Unofficial Bus Strike...

Stark

jaybird wrote:

Drivers are not being intimidated into not working. Many of the drivers want to go back to work, but are strongly unionisied and the culture of the job is that you don't cross a picket, they support each other.

What part of wanting to go back to work but being afraid to do so because of the strong union presence and resulting consequences for crossing a picket doesn't amount to intimidation?

_blank_

jaybird wrote: »

Many of the drivers want to go back to work, but are strongly unionisied and the culture of the job is that you don't cross a picket, they support each other.

So...errrr....how come the drivers who WERE out in the other Garages have gone and left the Harristown lads high and dry by themsleves? lol

Oh yeah, maybe they have mortgages to pay, but aren't as idiotic as the Harristown lads.

dub_commuter

Stark wrote: »

She's right about no windows being broken though.

Was it reported earlier that they had been thrown or they had been smashed? I thought that they earlier said they had been smashed, now they are backtracking if they are saying they had not been?

I don't see anywhere in that article where it says they have not been smashed.

shltter

KC61 wrote: »

How ultimately the company is managed and implements change is probably the single greatest issue facing Dublin Bus. The service needs a complete overhaul and timetables redesigned to reflect customer demand, and to be simplified into a clockface, regular interval service on each corridor. This is going to require a major redesign.

The fact remains that marked in drivers have an effective veto over any changes, and have received compensation for changes in route/termini. Meanwhile junior drivers have no such option.

Whether this model of operation is sustainable in the current economic climate is very much open to question. I think that most companies would view this as impossible conditions with which to manage a company. It effectively means that management's hands are tied when they want to implement any changes. And this was a key point in the Deloitte report.

As I've said on many occasions before, however, in the immediate timeframe what needs to happen is that people stand back from diametrically opposed positions and start to talk to one another as otherwise there will not be any bus service to operate.

You are unusually for you completely wrong there is no veto and there is now no compensation for route changes the only compensation is for loss of marked in position when a route is cut or moved to a different depot.

If no agreement after the 3rd attempt a schedule goes to a tribunal and they decide that's it NO VETO.

vandermeyde

My name is Mud wrote: »

Case in point right here ^

If managment broke all the rules like you said, why didn't the drivers go down the official union channels for conflict resolution? That would have brought better public sympathy, right?

The drivers have shot themselves in the foot with this.

The whole notion of leaving the customers stranded will do nothing towards getting the people on side.

This is something I'm struggling with as well, the labour court recommendation (as posted one one of the other threads a few weeks back) says that the implementation of the 120 bus reduction can commence on the 26th of April without agreement but that this can be dealt with after the fact by "tribunal". What is a tribunal and why can't it be used as per the labour court recommendations. I think this was in the 2nd clarification release.

Why start pulling the trigger straight away?

KC61

dub_commuter wrote: »

Was it reported earlier that they had been thrown or they had been smashed?

Does it really matter?

Either of the two is intimidation full stop and is completely unacceptable.

ntlbell

KC61 wrote: »

Does it really matter?

Either of the two is intimidation full stop and is completely unacceptable.

It matters if both are false.

Stark

dub_commuter wrote: »

Was it reported earlier that they had been thrown or they had been smashed? I thought that they earlier said they had been smashed, now they are backtracking if they are saying they had not been?

I don't see anywhere in that article where it says they have not been smashed.

sarcasm... Doesn't really matter if they managed to hit a window or not, throwing the stones shows what intent there was.

AlekSmart

Certainly an emotive group on here this morning.....reminiscent of the crowds gathered round the gibbet in 17th C Thomas Street

However,the ire is easily understood and its instructive that the Driver Unions failed totally to harness this in regard to the underlying principle of wide-scale Service Cuts which remain the core issue.

MiniD makes a valid point here.......

Who's to say these drivers won't have another issue with the next batch of changes on May 10th. How long more do Dublin Bus have to wait?

The reality is that there WILL be issues with the May10th cuts as they are FAR more wideranging than the Harristown set.
The May 10th round will see the first examples of widespread alterations which will impact upon whatever customers remain.

Now,to make a point which some may be unaware of.......

The initial cuts of last Sunday 26th also impacted upon other Depots,particularly Donnybrook,where the 14/48A route was to be substantially reduced and some wide ranging Staff displacement was to occur.

However.....BOTH Management and (Both) Unions had a 12 hour session of intensive table-thumping all through Saturday (Missed the Premiership stuff and all) which resulted in an agreed compromise that has managed to deliver the required Financial and Vehicular savings with minimal Staff displacement.....THAT is what I call a result and engaging in THAT negotiation process is what I pay my Union Subscriptions for.

There is little doubt but that Harristown Local Management has been proven to be somewhat deficient in their appreciation of core IR issues and more importantly in their ability to negotiate and manage arkward situations.

