9,400 Jobs to go and no Dail Discussion or campaign to save them.

CDfm

Here is something that is not being discussed in the Dail or made public at all.

Leading Economist predicts Agency Worker Directive will lead to Job losses and reduction in Competitiveness.
In a study of the impending E.U. Agency Worker Directive, Economist Jim Power has concluded that if the directive is transposed in its current form the flexibility of Irelands workforce will be damaged and the country’s competitiveness will be affected and up to 9400 jobs could be lost. In compiling the report Mr Power interviewed employers from the multinational and state sectors to assess the likely impact of the directive on employers and the economy as a whole. Identifying benefits of the agency worker model for both employers and agency workers Power commented “There are many reasons why certain employers engage staff through agencies but the overriding reason is the flexibility that it permits, the reality is that the jobs created offer convenient high quality employment for many workers in Ireland.
Ireland recently has seen increased competition from the U.K. for Foreign Direct Investment with lower corporate tax rates to compete with Ireland; our flexible educated workforce is our final trump card. The U.K. however have stolen a march on Ireland by introducing a 12 week qualifying period but the social partners have the opportunity to create a competitive advantage for Ireland by agreeing a longer qualifying period. It is difficult to see how the legislation has drafted in its pure form could possibly benefit employers, the agency workers themselves and the economy in general. The government needs to listen to the views expressed by employers on agency workers and apply the legislation in a more flexible manner with a derogation of up to 12 months and greater clarification of the issues involved” Power said.
Commenting on the report NRF president Colin Donnery said “ with the directive due to be introduced on December 5th, this report is further evidence that the government and social partners need to act quickly to agree a derogation and also ensure that the directive is not gold plated. This will ensure that existing jobs are protected and future job numbers enhanced.

http://www.nrf.ie/news.asp?p=press-release-awd-

What it is saying is that these jobs will go and it implies that the Social Partners are not agreeing with each other and making the decision.

When Talk Talk went in Waterford Enda got on the case , where is he now when he can make a difference ?

liammur

CDfm wrote: »

Here is something that is not being discussed in the Dail or made public at all.



What it is saying is that these jobs will go and it implies that the Social Partners are not agreeing with each other and making the decision.

When Talk Talk went in Waterford Enda got on the case , where is he now when he can make a difference ?

IDA seem untouchable and incredibly nobody appears to be questionning their strategy. What happens if MBNA can't find a buyer for their business in Leitrim? You'll have complete devastation. An intelligent 7 year old in primary school would see the madness behind it.

CDfm

liammur wrote: »

IDA seem untouchable and incredibly nobody appears to be questionning their strategy. What happens if MBNA can't find a buyer for their business in Leitrim? You'll have complete devastation. An intelligent 7 year old in primary school would see the madness behind it.

This is legislation affecting temps and seasonal workers and the idea that every job is sacred at the moment should be on everyones minds.

Yet almost 10,000 jobs going is not met with a wimper from a politician.

Reading between the lines

this report is further evidence that the government and social partners need to act quickly to agree a derogation and also ensure that the directive is not gold plated.

for social partners read trade unions

liammur

CDfm wrote: »

This is legislation affecting temps and seasonal workers and the idea that every job is sacred at the moment should be on everyones minds.

Yet almost 10,000 jobs going is not met with a wimper from a politician.

Reading between the lines


for social partners read trade unions

Dead right. Every job is important. Why no fuss over this ?

CDfm

liammur wrote: »

Dead right. Every job is important. Why no fuss over this ?

I do not know.

A guy I know was to price a job and would not touch it because the labour cost is potentially 30 to 50 % higher and more than the client will pay. For him the potential for loss is huge.

He believes that trade associations have lobbied David Begg & Richard Bruton on the issue.

Politicians are afraid of unions.

Its an EU directive that other countries get around in whole or in part.

Scofflaw

CDfm wrote: »

I do not know.

A guy I know was to price a job and would not touch it because the labour cost is potentially 30 to 50 % higher and more than the client will pay. For him the potential for loss is huge.

