The train dispute: asking the wrong questions..

Metrobest

What I want to know is, who's the militant force behind this strike? This could not have been an unplanned strike. The drivers knew what was coming down the tracks and it's clear they had discussed this in advance of Monday.

In what other company but Irish Rail, with its militant and agressive trade unions, could yesterday's events have happened? I mean, can you imagine in a large national company with staff dispersed all over the country, for example AIB, that if two employees walked out of the Cork branch on Monday morning at 6am furious that they hadn't been "fully trained" on the new computer equipment, that by 9am practically every AIB worker in the country downs tools in support? News doesn't filter through that quickly. It could only happen in Irish Rail.

Something seriously needs to be done about the culture within Irish Rail. How can employees who enjoy such generous terms and conditions, such unaccountable, easy jobs for life be so angry at "the company", as they call it? How has this industrial relations cancer developed? It's one thing having a cossetted and unaccountable public service; it's quite another when a militant faction within that priveleged group imposes its muscle on the rest of society in an illegal and disruptive strike that causes hassle and annoyance to ten and thousands of ordinary commuters.

Not all staff at Irish Rail are bad. There must be one or two good apples in that rotten basket, surely? Well I wish they'd have the courage to speak out. Now's the time to show us that Irish Rail is redeemable. One of the exasperated commuters interviewed by RTE put it right when she snarled: "I wish they'd priavatise Irish Rail." There is growing public resentment that this strike happened in the first place; unfortunately the public isn't informed well enough and sees only empty tracks and no trains. The public is going to turn anti rail. Next time that trip to Cork is planned, it will be by car.

I think these NBRU guys want to fleece the taxpayer for every cent they can wring out of us. They want cushy jobs for life for their members. They want absolutely no change to work practices - change is perceived as disadvantageous to their members. And let's be clear about one thing. The traveling public rate zero on their list of priorities. If they had any concern for the public welfare, they would have called off this foolish strike.

They cannot win. The public is against them, the government is against them, Irish Rail is against them.

The broader question is the future of Irish Rail. Lurching from one crisis to the next, it's clear there is management vacuum and a total lack of vision. There is no desire to deliver a 21st century rail service that the the people of Ireland deserve. Added to this is a belligerent workforce unable to adapt to modern working conditions, stuck in a miners' stike mindset. If the strikers don't cop on soon, there won't be a rail network for them to strike over, because the population will be in its cars.

I've been listening to RTE's coverage of the train dispute on Morning Ireland and the Nine News, and I didn't understand why the reportage was so uncritical. It was very much a "on the one hand, on the other hand" style of reporting when the facts, laid bare, are simple. The Irish Times, never one to ask a tough question of the Union industry, is equally guilty...:mad:

I'm not normally a fan of the Indo but it got the story right.

Thousands face second day of commuter misery over rail row

TENS of thousands of commuters face more rail chaos today because of wildcat action by a handful of train drivers.

Furious passengers accused the drivers of holding them to ransom and even Taoiseach Bertie Ahern joined the growing chorus of criticism.

Yesterday was to mark the start of a new era in Irish rail travel.

Instead, €117m worth of new high-speed luxury trains were left idle on the tracks.

The train drivers involved in the dispute earn a guaranteed €50,000 a year.

Iarnrod Eireann claim this is far above the average industrial wage. But the drivers want more money, two hours cut from their working week and bigger pensions if they're to drive the new state-of-the art trains instead of the frequently criticised outdated models

popebenny16

Mobile phones are very handy for stuff like this.

Look, this isnt the big surprise we all think it is. IE put a notice on the website last Friday warning of "possible" disruption on Dublin-Cork services. They knew.

Is it a plan from IE to head the unions off at the pass? This is the worst grounds for the unions, officialy or not, to make a stance with managment and they know it. There are much jucier confrontations up the road for them. Interconnector. New line (really this time) to Dunboyne. Electification to Maynooth/Balbriggan and Hazlehatch.

They could have got IE over a barrel by refusing to operat the CDE but all other trians, but they've blown it.

