Luas thread (NOTE: You must read warning in post #1 - updated April 13)

Jamie2k9 · 31-03-2016 06:20PM #1

Not sure if I should start this after the the other was closed.

Transdev have implied cuts backs will be made to Luas if the dispute is not resolved. Finally some P45's might be handed out. Like the buss surly this will force SIPTU and staff to accept an agreement.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0331/778580-luas/

He confirmed that he has written to all staff asking them to engage constructively with the local management team to conclude an agreement that is within the limits of the available resources.

In the open letter, Mr Stevens said there is no additional funding, nor will there be, from Transdev or other sources to allow for any improved offer.

The letter also says the company will not stand idly by while its already challenging financial position is further eroded.

************ MOD WARNING ******************

Same rules apply as in the locked thread:

Enough childishness on both side -- it ends here. I'm imposing strict rules on this thread -- expect to be warned and infracted for less than normal here.

I may yet review the last few pages again, but posts from now on must not have any hint of snipping and bickering, and must strictly stick with the rules on attacking the post and not the poster.

Also no grandstanding: Reply to posts if you want or don't, don't bother reference posts saying they are pointless or referencing what people.

Constructive posts only.

Also no posts re the value of what people think here -- because such points are as on-topic to the thread as posts discussing the meaning of life, ie not at all on topic.

*** UPDATE April 13 ***

1. To stop the side-issue debate on the use of word scab and to lower the temperature a slight bit: Scab is now banned from this thread: Stop using the words scab and scabbing -- strikebreaker is acceptable and, for now, strikebreaker will remain an acceptable word to describe workers who take up positions held by current strikers even if the strikers are legally sacked.

2. Lots of people using words such as idiots, calling people or groups bullies or a cancer etc -- this is name calling and against the rules and, for this thread, it's even more so than others -- there's no need for name calling when referring to other poster or groups involved in the strike. Expect to be infracted if it's used after this warning -- but if reporting posts only report them for after this post.

-- moderator

Grandeeod · 31-03-2016 06:32PM

Glad you did. It has to be discussed.

Del.Monte · 31-03-2016 06:46PM

Perhaps the Ronald Reagan approach is needed before the Luas turns into CIE Mk II? Total closure of the Luas for a few months while new staff are trained would seem a price worth paying for future stability.

Captain Chaos · 31-03-2016 06:47PM

Del.Monte wrote: »

Perhaps the Ronald Reagan approach is needed before the Luas turns into CIE Mk II? Total closure of the Luas for a few months while new staff are trained would seem a price worth paying for future stability.

That's what is happening, either SIPTU back down or P45s are on the cards next.

monument · 31-03-2016 07:21PM

NOTE: Mod warning added to post #1

cdebru · 31-03-2016 07:29PM

Captain Chaos wrote: »

That's what is happening, either SIPTU back down or P45s are on the cards next.

Realistically that would be months and cost more than settling the dispute in all honesty with no guarantee of success, 7 weeks training, plus advertising, interviewing, etc you are looking at 3 months minimum, and presuming you can get all the other grades hired and trained. that's 90 days at 100,000 a day less say the first month say with no/low cost of wages but once you start taking on staff you have to start paying them while you are training them while still being fined 100,000 a day.

Would the TII let them shut the system down completely for 3+ months, even if you do that and the TII agree what would the union response be ? Just roll over and let do nothing ? Can a minority government dependent on independents get into a brawl with the trade union movement ?

It actually brought to mind the late Jack Lynch's "idly by" he then proceeded to stand idly by.

ED E · 31-03-2016 07:31PM

Took them long enough to arrive at this juncture but I'm glad they finally have. SIPTUs responses quoted show just how deluded they are.

cdebru wrote: »

Realistically that would be months...

As raised in the other thread LUAS isnt the only installation of this particular system, several other european cities operate them. Hire a few retirees or spare staff on loan from a couple of them and you have a barebones service to tide you over until the new batch get out.

Jamie2k9 · 31-03-2016 07:32PM

cdebru wrote: »

Realistically that would be months and cost more than settling the dispute in all honesty with no guarantee of success, 7 weeks training, plus advertising, interviewing, etc you are looking at 3 months minimum, and presuming you can get all the other grades hired and trained. that's 90 days at 100,000 a day less say the first month say with no/low cost of wages but once you start taking on staff you have to start paying them while you are training them while still being fined 100,000 a day.

