Trade Unions or Government

K-9 · 24-03-2010 02:08PM

alias141282 wrote: »

+1

The banks, Government, and media blanantly and recklessly fed the bubble.

Also Unions through social partnership and the main opposition parties were just as bad.

They wanted less taxes, more Govt. spending and increased wages to afford houses. The Govt. was happy to lower direct taxes as they got it back with the over spending with VAT, VRT and Stamp Duties.

Very few stopped and actually thought about that logically.

The answer to increased house prices was more supply, one thing they did deliver on and boy, did they deliver!

Now, when the whole thing has gone t*ts up, our tax base is far too small and Govt. spending is out of control. That's what happens when you depend on people to spend, spend and spend to get tax revenues.

gandalf · 24-03-2010 02:26PM

Where is the option for both.

Not Kevin Myers · 24-03-2010 02:47PM

Failure is actually what Independent Ireland has always done best. We even failed at prosperity.

We can fight back against adversity, by accepting what's done is done, and deciding that communities everywhere must now regroup, and relearn. The day of indulgence is done - the time of duty has arrived. We can work together, just as the Irish people did 20 years ago, when we created the most successful economy in western Europe - or we can sink.

Let's not do that though - let's start posting on internet forums and start playing the blame game. It's the Irish way.

Theta · 24-03-2010 03:01PM

alias141282 wrote: »

I see why people are giving out about unions but have people considering the following:
If workers didn't form unions then workers would be seriously exploited.

Im sorry this is rubbish the purpose originally of unions was to provide protection that was not there from large companies. Those rights are now in law.

Unions are a profiteering racquet simple as. The unions just want money and they do this by making themselves appear needed to the worker!

dvpower · 24-03-2010 03:01PM

alias141282 wrote: »

Of course they are interested in pay and conditions for their own members. Thats what they do. And by negotiating decent pay and conditions they are holding the line against a blatant race to the bottom for everyone, for those in a union and those who are not. Is that not a decent and honourable thing to do?

Its decent and honourable until it goes too far, as it often does.
Then you get disputes like the current passport office dispute, where members of the public are targetted as a proxy for hurting the employers.
Or worse, where unemployed people are denied the opportunity to take up temporary positions.
Or worse still, where union members would prefer to see their jobs lost than their accept necessary change.

alias141282 wrote: »

Your reality is that there is no society and that we are all for sale and should just take what we can get. If that means someone with a degree working in call centre for €3 euro an hour so be it. Thats all they are worth. The private market has totally failed and the state is bailing it out massively. And here you are still preaching about the iron laws of the free market and accepting "reality" which just means misery and hardship for almost everyone.

The reality is that call centres can open up wherever they want. So if they can hire staff in, say, India, at €3 an hour, they will. It doesn't matter if we like this reality; it remains the reality.
And the market has been 'working'. In the western world, call centre work has been massively outsourced to cheaper markets. Millions of jobs have been lost. We can argue the pros and cons of this reality, but one thing is clear; unions can't beat the market.

dvpower · 24-03-2010 03:02PM

Kevin Myers wrote: »

Let's not do that though - let's start posting on internet forums and start playing the blame game. It's the Irish way.

So says the internet poster.

Sizzler · 24-03-2010 03:07PM

I hate the unions more than the govt right now and thats saying something, although the government is complicit in the behaviour they are tolerating from the unions at the moment.

The unions fleeced the government coffers during the days of the "boom" with their relentless negotiating for pay increases, if you want to know where all the money went, theres your first clue.

Now that the country is stoney broke the majority of workers are willing to take cuts to ensure they survive the current economic blizzard but the likes of Begg and his ilk think their members are bullet proof and should be exempt.Why? Happy to cream the cash in the good times but not happy to help out when times are tough.Reality check required.

Whilst I do have sympathy with the lower paid workers being penalised in similar terms to their superiors the fact remains that Begg & O'Connor have milked the system for years and have no real comprehension what so ever of what hardship is given their 150k+ salaries.

Govt should abolish tax relief on union subs and grow a set of balls and tell them exactly who the employer is, if the beardies dont like the current rules of engagement then they can find their members new jobs when the govt pulls the plug and starts hiring elsehwere from the pool of 450k that are currently unemployed and would give their right arm for any job.