He believes that trade associations have lobbied David Begg & Richard Bruton on the issue.

Politicians are afraid of unions.

Its an EU directive that other countries get around in whole or in part.

There's certainly a lot of room for manoeuvre in the Directive, in the definition of "pay" and in the definition of "temporary", as well as in the amount of red tape involved in proving compliance on the part of the employers.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Jaysoose

Well we are relying on the biggest collection of spoofers and self interested politicians in the history of the state to actually come up with an effective jobs strategy.

The current goverment is easily the most inneffective bunch of nomarks we have ever had the mispleasure of running the show. Enda Kenny the career benchwarmer has got his 'Turn' at the top job through no skill of his own and was fortunate enough that cowen was before him. We also expect Eamon "trade unionist" gilmore to have the cahones to stand up to the 'social partners' when he himself is clearly biased towards them?

The croke park agreement is still in place protecting the public/civil service pay when we are gearing up to the mother of all budgets which will punish the very people expected to pull this country out of the black hole we have been steered into.

These jobs will be let go with the usual half assed attempt to look like they care and the IDA lads will put out a report saying this or that to look like they are actually working..pretty much like every quango in this sorry cluster**** of a goverment.

CDfm

Scofflaw wrote: »

There's certainly a lot of room for manoeuvre in the Directive, in the definition of "pay" and in the definition of "temporary", as well as in the amount of red tape involved in proving compliance on the part of the employers.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Maybe, but the reference to social partners in the press release means that no negotiation is taking place and it is being rushed thru the Dail without debate.

The NRF are implying that the worst elements are being implimented and that there is no such discussion.

Scofflaw

CDfm wrote: »

Maybe, but the reference to social partners in the press release means that no negotiation is taking place and it is being rushed thru the Dail without debate.

The NRF are implying that the worst elements are being implimented and that there is no such discussion.

After which, the EU will be blamed...

cordially,
Scofflaw

CDfm

Scofflaw wrote: »

After which, the EU will be blamed...

cordially,
Scofflaw

LOL ...bang on.

Its weird this one has not been picked up by the media.

opinion guy

Wait a minute what this this directive actually say ?
How will it lead to job losses ???
Croke Park agreement has no relevance to agency workers.

This thread needs some kind of context.

Dr Galen

Jaysoose wrote: »

Well we are relying on the biggest collection of spoofers and self interested politicians in the history of the state to actually come up with an effective jobs strategy.

The current goverment is easily the most inneffective bunch of nomarks we have ever had the mispleasure of running the show. Enda Kenny the career benchwarmer has got his 'Turn' at the top job through no skill of his own and was fortunate enough that cowen was before him. We also expect Eamon "trade unionist" gilmore to have the cahones to stand up to the 'social partners' when he himself is clearly biased towards them?

The croke park agreement is still in place protecting the public/civil service pay when we are gearing up to the mother of all budgets which will punish the very people expected to pull this country out of the black hole we have been steered into.

These jobs will be let go with the usual half assed attempt to look like they care and the IDA lads will put out a report saying this or that to look like they are actually working..pretty much like every quango in this sorry cluster**** of a goverment.

With all due respect, I'd suggest that you aren't too familiar with the Agency Workers Directive and the impact that it will have. Pretty much none of your post addresses anything to do with it.

it's going to be very very interesting to see how this is implemented, specifically with regards to the Health sector. Currently the Health Service is being propped up all across the board by the use of agency staff. The HSE recently implemented an across the board agreement for the supply of agency staff, which changed the terms that a lot of these guys were working under in a pretty big way. There was quite a bit of fanfare about this at the time, even though it was a pretty flawed process that in the long run will end up costing more, but either way, the AWD could throw that into disarray.

Scofflaw

opinion guy wrote: »

Wait a minute what this this directive actually say ?
How will it lead to job losses ???
Croke Park agreement has no relevance to agency workers.

This thread needs some kind of context.

