Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Luas strike general thread (mandatory: read warning in post #1)

13567…54

Comments

  • #62
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,064 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    end of the road wrote: »
    68k, 60k, 65k, 64k. i have read so many bogus figures in the last couple of days its actually not funny any more. they are not looking for anything near 60 anything k. the most they will get (and the most they are looking for) is about 10-15% in real terms.

    Source?


  • #63
    end of the road
    Registered Users Posts: 28,981 ✭✭✭✭end of the road


    cardinal tetra wrote: »
    The likes of the sky train in vancouver or the one in seattle are automated.

    ah yes. more elevated and segregated railways as examples of how a completely on road, on street, barely segregated railway can be automated, yet which wasn't when built dispite the technology long being availible.
    cardinal tetra wrote: »
    it would take an awful lot of investment but for the hasle staff cause, go for it tf.

    what hassle. a strike within 11 years? hassle my backside. so where is the money coming from for this huge investment which if could be done would have been from the start?

    shut down alcohol action ireland now! end MUP today!



  • #64
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,234 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    loyatemu wrote: »
    there was supposed to be a walkway and cyclepath alongside when it was originally designed, but this was dropped for some reason when it was built.
    To allow for larger trains if the Green Line were to be converted to Metro. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge


  • #65
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,064 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    end of the road wrote: »
    68k, 60k, 65k, 64k. i have read so many bogus figures in the last couple of days its actually not funny any more. they are not looking for anything near 60 anything k. the most they will get (and the most they are looking for) is about 10-15% in real terms.

    You've had hours to supply a source for what you claim.

    The bottom line is that various staff are looking for pay increases from 8% up to 53% for drivers. Your claim that the sought increase for drivers is 10-15% in real terms is based on guess work. Obviously someone has suggested to you that the drivers/SIPTU have deliberately pitched it higher in order to get something. That may well be possible, but the facts as presented by the drivers, union and Transdev to the media clearly state a 53% pay increase. So please stop dismissing people who restate the facts as they have been presented by all parties involved.


  • #66
    GerardKeating
    Registered Users Posts: 7,524 ✭✭✭GerardKeating


    Victor wrote: »
    To allow for larger trains if the Green Line were to be converted to Metro. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge

    But the Proposed Metro was to have the same gauge as the Luas, it just longer trains.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    LOCKED.


  • #68
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    cardinal tetra has a permanent site ban because he's another user re-reged -- so please don't feel the need to reply to him more.


  • #69
    Shadow1983
    Registered Users Posts: 656 ✭✭✭Shadow1983


    Why was my thread name changed twice??


  • #70
    syklops
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,969 ✭✭✭✭syklops


    Next time I meet a luas driver Im going to poke him in the eye. This has strike has been a major inconvenience for me and my partner.


  • #71
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    syklops wrote: »
    Next time I meet a luas driver Im going to poke him in the eye. This has strike has been a major inconvenience for me and my partner.

    You probably won't really poke him in the eye. People have a right to take industrial action - it's a right that was not handed to people because they asked nicely, it had to be fought for. I don't agree with every strike action but at the same time I respect the right and I admire the drivers for standing up for their pay and conditions. Sure, the strike inconveniences the company and its customers - that's the whole point of striking, to leverage a worker's limited control and put pressure on the company. Luas strikes have been very rare so you can't accuse these drivers of abusing their right to strike, whatever you think about their claims. The most inconvenienced people in the end are actually the people on strike, who don't get paid, in the short term at least.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,064 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Murph_D wrote: »
    Luas strikes have been very rare so you can't accuse these drivers of abusing their right to strike, whatever you think about their claims. The most inconvenienced people in the end are actually the people on strike, who don't get paid, in the short term at least.

    Their reasons for striking (the % pay claim and reasons) is an abuse of the striking mechanism and their union is in on it. There is absolutely no semblence of reality attached to it. None whats so ever.

    The most inconvenienced people are the users, not the people on strike that earn a very decent wage regardless.


  • #73
    monument
    Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators Posts: 14,072 Mod ✭✭✭✭monument


    Shadow1983 wrote: »
    Why was my thread name changed twice??

    Because it developed into something more than your original opening post -- threads don't really belong to the opening poster and, if you want, you can unsubscribe from the thread.

    Please no more moderation discussion in-thread -- direct any questions, comments or abuse to me by PM. Thanks!

    -- moderator


  • #74
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Grandeeod wrote: »
    Their reasons for striking (the % pay claim and reasons) is an abuse of the striking mechanism and their union is in on it. There is absolutely no semblence of reality attached to it. None whats so ever.

    The most inconvenienced people are the users, not the people on strike that earn a very decent wage regardless.

    Well I haven't seen the union agreement but most would include pretty clear rules about dispute resolution procedures. What happened to contravene these, that you are aware of?


  • #75
    TheChrisD
    Registered Users Posts: 4,493 ✭✭✭TheChrisD


    And now they're striking on Paddy's Day. Can we just fire those pr**ks already and hire people who are willing to work for the initial overinflated salary?

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0215/768197-luas-patrick-s-day/
    image.png




  • #76
    kildarecommuter
    Registered Users Posts: 433 ✭✭kildarecommuter


    TheChrisD wrote: »
    And now they're striking on Paddy's Day. Can we just fire those pr**ks already and hire people who are willing to work for the initial overinflated salary?

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2016/0215/768197-luas-patrick-s-day/

    As the above suggestion is floated all over the media and Internet every time workers take industrial action, the answer is no you can't fire them.
    They are entitled whether you agree or not to withdraw their labour and strike once they comply with the relevant legislation.


  • #77
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    Can Transdev sue SIPTU for damages and replace the people who are striking?