K-9 · 24-03-2010 03:12PM

Kevin Myers wrote: »

Failure is actually what Independent Ireland has always done best. We even failed at prosperity.

We can fight back against adversity, by accepting what's done is done, and deciding that communities everywhere must now regroup, and relearn. The day of indulgence is done - the time of duty has arrived. We can work together, just as the Irish people did 20 years ago, when we created the most successful economy in western Europe - or we can sink.

Let's not do that though - let's start posting on internet forums and start playing the blame game. It's the Irish way.

Much better to write in the Indo and do it!

Like the name, bye the way!

dvpower · 24-03-2010 03:13PM

Fuhrer wrote: »

Dont European Labour laws make Unions mostly obsolete anyway.

In terms of stopping workers from being exploited I mean.

aoboa wrote: »

Labour Court rulings aren't binding, so no.

European labour laws span the whole gamut: Health and safety, equal opportunities, discrimination, rules around part time and fixed term contracts, redundancy rules etc ... many of the issues that unions were traditionally concerned with have been codified via EU directives.

I think its fair to say that EU legislation has lessened the need for unions.

Not Kevin Myers · 24-03-2010 03:14PM

Thank you K-9, sir!

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 03:14PM

Theta wrote: »

Im sorry this is rubbish the purpose originally of unions was to provide protection that was not there from large companies. Those rights are now in law.

Unions are a profiteering racquet simple as. The unions just want money and they do this by making themselves appear needed to the worker!

Of course unions want more money for workers. Are you suggesting their is something wrong with that? Is that not what people work for? Money. Unions are need because inflation erodes real earnings and pay needs to be periodically renegotiated. Also, there are innumerable ways in which people can be exploited, hence the ongoing need for unions.

Theta · 24-03-2010 03:23PM

alias141282 wrote: »

Of course unions want more money for workers. Are you suggesting their is something wrong with that? Is that not what people work for? Money. Unions are need because inflation erodes real earnings and pay needs to be periodically renegotiated. Also, there are innumerable ways in which people can be exploited, hence the ongoing need for unions.

No no no you misunderstand what I am saying!

alias141282 wrote: »

Of course unions want more money FROM workers. Are you suggesting their is something wrong with that?

This is what I am saying.

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 03:37PM

dvpower wrote: »

Its decent and honourable until it goes too far, as it often does.
Then you get disputes like the current passport office dispute, where members of the public are targetted as a proxy for hurting the employers.
Or worse, where unemployed people are denied the opportunity to take up temporary positions.
Or worse still, where union members would prefer to see their jobs lost than their accept necessary change.

The change [pay cuts] are necessary when you are pouring billions into a black hole that is Anglo Irish. What are people on low incomes in the public sector supposed to do? They have mortgages, and families to feed and many many people in the public sector are supporting family members on the dole. And the Govt is cutting their pay to bail out Anglo Irish - a problem they didn't create. And you are saying they should just sit there and take it. Where does it end? We should all become passive drones and accept whatever polices are handed down no matter how unfair or insane? It doesn't stop at the public sector, they will cut dole further and the minimum wage and increase taxes on low income earners, and introduce water charges and any other charges they can to bring in cash, while leaving plenty of tax loop holes open for big earners - and all to pay for Govt corruption and incompetence and bail out the banks - yes it is disgraceful that unions don't just accept this lying down.

Basically unless you are a really big earner i.e. over a quarter of a million a year - then the Govt. is after your wallet and you are going to get screwed. The money they get from you will go into Anglo Irish - a complete black hole.

dvpower wrote: »

The reality is that call centres can open up wherever they want. So if they can hire staff in, say, India, at €3 an hour, they will. It doesn't matter if we like this reality; it remains the reality.
And the market has been 'working'. In the western world, call centre work has been massively outsourced to cheaper markets. Millions of jobs have been lost. We can argue the pros and cons of this reality, but one thing is clear; unions can't beat the market.

I see. You have it all figured out. There is absolutely no alternative to the current system. Everyone must prostitute themselves to the "market". The free market system as currently exists is a reality, yes, but it has utterly failed. It is not a sustainable economic model unless we are all to be driven into the ground.

