Talk Talk at "Talk Talk"

hardybuck

200motels wrote: »

I can't understand the constant knocking of unions on this site, without unions most people would be on less than a fiver an hour, the whole idea behind a union is the union of people to unite together to get better work conditions and pay, most of labour law if not all was because unions kept pushing the law makers to protect workers, the 2005 health and safety act was the unions pushing for an up to date health and safety act. I'm a union member and have been all of my working life and I'm the better for it. Yes unions make mistakes as we all do but the unions work for the interests of the worker.

If more people were on a fiver an hour we'd probably be better off. Our cost base in Ireland is off the scale. Benchmarking and inflation spirraled out of control together during the boom years.

eeloe

€5 per hour for a 39 hour week is 195.

How are people supposed to live on such small wages when the cost of living is so high?

€1.55 for a liter of petrol today....

hardybuck

eeloe wrote: »

€5 per hour for a 39 hour week is 195.

How are people supposed to live on such small wages when the cost of living is so high?

€1.55 for a liter of petrol today....

Think outside the box for a minute. If wage levels weren't as high, cost of living wouldn't be as high either. People doing identical jobs even in Northern Ireland get paid less than us, and pay less for goods and services.

dayshah

Bards wrote: »

Yet it is the private sector which is the productive sector and that which earns the money to pay the unionised public sector inflated wages.

There is a country with no public sector. Its called Somalia. Any plans to emigrate there?

The country needs both a public sector and and private sector. They both support each other. The private sector would be in a very bad way without a legal service, educated workers, gas pipelines, water, or electricity.

The state is the largest single employer in the country, so the state actually does create jobs.

Anyway, TalkTalk was non-union, so blaming the unions for its closure is pure ideology.

dayshah

hardybuck wrote: »

Think outside the box for a minute. If wage levels weren't as high, cost of living wouldn't be as high either. People doing identical jobs even in Northern Ireland get paid less than us, and pay less for goods and services.

They also get lots of things for free from the government, like housing and NHS.

hardybuck

dayshah wrote: »

They also get lots of things for free from the government, like housing and NHS.

But pay higher income taxes I believe pay for NHS. Do we not have housing, rent allowance and vastly higher social welfare than they do?

Either way, cost of living there is about 20% cheaper in my experience.

Sad time for waterford, a massive loss.
Unions can be both good and bad, I think the problem in Ireland is that the politicians never stood up to them for so long, let them have all they wanted.

dayshah

hardybuck wrote: »

But pay higher income taxes I believe pay for NHS. Do we not have housing, rent allowance and vastly higher social welfare than they do?

Actually we don't.

But anyway the UK isn't a good comparison due to currency fluctuations. We are more or less in line with other Eurozone countries.

Sully

The government are to fast track WITs upgrade to University, as part of their response to the downward spiral is going. I think that's a serious move and something to be welcomed. We are always harping on about how it will create more jobs, so the government will work on doing that quicker than planned.

fuzzy dunlop

hardybuck wrote: »

Waterford clearly got a lot of hand outs from the IDA and Governments over the last few decades compared to other towns in the region. Why didn't the likes of Wexford or Kilkenny etc. get a big industrial estate and a Regional Technical College? Because concious decisions were made by politicans to put them there.

.

Any chance you can back this horse**** up with any evidence? You seem to forget that Kilkenny Wexford and Clonmel also have IDA industrial parks. Every bog arse town in Ireland has some form of Industrial estate.The same towns also have sattelite college campuses from Limerick,Carlow and NUI Maynooth. The History of Waterford is having its industry and educational facilities being assett stripped by gombeen politicians in all political parties to serve their own constituencies. Cop on FFS!

hardybuck wrote: »

Interestingly, unemployment in the region has decreased since this time last year, and also the south east has lower unemployment levels than the south west, the border region, and Dublin..

More horsesh1t!

http://www.cso.ie/releasespublications/documents/labour_market/2011/lreg_aug2011.pdf

The unemployment rates for the region are considerably higher than the South West, Mid West and Mid East. Are you sick or do you get a thrill out of adding insult to injury?

hardybuck wrote: »

What I'd be nearly more concerned about is how badly the SME's in the town are struggling. Take a spin or a walk any day of the week and the place is dead. Two big issues here for me are rates and parking charges. I can get cheaper parking in Dundrum Shopping Centre than in on the street in Waterford.

Rates are also putting severe pressure on SME's, and are seemingly the only cost which a business cannot negotiate down. The Government needs to get the finger out and tie these to inflation.

Apologies for sidetracking the topic here slightly, but I suppose the wider economy of Waterford is under scrutiny now.

