Do you support the Dublin Bus workers?

VinLieger · 07-08-2013 09:23AM

Could people stop claiming this is public vs private please? Bus drivers are NOT public servants. This is about people being against entitlement and holdover celtic tiger pay structures

Megatron!! · 07-08-2013 09:25AM

VinLieger wrote: »

Could people stop claiming this is public vs private please? Bus drivers are NOT public servants

no but as semi state they are subsidised with tax money. if they weren't they would have no choice but to take cuts or lose their jobs.

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 07-08-2013 09:26AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

This is the usual public vs private sector bollocks.

These workers provide an essential service to the economy, allowing it to function and providing us with money, through the economic activity that public services encourage - the benefits (both economic and social) of public services, are measured far beyond the narrow-minded view of their balance sheets (that's why there are public services - to provide social/economic benefits, that go beyond an individual companies profits/losses).

The people really costing us, are the bankers/financiers who dumped a generation worth of debt on us, and who will be lapping up our public assets and selling us overpriced privatized for-profit services, as we push further through austerity.
The same group, who are also very happy to keep people focusing ire on public vs private sector nonsense, which affords them the political power to dismantle unions and push forward their acquisition of public assets/services.

Idiotic to think that the idea of disempowering unions - the only significant political power the public have left - would be a victory for anyone; usually the same crowd discouraging people from protesting, saying "it will do nothing" - basically discouraging people from any political action, which ensures political power tips more towards corporate/business/financial hands.

That's what that is all about, and they have an army of useful idiots backing it everywhere you go in print/news/online - idiots who don't know (or even often do know..) that they are arguing against the publics and thus their own best interests, for the benefit of the parasites among financiers that helped destroy much of our economy.

There are further strikes in the offing, notably from the ESB, and I can see them becoming a lot more prevalent in the years to come, as austerity deepens - we'll see how deterred they are.

More anarchic rubbish.
This strike has nothing to do with bankers or austerity , it has everything to do with greed.
These drivers do NOT provide a public service, they are part of an organization thatabuss its monopoly position and is a huge drain on the taxpayers, it could quite easily be deregulated and become competitive, which would be boost to the economy.
As for the ESB, sure their own union boss accused them of being "spoilt" and "enjoying the gravy" not too long ago, enough said!

VinLieger · 07-08-2013 09:27AM

Megatron!! wrote: »

no but as semi state they are subsidised with tax money. if they weren't they would have no choice but to take cuts or lose their jobs.

Yes and that subsidy has been cut several times since 2008 yet the bus drivers are still on the same celtic tiger inflated pay scheme

Megatron!! · 07-08-2013 09:28AM

VinLieger wrote: »

Yes and that subsidy has been cut several times since 2008 yet the bus drivers are still on the same celtic tiger inflated pay scheme

exactly my point

Dravokivich · 07-08-2013 09:45AM

Frank Black wrote: »

We just had a union out on an unjustified strike to try to retain some of their Celtic Tiger perks. They cost ordinary workers and the general Dublin economy money.They received so little public support, they must have been ashamed and embarrassed standing on those picket lines yesterday.

They are also "Ordinary Workers" no? If a workforce is to go on strike, there are always going to be affects to it. It just so happens that its a primary means of commuting throughout and around Dublin, doesn't mean they need to heed on the availability of striking.

They didn't do it to stir up public support either. It was entirely about themselves, but that doesn't have to mean it makes'em greedy by default.

Way too many people shouting in here...

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 09:46AM

Frank Black wrote: »

Thanks for putting it so simply. I can't handle complex issues like you.

Let's me try this on you.

When the looney left come out with statements like 'Austerity isn't working', what they actually mean is 'Austerity isn't pleasant', which is true. Austerity means reducing your expendature and increasing your income (usually through increased taxes) in an attenpt to balance the budget.
It's not very pleasant - but guess what?
It is working - it's doing exactly what it's supposed to be doing.
Our budget deficit has reduced from 24.6bn in 2009, to around 12.5bn last year.
Now, obvioulsy I'm not as intelligent as you, but this austerty thingy, while pretty unpleasant seems to be doing what it's supposed to be doing.

On the other hand we've got your proposal - pump ****loads more money into the economy and worry about paying it back later.

Let me have a think about that.......

Nope, sounds pretty reckless, but then again, I'm not as intelligent as you and am probably missing something really obvious.

No, they mean austerity doesn't work.

It is backed by nobody other than ideologues, financial interests who benefit from the destruction of the economy and sale of state assets/services (affording them new rent-seeking opportunities upon the public), and useful idiots in print/news/online, who don't have the first fúcking clue about economics, but lionize impossible-to-achieve 'free markets' with religious fervour.