Similarly the Trades Unions have failed equally spectacularly to give clear decisive leadership to their local membership.

The Donnybrook 14/48A situation is PROOF of what can be achieved when a clear uninterrupted framework exists to negotiate stuff.
It`s accurate I feel to refer to the need for Head Office Senior Management to engage at a more local level on this current "Emergency" situation as the Local Management teams appear to march to a different drumbeat.

I would suggest to Harristown colleagues that they make it their business to refer themselves to their Union Head Offices and enquire as to what processess were engaged within Donnybrook which gave an agreed positive compromise.
Armed with that knowledge they then need to impress upon their Local Representatives AND their Local Managers the need to DO THE SAME.

That is what BOTH representative sides are being paid to do.

What the current Harristown beligerance IS doing is preventing BOTH sides from progressing the Donnybrook negotiation success further in a manner which is now URGENT,given the short time-frame before the 10th May.

There are significant major alterations due on the 10th May which require the full and undiluted attention of BOTH Management and Staff negotiation teams,however if both sides attention remains diverted into Peace Keeping duties along the Collinstown line then we,as in the REST of Bus Atha Cliath Staff,are giving up our best chances of achieving the best result from this unadulterated mess.

Harristown`s striking staff need to also re-assess how much their stand-alone action is further diverting the public gaze from Government Policy or more correctly the decision of the Minister for Transport to effectively abandon Government policy on Sustainable Transport...and THAT remains the cause of All of this codology !! :mad:

shltter

My name is Mud wrote: »

Case in point right here ^

If managment broke all the rules like you said, why didn't the drivers go down the official union channels for conflict resolution? That would have brought better public sympathy, right?

The drivers have shot themselves in the foot with this.

The whole notion of leaving the customers stranded will do nothing towards getting the people on side.

If you work the bill you have accepted it. The company had no right to force in this bill until it had gone to a tribunal if no agreement was found.

And if they had done as you said no doubt you would be here saying " hang on they have been working this schedule for X number of days and now they won't work it anymore if it was ok to work yesterday why is it not ok to work it now"

What you can not get around is that the company in the form of a letter from head office promised NOT to do this with schedules when the issue was up for a ballot once passed they broke their word so promises to sort it out while it is worked are worthless given that they have already shown their promises are not worth the paper they are written on.

_blank_

Great post AlekSmart

KC61

shltter wrote: »

You are unusually for you completely wrong there is no veto and there is now no compensation for route changes the only compensation is for loss of marked in position when a route is cut or moved to a different depot.

If no agreement after the 3rd attempt a schedule goes to a tribunal and they decide that's it NO VETO.

Thank you for the compliment! I do try to take a balanced approach to this.

Regarding compensation payments, was there not compensation paid when the 50/56A/77 terminus move to Ringsend Road rather than Eden Quay (I know that was due to the loss of canteen facilities), but there were other instances that I can recall compensation to marked in drivers being paid such as when the 15B extended to Whitechurch from Ballyroan and when other similar routing changes were made.

That I take it has now changed as a result of the recent ballot?

I think that we'll have to agree to disagree over the terminology regarding the method of roster change. I would consider such a procedure as unbelievably unwieldy and is to a degree a serious barrier to change within the company as it can take a substantial period of time to get agreement to any proposed changes. But like all things, it is really only through sitting down and talking that this sort of thing will be solved.

_blank_

What does "marked in" mean, and if a driver is not "marked in" then what is he?

MOH

jaybird wrote: »

None of you have a clue how the buses work, what the funding is like, or what the job is like. You care when you bus doesn't arrive, and sod anyone who has to drive it as long as you get to where you are going.
.

You're right, I don't have a clue and don't care. Do you care how your supermarket shelves get stocked? Or how your rubbish is collected? Or how any of the services you deal with on a regular basis without thinking twice about actually work behind the scenes?

dub_commuter wrote: »

I think I speak for everyone than if bus drivers or other Dublin Bus staff are smashing windows that is not acceptable and of course is taking things too far.

However, the fact that DB management are unwilling to even TALK or NEGOTIATE, when the drivers already have made offers to do so, and to work old bills until a new agreement, shows that management are only escalating things.

Of course DB HAVE already offered to talk to the drivers if they come back to work, which they've refused to do, showing that drivers are only escalating things.


Still, it's their own funeral. More nonsense like this => even less public faith in public transport => less money for Dublin bus => ultimately more cutbacks, and drivers on the dole. Where they'll stay, because with this kind of attitude no-one else will employ them.

Jip

If you're marked in you have a set roster and route, you'll know months in advance what you're doing. If you're not then you don't really know what route and shift you'll be doing too far in advance, if at all.

shltter

vandermeyde wrote: »

This is something I'm struggling with as well, the labour court recommendation (as posted one one of the other threads a few weeks back) says that the implementation of the 120 bus reduction can commence on the 26th of April without agreement but that this can be dealt with after the fact by "tribunal". What is a tribunal and why can't it be used as per the labour court recommendations. I think this was in the 2nd clarification release.