What I'd be more concerned about is that when this happens in the West everyone short of the Army is mobilised to do something about it. How can you sustain an SME sector without a significant industrial base in the city and region?

dayshah

The redundancy on offer is very poor.

Monty Burnz

dayshah wrote: »

The state is the largest single employer in the country, so the state actually does create jobs.

If that's the case, why bother with any businesses at all - sure the state can hire everyone?

...

jimbojazz

dayshah wrote: »

The redundancy on offer is very poor.

That's the initial offer of about 4.5 weeks.....but they dont have to accept that

letsbet

Sully wrote: »

The government are to fast track WITs upgrade to University, as part of their response to the downward spiral is going. I think that's a serious move and something to be welcomed. We are always harping on about how it will create more jobs, so the government will work on doing that quicker than planned.

Can't see anything happening for quite a while on this and it's not quite the same as being upgraded to a university. It'll change name to a Technological University (far from the same thing) and as with the move from RTC to IT I'm sure CIT etc. will kick up a stink. It'll also probably involve some sort of merger with Carlow and thus may first of all result in job losses although overall it will have a positive impact on the SE economy alright but it's far from the panacea for all of our woes (I know you weren't suggesting that but some people seem to overstate the impact of it). It'll be interesting to hear the concrete plans if and when they come out as today's comments aren't too much more emphatic than those of Enda Kenny when in Faithlegg last year where he committed to the university only for Ruari Quinn to scupper that by saying that there'll be no “rebranded university” as long as he's Minister for Education. I wonder did Mr Bruton talk to Mr Quinn before this latest statement! A rose by any other name comes to mind.

Gael23

dayshah wrote: »

The redundancy on offer is very poor.

I would find it insulting to be quite honest. It should be at least 6 weeks. If I was the union i'd be pushing for 8 weeks for such a profitable company.

Monty Burnz

Does anyone know if they do any substantial research at WIT at the moment? Creating a proper research institution is something that takes decades rather than years.

letsbet

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Does anyone know if they do any substantial research at WIT at the moment? Creating a proper research institution is something that takes decades rather than years.

There is quite a bit of research going on out there. The TSSG (link below) is a great success. The Macular Pigment Reseach Centre is almost as good and in other schools research centres have been set up over the last few years or are in the pipeline. It's a huge part of the strategy alright and as you say it takes quite a while but it's definitely something that in progress. The enterprise platform out there is another big initiative (SEEP it's called).

http://www.tssg.org/

Daysha

Sully wrote: »

The government are to fast track WITs upgrade to University, as part of their response to the downward spiral is going. I think that's a serious move and something to be welcomed. We are always harping on about how it will create more jobs, so the government will work on doing that quicker than planned.

People here have been hearing that from Irish governments for the last 30 years. FG have already backtracked on their originally proposals for the college so unless we see genuine movement I'm welcoming nothing, and no quick soundbite from Richard Bruton on the 6.1 is going to change that.

sparkling sea

200motels wrote: »

I can't understand the constant knocking of unions on this site, without unions most people would be on less than a fiver an hour, the whole idea behind a union is the union of people to unite together to get better work conditions and pay, most of labour law if not all was because unions kept pushing the law makers to protect workers, the 2005 health and safety act was the unions pushing for an up to date health and safety act. I'm a union member and have been all of my working life and I'm the better for it. Yes unions make mistakes as we all do but the unions work for the interests of the worker.

Most Labour law has little or nothing to do with modern unions, its purely because we are in the EU, where virtually all our employment law has originated from. I worked in a factory and was a union rep - I saw how the actual union officals operate first hand - it would be laughable if it was so sad.

I would also disagree when you state " but the unions work for the interests of the worker" - IMO unpaid union reps work for the people they work with.
Paid union reps on the other hand work for themselves. Unions are in the being profitable and keeping themselves in a job.

Jack O Connor SIPTU General President earned €125,000 on par with the CEO's of many businesses with a similiar number of employees as SIPTU - this in itself should speak volumes

dayshah

ryanf1 wrote: »

I would find it insulting to be quite honest. It should be at least 6 weeks. If I was the union i'd be pushing for 8 weeks for such a profitable company.

But there is no union. Given its a profitable company I would expect something like 8 weeks.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

If that's the case, why bother with any businesses at all - sure the state can hire everyone?

...

Because then we would have something like the USSR. :rolleyes: There actually is a middle ground between zero government involvement and 100% government control of the economy. I'm surprised you missed that given your knowledge of 'simple economics'.

Bens

My nephew has been there 5 years.

But he has already called me and asked can he stay with me in the UK for a couple of weeks while he looks for a job. He should get about 6 weeks for every year. His brother already came over and had a job within a week.