Why on earth do you think almost the entire right-wing network of political/economic ideology is founded almost entirely by think-tanks, funded by massive corporations/billionaires, like the Koch brothers? It is because they profit from it enormously, at the expense of the rest of society.

You can't be so completely clueless about the harm caused by economic ideology in the last 30 years (leading to multiple economic crisis all over Asia and South America) - culminating in the most massive economic crisis anyone has seen for 80 years - and how all that was advocated in that time, is exactly the same stuff that you are advocating now.

It's a truly autistic form of economics, where repeated failure of these policies just makes proponents even more determined to persist with them.

I mean guess what, turns out you don't need to balance the books because (surprise) government finances work differently to household finances; you can deficit spend until you hit inflation targets, because you don't need to use debt-based money to fund economies (Europe is easily capable of funding a massive stimulus program, all over Europe - all while keeping debt sustainable, and within inflation targets) - we're not in the gold standard anymore, your economics is almost 100 years out of date.

You don't give a toss about actual possibilities or reality though, because you care only about ideology - about supporting your economic theory 'team' and nothing else.

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 10:02AM

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

More anarchic rubbish.
This strike has nothing to do with bankers or austerity , it has everything to do with greed.
These drivers do NOT provide a public service, they are part of an organization thatabuss its monopoly position and is a huge drain on the taxpayers, it could quite easily be deregulated and become competitive, which would be boost to the economy.
As for the ESB, sure their own union boss accused them of being "spoilt" and "enjoying the gravy" not too long ago, enough said!

This is trite bollocks - more promotion of the privatization/deregulation nonsense, when that will end up costing the public even more, and likely would hand a windfall to the same financial parasites that helped destroy much of our economy.

Of course they have a monopoly position, they are public service - that is a natural result of providing a public service!
The rest is just the usual public sector vs private sector crap - painting all public sector workers as greedy moneygrabbers, when you want to sell off our public services to private industry, who will then need massive subsidies from government to run all of the unprofitable routes (there is a reason it's run as a public service after all - to provide a public service, not to turn a profit).

Sir Humphrey Appleby · 07-08-2013 10:09AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

This is trite bollocks - more promotion of the privatization/deregulation nonsense, when that will end up costing the public even more, and likely would hand a windfall to the same financial parasites that helped destroy much of our economy.

Of course they have a monopoly position, they are public service - that is a natural result of providing a public service!
The rest is just the usual public sector vs private sector crap - painting all public sector workers as greedy moneygrabbers, when you want to sell off our public services to private industry, who will then need massive subsidies from government to run all of the unprofitable routes (there is a reason it's run as a public service after all - to provide a public service, not to turn a profit).

No they are not and you lose the arguement when you have to resort to peddling the same downright lie over and over.
CIE are a Commercial Semi-State Company , they are not a public service, and truth be told for decades they have existed with little real purpose except to benifit they employees and their families.
It truely is sad that your only retort time and time again is to peddle a lie and attack those who disagree with you.

Frank Black · 07-08-2013 10:10AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

They are also "Ordinary Workers" no? If a workforce is to go on strike, there are always going to be affects to it. It just so happens that its a primary means of commuting throughout and around Dublin, doesn't mean they need to heed on the availability of striking.

They didn't do it to stir up public support either. It was entirely about themselves, but that doesn't have to mean it makes'em greedy by default.

Way too many people shouting in here...

They went on strike because they didn't want to give up a series of quite ludicrous allowances that they have somehow managed to hang onto for the last 5 years.
They went on strike because they have the safety net of knowing that no matter how much money they cost the company they are working for, public taxes will be used to make up the shortfall.
They went on strike because they work in a 'no redundancies' workplace.
They went on strike because they wanted to inconvenience the public and hoped that the anger generated by their actions would be directed at management/Government and allow them to keep their perks.

The right to strike is a right which comes with certain responsibilities.

The DB drivers showed they didn't give a **** about their responsibilities - that makes them greedy and selfish in my book.

Frank Black · 07-08-2013 10:19AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

No, they mean austerity doesn't work.

It is backed by nobody other than ideologues, financial interests who benefit from the destruction of the economy and sale of state assets/services (affording them new rent-seeking opportunities upon the public), and useful idiots in print/news/online, who don't have the first fúcking clue about economics, but lionize impossible-to-achieve 'free markets' with religious fervour.

Why on earth do you think almost the entire right-wing network of political/economic ideology is founded almost entirely by think-tanks, funded by massive corporations/billionaires, like the Koch brothers? It is because they profit from it enormously, at the expense of the rest of society.

