24th Nov Strikes... What a joke

old boy

Shea O'Meara wrote: »

Telling other people what to do and how to do it is their job.
You are aware of Councillors on these County Councils? Any Public Sector person you dealt with would be doing their job as layed out by elected officials. Do you think they suit themselves and make up the rules as they go? They're not all Fianna Fail;)

including getting them to understand the state of the economy, to take a pay cut et al et al,
i never mentioned their political persuasion,
as regards they doing their job as layed down by elected officials, ask any town or county counciller, at your own risk, have you ever looked for planning permission in co.limerick ?, try it, b.t.w i have not, nor have i any intention of doing so.

old boy

Badboy1977 wrote: »

Whatever you do , Dont move from making generalisations(gross) to specific examples!

wow, do we not live in a democracy.

Essexboy

Peter McLoone, Secretary of IMPACT, was chairman of FAS and sat back while the staff spent public money like drunken sailors, even benefitted from it.
Now his sour face is on TV every night whining about his members and why they should not suffer pay cuts. He and his colleagues helped bring the economy down but expect others to carry the can.

K-9

Badboy1977 wrote: »

We all know the Maths. We obviously must cut and Public pay must form part of that. However, can you explain this to me? Why Should i Take another pay cut under the following conditions
1) There are excessive numbers of staff HSE
2) We have no wealth tax to make those who benefited most during boom , help us out during what we are continually told is a crisis
3) Bank bonuses are still being paid
4) Two non viable Banks -AIB/BOI paid their staff pay increases. Yes the Labour court forced it but funny how a Government can get the law changed lickity split when it suits but when it doesn't, it falls back on the courts.
5) Childcare is ridiculously expensive-why no reform?

1) The reason there is excessive numbers in the HSE is because the Unions and Govt. did a deal to keep all the staff of the 7/8 old Health Boards when the HSE was created. They gave them permanent contracts too. Social Partnership isn't going to deliver job cuts, its only good for pay rises and recruitment.

So while the Unions are busy saying "no pay cuts" etc. they are ignoring the real problems. It suits them, why would they want their own members to lose jobs? This is why the love strikes as it creates siege mentality and means they can reach compromises to suit themselves, rather than real reform. The lower paid worker gets screwed again, same as always.

2) There should be a wealth tax. Banks do have large deposits. Some people made a killing from the property bubble and didn't reinvest it in property or shares. The property bubble seen a huge transfer in wealth to older generations and left young people crippled in debt. It should be taxed but I don't see Unions or Govt. proposing it.

3) YEP and Public Service bonuses.

4) The Govt. should insist on it.

5) Don't know. Another missed opportunity. The increases in child benefit should have been based on actual childcare costs.

Scofflaw

old boy wrote: »

wow, do we not live in a democracy.

Yes, but gross generalisations aren't any use to anyone really. Certainly they don't advance the discussion, since inevitably nearly everyone else can think of at least one counter-example.

Let's not make this a thread about whether your generalisations are true, because you can't prove them, and no-one else can change your mind.

moderately,
Scofflaw

Badboy1977

old boy wrote: »

wow, do we not live in a democracy.

Hardly a counter argument!! Show us the colour of your money and give specific examples,being careful to point out areas that are not policy driven because as already pointed out-Government sets policy.

Badboy1977

K-9 wrote: »

1) The reason there is excessive numbers in the HSE is because the Unions and Govt. did a deal to keep all the staff of the 7/8 old Health Boards when the HSE was created. They gave them permanent contracts too. Social Partnership isn't going to deliver job cuts, its only good for pay rises and recruitment.

So while the Unions are busy saying "no pay cuts" etc. they are ignoring the real problems. It suits them, why would they want their own members to lose jobs? This is why the love strikes as it creates siege mentality and means they can reach compromises to suit themselves, rather than real reform. The lower paid worker gets screwed again, same as always.

2) There should be a wealth tax. Banks do have large deposits. Some people made a killing from the property bubble and didn't reinvest it in property or shares. The property bubble seen a huge transfer in wealth to older generations and left young people crippled in debt. It should be taxed but I don't see Unions or Govt. proposing it.

3) YEP and Public Service bonuses.

4) The Govt. should insist on it.

5) Don't know. Another missed opportunity. The increases in child benefit should have been based on actual childcare costs.

Hardly fair to lump all the Unions together. The HSE deal was a sweet deal from the health workers side. Meanwhile in teaching we had a major cohort of temporary staff going from contract to contract. But you cant win with some of the anti-union bile that passes unchecked by moderators here. The teaching unions get blamed (ironically) by this brigade for not creating Permanent jobs! I don't include you in this, but your catch all "the Unions" masks worlds of differences.
Anyway-employees should always discuss conditions with employers. The problem with Social partnership was Gov should at the very least have stopped duplicating jobs. Health boards/HSE. I wish I had a duplicate to help me teach manners to children that many parents neglect to pass on!