We don't need call centres in this country. There is plently of meaningful and valuable work to be done in the community, teaching, healthcare, urban renewal, infrastructure, youth development, etc. etc. If the government wasn't bailing out our failed banks and developers there would be money to pay for this work. You have accepted the same old neo-liberal ideology of "free market" economics which has the country bankrupt without even considering that there might be alternatives. Read Fintan O'Toole's book 'Ship of Fools' if you think there is no alternative the shambles we have at the moment.

This is our country and we need to take ownership of what happens and stop accepting that there is no alternative to the current predicament.

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 03:47PM

Sizzler wrote: »

Govt should abolish tax relief on union subs and grow a set of balls and tell them exactly who the employer is, if the beardies dont like the current rules of engagement then they can find their members new jobs when the govt pulls the plug and starts hiring elsehwere from the pool of 450k that are currently unemployed and would give their right arm for any job.

Sizzler, if the govt. were to succeed in doing this people in private sector would pay dearly. Conditions in the public sector set a benchmark for conditions in the private sector. When the public sector is hiring the best and brighest will take public sector jobs if pay and conditions offer an overall better package than the private sector. If you drive down pay and conditions in the public sector it allows the private sector to hire the same talent for poorer pay and conditions. That is precisely govt. policy. They call it competitiveness - but it's a race to the floor.

markpb · 24-03-2010 03:49PM

alias141282 wrote: »

Conditions in the public sector set a benchmark for conditions in the private sector. When the public sector is hiring the best and brighest will take public sector jobs if pay and conditions offer an overall better package than the private sector.

Actually that's not true. I worked in the public service briefly and even though I liked the people and the conditions, the work was completely unchallenging so I left. I know several other IT graduates who did the same (and took paycuts).

dvpower · 24-03-2010 04:03PM

alias141282 wrote: »

The change [pay cuts] are necessary when you are pouring billions into a black hole that is Anglo Irish.

We have a massive current account deficit regardless of Anglo. The cuts would be necessary even if we could let Anglo die. NAMA and bailout money are not counted in the national debt figures.

alias141282 wrote: »

What are people on low incomes in the public sector supposed to do? They have mortgages, and families to feed and many many people in the public sector are supporting family members on the dole. And the Govt is cutting their pay to bail out Anglo Irish - a problem they didn't create. And you are saying they should just sit their and take it. Where does it end? We should all become passive drones and accept whatever polices are handed down no matter how unfair or insane?

We can ignore the tide coming in, but our feet will still get wet.

alias141282 wrote: »

I see. You have it all figured out. There is absolutely no alternative to the current system. Everyone must prostitute themselves to the "market". The free market system as currently exists is a reality, yes, but it has utterly failed. It is not a sustainable economic model unless we are all to be driven into the ground.

I don't have it figured out. I think we could do more on a stimulus, but we just don't have the money. We might be able to get some money at a good rate, if we can convince the market that we are good for it.
So, yes, we do have to prostitute ourselves to the market. They've already paid €20bn this year for the sex.

alias141282 wrote: »

We don't need call centres in this country.

Tell that to an unemployed call centre worker.

alias141282 wrote: »

There is plently of meaningful and valuable work to be done in the community, teaching, healthcare, urban renewal, infrastructure, youth development, etc. etc.

All of these valuable activities cost money. Where will be get this money from? We could borrow it (Greece are currently paying 6.6% for 10 year money)

alias141282 wrote: »

If the government wasn't bailing out our failed banks and developers there would be money to pay for this work.

No there wouldn't. We are running a c€20bn deficit.

alias141282 wrote: »

You have accepted the same old neo-liberal ideology of "free market" economics which has the country bankrupt without even considering that there might be alternatives.

What are the realistic alternatives?

alias141282 wrote: »

This is our country and we need to take ownership of what happens and stop accepting that there is no alternative to the current predicament

The first step in taking ownership of what happens is to tackle our current account deficit. If we don't take ownership of this, eventually the IMF or the EU will. But if you have a better solution to the current cuts, please share.

pajodublin · 24-03-2010 04:22PM

Fulton Crown wrote: »

why cant the public servants take a little bit of pain ?