And, to be fair, just one inacurate part of the quoted article:

nstead, €117m worth of new high-speed luxury trains were left idle on the tracks.

They're not high speed, they go as fast as the 201 that pulls/pushes them. And luxury? We'll have to wait and see but dont go expecting the Orient Express.

Red Alert

i doubt they're realistically any more comfortable than the Mk3's or the De Deitriches. But my view of CAF is spoiled by their other products i.e. poor quality tincans with bus engines. That said they do look very sexy.

every unionised place has the issues IE has. privatisation won't help, it'll just turn it into another eircom/aer lingus where the customer does get fleeced. socially responsible things that IE, BE, DB do will be lost in the move to make a quick buck.

AIB rolled out a new desktop system in all their branches. it's different for a lot of people because it's not Windows like their old system was. i'd be willing to bet money there were sweetners for people to get everyone behind it.

BuffyBot

I mean, can you imagine in a large national company with staff dispersed all over the country, for example AIB, that if two employees walked out of the Cork branch on Monday morning at 6am furious that they hadn't been "fully trained" on the new computer equipment, that by 9am practically every AIB worker in the country downs tools in support?

Internal telephone network, mobile phones..internal email (especially in a bank).. not the best example

popebenny16

Well, the thing about the AIB example is that it would mean the total introduction of something new. This isnt new. It is the same loco and CAF built the control cab on the other end to be the same as a 201 (wonder what GM thinks of this).

Look, there's a guy on IRN, a driver, and what he says about what goes in IE gives me a lot of sympathy for their position - however they have gone way over the top in shutting down virtually the entire western and southern rail network. They could have done a token protest. Yes, when you're against the damned wall and your livelihood is on the line strike, why not? But in this case it isnt, and all of the interviews with the unions and drivers are showing that fact up for what it is.

Transport21 Fan

In what other company but Irish Rail, with its militant and agressive trade unions, could yesterday's events have happened?

hmmmm Al Queda?

Look at this way; Both organisation are filled with well off blokes with beards. Both organisations are intolerant of outsiders and their 21st Century opinions. Both organisation have social defectives in the UK who support them on internet message boards no matter what. Both organisation get their orders from blokes who live in isolated caves high above the ground (liberty hall), with dodgy livers and who sends tapes to the media which nobody can understand.

Al CIEda.

Red Alert

Barry Kenny and Martin Cullen should consider their position - they have been conspicuous by their absense in the past few days.

Me wonders if they're locked inside the new Mk4's!

MarkoP11

Cullen is alive and did comment this afternoon after being pushed ( http://www.platform11.org/media/press_release.php?year=2006&no=pr_08.html ) That was released at 12:45 pm and Cullen had a soundbite for the 4pm news

Cullen was 'disappointed' and considered the 'unofficial strike unacceptable '

Barry Kenny I'm told is in Dubai on his holidays lucky guy

spacetweek

Transport21 Fan wrote:

hmmmm Al Queda?

Look at this way; Both organisation are filled with well off blokes with beards. Both organisations are intolerant of outsiders and their 21st Century opinions. Both organisation have social defectives in the UK who support them on internet message boards no matter what. Both organisation get their orders from blokes who live in isolated caves high above the ground (liberty hall), with dodgy livers and who sends tapes to the media which nobody can understand.

Al CIEda.

Hilarity!

MrPudding

Here is a couple of questions.

What is the downside for these clowns? Are they getting paid whilst they are unofficial strike? I hope and assume not.

Will there be action taken against them? For example, will they receive warnings on their records or anything like that?

Do they actually care that pretty much everyone is against them?

I hate to see anyone lose their job but in this case I will make an exception.

MrP

Hagar

Next time anyone asks on this forum why Joe Public insists on owning a car and driving to work when public transport is available I am just going to link them to this thread. The philosophy of both sides hasn't changed in years and won't anytime soon. The travelling public are just pawns to these people.

markf909

Are the drivers actually picketing or are they at home watching Battleship Potemkin?

spareman

How can management expect drivers to drive trains they do not know how to operate due to insufficent training? Who takes the blame if lives are lost?

