AdMMM wrote: » If a large amount of the workforce go on a strike, but the employer brings in staff to cover their duties, it then technically means that this large amount is now a minority. I suppose Mr Binman is technically correct in saying it's a minority of the staff striking but that's only PR spin.
If the Government and employers did a better job of informing the workforce of their entitlements then Unions wouldn't have half as much influence as they do. Some of the most successful industries in Ireland aren't unionised (the computer industry for example) but I'd argue that this is because the average wage is higher and the workforce is highly educated and perhaps therefore more aware of their entitlements.
well butty wrote: » Yes you are correct. Well done :rolleyes::rolleyes:
Anything I have read or heard seemed to suggest it was only a small selection of the work force striking
All I said was that I believe Unions have to much control over our country
dlofnep wrote: » And rightly so. People should be treated with respect, paid fairly by their employer and work under fair conditions. If an employer can't meet this conditions, then he/she should be rightly tackled by the Unions.
dlofnep wrote: » Seemed to be a pretty large group in Waterford present, although you probably wouldn't know since no FG representatives appeared to be present.
dlofnep wrote: » I'm glad you think it is ok to implement wage cuts of 10-49%, increase the working week by 6 hours along with this cuts, flat out refuse to speak to the elected Union representatives who are attempting to have a fairer compromise between the two - and not to mention, for the employer to flat out make racist remarks to his employers, insult them, and undercut their wage severely.
Seemed to be a pretty large group in Waterford present, although you probably wouldn't know since no FG representatives appeared to be present.
I'm glad you think it is ok to implement wage cuts of 10-49%, increase the working week by 6 hours along with this cuts, flat out refuse to speak to the elected Union representatives who are attempting to have a fairer compromise between the two - and not to mention, for the employer to flat out make racist remarks to his employers, insult them, and undercut their wage severely.
AdMMM wrote: » Sorry, what? Sorry, what? Sorry, what? Just wow. Seriously. I'm not sure if you're trying to crack us all up or if you genuinely are that clueless?!
Kahless wrote: » Free labour courts, not including related costs in time and money to the employee. It's much better to get things sorted out before it needs to go that far. You say rogue employers as if you mean small isolated employers. There's "rogue employers" such as Dunnes and Tesco, which account for a rather large amount of people. Lots of stuff happens in factories and the like too. Just because you may not hear about them trying their luck in public doesn't mean it isn't happening constantly. And I do mean constantly. A lot of attempted abuse gets sorted out before getting far if a union rep is invited to a meeting. And that is with unions involved. If there were no unions, I dread to think what would happen. I personally know two people who made some minor mistakes after being put under a lot of pressure due to staff cutbacks and cuts in hours leaving them unable to do their job properly. Lots of people are in the same position, but they were picked on for some reason. They were going to be fired until they said they were bringing a union rep to the meeting. Your option is for them to be fired and then try to drag the company through the labour court, meanwhile they've lost their income and other difficulties arising from it. Despite what you may think, it isn't easy for people to go through all that.
well butty wrote: » Grossly misinformed - certainly not. Firstly, employers do not need to be chased through the courts, they can be brought to the Labour Court at NO cost to the employee. I think maybe you are the one that is misinformed. However, i do believe that you are generalising when you suggest that "companies still try their luck on walking all over employees if they think there is half a chance of getting away with it" How many companies? What percentage of companies are we talking about? There will be rogue employers as there are rouge employees. It's sounding like old school left wing brainwashing to me!!
If the Mayor supports a minority group (Mr. Binman employees) should he support every other minority group like serial objectors etc. etc.??? where would he stop????
Remember without entrepreneurs there is no business and without no business there is no work
I would like to see our Mayor involved in proper politics and not showboating to be honest!!!!
We need to grow up now and smell the roses before the IMF come in and remember if they do they will not recognise any Union!!!!!!!!
well butty wrote: » I was going to answer all your points individually however, if anything you are consistent, consistently intransigent and unable to see the wood from the trees!!:rolleyes:
dlofnep wrote: » Opposed to the right wing loonies, who are more than happy to shaft the working class to protect big businessmen? I believe we've covered this already. The right to earn a fair wage, to be treated with respect and to have fair working conditions. Tell that to the thousands of workers who have lost their jobs on unfair conditions, or have been asked to take inappropriate paycuts, or have been harassed by their employer, or have been exploited. There will always be the need for Unions, because Employers case about profit before people. And if you don't understand the concept of profit before people, and why there needs to be someone to protect the people - then the ideologies of protection of the working class are lost on you. Oh you said it, so it must be the final word. There is a reason that Unions have a huge membership base here in Ireland, and around the world. The requirement for their protection is a must, and that is the basis of their necessity to exist. No you don't. Don't lie. You've already agreed with the assumption that Irish people are lazy - and sided with that utter gobshíte Sheehan. He's a bigot, and a danger to the working-class people & wage of Ireland. I'm all for business. But the business you are constantly speaking of, is foreign multinational business which can go in the blink of an eye and turn the local economy upsidedown. I'd be more than happy to see a successful local businessman, have a good profitable business, where he can employ workers and treat them fairly. Not only because of the label of Paddies, but because he stated that they were lazy (as if, by birth in a specific country makes you more likely to be lazy than somewhere else). There are many lazy people in all countries, but to label Irish workers as lazy is not only disrespectful to his own hard-working employees, but the 100,000's of hard workers across Ireland. No, it wasn't. No, they haven't. No, they haven't. They are as equally hard-working as their fellow Irish workers. The only person that needs to do that, is you. He supports workers who have been disrespected, mistreated, who have had their wages undercut and their hours increased. He is a good man, and there needs to be more like them. It's people like you that ruin this country for the working-class people.