As every one knows the public service is RIFE with waste and incompetence not to mention poor work practices and avoidence of responsibility.

A little bit of pain.....A LITTLE BIT OF PAIN....
We were the worst paid workers in the 80's and 90's
finally get a bit of catch up going in early 2000's
mid 2000's we finally reach the level we DESERVE
and now we've been dropped by nearly 20%

Would you ever get a grip and stop listening to RTE scaremongering and the shite from Independent Newspapers.

I work hard at my job, I work non stop in my job.
Just in case a few smart arses start asking why am i on the internet then, im not in work at the moment. im in work tonight on shift work.

Next, i have NO SYMPATHY for the people in the passport office missing holidays. Having worked there for 2 years a while back i can honestly say, why the feck didnt they check their passports when they booked the holiday.
Dont leave it to the last minute and you wont be dissappointed.

Lastly, you still think public servants have it easy, try telling that nurse who will has to wipe 100 arses a day, put up with all the crap(excuse the pun) from patients and patients families and tell her/him that they dont deserve their current pay.

/rant

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 04:32PM

dvpower wrote: »

We have a massive current account deficit regardless of Anglo. The cuts would be necessary even if we could let Anglo die. NAMA and bailout money are not counted in the national debt figures.

The current account deficit has arisen due to the whole package of economic mismanagement over the past decade - not just anglo. The Govt response to the crisis is inequitable - targeting those on low incomes and on social welfare and bailing out Anglo is a big part of it.

dvpower wrote: »

The first step in taking ownership of what happens is to tackle our current account deficit. If we don't take ownership of this, eventually the IMF or the EU will. But if you have a better solution to the current cuts, please share.

I am not for second denying the massive hole the country is in. I don't have any one solution that will fix everything. A sea change is needed. Where I disagree with you most is the idea that we should continue with the economic model that has got us into the mess. We went for "Boston" in the Boston V Berlin debate. That was a huge mistake and we should never do that again. We need to create a sustainable economy here. The first step would be to reform the taxation system. Close off the tax loopholes for big earners. Introduce a higher top rate of tax for those on over 150k. Management of the banks is a big part of it. When the govt. gaurantee runs out at the end of this year the govt. needs to agree to repay a fraction of the subordinated debt. Anglo should have been let go to the wall - and the govt. needs to stop bailing it out now. People need to get active at community level. Thats why I gave the link to Fintan O'Toole's article. Look how motivated and active people were to fight the British at the turn of the last century - if we could get that same energy going - the country might have a future.

If you think there are no alternatives look at iceland. They had a referendum on whether or not they should pay back their debt to international banks. They voted no. They now have 8% unemployment. We have 14% + emigration. Here’s the Icelandic president, Olafur Grimsson, on the recently rejected referendum in that country: “How can you ask the taxpayers, ordinary people who have nothing to do with the banking sector, to shoulder the debt and the failure of the banking system, without asking those people directly, ‘to what extent are you willing to do it?’

aoboa · 24-03-2010 04:50PM

dvpower wrote: »

European labour laws span the whole gamut: Health and safety, equal opportunities, discrimination, rules around part time and fixed term contracts, redundancy rules etc ... many of the issues that unions were traditionally concerned with have been codified via EU directives.

I think its fair to say that EU legislation has lessened the need for unions.

Try taking a multinational to court on your own for any breach of contract or worse - something harder to prove like bullying or discrimination.
Then tell me that union membership isn't an advantage.
Labour law is trecherous at best and not only to companies have legal teams they also have IBEC to fall back on.
As an individual you get to pay for a solicitor and take your chances and the chances are that you may lose your job anyway. As a union member, chances are any problem will be sorted out through negotiation or arbitration or by a rights commisioner. This is what unions spend the vast majority of their time dealing with and it's good and necessary work.

If unions were crushed in Europe as people seem to want, How long do you think it would take before lobbyists from industry started to put pressure on Europe to relax the labour laws? Simply by being there unions protect against this.

markpb · 24-03-2010 04:56PM

aoboa wrote: »

If unions were crushed in Europe as people seem to want, How long do you think it would take before lobbyists from industry started to put pressure on Europe to relax the labour laws? Simply by being there unions protect against this.

