Bausch and Lomb

I don't know much about the situation to be fair but I think didn't the B&L workers take big cuts to their wages and benefits back when the plant was in difficulties and as far as I know these wages haven't been restored back to a level that is even competitive with the other MNCs in the city. B&L have invested big money in the plant and the site in recent years so probably only fair that they invest in their workforce now too.

Until the offer is made public I dont think anyone can criticise or support either side.

There has to be a trade off/compromise.

What was the first offer by the company?

What are the "members" (not handful of reps) looking for/willing to accept?

What aspects of the original offer from the company have been improved and by how much?

Is it just pay??

Sure isn't that the point the employer are making? They made an offer but SIPTU officials decided not to bring it back to the members for ballot.

Hope this ends well but it doesn't look good.

But what if the members were prepared to accept it?

Over the years the teachers union members have gone against their executive on a couple of occasions, in situations were their executives were refusing to agree to terms which their members wanted to accept.

Sometimes these things can be escalated by personal rivalries or by one or two people who aren't good negotiators, or even by people who are just difficult to deal with.

"The offer proposed last Tuesday 7th June consisted of an improvement to terms and conditions amounting to 10.8% for the average operator in the site over 3 years. By the end of the agreement a 4-cycle shift operator will earn a weekly wage of over €1,000 (basic + shift premium).”

The offer was more than what the LRC recommended.

So what are SIPTU reps (not members) looking for exactly?

52 grand a year for relatively unskilled labour is very good to be fair.

It's not a semiconductor plant.

yes, for most, if not all sme's rate increases linked to inflation probably would be suicide, but its always important to remember, large corporations have far more state and other institutional protections in place, compared to sme's. if required, the flood gates are regularly opened for them, in regards bail outs, debt forgiveness, and other public polices which were clearly designed for them, such as qe, which just (re)inflated asset prices, including share prices. many of these corporations have also been showing record high profits, in particularly during covid, when of course many sme's were closed, i.e. large corporations are almost incomparable to most sme's, due to the bias in protective measures in place

...but exactly that, the factory is a part of a larger conglomerate, for example, i use to work for a similar szied corporation, and in its first 30 years of existence in the region, it never made a profit, even though the business is in fact highly successful, and extraordinary wealthy! you will find that this is a very common outcome for such organisations, ive even had previous managers admit to me that something is very wrong with this set up, and you d wonder why we re seriously struggling to provide ourselves with our most critical of needs, including our health care needs!

we ve wrapped ourselves in a knot over all this competitive stuff, and its clearly obvious, its starting to collapse, being competitive shouldnt mean that more and more are simply unable to meet their most critical of needs, including the workers that have played a vital role in creating all of this wealth!

its clearly obvious that theres far more protective measures in place to protect the wealth thats created by such businesses, but very little, if any protections in place for the workers of such, i.e. its clearly obvious that this approach was, and still is, in fact intentional, and it has worked. we re now coming to an end of this era, and it has the potential to end very harshly, this is only the beginning of such disputes..... we ve been experiencing a period of rapid asset price inflation, including property price inflation, but wage inflation has been intentionally kept low, they have decoupled enough now to cause severe de-stabilisations, i.e. causing rapidly rising wealth inequalities, and all it brings.... this isnt good for any of us, even the wealthy entities in our societies..

But none of that has anything to with the current situation of general ops getting a bump to 1k a week which is an improved offer on what the LRC has recommended.

And whatever else was in the deal. Is there back pay?

General ops in there could be on 45k+ a year at the moment for unskilled work (I only say unskilled because a qualification is not necessary and I don't know a better term to use, it's not meant to be derogatory). What about clerical positions that pay the same (if they do) in there at the moment, do they also get a bump to keep them in line with ops?

Does everyone in the plant get an 8% increase year on year because of inflation?

The point I'm making is that pay is a tricky situation, you can't just say "the company makes a profit, the general ops should get 10% pay increase every year because buying things is difficult". It's a much bigger and trickier puzzle than that. How does the waterford plant stay competitive and make profits if the whole plant gets a wage increase in line with inflation or even just to keep salary gaps stable?

Personally I would be delighted to know that in 3 years time I can earn 51k without having to put in any extra effort.

The 10% is to cover the inflation reason brought up by another poster. I didn't didn't say they want 10%.

1k a week is the figure after the 3 years as mentioned in the report in the news and star.

Do you know something different?

Very true.

I guess the other pharma jobs are guide wires and medication where there's a big responsibility on the operators to get things exactly right because the cost of making those is significantly higher and failed parts is extremely costly.

Lenses manufactured in high volumes to be discarded willy nilly is a different story.

....the reality is, large corporations are effectively playing an accountancy game, making it seem like theyre not as profitable as they are, again, ive had head accountants of such companies confirm this to me, its ultimately a game of wide scale global tax avoidance, which results in us being unable to provide ourselves with our most critical of needs, property, health care etc etc. this also means the need for the increase in taxation, in order to try resolve this is ultimately a your problem, i.e. you ve been experiencing tax increases year on year, this is an unsustainable approach, and simply isnt working!

our new found wealth is largely mythical, we ve managed to convince ourselves that we have become extremely wealthy, this is of course true to a degree, but also not so true in other ways. wealth is generally stored in the value of assets such as property, but this overall game, including the overall operations of large corporations, is now leading to a rapid rise in wealth inequalities, whereby a rapidly rising number of citizens are simply unable to meet their most critical of needs, again, very evident in their property and health care needs, and it clearly obvious, the operations of large corporations are playing in critical role in this outcome!

large corporations play a critical role in our economies and societies, the most obvious being in providing employment, but i personally suspect they create far more employment indirectly than directly, but of course thats debatable, i also think one of their main critical functions is creating and maintaining major global supply chains, without which, our modern economies simply wouldnt survive.

yes, elements of our modern societies certainly are far superior than previous generations, but theres clearly something going badly wrong, for the reasons explained above, we re clearly in a rapid state of deterioration in other more critical ways....

again, another myth, the welfare thing, welfare is so well paid, as soon as a large proportion of workers were forced onto it, we immediately had to almost double it over night, in order for them to survive. huge levels of welfare payments, i think not! pup also confirmed, increasing welfare actually directly improved both the welfare of those citizens, and the well being of the overall economy, as this money was spent into the economy!

yes, this is a serious risk for the workers of b&l, the company could decide to move on, leaving us with an even bigger problem, but something has to give, we ve been experiencing wide scale property price inflation for decades, and now inflation has also turned up, yet some of these large corporations are still cleaning up, some still announcing record profits, something isnt right, something has to give!

its unfortunate that it has come to this, but the tools available to the workforce have become extremely limited in order to force changes, hence the decision to strike, but it is very risky, i wish them the best

yes this is a very tricky one for everyone involved, including the company, but its clearly obvious, the workforce is generally getting the sh1t end of the stick, we cant keep playing this game, being more competitive shouldnt mean you shaft as many as possible in order to be so.... as this approach could simply mean failure for everyone eventually.... the needs of all need to be considered at all stages, in order for it all to survive, the workforce needs to be a bigger part of the whole process, we truly should be doing what other countries do such as germany, the workforce needs to be a part of boards of such companies, in order to make this happen, this is legislation in germany.....

...so ireland doesnt play a critical role in the global corporate supply chain, including in regards corporate taxation, and ultimately, the lack of it, and this factory is completely separate to this global network!

yes a bump to 1k a week would certainly help most, but it has taken this action to force this possibility!