You can't be so completely clueless about the harm caused by economic ideology in the last 30 years (leading to multiple economic crisis all over Asia and South America) - culminating in the most massive economic crisis anyone has seen for 80 years - and how all that was advocated in that time, is exactly the same stuff that you are advocating now.

It's a truly autistic form of economics, where repeated failure of these policies just makes proponents even more determined to persist with them.

I mean guess what, turns out you don't need to balance the books because (surprise) government finances work differently to household finances; you can deficit spend until you hit inflation targets, because you don't need to use debt-based money to fund economies (Europe is easily capable of funding a massive stimulus program, all over Europe - all while keeping debt sustainable, and within inflation targets) - we're not in the gold standard anymore, your economics is almost 100 years out of date.

You don't give a toss about actual possibilities or reality though, because you care only about ideology - about supporting your economic theory 'team' and nothing else.

You can hark back to the wonderful times of 30years ago, before 'economic ideologies' ruined everything when the world was great, but some of us are old enough to remember that that's a load of bollox - those too young can consult statistics on how much standards of living has increased over this period.
You can try to scare people with bogey men hiding in the shadows - some are desperate enough or naive enough to believe you, but most will laugh at you.

Whisper it quietly, but no one is buying your 'magic beans' solution to the current economic mess. If you can't sell your beans in the current economic climate, I'm afraid the game is up for you my friend.
How frustrating it must be. Here was you big chance to tap into the justifible public anger and it's just not working, is it?

Dravokivich · 07-08-2013 10:25AM

Frank Black wrote: »

The right to strike is a right which comes with certain responsibilities.

The DB drivers showed they didn't give a **** about their responsibilities - that makes them greedy and selfish in my book.

Tried making sense of what you're saying there and looking up on the following site (http://employmentrightsireland.com/tag/right-to-strike/), the below are the only preconditions I can find with regards to responsibilities prior to going on strike:

The preconditions to lawful industrial action are:
the immunitites only apply to members and officials of authorised trade unions

if the dispute relates to an individual worker, any agreed procedures in the workplace or procedures normally availed of by custom or practice must be availed of first

if the industrial action or strike is to be supported by a trade union, a secret ballot must be held first.

I think all three were met. If you wish to go on shouting, fire away. Or do you wish to discuss what you consider their responsibilities to be?

Dave! · 07-08-2013 10:30AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

Tried making sense of what you're saying there and looking up on the following site (http://employmentrightsireland.com/tag/right-to-strike/), the below are the only preconditions I can find with regards to responsibilities prior to going on strike:

I think all three were met. If you wish to go on shouting, fire away. Or do you wish to discuss what you consider their responsibilities to be?

err, I don't think he's claiming that legal preconditions were not met; he's referring to the broader responsibilities that apply when you have the power to bring the capital city to a halt, i.e. only striking when there's a genuine injustice being imposed, rather than to protect your anachronistic privileges when the company needs to cut costs.

Dravokivich · 07-08-2013 10:36AM

Dave! wrote: »

err, I don't think he's claiming that legal preconditions were not met; he's referring to the broader responsibilities that apply when you have the power to bring the capital city to a halt, i.e. only striking when there's a genuine injustice being imposed, rather than to protect your anachronistic privileges when the company needs to cut costs.

But it referred to a change to their employment conditions. If they didn't strike, they couldn't oppose them.

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 10:39AM

Sir Humphrey Appleby wrote: »

No they are not and you lose the arguement when you have to resort to peddling the same downright lie over and over.
CIE are a Commercial Semi-State Company , they are not a public service, and truth be told for decades they have existed with little real purpose except to benifit they employees and their families.
It truely is sad that your only retort time and time again is to peddle a lie and attack those who disagree with you.

You're just engaging in pedantry and nitpicking here - they are de-facto a public service, they are owned by government so this is a ridiculous exercise in point-scoring.

The rest is the usual 'greedy public workers' bollocks.

JRant · 07-08-2013 10:39AM

So we'll probably see the db unions selling out any new recruits first. That seems to be the m.o. of these parasitic organisations over the past 5 years or so. Protect the old timers at any cost and to hell with the next generation coming through.

Yep, I read some waffle in my time but the past few pages here take the biscuit. Unions in Ireland are not the "only power the people have". In fact that couldn't be further from the truth. Every big union in this country should be immediately dispanded. These boyo's sat at government tables, in central bank meetings, organised slush-funds, went on jollies all over the world and for what? It certainly wasn't for their members.

When it comes down to it, they are more than willing to throw new members under the bus (see teaching, nursing to name but a few) to protect the establishment.