Why do companies where unions don't exist not penalise their workers? I've never been in a union and probably never will. I don't think anyone in my industry is in any union. I've suffered no pay cuts and my company treats me well despite the current massive losses they're suffering. By your logic, I'm a defenceless peon waiting to be crushed by the evil capitalist employer. I haven't noticed that.

On the other hand, when I worked (briefly) in the public service, the union refused to switch from a manual time & attendance system to an electronic one because you would clock in 2 minutes later (even though everyone was salaried and on flexitime) and they demanded days off or cash payments if you had to move office.

aoboa · 24-03-2010 05:01PM

markpb wrote: »

Why do companies where unions don't exist not penalise their workers? I've never been in a union and probably never will. I don't think anyone in my industry is in any union. I've suffered no pay cuts and my company treats me well despite the current massive losses they're suffering. By your logic, I'm a defenceless peon waiting to be crushed by the evil capitalist employer. I haven't noticed that.

On the other hand, when I worked (briefly) in the public service, the union refused to switch from a manual time & attendance system to an electronic one because you would clock in 2 minutes later (even though everyone was salaried and on flexitime) and they demanded days off or cash payments if you had to move office.

The fact that you have not needed representation does not mean that there's no need for represention. It also doesn't mean that you wouldn't have need for it in the future.

I can't comment on what goes on in the PS because I work in the private sector.

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 05:03PM

aoboa wrote: »

If unions were crushed in Europe as people seem to want, How long do you think it would take before lobbyists from industry started to put pressure on Europe to relax the labour laws? Simply by being there unions protect against this.

+1

Its amazing that people who are themselves employees have turned against unions. I mean, do employees who are against unions think they are immune? If you are in the labour market then thank your lucky stars there are unions out there even if you are not in one yourself.

The media is dead against unions and for good reason. The people who pay them (advertisers) are employers and of course they hate the idea of workers ganging together and negotiating decent terms of employment.

Recently Gordon Browne said the strike by cabin crew at British Airways was 'deplorable'. I mean what are they supposed to do? BA was going to make them work longer hours for less pay. And the justification is that Ryanair is doing it. Therefore, if one group of employees is being treated terribly the solution is to treat everybody terribly. And people don't think this is a race to the bottom?

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 05:11PM

markpb wrote: »

Why do companies where unions don't exist not penalise their workers? I've never been in a union and probably never will. I don't think anyone in my industry is in any union. I've suffered no pay cuts and my company treats me well despite the current massive losses they're suffering. By your logic, I'm a defenceless peon waiting to be crushed by the evil capitalist employer. I haven't noticed that.

You probaly are being penalised but you don't even know it. Public sector unions have negotiated better terms for their workers than generally exist in private sector. In terms of sick leave, pensions, annual leave, flexi time, etc. These are conditions of employment that everyone would like to have and should be there for everyone. The answer is not to make everyone in the public sector work under the same conditions as the private sector but the other way around.

markpb wrote: »

On the other hand, when I worked (briefly) in the public service, the union refused to switch from a manual time & attendance system to an electronic one because you would clock in 2 minutes later (even though everyone was salaried and on flexitime) and they demanded days off or cash payments if you had to move office.

Yes unions fight tooth and nail for any concessions they can get for their staff. Thats their job. They don't always win. They frequently lose. But they keep fighting. And good for them.

dvpower · 24-03-2010 05:21PM

pajodublin wrote: »

Next, i have NO SYMPATHY for the people in the passport office missing holidays. Having worked there for 2 years a while back i can honestly say, why the feck didnt they check their passports when they booked the holiday.
Dont leave it to the last minute and you wont be dissappointed.

This attitude is why a lot of people don't have sympathy for the current plight of public servants.

Every passport application form has the time it is expected to take to process it printed on it. People have a right to expect that these SLAs share some relationship with reality.

Hint: If you want the public (your customers) on your side, don't dismiss their concerns.