Why start pulling the trigger straight away?

That was the original labour court recommendation which was rejected and then clarified part of that clarification is a letter from the company promising to use the normal schedules procedure.

The tribunal is union reps, management reps and a labour court chair they decide on the bill and the outcome is binding on both parties.

shltter

Des wrote: »

What does "marked in" mean, and if a driver is not "marked in" then what is he?

marked in means you work on a particular route and follow a rota on that route.

Other staff are spare they find out today what they are working tomorrow.

shltter

MOH wrote: »

Of course DB HAVE already offered to talk to the drivers if they come back to work, which they've refused to do, showing that drivers are only escalating things.

And the drivers offered to come back and work the old rota for 3 days while the new rota completed the agreed procedures. This offer was rejected by management.

KC61

AlekSmart wrote: »

Certainly an emotive group on here this morning.....reminiscent of the crowds gathered round the gibbet in 17th C Thomas Street

However,the ire is easily understood and its instructive that the Driver Unions failed totally to harness this in regard to the underlying principle of wide-scale Service Cuts which remain the core issue.

MiniD makes a valid point here.......



The reality is that there WILL be issues with the May10th cuts as they are FAR more wideranging than the Harristown set.
The May 10th round will see the first examples of widespread alterations which will impact upon whatever customers remain.

Now,to make a point which some may be unaware of.......

The initial cuts of last Sunday 26th also impacted upon other Depots,particularly Donnybrook,where the 14/48A route was to be substantially reduced and some wide ranging Staff displacement was to occur.

However.....BOTH Management and (Both) Unions had a 12 hour session of intensive table-thumping all through Saturday (Missed the Premiership stuff and all) which resulted in an agreed compromise that has managed to deliver the required Financial and Vehicular savings with minimal Staff displacement.....THAT is what I call a result and engaging in THAT negotiation process is what I pay my Union Subscriptions for.

There is little doubt but that Harristown Local Management has been proven to be somewhat deficient in their appreciation of core IR issues and more importantly in their ability to negotiate and manage arkward situations.

Similarly the Trades Unions have failed equally spectacularly to give clear decisive leadership to their local membership.

The Donnybrook 14/48A situation is PROOF of what can be achieved when a clear uninterrupted framework exists to negotiate stuff.
It`s accurate I feel to refer to the need for Head Office Senior Management to engage at a more local level on this current "Emergency" situation as the Local Management teams appear to march to a different drumbeat.

I would suggest to Harristown colleagues that they make it their business to refer themselves to their Union Head Offices and enquire as to what processess were engaged within Donnybrook which gave an agreed positive compromise.
Armed with that knowledge they then need to impress upon their Local Representatives AND their Local Managers the need to DO THE SAME.

That is what BOTH representative sides are being paid to do.

What the current Harristown beligerance IS doing is preventing BOTH sides from progressing the Donnybrook negotiation success further in a manner which is now URGENT,given the short time-frame before the 10th May.

There are significant major alterations due on the 10th May which require the full and undiluted attention of BOTH Management and Staff negotiation teams,however if both sides attention remains diverted into Peace Keeping duties along the Collinstown line then we,as in the REST of Bus Atha Cliath Staff,are giving up our best chances of achieving the best result from this unadulterated mess.

Harristown`s striking staff need to also re-assess how much their stand-alone action is further diverting the public gaze from Government Policy or more correctly the decision of the Minister for Transport to effectively abandon Government policy on Sustainable Transport...and THAT remains the cause of All of this codology !! :mad:

Alek - I could not put it better if I tried!!!

Well said.

I was aware of the 14/14A/48A discussions, and that is an example of where both sides recognised the realities, and delivered a workable compromise.

Again that is frankly the only way forward.

jaybird

MOH wrote: »

You're right, I don't have a clue and don't care. Do you care how your supermarket shelves get stocked? Or how your rubbish is collected? Or how any of the services you deal with on a regular basis without thinking twice about actually work behind the scenes?

Yes I do care. I care that people are treated properly and decently. I care if the people who stock the shelves and empty my bins are treated fairly and that their employers follow the law and the rules laid down and agreed.

You may be happy to give up every shred of employee protection in order to keep a small number of people in jobs. I care about the quality of those jobs and that people have their rights protected.


The reason they didn't get the union backing for the strike was because management forced the issue on a Sunday morning knowing exactly what was going to happen, and knowing that union involovement could not be obtained at that time.
Management forced this situation every step of the way, there is something very very odd about the whole situation.

jaybird

shltter wrote: »

And the drivers offered to come back and work the old rota for 3 days while the new rota completed the agreed procedures. This offer was rejected by management.

