How do people feel about this one? Will it be short and sweet?
Mod warning:
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121425200/#Comment_121425200
Any chance of some medical scheme or benefits also?
Union was pushing for pay rises even when the books said they couldn't afford them. Pushed the company into examinershio
It's not a union's job to save a company. Blaming a union because a company is circling the drain is crazy
I was in management at the time. I know exactly what went on.
I am disgusted by them.
Several times over the past year I have tried to make contact and evert time my correspondence is ignored, unless it's about the bloody panto
What nonsense, that company was in the shitter regardless.
This and if the offer isn't good enough all out until it is reached
I worked in finance and the Finance Services Union was amazing. Can think of plenty of examples they got involved on issues within the place I worked and improved working conditions.
Can not say the same for Forsa. And closing in on 5 years in the service, I have never heard a positive thing from others. They seem to actively avoid issues and you only hear from them when its pay talk season. Anyone old still seems pissed off they rolled over during the recession and young staffs are either angry they never respond to their emails or money is so tight they would rather keep the extra fiver per payday
Perhaps it was different in the private sector where I spent 25 years. Unions only protect themselves.
The intransigence of Siptu with the company I worked with resulted in the company calling in the examiner and 300 out of 600 people loosing their jobs. I've absolutely no faith in them
In CS 8 years. Wouldn't join even if it was compulsory.
I see it every day if the week in DSP. Scrotes who have never worked a day in their lives and spend more time in jail then out get €12 a week. I'm actually down a euro a week with the latest budget.
The last pay increase gave me €8 a week before deductions.
I think the poster means for service purposes and I think they're right. never thought about it tbf. but yeah 20 days of striking over your career is a month less of pensionable service 😫
Having a go at older workers won't solve anything either.
In over 30 years I think I've had 3 strike days. It's on NSSO, I will check the next time I've my work laptop logged on.
I'm pretty sure it won't impact my service record or pension that much.
Of course you don’t get paid if you’re on strike. It’s not when you retire, it’s the month you go on strike…
You do realise that if you go on strike the Gov. will penalise you and deduct all your strike days when you finally retire,a former colleague told me she had it all in writing....all the strike days way back over her working lifetime DEDUCTED!
Unfortunately 'having a go' or giving off about young workers will not solve anything.
Yes,they should join a union,for their own protection,if for nothing else.
I still do not see a double digit % pay rise....and should it hit double figures it will be for a 3 yr ,at least, period.
Remember the rate of inflation is creeping down at the moment so who knows it may be 2.5% by March and then a 10% over 2 and a half or 3 years will look mighty!....even though we all know that it will not make a whole lot of difference for those trying to get on the property ladder or for those of us who are still awaiting FEMPI retraction,going back nearly 15 yrs now!
Work to rule only works in areas where management rely on flexibility e.g. education, policing and health springs to mind.
What you seem to be overlooking, is that a lot of those older staff who you think "couldn't care less" are the parents of the generation of young people who will end up emigrating or struggling to buy a house.
They're the ones who probably have adult children stuck living with them into their 30s or later with no end in sight - and believe me, it's not easy living with adult children after a certain age.
So again, it's a big generalisation on your part to assume that those who you believe are "settled" couldn't care less or are oblivious to the challenges facing young people. Most likely they are far more aware of the issues facing young people than YOU are aware of, because it is their children who are facing them.
I repeat, if young people want better pay or terms and conditions, then it's up to them to become active in their unions and look for them. No one else is going to do it for them. DPER certainly isn't going to do it out of the goodness of their heart.
If there are problems with WFH in your department, well, that is a local issue. No such issues in my department. Maybe you'll be luckier in your next role.
Don't see any value in a work to rule. From my CS experience, many already work to rule, and frequently refuse to do tasks within the scope of their role with the reply "that's not my job". It won't have any material impact in a lot of cases outside of certain professions.
All out strike definitely would have more of an impact imo - set a date asap and then if will get govt moving on an offer over the interim
Why should anyone do more work for the same pay
EDIT: sorry lol misunderstood your comment as being serious rather than a joke
The problem with a 'work to rule' is it would in many cases result in people doing more than they currently do!!
It would indeed be difficult to implement across the board.
I recall refusal to engage with new technologies as one of the ways to do this in the past, which would be an awful shame, but perhaps we need to go there.
You're right that I was generalising and I respect that you've stood up for those in lower grades but what I see in my office is a lot of young staff who are stuck at home or barely getting by joining the union whilst those who are settled in couldn't care much less because they're a few years off retirement and have been in the same building since before I was born...
If it wasn't for me getting an offer for EO I would have had to look seriously at leaving the country and even what I'll be taking home starting off in that role isn't enough for me to get much more than a room by myself which wouldn't bother me so much if those above me didn't constantly try to stall WFH arrangements that should be sparing me from hours on slow, dirty buses and overcrowded trains.
In the union since day 1 myself here too anyways and I'll be voting no on any insult of a deal even if nobody else does.
Email from SIPTU:
”In the event of any further procrastination by the Government or failure to secure a set of proposals that protect our members' employment and award them with proper pay increases, the ICTU Public Service Committee will meet on Thursday, 11th January to discuss a strategy for effective and widespread industrial action across the public service.“
There’s typically a review clause, if inflation goes above a certain percentage, they can trigger a renegotiation.
Not quite what you describe but allows for something similar.
I see work to rule or refusal of flexibility very difficult to implement.
if teachers want to do a work to rule, it’s easy enough. If the entire public sector does it, I think it’s much harder.
In my case, i would have no idea what a work to rule means. My contract is very vague. The union would likely have to spell it out in intricate detail what I should and shouldn’t do. I don’t see it viable on such a large scale.
Saying that, the unions may be happy with some sectors carrying more of the burden on a work to rule. I would likely continue my job as normal.
Yeah, I understand that as well. I can see your logic as well.
Long time reader of this thread but first post. I note a growing trend of utilities using a model for price rises of CPI+x%. In particular in telecoms, operators all seem to be offering 12 or 24month contracts which have built-in review periods in the t&cs where the monthly price can rise.
I wonder could or would the unions consider proposing a similar model in the current talks? If a multi year approach is selected, have a midterm review with CPI-+or- X? This would certainly avoid the large differences which occurred in the 2022/2023 agreement and what actually happened with inflation.
I realise this may be a bit open ended from the govt spending side, and there is a view that wages should not track inflation exactly but govt seem to have looked after everyone else, so why not it’s own workers too at a time when they are struggling to get staff in certain areas
Surely a strike in the likes of social welfare or Revenue would make more sense.
Maybe then the Unions could afford to pay those workers who are out?
In addition to this, the cohort you describe are the ones who are still down the 6%-8% of salary that was cut under the guise of the PRD, reinforced as the ASC, with no actual discussion of reinstatement even coming to the table.
There are other options between one-day strikes and all-out strikes, such as work to rule and refusal of flexibility.
Yeah fair enough, I’m just not against the idea of an initial strike or some form of action. It’s appears to me that the government are not worried whatsoever. Coughs need to be softened.
We go on a few one day strikes. government make an offer (a credible offer). We refuse. Our only other option is an all out strike.
I think striking because of no deal reduces our options and backs us into a corner.
By the time any strike comes around, we would be in a much clearer place anyway. Minimum 4 weeks away? 3 for ballot and 1 week notice
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0e54e8024b002427df3ce2953d22b721.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/196803dfa0698243a1e4321ab9efd141.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wd.vanillicon.com/v2/dbd35c43580ff62b54e9919958f2a898.svg)
