nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

ALL THINGS IRISH WATER/WATER CHARGE RELATED POST HERE

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

Find more posts tagged with

water

fanny

irish water

water charges

con job

wrecked

water consumption

brainwashed

new world order in action

nazi aliens!

make them pay joe!

imf agenda

u & whose army?

end of 31st dáil

denis o’brien

Comments

Chance The Fapper

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

So you can't address a single point?

We were told we were paying for water and maintenance of the infrastructure, not for some arsehole consultants, and a gym for the workers.

Little CuChulainn

My name is URL wrote: »

Making people work just one hour per day would reduce sick leave too. What's your point? The state / taxpayers should not be funding the recreational time of semi-state bodies.. 95+% of private sector employees don't have a luxury such as a free gym to go to while working.

Then again, in the private sector absenteeism is taken seriously :rolleyes:

Like I said, any initiative to increase productivity while simultaneously increasing employee health is something I approve of. You say why should they do it? Why should employers go the extra mile anywhere in that case? Because they want to get the best out of their workers and most understand that this requires a carrot as well as a stick.

Tony EH

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Didn't think you could. They were 4 simple yes/no questions and you chose to ignore them because they were logical and contradicted your simplistic view on workplace management. All you've done so far is insult me and not address anything I've said.

I haven't insulted you at all.

I've called you out.

From you text, you support Irish Water and are interested in derailing the thread with non issues like the benefits of a gym.

eeepaulo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, any initiative to increase productivity while simultaneously increasing employee health is something I approve of. You say why should they do it? Why should employers go the extra mile anywhere in that case? Because they want to get the best out of their workers and most understand that this requires a carrot as well as a stick.

We could set up a laundry service for them as well,

How about some of those little scooter things to get around quicker,

hju6

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, any initiative to increase productivity while simultaneously increasing employee health is something I approve of. You say why should they do it? Why should employers go the extra mile anywhere in that case? Because they want to get the best out of their workers and most understand that this requires a carrot as well as a stick.

It's not working though is it?

The company is a shambles

Little CuChulainn

Chance The Fapper wrote: »

We were told we were paying for water and maintenance of the infrastructure, not for some arsehole consultants, and a gym for the workers.

Surely you realised there would be other expenses in setting up a national water network, including a large admin section, that takes over the jobs of the councils?

CatFromHue

Chance The Fapper wrote: »

We were told we were paying for water and maintenance of the infrastructure, not for some arsehole consultants, and a gym for the workers.

Damn those hot sexy and fit IW workers.

Little CuChulainn

eeepaulo wrote: »

We could set up a laundry service for them as well,

How about some of those little scooter things to get around quicker,

You mean like Google? One of those places that gets so much out of it's employees? Nah, why emulate them?

hju6 wrote: »

It's not working though is it?

The company is a shambles

I'll give it longer than a few early months to decide if it was worth it.

My name is URL

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, any initiative to increase productivity while simultaneously increasing employee health is something I approve of. You say why should they do it? Why should employers go the extra mile anywhere in that case? Because they want to get the best out of their workers and most understand that this requires a carrot as well as a stick.

The vast majority of employers don't because they can't afford to, due in no small part to the fact that they're being robbed blind in order to fund fcukwits like IW.

Chance The Fapper

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Surely you realised there would be other expenses in setting up a national water network, including a large admin section, that takes over the jobs of the councils?

Yep, but not a gym

eeepaulo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You mean like Google? One of those places that gets so much out of it's employees? Nah, why emulate them?

That was exactly who i was thinking of.

Because irish water is not making any money, it is just spending it.

Little CuChulainn

My name is URL wrote: »

The vast majority of employers don't because they can't afford to, due in no small part to the fact that they're being robbed blind in order to fund fcukwits like IW.

It's false economy though. Cut out an employee benefit in the short run and suffer in the long run. Government run bodies can avoid that and should be better off for it.

My name is URL

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Surely you realised there would be other expenses in setting up a national water network, including a large admin section, that takes over the jobs of the councils?

Don't forget the €50,000,000+ spent on management consultancy. Money well spent that was

hju6

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You mean like Google? One of those places that gets so much out of it's employees? Nah, why emulate them?

I'll give it longer than a few early months to decide if it was worth it.

Feel free, ill beg to differ

Rubber_Soul

Tony EH wrote: »

Oh please.

Obsfucation and waffle about the benefits of a gym is just an attempt by someone who supports Irish Water to muddy the waters, as it were.

Nothing more.

NONE of those points are worth addressing because they are COMPLETELY beside the point and just an attempt to derail the thread.

He's responding directly to someone talking about the gym, if anyone derailed the thread it's first person you quoted.

Tony EH

tallus wrote: »

Prime Time on RTE1 at 9:35 is about Irish water. Might be interesting.

Tony EH wrote: »

Unfortunately, 'Prime Time' has again split an hour program over two extremely important current issues.

Both of which would have easily filled the complete hour slot.

:mad:

Well that was a complete waste of airtime regarding Irish Water.

Nothing answered, everything deflected.

adrian92

I think Irish Water is exemplary as an employer.

All employees should have a gym and a bonus and ...

My name is URL

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

It's false economy though. Cut out an employee benefit in the short run and suffer in the long run. Government run bodies can avoid that and should be better off for it.

I'm not talking about cutting out employee benefits, I'm questioning why an on site gym was seen as something they should have included as one of those benefits in the first place. IW employees aren't on a bad wage, they can well afford a modest gym membership should they want to use a gym.

Taxpayers, many of whom can't afford gym membership let alone lesser things, shouldn't be funding it.