Jester252 · 07-08-2013 10:40AM

So they stop striking because the unions and Dublin bus are in the labour court.
Where they not already in the labour court and the unions just ignored the ruling because they didn't like it? What good will it do to just head back into this roundabout?

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 10:45AM

Frank Black wrote: »

You can hark back to the wonderful times of 30years ago, before 'economic ideologies' ruined everything when the world was great, but some of us are old enough to remember that that's a load of bollox - those too young can consult statistics on how much standards of living has increased over this period.
You can try to scare people with bogey men hiding in the shadows - some are desperate enough or naive enough to believe you, but most will laugh at you.

Whisper it quietly, but no one is buying your 'magic beans' solution to the current economic mess. If you can't sell your beans in the current economic climate, I'm afraid the game is up for you my friend.
How frustrating it must be. Here was you big chance to tap into the justifible public anger and it's just not working, is it?

Right you even deny the last 30 years of neoliberal economic ideology that happens to almost precisely match what you are advocating - one of the most well-documented instances of intellectual/ideological corruption of politics/economics in the last half-century.

You show yourself as nothing more than an ideologue yourself here in pretending this was all imaginary 'bogey men' - seems you're interested in nothing more than rhetoric and peddling the same repackaged garbage, that landed us into this crisis in the first place.

Frank Black · 07-08-2013 10:45AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

Tried making sense of what you're saying there and looking up on the following site (http://employmentrightsireland.com/tag/right-to-strike/), the below are the only preconditions I can find with regards to responsibilities prior to going on strike:

I think all three were met. If you wish to go on shouting, fire away. Or do you wish to discuss what you consider their responsibilities to be?

Dave! wrote: »

err, I don't think he's claiming that legal preconditions were not met; he's referring to the broader responsibilities that apply when you have the power to bring the capital city to a halt, i.e. only striking when there's a genuine injustice being imposed, rather than to protect your anachronistic privileges when the company needs to cut costs.

What he said.

And I'm not sure why you think I'm shouting. Is it because I'm making a point you disagree with?

If a group of workers - say air traffic controllers had their salaries cut by 1c, would they be justified in going on an all out strike for months, affecting the travel plans of thousands, costing the country millions?
You seem to think this would be perfectly acceptable.

IMO there would be no justifiable moral argument for such an action regardless of their legal right to strike.

We all have a right to free speech. We have a responsibility not to abuse this by shouting 'Fire' in a crowded theatre.

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 10:47AM

JRant wrote: »

So we'll probably see the db unions selling out any new recruits first. That seems to be the m.o. of these parasitic organisations over the past 5 years or so. Protect the old timers at any cost and to hell with the next generation coming through.

Yep, I read some waffle in my time but the past few pages here take the biscuit. Unions in Ireland are not the "only power the people have". In fact that couldn't be further from the truth. Every big union in this country should be immediately dispanded. These boyo's sat at government tables, in central bank meetings, organised slush-funds, went on jollies all over the world and for what? It certainly wasn't for their members.

When it comes down to it, they are more than willing to throw new members under the bus (see teaching, nursing to name but a few) to protect the establishment.

Name any other group representing the public that can exercise as much political power as the unions did the last few days - there is not one.

You argue for disbanding unions, you argue for disempowering the public - if we have badly run unions, replace them with better run unions.

Frank Black · 07-08-2013 10:50AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

seems you're interested in nothing more than rhetoric and peddling the same repackaged garbage,

The lack of self-awareness is highly amusing.

Phoebas · 07-08-2013 10:54AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Name any other group representing the public that can exercise as much political power as the unions did the last few days - there is not one.

The Oireachtas.

Dave! · 07-08-2013 10:54AM

Dravokivich wrote: »

But it referred to a change to their employment conditions. If they didn't strike, they couldn't oppose them.

They could engage in discussions with the employer, which they did, and have an independent body mediate, which they did. And they rejected it.

Unfortunately "not cutting costs" isn't an option - any employers has to be able to cut their costs in order for the company to remain in business. The company's figures were analysed by 2 independent consultants and accepted by the Labour Court.

These are the tamest cuts imaginable, with no impact on core pay, and with no redundancies. That the unions saw fit to strike in response to this is IMO irresponsible and I think the fact that they have no public support for it would indicate the same.

JRant · 07-08-2013 10:59AM

KyussBishop wrote: »

Name any other group representing the public that can exercise as much political power as the unions did the last few days - there is not one.

You argue for disbanding unions, you argue for disempowering the public - if we have badly run unions, replace them with better run unions.

Well the OAP's stuck it to the government and they don't have a bloated, bearded, oh brother where art thou union behind them.

There was no political power exercised over the past number of days either. It was all fur coat and no knickers.

