nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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?

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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.

Dyr

Mr. Incognito wrote: »

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.

Bwahahahah, yeah the t&cs in non union jobs are a great indicator of how well that idea is working out.

Also: "Lawyer" is not a protected term in Ireland so I wouldnt have one representing me in any court

A Little Pony

Unions are pointless in society today. The governments of Ireland and UK don't listen to them.

MeatTwoVeg

I don't blame the Unions.

They're grasping, greedy, shortsighted, self-centered, rabble rousing, horribly selfish little institutions.

This is unlikely to change.

I blame the successive Governments who've failed to face them down and used our money to buy them off.

kona

I think the people who are doing the same job as somebody who is older for less money purely on the fact that they entered at a different time should get what the others are on.
Absolutely vile carry on the way some people under 35 have been treated. No wonder that there is massive amounts of suicide amongst that group.

Sue Pa Key Pa

I don't want an increase in my wages, I think what I get is fair enough for what I do. However, I want to be left with more of it after being taxed directly & indirectly and getting a very poor service in return for my money.

Sudden Valley

The government have shown themselves to be weak with the last few disputes so of course the other unions have begun agitating to get their own piece of the pie. I would disagree with a previous poster that the poor moral in the public sector is not due primarily due to the reduced pay. With rising rents and insurance and strict restrictions on getting mortgages pay is a primary concern.

astrofool

It's all a big sequence of events since the Luas strike (where they ended up getting the original deal on the table with some nice wording added).

They need to go on strike because it shows they aren't rolling over.

The government needs to let them go on strike to show they aren't soft on unions. (SF express disappointment and how they would fix it, and are now claiming that their crazy budget planning is somehow not crazy, and Doherty is some sort of budget genius, watch them push this mantra, despite the ridicule their plans got and still get. PBP promise the earth moon and stars to the working man, blame old man physics for how this all falls flat on it's face, and get all skittish and piss and poop everywhere when someone questions how their budget is batsh*t insane).

They'll meet half way in the middle and then repeat in 2 years time.

The unions have been putting moves in place to undermine the last agreement for over a year now with the plan to get to talks earlier than expected, but in a "we know what you're trying to do so just go on and get to it way", while the bearded lot chest bump each other at how "genius" their plan has been.

In reality, they only need to keep the guards and nurses in check, everyone else, including the teachers, can strike to their hearts content and no one would bat an eye lid.

Smart Bug

What strikes me about these kind of threads and some of the posts in them is the ignorance displayed by some commentators.

People enjoy rights in their workplaces due to the collective bargaining engaged in by trade unions. Employment rights came about due to effective lobbying of the governments (be they at national or EU level) by interest groups, among them trade unions.

It is the very nature of capitalist industry to exploit all resources, including human (workers), to their absolute capacity and beyond. The reward from this exploitation does not reach those whose efforts have reaped the reward. That, again, is the nature of capitalist industry. This necessitates the formation of collective bargaining organisations to ensure that workers have at least some rights, and do share in some of the reward.

The reason that this sounds so communist is because it has been sold to you as such by those who will reap the most reward if collective bargaining were to be outlawed.

In general, people have forgotten that their forebears had it so bad in the workplace, and had to fight so hard to improve their rights, and the rights of generations to come. We have not had to fight to gain rights, or to maintain them.

Another general observation: there's a split between the public and private sectors on these kind of topics as by the very nature of their work (their vocation if you will) public servants tend to have a more developed sense of altruism and will therefore tend toward activities (membership of trade unions etc) that will improve the lot of their fellows, rather than a tendency to look after themselves while disregarding the welfare of others (capitalist mind-set).

Boggy Turf

jimmy blevins wrote: »

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

Very good point and pubic sector salaries and pensions are still paid with borrowed money.

MeatTwoVeg

Smart Bug wrote:

Another general observation: there's a split between the public and private sectors on these kind of topics as by the very nature of their work (their vocation if you will) public servants tend to have a more developed sense of altruism and will therefore tend toward activities (membership of trade unions etc) that will improve the lot of their fellows, rather than a tendency to look after themselves while disregarding the welfare of others (capitalist mind-set).

What absolute unadulterated bolloxollogy.