How come if management knew the introduction of said trains may cause problems they still pushed ahead to introduce the trains? why didnt they try to iorn out the problems before forcing this on drivers and the public?

If you remember there was a threat of industrial action at Dublin bus a few months ago over proposed changes to work practices for drivers, and management backed off with there proposal and returned to the negotiation table to try and resolve the issues, instead of forcing changes as weve seen Irish rail do on monday.

I put it down to bad management at Irish Rail, but unfortunatly its the drivers who pay the price, And if you think this was started by 2 drivers think again, they just happened to be the 2 rostered for the first trains from Dublin and Cork on Monday morning.

popebenny16

How can management expect drivers to drive trains they do not know how to operate due to insufficent training? Who takes the blame if lives are lost?

They are the same trains. The loco is the same - it's a 201 with some nice new paint. The driving car on the other end is the same, its a replica of the 201 cab.

There are no such safety issues. The drivers will have to open and close the doors, which means pressing a button and checking that it is safe to do so. They do that already on mark3 push pulls and have been doing so for 20 years.

EDIT: Who takes the blame if lives are lost??? I am amazed at that comment. Do you really, honestly think that lives are at stake?

Please, tell me how lives are at stake.

Also, please, PLEASE, tell me and everyone else here why the drivers are refusing to drive mark3, mark2d and commuter trains.

spareman

In that case why did they recieve one days training on them at all?
Either way management shouldnt change work practice without agreement.

spareman

Why are you amazed? From what I heard drivers were not trained properly to operate the trains, surely therefore there is a risk to the safety of the public who travel on these trains?

mikemac

spareman wrote:

How can management expect drivers to drive trains they do not know how to operate due to insufficent training? Who takes the blame if lives are lost?

From what I heard on the radio, the Cork driver who was to drive the Cork-Heuston this morning was offered the chance to come in on Saturday and Sunday to familiarise himself with the train. This is in addition to the training he'd already recieved. He refused this offer so how can any driver then claim they had not recieved adequate training.

Other countries have been held to ransom by illegal strikes before. However, some of these countries had leaders with bottle.
This situation reminded me of another situation in the 1980's. I wish Bertie would do the same:

On August 3, 1981, almost 13,000 air-traffic controllers went on strike after negotiations with the federal government to raise their pay and shorten their workweek proved fruitless. The controllers complained of difficult working conditions and a lack of recognition of the pressures they face. Across the country some seven thousand flights were canceled.

The same day, President Ronald Reagan called the strike illegal and threatened to fire any controller who had not returned to work within forty-eight hours. Robert Poli, president of the Professional Air-Traffic Controllers Association (PATCO), was found in contempt by a federal judge and ordered to pay $1,000 a day in fines.

On August 5, an angry President Reagan carried out his threat and fired the 11,359 air-traffic controllers who had not returned to work. In addition, he declared a lifetime ban on the rehiring of the strikers by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). On August 17, the FAA began accepting applications for new air traffic controllers, and on October 22 the Federal Labor Relations Authority decertified PATCO.

taken from www.historychannel.com

popebenny16

Right. They got training because they have to do part of what the guards job was - opening and closing doors. How much training do you need?

If this is a safety issue, why hasnt the NBRU balloted for an official strike on the issue? If it was you would presume they'd be fairly confident of public support. It isnt a safety issue and its not a training issue, that's a red herring.

Why did they go to the Labour Court with a 5% pay claim if it was a safety issue, and get kicked out?

Why havent you replied to my question about the other carriages?

I'm not anti-union. Look at my other posts, you'll see I'm anti-stupidity. They could have picked a better fight. EG - in five months time the first of the new Intercity DMU's arrive, they could well have ground there, but this isnt the issue, it's stupid and its self defeating.

spareman

The only reason this is still unoffical action is so some trains are still running, If the nbru make it offical I dont think the darts or buses would be running either. At the end of the day its down to management of CIE trying to change work practice without prior aggreement with staff, and just because it is unoffical action does not mean it's illegal.

popebenny16

The only reason this is still unoffical action is so some trains are still running, If the nbru make it offical I dont think the darts or buses would be running either. At the end of the day its down to management of CIE trying to change work practice without prior aggreement with staff, and just because it is unoffical action does not mean it's illegal.

