is a thing at all. Pay and conditions are one thing but that?

not if it means extra work load without some compensation.

XPS_Zero wrote: »

They seem blissfully unaware that this kind of behaviour gives nothing but ammo to people who want to push privatisation

no, no they really don't. they are well aware like anyone else that anything can be used to push the agenda of privatization. they also know that any of the issues that we would be told would go away with privatization, don't go away with privatization.

lxflyer wrote: »

Just to correct you - they don't tend to strike over new routes per se - but rather new rosters, which like it or not are part of the "pay & conditions".

Striking over rosters is questionable as if it does no impact terms and conditions it's not valid. The DART dispute in terms of rosters was not valid but it's obvious why IE eased off with the dispute.

GM228

lxflyer wrote: »

Just to correct you - they don't tend to strike over new routes per se - but rather new rosters, which like it or not are part of the "pay & conditions".

You are incorrect, rostering is not part of pay and conditions.

Rostering is a work practice as decided by our courts and not part of any pay and conditions (i.e roster changes are not a change of your terms and conditions of employment).

GM228 wrote: »

You are incorrect, rostering is not part of pay and conditions.

Rostering is a work practice as decided by our courts and not part of any pay and conditions (i.e roster changes are not a change of your terms and conditions of employment).

OK fair enough - I was using the term "pay and conditions" in the post above in the broadest sense to include agreed work practices - in other words I meant outside agreements. I wasn't intending to use legal terms but making a broad point.

ChannelNo5

Thrashssacre wrote: »

Anyone have any idea why the first "leaked" timetable on Irish rails website was nothing like the one put out for consultation?

Because it was rejected by the NTA and IE were asked to review it in line with earlier agreements.

ChannelNo5 wrote: »

Because it was rejected by the NTA and IE were asked to review it in line with earlier agreements.

Again - the reason is that there are not enough drivers available to operate the all day timetable.

sheff the ref

So when will we be able to travel on this???

sheff the ref wrote: »

So when will we be able to travel on this???

Whenever IE and the NTA announce it.

Given that there are ongoing negotiations on pay & conditions with drivers this may be having an impact, I don't know, but I'm sure the unions will try and use it as a bargaining chip.

ClovenHoof

Irish Rail needs to be destroyed and replaced with a rail service provider.

Still doing training to Connolly, not sure if they will have to do it to GCD separately.

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Irish Rail needs to be destroyed and replaced with a rail service provider.

They said the same about fianna fail and look what you got. The only difference here would be the same people driving the train with a different uniform and possibly on better pay.

Hilly Bill wrote: »

ClovenHoof wrote: »

Irish Rail needs to be destroyed and replaced with a rail service provider.

They said the same about fianna fail and look what you got. The only difference here would be the same people driving the train with a different uniform and possibly on better pay.

And unions say privatisation is a bad thing

[Deleted User]

Hilly Bill wrote: »

They said the same about fianna fail and look what you got. The only difference here would be the same people driving the train with a different uniform and possibly on better pay.

Increased dividends for shareholders more likely!

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

And unions say privatisation is a bad thing

It can be for both staff and passengers. For staff it could be a change of pay and conditions and it's no guarantee that you won't get delays, lower fares or the end of standing on trains. It will be just another name to give out about.

Deleted User wrote: »

Increased dividends for shareholders more likely!

You may be right but why alter my post? Could you have not just posted that anyway?

Hilly Bill wrote: »

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

And unions say privatisation is a bad thing

It can be for both staff and passengers. For staff it could be a change of pay and conditions and it's no guarantee that you won't get delays, lower fares or the end of standing on trains. It will be just another name to give out about.

I agree it has some pluses like everything bus surprised you take the same view.

[Deleted User]

Hilly Bill wrote: »

You may be right but why alter my post? Could you have not just posted that anyway?

Privatisation does not have a good track record in improving the wages of the general staff, that's why.

Deleted User wrote: »

Privatisation does not have a good track record in improving the wages of the general staff, that's why.

I didn't say otherwise, so why alter my post? It's all may or may nots,

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

I agree it has some pluses like everything bus surprised you take the same view.

The only ones that will prosper would be senior management, the rest will be fighting for their rights and the passengers caught up in the crossfire with no guarantees that their quest for the demise of Irish rail will be any beneficial for them if they get what they want. It's a case of being careful for what you wish for. Anyways it's nothing to do with the thread in question.