Kahless wrote: » I'm afraid you have been grossly misinformed on that one. They are very much required still. Even with unions, companies still try their luck on walking all over employees if they think there is half a chance of getting away with it. Luckily, unions are still around to help those employees set things straight. You say regulation can be used instead, but following that through courts can be prohibitively expensive for employees.
well butty wrote: » The fact is unions are not required anymore in a regulated society where there are more laws in place to protect the worker that there is the employer.
well butty wrote: » When backward left wing loonies control it!
well butty wrote: » Protecting what
well butty wrote: » End of storey!
well butty wrote: » Depending on who's perspective you are looking at it from! I believe that everyone should be treated fairly including both the employee and the employer.
well butty wrote: » Remember without entrepreneurs there is no business and without no business there is no work.
well butty wrote: » And how is he racist because he called the Irish Paddies??
well butty wrote: » Again, unfortunately, some of what he had to say is right
well butty wrote: » The Irish have become lazy.
well butty wrote: » The Polish are the Irish of the 60s, 70s and 80s where we worked hard far a field.
well butty wrote: » We need to grow up now and smell the roses
well butty wrote: » If the Mayor supports a minority group (Mr. Binman employees) should he support every other minority group like serial objectors etc. etc.??? where would he stop????
dlofnep wrote: » Backwards step? Since when was protecting workers rights a backwards step? It's a forwards step if anything. Unless you're a business owner who wants to squeeze the last drop of milk from your employees.
dlofnep wrote: » It's a perfectly forward-minded step for the working class of the world. You seem to only give a monkeys about the business, and not the worker.
dlofnep wrote: » Since when was were they protecting poor performing workers? Let' stick to the issue at hand. These workers are not getting a fair days wage, and that's the root of the problem. The employer is racist, and categorically disrespects his workers, without a bat of an eye. The same workers that filled his pockets with cash. You're jumping around the topic at hand. Debate the real issues!
well butty wrote: » the point i'm making is the whole idea of unions is a backward step. The HRM example of the American companies with the mass of regulation protecting workers is the way to go.
well butty wrote: » Protecting poor performing workers is as equally appaling as an employer not paying a fair wage and in my opinion that is what unions do!
dlofnep wrote: » Oh pardon him for campaigning on behalf of workers getting a decent wage for their work. It does need to generate employment, it also needs to protect workers rights who already have employment. Without Unions, there would be severe undercutting in workers wages - which might be fine in other countries, but not in the rip-off Republic which is one of the most expensive countries in the world to live in. People have bills to pay, families to feed - and if their wages are attacked - then this severely affects their living standards. They pay well and provide fair conditions, and if they squeezed their workers then there would certainly be a need for one. Although, I wouldn't put my faith in American multinationals too much, since they could walk at any given time - Ala Dell. Mr. Binman's owner is NOT paying well, and has already insulted his long-time employees. Not only that, but he is asking to increase the working week. He is exploiting the current economic climate, by trying to squeeze the last drop of milk out of his workers. All they are asking is to be paid fairly for their work. You don't have to be a communist or a capitalist to appreciate that.
Sully wrote: » You can do sweet F all in this country with the bloody unions on your back.
Sully wrote: » Thought it was only a small enough group out of the company with the issues anyway?
well butty wrote: » The Mayor requires a much broader perspective on economic matters not a narrow minded view taken by ALL union representatives with their communist ideals!
well butty wrote: » We need to generate much needed employment in our City and he should be shouting this from the roof tops. Unfortunately, Waterford has a strong union history and in the present climate it will be a barrier to new businesses setting up in Waterford.
well butty wrote: » Look at the larger American businesses in Waterford and tell me how many of them have unions??
dlofnep wrote: » You haven't a clue what you are talking about. Ignorant Unions? It's the owner of the company who has refused to speak to any elected Union representative. It's the owner who has uncompromisingly asked for cuts between 10-49% in wages. It is the owner who stated that he was employing foreign workers to keep manners on the "Paddies" in an attempt to undercut wages. Unions are there to protect workers, and without them - there would be a lot of people today taken advantage of by their employer. Tell me exactly what "proper politics" is? If sticking up for workers isn't real politics to you - I'd say it's safe to say, the cause is lost on you in the first place.
well butty wrote: » Mr. Bunman's march was like a walk down old memory lane of ignorant unions with their school yard mantras! I would like to see our Mayor involved in proper politics and not showboating to be honest!!!!
Partizan wrote: » Will he take home the average industrial wage like Joe Higgins is doing or is he creaming off the €65k+ a year for his Mayoral salary. The 'peoples Mayor', give me a ****ing break. He joined the pact and votes for the Book of Estimates which has many services charges included in them which hurts working people. Hypocrite
Mickdots wrote: » i have to say the ignorance of people here is unreal! if you bought the news and star this week you will see john has come out fighting against an bord snip, infact he is the only local politican who has come out and said something about it! actually there wont be a 10 - w- 1 car supplied by tom murphy next year, murphy has decided to pull out due to costs, council has told john that they will buy one off murphy but john has told them that he will refuse to drive the car if it bought out of public funds or taken from any public budget. also john pays for his own fuel and has handed back the fuel card supplied by the council! his door is always open down in the council and it would be well worth ur time going down and having a chat with him instead of sprouting ****e here