Would the TII let them shut the system down completely for 3+ months, even if you do that and the TII agree what would the union response be ? Just roll over and let do nothing ? Can a minority government dependent on independents get into a brawl with the trade union movement ?

It actually brought to mind the late Jack Lynch's "idly by" he then proceeded to stand idly by.

If jobs were advertised tomorrow they could start training by Friday. A full closure for 7 weeks would be far more effective long term.

Interesting to watch if SIPTU would sanction an all out strike with jobs on the line. Begging again for DoT to get involved on Six One.

trellheim · 31-03-2016 07:37PM

I cannot find a copy of the letter, just excerpts. Martin Wall in the IT seems to have cogged the best bits.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/transdev-tells-luas-staff-cuts-may-be-needed-if-strikes-go-on-1.2593678

cdebru · 31-03-2016 07:43PM

Jamie2k9 wrote: »

If jobs were advertised tomorrow they could start training by Friday. A full closure for 7 weeks would be far more effective long term.

Interesting to watch if SIPTU would sanction an all out strike with jobs on the line. Begging again for DoT to get involved on Six One.

Seriously a week to allow people to apply, go through applications, identify likely suitable candidates, conduct interviews and assessments, medicals, garda clearance? , Allow successful candidates to serve notice to current employer and you can do that in a week ?

strandroad · 31-03-2016 07:46PM

They must have people on file who applied in the past or indeed recently when the conditions were publicised... speeds up the process.

Jamie2k9 · 31-03-2016 07:47PM

cdebru wrote: »

Seriously a week to allow people to apply, go through applications, identify likely suitable candidates, conduct interviews and assessments, medicals, garda clearance? , Allow successful candidates to serve notice to current employer and you can do that in a week ?

You would not need a week, I will accept that it would take time to build service back to to current levels however it would be possible to resume with some sort of service within 6 weeks.

Giving existing staff P45's will be with current service cuts for a few months. Small price to pay. It should be enough to drivers to play ball if a few were let off.

cdebru · 31-03-2016 07:48PM

mhge wrote: »

They must have people on file who applied in the past or indeed recently when the conditions were publicised... speeds up the process.

Anyway the implied threat in the letter is not a P45, it is cost cutting ie cuts to wages terms and conditions if the dispute is not resolved soon.

Infini · 31-03-2016 07:50PM

cdebru wrote: »

Realistically that would be months and cost more than settling the dispute in all honesty with no guarantee of success, 7 weeks training, plus advertising, interviewing, etc you are looking at 3 months minimum, and presuming you can get all the other grades hired and trained. that's 90 days at 100,000 a day less say the first month say with no/low cost of wages but once you start taking on staff you have to start paying them while you are training them while still being fined 100,000 a day.

Would the TII let them shut the system down completely for 3+ months, even if you do that and the TII agree what would the union response be ? Just roll over and let do nothing ? Can a minority government dependent on independents get into a brawl with the trade union movement ?

It actually brought to mind the late Jack Lynch's "idly by" he then proceeded to stand idly by.

If they were to actually go through with their threat theres no telling how this would end or how ugly thing would become. Many think that they could simply fire em all and replace em no problem. Thats never how it works in practice. At the minimum it could have the luas down indefinately at worst it could snowball into an all out national transport strike. The conditions are there for it to happen if people simply wont talk to one another. Its well and good saying its all the unions fault but theres 2 sides to every story and I seriously doubt Transdev are innocent angels in all of this expecially considering it was brewing for 2 years.

cdebru · 31-03-2016 07:53PM

Infini2 wrote: »

If they were to actually go through with their threat theres no telling how this would end or how ugly thing would become. Many think that they could simply fire em all and replace em no problem. Thats never how it works in practice. At the minimum it could have the luas down indefinately at worst it could snowball into an all out national transport strike. The conditions are there for it to happen if people simply wont talk to one another. Its well and good saying its all the unions fault but theres 2 sides to every story and I seriously doubt Transdev are innocent angels in all of this expecially considering it was brewing for 2 years.

They haven't actually threatened that, just some people getting all flustered and ahead of themselves with excitement. The threat is that they would have to cut costs, so wages, terms and conditions. And an appeal to staff to sort it out with local management.