No. Under the 1990 Industrial Relations Act a strike is only legal when there is a ballot and strike notice is served. When that it not done by the registered trades union concerned they lose their tortious immunity. When it is "unofficial" action the union can wash their hands of it. If this was a safety issue the NBRU would have issued an official recomendation to their drivers not to operate these mark4 rakes. They didnt because they know they have no grounds to do so.

A strike can be limited, dont be dense, you know the diference between a limited strike and an "all-out" strike.

EDIT: and you still havent replied as to why the other trains cant go back.

spareman

popebenny16 wrote:

EDIT: and you still havent replied as to why the other trains cant go back.

Im sure the drivers will go back and drive the old trains when the new stock is removed untill agreement has been reached to operate the new stock. And if the strike is illegal why dont Irish rail sack the staff involved?

Champ

Thats an interesting PATCO read micmclo.

Here's some more info on that US strike if anyone's interested:
http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id296.htm

I think the US just got fed-up of strikes at that point.:D

Nevertheless, 22 unauthorized strikes had occurred in recent years -- by postal workers, Government Printing Office and Library of Congress employees, and by air traffic controllers who staged "sick-outs" in 1969 and 1970.

secret_squirrel

spareman wrote:

Im sure the drivers will go back and drive the old trains when the new stock is removed untill agreement has been reached to operate the new stock. And if the strike is illegal why dont Irish rail sack the staff involved?

Im sure that is an option IR are considering. However that may well give the unions the mandate for an official strike over the sackings.

Like a lot of people the training issue to me seems to be a red herring. Especially if the cabs are the same as stated by a number of posters whom I presume are in the know.

This looks like a small greedy minority acting like spoilt kids after they got their blackmail pay claim kicked out by the labour court.

A fact backed up by the fact that as numerous posters have said there are far stronger issues coming down the track in the next year or so...

I imagine whilst in public they are being supportive, in private their union reps are raging about how these muppets have struck too early on so weak an issue.

MarkoP11

The drivers in Cork took a unanimous decision on Wednesday last week not to drive the new train, they like Limerick drivers and Inchicore drivers have driven the train under test conditions (with other trains running) with staff as passengers, thats been going on since mid October

The drivers refused a opportunity over the weekend to take the new train out for further familiarisation. The drivers had carried out the training required they had been passed out to drive the train there is no way they would have been asked otherwise. There is normally a short conversion course where the driver drive accompanied by an inspector. There are 5 sets out on test currently, set 3 has over 10,000km on the clock

The locomotive on one end is a 12 year old 201 class engine which has been driven without any issues. The control car has a replica control console just like the Enterprise sets. The train operates under push pull operation which drivers in Cork have operated for several years again without trouble. All the buttons are in the same place. There are multiple safety systems in fact it is vastly safer than the ones it replaces. In fact any Iarnrod Eireann driver would already possess the knowledge required to drive the train but not formally certified. In fact any locomotive driver trained to drive a general motors design engine anywhere would be famliar with the controls

There was no mention of training at 6am on Monday it appeared much later, its a smoke screen to cover up the union has no case, the union members are despartely seeking something to hold onto to legitimise there case, its not the new train. The new train is a convenient wedge to force issues with respect to safety standards which apply to all drivers all trains all lines

Labour court ruled the issue separate, there can be no pay claim since it is covered by existing agreements. For god sake go back to work and let us get to work/home etc

If the unions want to play the new train game why are there no service from Dublin or Galway they aint driving the new trains, the vast majoity of drivers are working its only a handful who are not. If this was a real issue the proper channels would be followed and a ballot called and a legal strike be called but since you need to give a weeks notice a resolution as is nearly always the case its solved before that

popebenny16

spareman wrote:

Im sure the drivers will go back and drive the old trains when the new stock is removed untill agreement has been reached to operate the new stock. And if the strike is illegal why dont Irish rail sack the staff involved?