Big unions are just a hothouse for wannabe politicians and serve no good purpose.

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 10:59AM

Frank Black wrote: »

The lack of self-awareness is highly amusing.

If I'm spouting rhetoric and the same repackaged garbage, point out exactly what is rhetoric, and what is repackaged flawed economic theory?

I respond to arguments without counterarguments, I don't peddle crap like 'lefty loonies', and jump down to the gutters in my quality of argument, by spouting rhetoric and other garbage.

When you do that, you do it to avoid addressing any of the points in my post - most notably, that the austerity crap, is the same repackaged garbage that is promoted by the massive right-wing network of think tanks, that just-so-happen to be funded by massive corporations and wealthy folk like the Koch brothers, who stand to gain massively from austerity and the pushing of this right-wing dogma.
This is also why you have no response to the study I posted earlier either - giving academic credence to the point that austerity is harmful and nonsense.

You know that, and you know you have nothing to provide that can give an alternative explanation for those well documented facts, so you jump down to garbage/trite rhetoric in your response, to avoid addressing it.

You're (consciously or not) spouting ideology being promoted by wealthy business oligarchs/parasites, for their own profit at the expense of the rest of societies around the world - and you can't put two and two together (or maybe don't desire to), to see it is all bullshít.

KyussBishop · 07-08-2013 11:03AM

Phoebas wrote: »

The Oireachtas.

I wish, though the public doesn't seem to have a lot of power there beyond a vote every 4-5 years.

KwackerJack · 07-08-2013 11:03AM

So basically the staff lost 2 days pay and cost an already struggling company 2 days takings!

So the staff lose out and if strikes resume then the already struggling company may be forced to cease operations and the staff will have sealed there own faith!!

Im self employed....I think ill go on strike and bring myself to the labour court and see if I can get my wage increased! Although my business may go under hmmm

end of the road · 07-08-2013 11:46AM

Frank Black wrote: »

We just had a union out on an unjustified strike to try to retain some of their Celtic Tiger perks.

it was a justified strike to send a message to management that cutting drivers alone won't solve the companies problems.

Frank Black wrote: »

They cost ordinary workers and the general Dublin economy money.

very little, and for that i say, good

Frank Black wrote: »

They received so little public support, they must have been ashamed and embarrassed standing on those picket lines yesterday.

they weren't, our boys and girls in dublin bus stood on those picket lines with pride, they got good support from decent working class people who are sick of being taken for a ride, the only people who still think its the celtic tiger are those who wouldn't support them and who would turn on any other worker for trying to protect some of what they have in the ideal of "they should be greatful for a job, so greatful they would take less then minimum wage if it was possible"

Frank Black wrote: »

There's no way they wanted to spend another day there today.

they didn't want to go out in the first place but had no choice

Frank Black wrote: »

They will get a cosmetic change to the original deal to allow them to salvage some pride and tell themselves it was worth it.

they will get a good deal that will be transparent and with open dialogue between staff and management cuts will be agreed on

Frank Black wrote: »

Yesterday was a great victory for the ordinary non-unionised tax-paying workers in this country.

was it? wonder how? most of the public are clueless in relation to these things so i'd say no victory, remember many voted yes then no or no then yes on the same treaty and believed the "yes for jobs" mantra which we all knew was a lie

Frank Black wrote: »

The next public sector union will think long and hard before pulling a similar stunt.

no they won't, if our boys and girls in the public sector have to go out on strike they will do so, much of the public are to weak to do anything about their bad situations, they will sit there and take it, yet complain when those that can stand up do so.

end of the road · 07-08-2013 11:56AM

V4Voluntary wrote: »

Privatisation would do wonders for competition in transportation.

bull, it would leave our most vunerable communities in dublin marginalised or with no service as its unreasonable to lumber private companies with loss making routes.

V4Voluntary wrote: »

The monopoly that Dublin Bus holds must be brought to an end immediately.

no, it must be kept at all costs to ensure that all communities in dublin have a vital social service meaning they can get to employment and all the places they will need to go to do with school college or employment, this must happen at all costs, privatisation to keep a few vested interests happy must be stopped using whatever means possible to ensure a state run public transport service to provide communities with vital public transport is kept

end of the road · 07-08-2013 12:09PM

Frank Black wrote: »

If a group of workers - say air traffic controllers had their salaries cut by 1c, would they be justified in going on an all out strike for months, affecting the travel plans of thousands, costing the country millions?
You seem to think this would be perfectly acceptable.

if it has to happen then so be it, i'm surprised anyone can afford a foreign holiday in this current climate

Do you support the Dublin Bus workers?

Comments