They're not Google ffs.. if ever there was an example of a collective delusion of grandeur, it's evident in IW, its board, and the people that set it up.

Tony EH

StarshipPooper wrote: »

He's responding directly to someone talking about the gym, if anyone derailed the thread it's first person you quoted.

No.

He's obfuscating by waffling about non-issues and NOT responding to the salient point the poster was making and that's the cost of setting up said gym using your money.

The benefits od using a gym is NOT what the discussion is about.

cajonlardo

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

You are completely missing the point. If the gym contributes to a reduced amount of sick leave then it can pay for itself in productivity increase and your money goes further.

No. I saw your "point". It was...... pointless, much like all your posts.

I do ,however, note that you didn't answer my question regarding how you think someone who is in dire straits feels about paying for that gym and canteen through ransom on their water.

btw we paid for a gym in the Dail. fcuhed if that made a difference to productivity.

Rubber_Soul

Tony EH wrote: »

No.

He's obfuscating by waffling about non-issues and NOT responding to the salient point the poster was making and that's the cost of setting up said gym using your money.

The benefits od using a gym is NOT what the discussion is about.

The OP said the gym was un-needed, he's responding directly to that assertion by pointing out that there are longer term benefits to a funded gym. The OP went off on a tangent and he followed. Simple. The fact you can't seem to engage in a debate with anyone that holds a different viewpoint to your own is more a reflection on you than him.

gandalf

The thing about the gym is that it is only for the head office staff. The poor smucks manning the call centre lines at Abtran in Cork won't benefit from it and I am fairly positive that they will be contract staff with minimal benefits!

Bongalongherb

Little CuChulainn wrote: »

Like I said, any initiative to increase productivity while simultaneously increasing employee health is something I approve of. You say why should they do it? Why should employers go the extra mile anywhere in that case? Because they want to get the best out of their workers and most understand that this requires a carrot as well as a stick.

You are obviously taking the piss now. You're making no sense at all. I'm sure at this stage that your comments are a wind-up.

Tony EH

StarshipPooper wrote: »

The OP said the gym was un-needed, he's responding directly to that assertion by pointing out that there are longer term benefits to a funded gym. The OP went off on a tangent and he followed. Simple. The fact you can't seem to engage in a debate with anyone that holds a different viewpoint to your own is more a reflection on you than him.

You're entirely welcome to think what you wish, however, it IS un-needed, especially in Dublin, where there are no shortage of gyms one can avail of. Plus your money should NOT be used to fund such a luxury for SOME members of a quango, which is the salient point and the point that was misdirected in order to derail the conversation.

And, on that note, I refuse to give it more oxygen.

adrian92

Surely this is the model employer that everyone would wish to work for.

No income. Guaranteed bonus . plush offices. Min 100k per annum.

(We have 100, 000,000 to spend before we are asked to return a penny)

Every business should copy this model.

Rubber_Soul

Tony EH wrote: »

You're entirely welcome to think what you wish, however, it IS un-needed, especially in Dublin, where there are no shortage of gyms one can avail of. Plus your money should NOT be used to fund such a luxury for SOME members of a quango, which is the salient point and the point that was misdirected in order to derail the conversation.

And, on that note, I refuse to give it more oxygen.

There's plenty of anecdotal and growing academic evidence that funded gyms provide benefits that in the long-term save more than the initial investment through increased productivity and the reduced healthcare costs of having a fitter workforce. If it saves the tax-payer money long-term then it could be argued it is needed, or at least a positive. It's certainly worthy of debate. His point seemed quite on-topic and given he's answered pretty much every question asked of him on here while a core group of you seem to avoid the debate and call him a shill instead of arguing your case, it really isn't him that people should be pointing the finger at when blaming people for taking the thread off topic.

adrian92

[I agree. The entire population should be given gyms, by extension of the logoc

UOTE=StarshipPooper;92709296]There's plenty of anecdotal and growing academic evidence that funded gyms provide benefits that in the long-term save more than the initial investment through increased productivity and the reduced healthcare costs of having a fitter workforce. If it saves the tax-payer money long-term then it could be argued it is needed, or at least a positive, it's certainly worthy of debate. His point seemed quite on-topic and given he's answered pretty much every question asked of him on here while a core group of you seem to avoid the debate and call him a shill instead of arguing your case, it really isn't him that people should be pointing the finger at when blaming people for taking the thread off topic.[/QUOTE]

My name is URL

StarshipPooper wrote: »

There's plenty of anecdotal [..] evidence that funded gyms provide benefits

It's some anecdote alright

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/exercise-in-democracy-new-gym-shunned-26405468.html

Bongalongherb

StarshipPooper wrote: »

There's plenty of anecdotal and growing academic evidence that funded gyms provide benefits that in the long-term save more than the initial investment through increased productivity and the reduced healthcare costs of having a fitter workforce. If it saves the tax-payer money long-term then it could be argued it is needed, or at least a positive. It's certainly worthy of debate. His point seemed quite on-topic and given he's answered pretty much every question asked of him on here while a core group of you seem to avoid the debate and call him a shill instead of arguing your case, it really isn't him that people should be pointing the finger at when blaming people for taking the thread off topic.

It's all gone to the dogs now with comments like the above.
Oh god, now we have two fitness fanatics derailing this thread.

Bye Bye.

Rubber_Soul

My name is URL wrote: »

It's some anecdote alright

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/exercise-in-democracy-new-gym-shunned-26405468.html

Unless the members of the Dail are double jobbing in IW I fail to see the relevance. Just because the gym turned out to be a waste there doesn't mean it'll be a waste in IW where the demographics, working hours, lifestyles etc may be entirely different.

http://www.bris.ac.uk/news/2008/6063.html