Stark

Badboy1977 wrote: »

Hardly fair to lump all the Unions together. The HSE deal was a sweet deal from the health workers side. Meanwhile in teaching we had a major cohort of temporary staff going from contract to contract. But you cant win with some of the anti-union bile that passes unchecked by moderators here. The teaching unions get blamed (ironically) by this brigade for not creating Permanent jobs! I don't include you in this, but your catch all "the Unions" masks worlds of differences.

Overinflating permanent staff wages means that it's less affordable to hire more permanent staff. What employer can afford to hire a graduate straight out of college onto €40k for 22 hours a week work, 9 months a year? I'm sure if the unions have their way, we'll probably see more temporary staff losing their jobs to divert cost cutting measures away from salaries. Path of least resistance and all that.

K-9

Badboy1977 wrote: »

Hardly fair to lump all the Unions together. The HSE deal was a sweet deal from the health workers side. Meanwhile in teaching we had a major cohort of temporary staff going from contract to contract. But you cant win with some of the anti-union bile that passes unchecked by moderators here. The teaching unions get blamed (ironically) by this brigade for not creating Permanent jobs! I don't include you in this, but your catch all "the Unions" masks worlds of differences.
Anyway-employees should always discuss conditions with employers. The problem with Social partnership was Gov should at the very least have stopped duplicating jobs. Health boards/HSE. I wish I had a duplicate to help me teach manners to children that many parents neglect to pass on!

Not sure what Unions negotiated the HSE one but I can understand why people throw all Unions together. Social partnership requires Unions to agree so they all get lumped together, just as all employers get lumped together and the private sector.

As for teachers on temporary contracts, I don't know the exact reasons why that is. Teacher numbers did increase over the last few years as well as a huge increase in Classroom Assistants, so the money was there for more permanent staff. It was just spent a different way as they have to prioritise.

I haven't seen anybody blame Unions for not creating permanent jobs! Makes no sense.

Stark wrote: »

Overinflating permanent staff wages means that it's less affordable to hire more permanent staff. What employer can afford to hire a graduate straight out of college onto €40k for 22 hours a week work, 9 months a year? I'm sure if the unions have their way, we'll probably see more temporary staff losing their jobs to divert cost cutting measures away from salaries. Path of least resistance and all that.

That is what is happening. Govt. doesn't really have any other option.

Badboy1977

K-9 wrote: »

Not sure what Unions negotiated the HSE one but I can understand why people throw all Unions together. Social partnership requires Unions to agree so they all get lumped together, just as all employers get lumped together and the private sector.

As for teachers on temporary contracts, I don't know the exact reasons why that is. Teacher numbers did increase over the last few years as well as a huge increase in Classroom Assistants, so the money was there for more permanent staff. It was just spent a different way as they have to prioritise.

I haven't seen anybody blame Unions for not creating permanent jobs! Makes no sense.



That is what is happening. Govt. doesn't really have any other option.

social Partnership splits into separate talks for each sector,once overall increases are agreed. I think it should be noted that IBEC,IFA were also involved. It was not just unions. Employers should talk to their employees about conditions-perhaps rates of increase were too high but thats also at issue in Private sector.

Dr Kamikazi

Benchmarking was all fine and dandy when things where going well, but of course goes right out the window when things take a downturn.
Also, I love the "we're willing to make sacrifices" line, yeah, but only as long as this doesn't mean you may get paid less.
I've been in many government offices and if I worked like that in my job I'd be thrown out in a week. If seen continents drift faster than that.
This whole "we're on the frontline and we're getting abuse" shtick only applies to a tiny minority of public staff. Also it is quite unacceptable, anyone abusing anyone in their job should be locked up for 30 days, but the approach in Ireland seems to be softly, softly. Don't upset the poor scumbags.
But the majority of civil servants have a job no more stressful than a long soak in a bath.
Of course I understand you don't like anyone pissing into your soup, you have put your interests above anyone else and that's quite natural, no one likes having their cheese moved.

K-9

Badboy1977 wrote: »

social Partnership splits into separate talks for each sector,once overall increases are agreed. I think it should be noted that IBEC,IFA were also involved. It was not just unions. Employers should talk to their employees about conditions-perhaps rates of increase were too high but thats also at issue in Private sector.

Exactly, I'd assume the Health unions would negotiate things like the HSE.

I'd agree on IBEC etc.

The problem wasn't particularly Unions, social partnership just became about far more than pay talks. It became about tax rates and social policy, not ideal when its main objective is pay talks!