That was offered on Sunday morning, none of this needed to happen, management said no. Like I said, they forced the situation.

My name is Mud

Im glad there are no unions in Rocket Science and Brain Surgery. I can only imagine the carnage!

Its a piddly bus timetable FFS.

Could they (DB and Unions) make this more complicated?

Tribunal, LRC, Proposals, Unions, Commissions...what next?

Commission for Regulation of Tribunals who Prospose Schedule Changes to the LRC? Or the CRTPSCLRC?

shltter

Des wrote: »

So...errrr....how come the drivers who WERE out in the other Garages have gone and left the Harristown lads high and dry by themsleves? lol

Oh yeah, maybe they have mortgages to pay, but aren't as idiotic as the Harristown lads.

Because the Harristown lads removed the pickets from the other depots. Presumably there is some movement in the back ground and this is first step to resolving this ridiculous and unnecessary disruption.

vandermeyde

shltter wrote: »

That was the original labour court recommendation which was rejected and then clarified part of that clarification is a letter from the company promising to use the normal schedules procedure.

The tribunal is union reps, management reps and a labour court chair they decide on the bill and the outcome is binding on both parties.

Thanks for the reply.

It seems that there may be more underlying problems in Harristown than just the new schedule that was supposed to start on Sunday given how Alek has outlined what is happening in Donnybrook.

Obviously the relationships out there between management and staff are nowhere near what is required.

jaybird

shltter wrote: »

Because the Harristown lads removed the pickets from the other depots. Presumably there is some movement in the back ground and this is first step to resolving this ridiculous and unnecessary disruption.

There is a tentative agreement in place, should be finalised this afternoon, hopefully. I'm sure given the info you know, you can guess who is going to work the new bill and who isn't!

bazzer

Des wrote: »

What does "marked in" mean, and if a driver is not "marked in" then what is he?

A marked in driver is usually a senior driver who operates on one route only. S/he can work out exactly what hours and days they are driving for the foreseeable future.

Before a driver is marked-in, they are Spare. They don't know from one day to the next what hours or route they will be on. A driver can be spare for up to about seven years before being marked in.

dub_commuter

shltter wrote: »

If you work the bill you have accepted it. The company had no right to force in this bill until it had gone to a tribunal if no agreement was found.

And if they had done as you said no doubt you would be here saying " hang on they have been working this schedule for X number of days and now they won't work it anymore if it was ok to work yesterday why is it not ok to work it now"

What you can not get around is that the company in the form of a letter from head office promised NOT to do this with schedules when the issue was up for a ballot once passed they broke their word so promises to sort it out while it is worked are worthless given that they have already shown their promises are not worth the paper they are written on.

Good post. Sums it all up well.

Dublin_Gunner

jaybird wrote: »

Yes I do care. I care that people are treated properly and decently. I care if the people who stock the shelves and empty my bins are treated fairly and that their employers follow the law and the rules laid down and agreed.

Thats b=no use if consumers can't buy the goods...

jaybird wrote: »

You may be happy to give up every shred of employee protection in order to keep a small number of people in jobs. I care about the quality of those jobs and that people have their rights protected.

Or how about they dont proceed with cuts etc and the company has to stop trading (or in this case, goes private), then none of them have jobs?

jaybird wrote: »

The reason they didn't get the union backing for the strike was because management forced the issue on a Sunday morning knowing exactly what was going to happen, and knowing that union involovement could not be obtained at that time.
Management forced this situation every step of the way, there is something very very odd about the whole situation.

If that was the case, how come it was only the one driver that led to this whole fiasco? Sure, there was obviously a lot of animosity already there, but it was he who forced the hand of the other drivers, and as per usual, they stick on their industrial strike action, screwing many a commuter in the process.


I'm sorry, but I'm of the opinion that they should have stuck it out until a proper arrangement / agreement was in place. Screwing the public for their own personal reasons is in no way justified.

They are too heavily unionised. Jebus, if I worked strictly to my job description, feck all would get done.

Gob forbid some people might have to work a bit harder these days :rolleyes:

shltter

vandermeyde wrote: »

Thanks for the reply.

It seems that there may be more underlying problems in Harristown than just the new schedule that was supposed to start on Sunday given how Alek has outlined what is happening in Donnybrook.

Obviously the relationships out there between management and staff are nowhere near what is required.

Absolutely unfortunately there seems to be a complete breakdown of relations in that Depot probably stemming back to former disputes.

It is not just Donnybrook all the other 6 depots agreed the changes needed for Sunday without incident and that's what is really annoying about this. IF the management view harristown union reps as being inflexible all they had to do was allow this to finish out the agreed procedure.

Too many egos and one upmanship has led to this.

My name is Mud

shltter wrote: »

Too many egos and one upmanship has led to this.

Sounds like Kanye West drives a bus in Harristown