The Directive will say that agency workers (temp workers hired from an agency) should be treated in principle on similar terms to permanent workers, in terms of pay and conditions, and after a suitable qualifying period.

Where the job losses come from is if you take the least flexible possible attitude to this, interpreting 'pay and conditions' in the broadest sense possible and 'suitable qualifying period' in the narrowest sense possible, then you can wind up in a situation where hiring temporary workers becomes as burdensome (from a business perspective) as hiring permanent workers.

Since there are many business opportunities which wouldn't be opportunities if it weren't possible to hire temporary workers, the more similar you make hiring agency workers to hiring permanent workers, the more of these business opportunities will simply not be taken up, because they're no longer opportunities to do anything except lose money. Those temporary jobs, then, simply don't happen - they're not replaced by permanent jobs.

From the perspective of a union, however, the use of temporary agency workers can be seen primarily as a threat to permanent and unionised workers, because there are some business situations where the two are interchangeable.

Tip the balance one way, and you have a situation in which employment of temporary workers is as flexible as possible to allow businesses to exploit short-term opportunities, and thereby create short-term employment - but also to use short-term agency workers to substitute in some circumstances for permanent workers. Tip the balance the other way, and it's no longer possible to exploit some of the short term opportunities and create short-term employment, but it's also not possible to use short-term agency workers to substitute in some circumstances for permanent workers.

The claim being made here is that the unions have weighed in heavily in favour of the latter approach, and that therefore the transposed Directive here will tend heavily in favour of inflexibility, and thereby, overall, cause a loss of employment opportunities. The Directive itself doesn't mandate the balance - it's up to the Member State transposing it to decide what's included in pay and conditions, to decide on how long the qualifying period is, and decide on how much red tape is involved in showing compliance for a business employing temporary workers.

cordially,
Scofflaw

CDfm

Dr Galen wrote: »

With all due respect, I'd suggest that you aren't too familiar with the Agency Workers Directive and the impact that it will have. Pretty much none of your post addresses anything to do with it.

it's going to be very very interesting to see how this is implemented, specifically with regards to the Health sector. Currently the Health Service is being propped up all across the board by the use of agency staff.

So the cost to the HSE will go up by gazzilions ,that goes up and other cuts are made elsewhere.


Why the secrecy , its like there is a news blackout, why can't you find it in newspapers or why hasn't George Hook covered it ?

Jaysoose

Dr Galen wrote: »

With all due respect, I'd suggest that you aren't too familiar with the Agency Workers Directive and the impact that it will have. Pretty much none of your post addresses anything to do with it.

Fair point i was just ranting as i still hadnt had my coffee...

BeeDI

CDfm wrote: »

Here is something that is not being discussed in the Dail or made public at all.



What it is saying is that these jobs will go and it implies that the Social Partners are not agreeing with each other and making the decision.

When Talk Talk went in Waterford Enda got on the case , where is he now when he can make a difference ?

So Jim Power says 9,400 job will go. That's it then. You can take it as read.
Jim Power of Friends First eh!!!
Jim Power that said all along that Ireland would have a soft landing at worst.
Jim Power of Friends First ........... remember their Superquinn property deal. The Corinthian Fund!!! Down nearly 70%.

Ah, but that was Ireland......... where the arse fell out of the bag.

The bright Jim, and his bright mates in FF, had another property fund, in a safer market, where they dont do collapse.
That was in Germany. The FF Oyster Fund. That's down a mere 64%!!!

Jim Power, who cannot get his mug off of the RTE screens, telling the nation how it should run its affairs.

Good man Jim.

Dr Galen

Jaysoose wrote: »

Fair point i was just ranting as i still hadnt had my coffee...

Ah no bother, without coffee I can be much the same.

Scofflaw pretty much nails it as an explanation though. We have to find the sweet spot with this, otherwise we'll have issues. There really isn't a black and white with this. While we need to protect the rights or agency and temp workers, we also need to allow for the flexibility that these types of workers give.

swordofislam

Jaysoose wrote: »

Well we are relying on the biggest collection of spoofers and self interested politicians in the history of the state to actually come up with an effective jobs strategy.

