Floppybits wrote: » FG and FF will point to the mother and baby homes as being a Green cock up rather than one of theirs. If you noticed when O'Gorman was defending that legislation there were very few if any FF or FG TD's supporting him, infact did Ryan the leader of the Greens or Martin the deputy leader help him out?
joeguevara wrote: » I would agree with this. For me the watershed moment on how they really can fcuck up was the RIC/Black and Tans memorial and not listening to how it was being perceived. I thought that they would learn from this but the Mother and Baby Homes palaver (with Fianna Fail) and how they kept failing to explain properly showed that little was learned.
Solutionking wrote: » This thread is baffling. We had a lad get a hatchet into the head in Dublin last week. Now last night some lad going around slashing people with a knife. Not a whisper on here, yet we have posts about FG hiring people and the government are monitoring social media, which at best can be described as page filler articles. What bulls**t are you going to post next? Shock horror, kitten stuck up tree and FG didn't ring the rescue crew
McMurphy wrote: » And they learnt absolutely nothing from their last mistakes by the looks of thing's.
FrancieBrady wrote: » The negativity is bizarre. Clear as day, we can now see the reason why FG messed up their own general election campaign. It wasn't an accident.
Solutionking wrote: » How is it bizarre? every party attacks other parties in opposition.
FrancieBrady wrote: » If you needed evidence that SF are under the beds and in the headspace of FG, this is it. Bizarre.https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/fine-gael-research-candidates-asked-how-to-attack-sinn-fein-39736985.html
Cluedo Monopoly wrote: » That's TUPE, but yes you are correct.
Floppybits wrote: » I know it happens in Tupee as well where when an employee is transferred from one company to another then under the agreement for a certain amount of time if an employee that got transferred is being made redundant within that period then they get the same offer they would have got in the original company. Redundancy agreements are always only available for that particular offer or round of redundancies. It all depends on what funds the company makes available, some companies are quite generous, others not so much and others may just be broke and can't offer anything. This is why I took voluntary redundancy because if you hang on and are then made mandatory redundant you only get what is left in the pot.
Cluedo Monopoly wrote: » I have not been following this story but this statement is not true. I have seen many employment contracts with ex-gratia redundancy terms e.g. statutory + 4 weeks. It will often happen during acquisitions or at senior management levels.
smurgen wrote: » But when they signed their contracts was more than the statutory redundancy promised?
blanch152 wrote: » No standard contract of employment ever commits to enhanced redundancy.
FrancieBrady wrote: » That is extremely disturbing if you couple it with Leo's slip about 'regulating' publications he doesn't like. Hope this journalist follows it up fully. The Irish press corp need to stand up here and be counted as the Village made clear yesterday, whatever they think of what the Village exposed.
smurgen wrote: » Really? Of no concern? https://twitter.com/aoifegracemoore/status/1326815760799461377?s=19
s1ippy wrote: » That's an interesting take. It was a FOI request so they would have had documentation on it. It was someone's job to do this surveillance. But SINN FÉIN are to blame wasting €25k while Larry Goodman accidentally gets an extra €10m rent they can't retrieve.
smurgen wrote: » Link? Do you have one of the contracts?
blanch152 wrote: » In another scandal this morning, a civil servant read the Irish Times and told the Minister what was in it. Seriously? This is more than barrel-scraping, it is the Life of Brian type mob with pitchforks stuff.
blanch152 wrote: » No
Bowie wrote: » What do you see when you are out that gives you a window into the private lives of people? Your comment was cliché and anecdotal, which is fine up until people start thinking it's factual. Likely is with some small element but as with all such discussions nobody can every post verified numbers on them that don't want to work. Blanch might've chimed in around now with that report on the numbers of unemployed per household which as we know doesn't answer the query but helps to add to the fudge.