My advice to anyone there is that when you get your redundancy, dont sit and let it waste away until you dont have enough left to emigrate. Use it straight away to set yourself up somewhere else where you can get a job.

jo_bombshell

Feel sorry for all the talk talk employees. I know how it feels as I lost my job last year too unexpectedly, but took it as an opportunity to set up my own business which I wanted to do for years but was afraid to take the risk. The Social Welfare fair play to them are a great help in getting you started (thought i'd never say anything good about them after all the waiting and crap to get the dole in the first place, but there ya go). And the area partnership and enterprise board are also great for advice and funding.

I know it may sound a bit sexist, but there is a FREE information morning in the tower hotel for any women thinking of setting up their own business the "FAB" Programme (females at business) on 13th Sept from 9.30 - 12.30. I personally completed this programme last year and found it a great help as it helps you to decide if your business idea will work and how to finetune it as well as providing a start your own business course.

Here is the link to their facebook page:
http://www.facebook.com/FABProgramme?sk=info

There is also may options from social welfare such as the back to work enterprise allowance that help people setting up their own business by providing grants and letting you keep full dole for your first year of business and 75% for the second year, so at least you may have money there to pay the bills while you get your business off the ground.

It can be soul destroying losing your job, but the main thing is to stay positive and think of it as a new chapter to do something you may have wanted to do for years like me.

Hope this information helps someone

ekboy

I worked in AOL/Talk Talk for 7 years in Waterford. I left last year to travel and I am still currently away. Yesterday when I herd the news my heart broke. I have to say that I have never and will never work in a building with so many great people.

This is just massive for Waterford. It effects everybody the WIT college (No part time jobs) local business etc etc The busiest job in Waterford (and im sure a lot of other areas in the country) must be the chap grilling people at the top of that dole que the is growing by a further 575 people.

AOL was the last place left standing in Waterford. How many empty buildings are on the IDA now?

Best of luck to all the people in AOL,I really wish the best for everbody. They never deserved you

hardybuck

dayshah wrote: »

Actually we don't.

But anyway the UK isn't a good comparison due to currency fluctuations. We are more or less in line with other Eurozone countries.

We don't have what? Can you clarify? There hasn't been huge currency fluctuations either.

Average Eurozone industrial wages:
Ireland: €45k
France: €37k
Germany: €37.5k
Greece: €27.5
Spain: €33k
Portugal: €22
Italy: €32k

Eurozone minimum wages:

Ireland: €8.65
France: €9 - due to a shorter working week
Germany: €8.40
Greece: €4.27
Spain: €4.26
Portugal: €2.02
Netherlands: €8.07

So, Ireland not really in line with other Eurozone countries. A few close on minimum wage fronts, but our average industrial wage is still a bit off. Coming down though.

dlofnep

hardybuck wrote: »

Ireland: €45k

How exactly do they calculate this? I don't know anyone in a standard industrial job that is earning €45k a year. Most average wages seem to be around 25k. It's a load of bollocks.

hardybuck

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

Any chance you can back this horse**** up with any evidence? You seem to forget that Kilkenny Wexford and Clonmel also have IDA industrial parks. Every bog arse town in Ireland has some form of Industrial estate.The same towns also have sattelite college campuses from Limerick,Carlow and NUI Maynooth. The History of Waterford is having its industry and educational facilities being assett stripped by gombeen politicians in all political parties to serve their own constituencies. [URL="http://"][/URL]

To be honest I couldn't be bothered spending time checking exact dates of when the various industrial parks were founded, but in Clonmel's case - who I made no reference to - their expansion has been far more recent. I might give you the precious detail you crave in the near future if I get the time.

Waterford got the regional third level college and hospitals when Kilkenny and Wexford received smaller hospitals and satellite college campuses which are about the size of primary schools. So I presume the evidence I'd back it up with is located in bricks and morter on both the Cork and Dunmore Roads respectively if you want to go check out my facts there...

hardybuck

dlofnep wrote: »

How exactly do they calculate this? I don't know anyone in a standard industrial job that is earning €45k a year. Most average wages seem to be around 25k. It's a load of bollocks.

I sourced these figures from the OECD. It is an average wage across all industries. Carpenters, teachers, doctors, shop workers - you get the drift. The average weekly working hours are factored in also, Ireland has a longer week than France for example. Average industrial wage might be misleading actually - average national wage is probably clearer.