70 years of Fianna Failure and 6 months of Fine Gael but the traitor class affects surprise that the problems that its treason created are not solved.

It is hard to fix an economy that was looted for decades by the Fianna Fail traitor kleptocrats.

Scofflaw wrote: »

Since there are many business opportunities which wouldn't be opportunities if it weren't possible to hire temporary workers, the more similar you make hiring agency workers to hiring permanent workers, the more of these business opportunities will simply not be taken up, because they're no longer opportunities to do anything except lose money. Those temporary jobs, then, simply don't happen - they're not replaced by permanent jobs.

The claim is illogical and there is no evidence for it other than assertion from sources that are not merely not credible but dishonest:


Agencies can hire workers as permanent workers and provide their services to clients.
Some of the jobs for which agencies would be used will be created as permanent jobs.
Some of the jobs for which agencies would be used will be created as fixed term contract jobs.

In all cases above the jobs created will be more stable and the relevant workers will have more rights and be better paid. Of course there will be less room for the likes of Manpower, Grafton etc. other labour providing businesses might come along but not with the old 'slimy recruiter' model.

The reason that the argument put forward by the NRF is not being discussed in the Dail is simple.

Recruitment consultants have no credibilty because they are dishonest as a class and the business model is parasitic.
There lobbying organisation has no credibilty because recruitment consultants are dishonest as a class and the business model is parasitic.
Jim Power is a disgraced figure who will say anything for anyone even people like recruiters who are dishonest as a class.

Jim Power is simply saying what he is paid to say by the lobbying body for recruitment agents.

Dr Galen

So I take it you don't like recruitment companies then?

BeeDI

swordofislam wrote: »

70 years of Fianna Failure and 6 months of Fine Gael but the traitor class affects surprise that the problems that its treason created are not solved.

It is hard to fix an economy that was looted for decades by the Fianna Fail traitor kleptocrats.






The claim is illogical and there is no evidence for it other than assertion from sources that are not merely not credible but dishonest:


Agencies can hire workers as permanent workers and provide their services to clients.
Some of the jobs for which agencies would be used will be created as permanent jobs.
Some of the jobs for which agencies would be used will be created as fixed term contract jobs.

In all cases above the jobs created will be more stable and the relevant workers will have more rights and be better paid. Of course there will be less room for the likes of Manpower, Grafton etc. other labour providing businesses might come along but not with the old 'slimy recruiter' model.

The reason that the argument put forward by the NRF is not being discussed in the Dail is simple.

Recruitment consultants have no credibilty because they are dishonest as a class and the business model is parasitic.
There lobbying organisation has no credibilty because recruitment consultants are dishonest as a class and the business model is parasitic.
Jim Power is a disgraced figure who will say anything for anyone even people like recruiters who are dishonest as a class.

Jim Power is simply saying what he is paid to say by the lobbying body for recruitment agents.

Just proves the point .......... he has nothing of any substance or credibility to say for himself, so bleating some other go****es message, is teh only game in town for him.

Dob74

CDfm wrote: »

Here is something that is not being discussed in the Dail or made public at all.



What it is saying is that these jobs will go and it implies that the Social Partners are not agreeing with each other and making the decision.

When Talk Talk went in Waterford Enda got on the case , where is he now when he can make a difference ?

Some right wing economist think's this, it must be true.

CDfm

Dob74 wrote: »

Some right wing economist think's this, it must be true.

There must be a good reason not to release the info until Dec 5th - to be obscured by the budget on Dec 6th perhaps ?

Stheno

CDfm wrote: »

There must be a good reason not to release the info until Dec 5th - to be obscured by the budget on Dec 6th perhaps ?

This has been in the news a fair bit if it's a subject you are interested in, back in September, Richard Bruton was calling for a six month derogation period.

If you do a quick google on it, it's been in the news for over a year, and even on Citizens Information since February

opinion guy

CDfm wrote: »

So the cost to the HSE will go up by gazzilions ,that goes up and other cuts are made elsewhere.