Stark · 24-03-2010 05:22PM

Deleted User wrote: »

Which are you angrier at After Hours?
While I'm very pissed at the government, I'm not forgetting that the world is in a recession nd a small open economy with a property bubble is gonna get destroyed. Government didn't create the bubble, neither did banks, we did. I don't blame the banks for the stupid college loans I took out cause I'm fit to admit I was the idiot. If you a sign a mortgage, you're responsible. Stop blaming everyone around you for your selfinflicted negative equity.

FF are far from blameless. They egged people on through the madness (all the naysayers could just go top themselves sure) as well as introducing tax breaks that further inflated the bubble and the wasteful spending practices it introduced on the back of all that are responsible for the current pain and hardship being experienced.

But at least they were voted in democratically and we have the option of voting them out. We didn't elect the trade union leaders yet they see fit to dictate how the country should be run.

pajodublin wrote:

Lastly, you still think public servants have it easy, try telling that nurse who will has to wipe 100 arses a day, put up with all the crap(excuse the pun) from patients and patients families and tell her/him that they dont deserve their current pay.

Should someone who scrubs pub toilets for a living be paid the same as a nurse?

dvpower · 24-03-2010 05:25PM

aoboa wrote: »

Try taking a multinational to court on your own for any breach of contract or worse - something harder to prove like bullying or discrimination.

I accept that unions are useful in some cases. I went only as far as saying that the need for unions was lessened by EU directed law.

aoboa · 24-03-2010 05:33PM

dvpower wrote: »

I accept that unions are useful in some cases. I went only as far as saying that the need for unions was lessened by EU directed law.

The laws exist because of unions and the only thing that keep the laws in place are unions. Unions police these laws.
Look to the US to see how lobbyists can pretty much destroy employment law. T&C's in the US are among (or maybe are) the worst in the first world.

dvpower · 24-03-2010 05:43PM

alias141282 wrote: »

The current account deficit has arisen due to the whole package of economic mismanagement over the past decade - not just anglo. The Govt response to the crisis is inequitable - targeting those on low incomes and on social welfare and bailing out Anglo is a big part of it.

I hate to say it, but, we are where we are.

I'm sure there are lots of better ways we could organise ourselves in the long term. But we are in a crisis at the moment. I just don't see how we have the leeway for radical change, and while I'd have a lot of time for Fintan O'Toole, that article is a bit of a colour piece; its lacking in hard proposals.

I agree that we need to reform the tax system, but that, I think, will mean a broadining of the tax base ~ more taxes, but proportionally less on earned income. I don't think there is great scope for substantially more tax on the higher paid. I agree that we need much tighter control on the banks.

Meanwhile, our national debt keeps growing. We need to figure out, as a priority, how to halt it.

alias141282 wrote: »

If you think there are no alternatives look at iceland. They had a referendum on whether or not they should pay back their debt to international banks. They voted no.

The referendum wasn't about whether or not they should pay back their debt. It was on a specific proposal for debt repayment. The Icelanders will pay their debt.
On their response to the economic crisis, they devalued their currency and raised interest rates massively - neither option is open to us.

alias141282 · 24-03-2010 06:03PM

dvpower wrote: »

I hate to say it, but, we are where we are.

So we should just accept everything that has gone before, all the corruption and mismanagement?

dvpower wrote: »

I'm sure there are lots of better ways we could organise ourselves in the long term. But we are in a crisis at the moment. I just don't see how we have the leeway for radical change, and while I'd have a lot of time for Fintan O'Toole, that article is a bit of a colour piece; its lacking in hard proposals.
.

We have no choice but to change radically. The country is bankrupt. there are plenty of proposals in his book 'Ship of Fools'.

dvpower wrote: »

I agree that we need to reform the tax system, but that, I think, will mean a broadining of the tax base ~ more taxes, but proportionally less on earned income. I don't think there is great scope for substantially more tax on the higher paid. .

Why not a higher marginal rate of tax on the higher paid? They pay less than they do in Germany, France, Finland, Denmark, etc.

Stark · 24-03-2010 06:17PM

alias141282 wrote: »

Why not a higher marginal rate of tax on the higher paid? They pay less than they do in Germany, France, Finland, Denmark, etc.

Punitive marginal tax rates reduce the supply of effort and investment meaning less growth and less money for everyone. The marginal tax rate in France is only 40% these days. It used to be 50% in 2002.

Trade Unions or Government

Comments