The Ireland figure is actually slightly over that but I've rounded it down. Apparently there is a new figure due shortly which will bring it right up to date, I think it'll be closer to €40k than €45, but then the other countries will have come down slightly also.

letsbet

hardybuck wrote: »

If you look at PAGE 2 of that report you will hopefully be able to read that pie chart which shows a regional analysis of unemployment. You can hopefully read that the South East has a marginally lower slice of the unemployment pie than the South West, Border and far less than the Dublin region. If you actually read my comment you'll see I made no mention of the Mid West of Mid East regions.

If you flick to PAGE 9 of that report you will again hopefully be able to read that in August 2010 the South East had 38,802 persons on the Live Register, and in August 2011 had 38,670. They've even done the math for you - thats a reduction of 63 persons.

Enough evidence for you chief?

The above two points really make no statistical sense at all.
1. The pie chart doesn't show the unemployment rate and thus the fact that Waterford has a lower slice of the pie doesn't mean it has less unemployment than other regions with a higher slice of the pie unless the population in those other areas are the same or smaller. You've tried to suggest that we're far behind Dublin but I'd imagine their population is more than twice ours so our 13% contribution to the total is more significant than their 24%.

2. The fact that there is 63 less people on the live resister doesn't mean that the unemployment rate went down though. If a few hundred people emigrated then the unemployment rate is actually up. Similalry, there's probably quite a few who have come off the live register because their entitlements have lapsed or they've taken up courses. Either way to look at the number of people on the live resiter in an area as opposed to the percentage makes little sense. If a million people emigrated from Ireland our live register figures would fall dramatically but it'd hardly be a success story.

Also the figure you've quoted of 38,670 is only for males. The female figure increased slightly and the overall figure is down a bit to 60,790 - but that's a smaller issue. Also if they did the math for us and took 38,670 from 38,802 they wouldn't get a reduction of 63 as the 63 is the monthly change whereas those two figures are year-on-year comparisons.

At any rate, even without live register figures it's easy to see that the south east has probably been the worst hit region. Either way, The annual increase in the live register in the south east was the second highest of all regions (731 people or 1.2%). Imagine what it's going to be like in a couple of months (Genzyme's good news more than cancelled out by Talk Talk's disaster and we'll have an enormous year-on-year increase from say November to November).

hardybuck

letsbet wrote: »

The above two points really make no statistical sense at all.
1. The pie chart doesn't show the unemployment rate and thus the fact that Waterford has a lower slice of the pie doesn't mean it has less unemployment than other regions with a higher slice of the pie unless the population in those other areas are the same or smaller. You've tried to suggest that we're far behind Dublin but I'd imagine their population is more than twice ours so our 13% contribution to the total is more significant than their 24%.

2. The fact that there is 63 less people on the live resister doesn't mean that the unemployment rate went down though. If a few hundred people emigrated then the unemployment rate is actually up. Similalry, there's probably quite a few who have come off the live register because their entitlements have lapsed or they've taken up courses. Either way to look at the number of people on the live resiter in an area as opposed to the percentage makes little sense. If a million people emigrated from Ireland our live register figures would fall dramatically but it'd hardly be a success story.

Also the figure you've quoted of 38,670 is only for males. The female figure increased slightly and the overall figure is down a bit to 60,790 - but that's a smaller issue. Also if they did the math for us and took 38,670 from 38,802 they wouldn't get a reduction of 63 as the 63 is the monthly change whereas those two figures are year-on-year comparisons.

At any rate, even without live register figures it's easy to see that the south east has probably been the worst hit region.

You're absolutely correct about point 2 there - I've been looking into a screen too long today. Slap on the wrist for me there. The yearly comparison shows we have 132 less men on the dole, but the female figure has risen in the past year to bring us up to over the 2010 figure.

I'd also agree about the Live Register not being a true reflection of unemployment, but in the absence of a jobless figure it is all we can reference for the moment. However, as a resident taxpayer, I'm fairly interested in lowering this figure. Harsh reality is that we have literally hundreds of thousands of excess craft and trades people - we need them to re-skill or emigrate. Those are the only two options for them.

On point 1 though, you are making assumptions on population - I won't.

letsbet

That's fair enough. I'm not really making assumptions on population though, I'm just saying that your post ignored the population and that the slice of the pie doesn't necessairly equate to lower or higher unemployment (rates). The emigration this is a tough one - on a macro level it's easy to see that lots of people emigrating will reduce our over supply of labour in certain areas but nobody wants it to be their loved ones (I for one don't look forward to seeing some of my own family possibly emigrate) and it also in many cases means losing people who have been funded at great expense through college in this country who may never come back and work here if and when we need them. Being harsh about it I suppose it's more of a loss if the person in question is a doctor rather than an unskilled worker (from a cold-hearted economic point of view at least).