The "new stock" is one train set, scheduled to depart Dublin at 9.00 return at 13.30 from Cork. That's it. Are you really saying that, for example, they couldnt simply refuse to drive that train in isolation instead of what they are doing now?

Why dont they sack the drivers involved? They've breahed their contracts to be sure (although interstingly another poster mentioned the fact that there may be no written contracts) and they CAN be sacked. However, as I said previously on this thread, why sack them? Look at what has happend, the backwash against the drivers is overwhelming. Do you honestly think that IE are going to make mayrters out of these guys? I mean, IE are stupid but they're not THAT stupid.

Snickers Man

spareman wrote:

At the end of the day its down to management of CIE trying to change work practice without prior aggreement with staff,

What work practices are being changed? As far as I can make out from posters here, all that seems to have changed for the drivers is they have a comfier chair to sit in.

Do tell. I really want to know what the issues are here. If any.

mike65

This is/was about a failed attempt to squeeze a few more bob out of Irish Rail for doing nothing more than they are already contracted to do. Anyway its over so all they've done is piss off the people of the South West in particular and re-enforce the public perception of rail unions. What is it with the comardes in the Cork/Kerry region?

Mike.

popebenny16

At the risk of repeating myself, here are the questions that need to be asked:

1. If safety was an issue: Last Wednesday the Cork Drivers started making rumptions about driving these trains from last Monday. They were offerd time between last Wednesday and Monday for aclimitisation. They refused. This Wednesday they have accepted THE EXACT SAME THING to bring the trains on next Monday.

2. If there was an issue with the CDE's (mk4) carriages why did the drivers not drive any other type of train?

3. If there was a safety issue and people were at risk of being killed (ffs) why didnt the union ballot and put out strike notice?

Where are the answers to these questions?

dowlingm

popebenny

It's not like a car park. The Mk3s were obviously not available to be used.

MarkoP11

dowlingm wrote:

popebenny

It's not like a car park. The Mk3s were obviously not available to be used.

To be fair I think the point is why no other trains ran, no Cobh services etc nothing to do with the new train. Just refusing to drive the new train and continuing to drive all others would have cost IE nothing and the cheeky drivers would not have got any press and the public would be mostly unaffected so you can see why the drivers did what they did

popebenny16

It is. Every night all the passanger trains are lied up. Every train was usable by them, they were scheduled to run, they could have simply restricted their action to boycotting the one scheduled mark 4 service (900 from Dublin 1330 return from Cork) instead of.............. wait for it....................discommoding ((c) Gerry Ryan) 35,000 people per day.

Red Alert

The fun will start if/when the matching 'power cars' for the train gets ordered.

Surely the train managers / guards would have had more reason to strike than the drivers?

MarkoP11

Red Alert wrote:

The fun will start if/when the matching 'power cars' for the train gets ordered.

The 2000 new deal covers that

Red Alert wrote:

Surely the train managers / guards would have had more reason to strike than the drivers?

They had a legitimate claim and followed normal industrial relations practice and got a very good deal from what I know, they didn't resort to stupid unofficial action

SeanW

MarkoP11 wrote:

The 2000 new deal covers that

Like it covered THIS? And the 8-coach Darts?

dowlingm

MarkoP11

you're right, the Cobh suburban services could have run, that was just "solidarity".

Popebenny was expecting the Mk3s be available to do Cork-Dublin but if I were in IE operations, why would I have a Mk3 in Cork when a Mk4 was due to run? It would presumably be assigned to another service entirely or be in maintenance, similarly to how the 8-car DARTs replaced rather than supplemented DART services because of sending other DARTs to Leipzig for refit.

Obviously it's possible the Mk3 set was available - I used to live 400m from Kent but I live a lot further away now so I can't be sure! - but if it were I would presume NBRU would have claimed the regular train was available. Instead they have merely said (that I have seen) that the driver was willing to drive a Mk3.

popebenny16

MarkoP11

you're right, the Cobh suburban services could have run, that was just "solidarity".