Anita Blow · 31-03-2016 07:54PM

In what world would the Luas ever stop 'indefinitely'? Honestly one of the stupidest justifications I've read so far for capitulating. If people say it's as simple as firing the existing drivers and replacing them, then it's because it is. One could argue that training would be complete in less than 7 weeks considering Transdev would be under pressure and so could attempt to condense the training course

screamer · 31-03-2016 07:55PM

I'm pretty sure someone could be taught to drive a team in less than 7 weeks. Buses in the interim to minimise the disruption and 2 weeks pay per year served wouldn't be a massive redundancy bill. It can all be done. Transfer know it and it's time the staff now consider their untenable position and get more realistic.

eeguy · 31-03-2016 07:58PM

Transdev elready employ hundreds of trained Luas drivers across Europe. Fly them over for a few weeks and use them to provide a skeleton service while new recruits are trained.

That 7 week training is most likely bull. They could probably have them on the rails in 3 weeks for a 3 days and in class training for 2.

cdebru · 31-03-2016 08:08PM

Just posting unrealistic stuff isn't an argument, just saying it could be done doesn't make it so, and can anyone point to where transdev threatened to sack their employees ?

tayto lover · 31-03-2016 08:09PM

Some people don't seem able to see further than their noses on this.
It could well turn into a national transport strike if any rash decisions are made.
And nobody wants or needs that. This requires level headed discussion.

Del.Monte · 31-03-2016 08:10PM

Also, a large number of existing drivers would probably wish to re-sign with the company. A no-strike clause would need to be included in whatever agreement was reached. Sadly, such a scenario is most unlikely and the Luas is destined to follow the CIE route to ruination.

Anita Blow · 31-03-2016 08:15PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Some people don't seem able to see further than their noses on this.
It could well turn into a national transport strike if any rash decisions are made.
And nobody wants or needs that. This requires level headed discussion.

This has been going on for 2 months now and Transdev showing remarkable restraint and consideration for the drivers, while the drivers have refused to cooperate, rejected a compromise that their own representatives negotiated and then even while working staged ongoing work-to-rules outside of official strikes which hugely inconvenienced passengers. On top of that, Transdev have incurred fines amounting to 800,000 euro so far and the 2 strike days this weekend will push that over 1 million. At what point is the time for level-headed discussion over?
The drivers re-asserted their demand for equal pay for new entrants AND a pay increase higher than 20% yesterday on the news. I'm honestly at a loss at what people expect Transdev to do beyond what they've already done?

cdebru · 31-03-2016 08:19PM

Del.Monte wrote: »

Also, a large number of existing drivers would probably wish to re-sign with the company. A no-strike clause would need to be included in whatever agreement was reached. Sadly, such a scenario is most unlikely and the Luas is destined to follow the CIE route to ruination.

just for clarity, the letter doesn't threaten dismissals but even if it did, just so we can keep the conversation based in reality if you sack people for industrial action you have to sack them all, if you allow one to return you have to allow them all to return.

But it is kind of irrelevant because no one has even been threatened with dismissal the threat is cost cutting to realign the costs of the business with the reduction in income from strikes yada yada.

Anita Blow · 31-03-2016 08:21PM

cdebru wrote: »

just for clarity, the letter doesn't threaten dismissals but even if it did, just so we can keep the conversation based in reality if you sack people for industrial action you have to sack them all, if you allow one to return you have to allow them all to return.

But it is kind of irrelevant because no one has even been threatened with dismissal the threat is cost cutting to realign the costs of the business with the reduction in income from strikes yada yada.

And cost-cutting comes in the form of wage cuts & cuts to benefits because Transdev isn't allowed reduce service levels below those in its contract with TII

end of the road · 31-03-2016 08:22PM

Anita Blow wrote: »

If people say it's as simple as firing the existing drivers and replacing them, then it's because it is.

and if people say black was white then it is? right?

Anita Blow wrote: »

One could argue that training would be complete in less than 7 weeks considering Transdev would be under pressure and so could attempt to condense the training course

well, how exactly are they going to be able to, or attempt to condense the level of training. training is training.

Anita Blow wrote: »

the drivers have refused to cooperate, rejected a compromise that their own representatives negotiated and then even while working staged ongoing work-to-rules outside of official strikes which hugely inconvenienced passengers.

the drivers haven't refused anything apart from a deal. a deal that by the looks of it would have seen younger workers having to pay for a pay deal for long servers.