Why the secrecy , its like there is a news blackout, why can't you find it in newspapers or why hasn't George Hook covered it ?

The HSE could cut their costs overnight if they hired sufficient full time staff to do the work, cover leave etc and then treated their staff like human beings instead of battery hens. They hire agency workers at a heavy premium purely for the reason that they can get rid of them at the drop of a hat. If they managed things right they would not need agency staff and would pay less over all.

CDfm

Stheno wrote: »

This has been in the news a fair bit if it's a subject you are interested in, back in September, Richard Bruton was calling for a six month derogation period.

If you do a quick google on it, it's been in the news for over a year, and even on Citizens Information since February

Richard Bruton is the Minister and its a bit odd that he is calling for a derogation when it is his decision.

It has been in the news because the legislation is pending and it has been legislated for in the UK.

The NRF imply that the derogation is being blocked by the unions.

CDfm

opinion guy wrote: »

The HSE could cut their costs overnight if they hired sufficient full time staff to do the work, cover leave etc and then treated their staff like human beings instead of battery hens. They hire agency workers at a heavy premium purely for the reason that they can get rid of them at the drop of a hat. If they managed things right they would not need agency staff and would pay less over all.

The health service is an area where some pundits claim we are not getting value for money and is hopelessly inefficient .

Do you have any figures to back up your statement.

EDIT -The thread is about jobs that will go as a result of this change and it will hit situations where a worker is hired and otherwise could not be afforded .

Despite it being commented on the decision is not being made by the Dail and I thought this was a feature of FF we were to see the back off.

Oh,deary me.

opinion guy

CDfm wrote: »

The health service is an area where some pundits claim we are not getting value for money and is hopelessly inefficient .

Do you have any figures to back up your statement.

Nope. But the well publicised sick leave of hse staff etc and the also well publicised Flight of the Doctors would not be occurring if the HSE were treating their staff right.

EDIT -The thread is about jobs that will go as a result of this change and it will hit situations where a worker is hired and otherwise could not be afforded .

Despite it being commented on the decision is not being made by the Dail and I thought this was a feature of FF we were to see the back off.

Oh,deary me.

Huh ? Not following this.

swordofislam

CDfm wrote: »

The health service is an area where some pundits claim we are not getting value for money and is hopelessly inefficient .

Do you have any figures to back up your statement.

EDIT -The thread is about jobs that will go as a result of this change and it will hit situations where a worker is hired and otherwise could not be afforded .

Despite it being commented on the decision is not being made by the Dail and I thought this was a feature of FF we were to see the back off.

Oh,deary me.

There is no evidence that any jobs will go.
The assertion is made by the representative body for organisations that make their money by providing 'agency staff'.
These organisations have a generally poor reputation for honesty.
The people who work in and own these organisations have a generally poor reputation for honesty.
The assertion is made by an economist who has a track record of being wrong in a way that benefits his paymasters.

The directive will improve the pay and conditions of all workers not just agency staff.

opinion guy wrote: »

Huh ? Not following this.

Not much to follow tbh. The initial post is based on a faulty premise

CDfm

I was with a guy the day I posted who normally took on circa 40 plus people this time of year.

This year he is not doing that and its down to the AWD.

I went to see him about a job for someone I know and needs one.

Thats 40 ,only 9360 to go .

swordofislam

CDfm wrote: »

I was with a guy the day I posted who normally took on circa 40 plus people this time of year.

This year he is not doing that and its down to the AWD.

I went to see him about a job for someone I know and needs one.

Thats 40 ,only 9360 to go .

The only difference between this year and every other year is the AWD. What is this guys line of work?

CDfm

swordofislam wrote: »

The only difference between this year and every other year is the AWD. What is this guys line of work?

I would rather not say the line of work only that it is seasonal.

Price wise he can't recover the cost of the proposals from his customers and that being the case he wont be doing it and there also is the risk to him if he takes the work on.

Its fairly simple really, a lot of the jobs that this will affect are not essential jobs either.