Popebenny was expecting the Mk3s be available to do Cork-Dublin but if I were in IE operations, why would I have a Mk3 in Cork when a Mk4 was due to run? It would presumably be assigned to another service entirely or be in maintenance, similarly to how the 8-car DARTs replaced rather than supplemented DART services because of sending other DARTs to Leipzig for refit.

Obviously it's possible the Mk3 set was available - I used to live 400m from Kent but I live a lot further away now so I can't be sure! - but if it were I would presume NBRU would have claimed the regular train was available. Instead they have merely said (that I have seen) that the driver was willing to drive a Mk3.

All right, this is the thing:

IE replaced one mark3 set with one mark4 (CDE) set, on the Dublin Cork Service. It was to leave Dublin at 9.00am and leave Cork on ruturn at 13.30. Got that? All the other services on the Cork-Dublin line are Mark3 at the moment. As of Monday morning, these trains would have been in theior original starting places, eg, the 7.00am train from Dublin to Cork wwould have been waiting. All over the Country the same situation was set out. However, with the exception of a few drivers operating out of Limerick Waterford and the west no services at allran, to or from Dublin, on any type of train. All of thes trains were available to run, they were phyisicly there at their initial starting poitions, be it in a station or a depot. The drivers refused to drive them.

It is as simple as that.

It is not a case of replacing the one mark 4 with a mark 3. There was no justification for the drivers to refuse to drive other trains, excapt, as you say "solidarity"

Well, Solidarity left 35,000 people stranded for two days this week.

Hagar

popebenny16 wrote:

As of Monday morning, these trains would have been in theior original starting places

Who would have driven these trains to their starting places?

popebenny16

Who would have driven these trains to their starting places?

The previous shift!!!

Hagar

My thoughts exactly your Holiness.
Were they safe to drive then?
Had the previous shift more extensive/adequate training?

Hotblack Desiato

secret_squirrel wrote:

Im sure that is an option IR are considering. However that may well give the unions the mandate for an official strike over the sackings.

In the union I'm in, unofficial action results in expulsion.
Proper order too, as it's the union officials who have to pick up the pieces.
But "unofficial" in CIE seems to mean something different - "Gowan on strike lads, just don't let on we told yiz"
NBRU and any others who refuse to condemn unofficial action should lose their negotiating rights. Those who participated, particularly those not rostered to drive the Mk4 sets in question, should be sacked.

Not that I believe the excuse over Mk4 sets was anything other than the feeblest of feeble excuses!

John R

ninja900 wrote:

In the union I'm in, unofficial action results in expulsion.
Proper order too, as it's the union officials who have to pick up the pieces.
But "unofficial" in CIE seems to mean something different - "Gowan on strike lads, just don't let on we told yiz"
NBRU and any others who refuse to condemn unofficial action should lose their negotiating rights. Those who participated, particularly those not rostered to drive the Mk4 sets in question, should be sacked.

Problem is that membership of NBRU or SIPTU is compulsory for employment in CIE. So the staff are stuck with those unions, the unions are stuck with the staff and for some reason IE management seem to be dead set aainst changing that. It was at the heart of the ILDA fiasco.

If the staff were free to ditch those two unions who all too often represent the interests of only a minority of the staff I believe that industrial relations in the group in general would improve greatly.

No matter which side was to blame for this current mess it is obvious that industrial relations in IE are apalling. If the unions had some fear over loosing their subs and the management were able to communicate better with their staff without the filter of self-serving unions most of the gripes that build up into ridiculous stoppages over petty issues would not happen in the first place.

Hotblack Desiato

John R wrote:

Problem is that membership of NBRU or SIPTU is compulsory for employment in CIE.

So what? If they feel their representatives aren't doing their job it's open to them to elect different ones. At least they've a choice of two unions, in my employment only one is permitted.

No matter which side was to blame for this current mess it is obvious that industrial relations in IE are apalling.

No, it's not. It's obvious that IE management is finally standing up to ridiculous claims which the Labour Court has decided have no substance whatsoever.