Anita Blow wrote: »

On top of that, Transdev have incurred fines amounting to 800,000 euro so far and the 2 strike days this weekend will push that over 1 million.

well, they didn't run a service on the days of the strike so got fined. that is the contract.

eeguy wrote: »

Transdev elready employ hundreds of trained Luas drivers across Europe. Fly them over for a few weeks and use them to provide a skeleton service while new recruits are trained.

and tell me, what do you think might possibly have to happen so those drivers will come here to run services? service cuts on other systems maybe? that would go down well.

eeguy wrote: »

That 7 week training is most likely bull. They could probably have them on the rails in 3 weeks for a 3 days and in class training for 2.

and you base that on? if the training takes a certain amount of time then that is what it takes.

trellheim · 31-03-2016 08:24PM

A no-strike clause would need to be included in whatever agreement was reached.

I think such clauses are illegal.

Some people don't seem able to see further than their noses on this.
It could well turn into a national transport strike if any rash decisions are made.
And nobody wants or needs that. This requires level headed discussion.

I see no rash decisions being contemplated by transdev just utter weariness and a simple, decided facing up to the facts
I see level headed discussions on one side only; I see refusal to accept simple facts on the other
I see refusal to compromise and properly negotiate ; I see the madness of a 169 to 2 refusal of a pay deal that the other unions would cut their left nut off for.
I see a group of drivers, indeed, who cannot seem to see further than their noses.

Infini · 31-03-2016 08:27PM

tayto lover wrote: »

Some people don't seem able to see further than their noses on this.
It could well turn into a national transport strike if any rash decisions are made.
And nobody wants or needs that. This requires level headed discussion.

Its the last thing anyone would want to see. I would rather things get sorted out but that means everyone including the goverment that drew up and signed these contracts getting involved. Many have gone on ranting how the luas strikes are holding people hostage etc but many have never seen an old school national transport strike which really could shut down the country. The conditions are there in all 3 cie companies and stupid rash decisions could set off a chain reaction.

howamidifferent · 31-03-2016 08:30PM

tayto lover wrote:

Some people don't seem able to see further than their noses on this. It could well turn into a national transport strike if any rash decisions are made. And nobody wants or needs that. This requires level headed discussion.

It won't matter to the 4 million people outside of Dublin who have no national transport service anyway. At least anyone outside the few city routes.

strandroad · 31-03-2016 08:41PM

Infini2 wrote: »

Its the last thing anyone would want to see. I would rather things get sorted out but that means everyone including the goverment that drew up and signed these contracts getting involved. Many have gone on ranting how the luas strikes are holding people hostage etc but many have never seen an old school national transport strike which really could shut down the country. The conditions are there in all 3 cie companies and stupid rash decisions could set off a chain reaction.

I'm a public transport commuter and I'd rather suffer an all out strike than never have the services improved because wages would consume the whole budget and any improvement ideas would be shot down by the unions with countless strikes.
Their pay and overall package is decent for what they are doing, time to accept it or find another job. How many pensionable jobs exist that require 7 week training to do?

31-03-2016 08:42PM

trellheim wrote: »

I think such clauses are illegal.

Yup, we all have (and ought to have!) a legal right to strike.

Employers could offer bonuses to people who don't strike though.
Just like offering a '0 sick day' bonus to people who don't miss days off work.

Legally they couldn't put in a contract 'you must come to work each day', but they can reward people who do.

trellheim wrote: »

I see no rash decisions being contemplated by transdev just utter weariness and a simple, decided facing up to the facts
I see level headed discussions on one side only; I see refusal to accept simple facts on the other
I see refusal to compromise and properly negotiate ; I see the madness of a 169 to 2 refusal of a pay deal that the other unions would cut their left nut off for.
I see a group of drivers, indeed, who cannot seem to see further than their noses.

Transdev appear to have implored a sense of realism from day 1. They've impressed me an awful lot with their handling of this and the patience that they have shown. I don't think they would be prone to anything but considered responses (no rash decisions being threatened), and are simply outlining the issues that they are being faced with and being remarkably open about the situation.

trellheim · 31-03-2016 08:43PM

The conditions are there in all 3 cie companies and stupid rash decisions could set off a chain reaction.

Many people have been accused of using this dispute to suit their own agenda; is this not a prime example of how the upper union management see it ? Rather than acting to calm the water and focus on a limited set of achievable goals we see the above. I put it to you that 169:2 is a "stupid rash decision" by the drivers, egged on by SIPTU -either a sin of omission or of commission,true, but nonetheless.

Luas thread (NOTE: You must read warning in post #1 - updated April 13)

Comments