  • #78
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    kildarecommuter wrote: »
    As the above suggestion is floated all over the media and Internet every time workers take industrial action, the answer is no you can't fire them.
    They are entitled whether you agree or not to withdraw their labour and strike once they comply with the relevant legislation.

    Isn't Transdev a private company who could take disciplinary action against their employees?


  • #79
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    Can Transdev sue SIPTU for damages and replace the people who are striking?

    No. Trade unions are protected by law from such actions. The second part of your question is answered above.


  • #80
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    Isn't Transdev a private company who could take disciplinary action against their employees?

    Yes, but only if they are in breach of their employment contracts. Employees don't have a right to strike as such but they have the freedom to strike and can't be fired for such.


  • #81
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    Murph_D wrote: »
    No. Trade unions are protected by law from such actions.

    Really?

    Then why did Dublin Bus and Bus Eireann plan to sue SIPTU for losses when they knew they couldnt
    Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann is set to sue trade unions for losses incurred as a result of the 48-hour strike at the companies on Friday and Saturday.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-bus-bus-%C3%A9ireann-set-to-sue-trade-unions-for-losses-1.2195084


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    In that case the company claimed the industrial action was illegal. I don't know if the planned legal action against the unions in question ever went ahead - did it?

    I haven't heard Transdev claiming any such illegality on the part of its employees or their union.


  • #83
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    In that case the company claimed the industrial action was illegal. I don't know if the planned legal action against the unions in question ever went ahead - did it?

    I haven't heard Transdev claiming any such illegality on the part of its employees or their union.

    From what I remember had it gone ahead they would of won a case, there was some illegal element to this action. Only reason it would of been stopped is not to increase tensions among both sides. It was either related to notice of the way the ballot was conduced.

    Transdev have not case with this action as it is all done by the book.


  • #84
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Murph_D wrote: »
    Yes, but only if they are in breach of their employment contracts. Employees don't have a right to strike as such but they have the freedom to strike and can't be fired for such.

    Actually you can be fired for striking, but it's only considered fair dismissal if all those on strike are fired!


  • #85
    Polo_Mint
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,504 ✭✭✭Polo_Mint


    Murph_D wrote: »
    In that case the company claimed the industrial action was illegal. I don't know if the planned legal action against the unions in question ever went ahead - did it?

    I haven't heard Transdev claiming any such illegality on the part of its employees or their union.

    doesnt matter if its legal or illegal strike action. Sitpu can be sued

    Aer Lingus were also going to sue Siptu so its possible

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0314/602264-aer-lingus-sues-siptu-for-damages/

    And im sure Transdev can pass the following costs to Siptu
    Transdev is the fact that they are a private company, and will face penalties to any change in the existing contract with the State.


  • #86
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    doesnt matter if its legal or illegal strike action. Sitpu can be sued

    Aer Lingus were also going to sue Siptu so its possible

    http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0314/602264-aer-lingus-sues-siptu-for-damages/

    And im sure Transdev can pass the following costs to Siptu

    Does not apply as that action was because of an illegal ballot taken by SIPTU. Breached Statue law.


  • #87
    GM228
    Registered Users Posts: 8,925 ✭✭✭GM228


    Polo_Mint wrote: »
    doesnt matter if its legal or illegal strike action. Sitpu can be sued

    Aer Lingus were also going to sue Siptu so its possible

    Aer Lingus wanted to sue as they argued there was no legal dispute!
    The company is also seeking damages for loss and damage, which it said was inflicted by unlawful means.


  • #88
    Grandeeod
    Registered Users Posts: 12,064 ✭✭✭✭Grandeeod


    Murph_D wrote: »
    Well I haven't seen the union agreement but most would include pretty clear rules about dispute resolution procedures. What happened to contravene these, that you are aware of?

    Its a moral thing. I believe in workers being treated fairly. I disagree with unions and their highly paid leaders, taking the piss. This industrial action is taking the piss. Any sensible person can see this. Luas drivers are chasing a pay claim to bring them on a par (or near enough) to IE train drivers. IE train drivers are on that pay scale after years and years and yet more years of union/company negociation. I'm no fan of theirs either. So after nearly 12 years of luas operation, these guys want parity. Despite the fact that their job is less skilled than a train driver, this whole saga just stinks of greed and self entitlement.


  • #89
    Murph_D
    Registered Users Posts: 10,414 ✭✭✭✭Murph_D


    Jamie2k9 wrote: »
    Does not apply as that action was because of an illegal ballot taken by SIPTU. Breached Statue law.

    Allegedly. The threat to sue was almost universally condemned. The action never went ahead to best of my knowledge. Smells like posturing to me.


  • #90
    Jamie2k9
    Registered Users Posts: 10,664 ✭✭✭✭Jamie2k9


    Murph_D wrote: »
    Allegedly. The threat to sue was almost universally condemned. The action never went ahead to beat of my knowledge. Smells like posturing to me.

    An agreement for the pension issue was found soon after. Make no mistake Aer Lingus would of went through. SIPTU meet there match when Christoph Mueller arrived and transferred the position of power from union to management.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    kildarecommuter
    Registered Users Posts: 433 ✭✭kildarecommuter


    Grandeeod wrote: »
    Its a moral thing. I believe in workers being treated fairly. I disagree with unions and their highly paid leaders, taking the piss. This industrial action is taking the piss. Any sensible person can see this. Luas drivers are chasing a pay claim to bring them on a par (or near enough) to IE train drivers. IE train drivers are on that pay scale after years and years and yet more years of union/company negociation. I'm no fan of theirs either. So after nearly 12 years of luas operation, these guys want parity. Despite the fact that their job is less skilled than a train driver, this whole saga just stinks of greed and self entitlement.

    So you believe in workers rights but not their right to organize in a Union to try and improve their lot?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement