Bus Eireann strike - services have resumed (Read first post)

end of the road

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

I for one hope BE don't bend to the unions demands

a deal will be reached eventually so put up with it

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

it will set a bad precedent for future negotiations for other semi-states/departments with unions.

rubbish

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

I think Ireland has gone far to long without a strike

so you want more strikes?

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

which to me indicates we have been bending to the unions demands for far too long.

no i'l think you'l find its as simple as the unions were happy with what they were getting, way different to "bending to the unions demands"

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Like others have said liquidate BE

and then i think you should be taxed more to pay for the drivers who will lose their jobs, you want BE liquidated so you should have to pay for the fallout, those who don't wish it to happen shouldn't have to be paying for the fallout, or even better keep the negotiations going until a deal is reached, grudgingly or not.

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

see how quickly the unions and workers will agree to these pay cut proposals, if they do

they definitely wouldn't if they did, and rightly so, negotiations are the best way forward

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

Yup but also irrelevant as Bus Eireann drivers are not contracted to work 30 hours a week or indeed 36 hours a week. So the relevance here is what exactly?

It's called an example.

SandyfordGuy

What is your connection with the industry

I see you continue to avoid the question but you could not know such things if you had none and people have a right to know

foggy_lad

cdebru wrote: »

What over inflated perks ?

How much is the Lunch allowance, what are the conditions for getting such an allowance ?
What is the mileage rate ? Do all drivers working in Edenderry live within a mile or 2 of Edenderry?


I expect specific examples of the over inflated perks, including rates and conditions for payment or I'll presume you are just talking the usual nonsense. thanking you and looking forward to your reply.

They get paid an inflated overtime rate, most private workers get time and a quarter after their 8 hours but bus Éireann staff get time and a half, they also get double time on Sundays and the meal allowance is €7 daily afaik when you are rostered on a route where there is no proper canteen available where you take your lunch.

As for the mileage allowances, many drivers will operate on routes in their own areas so will often be driving a bus to their own town and parking it there overnight then they or another driver will drive the bus the next morning from the regional depot/yard.

they get more uncertified sick leave than most private companies would ever tolerate(most allow some days but these would be unpaid or taken from the annual leave). there is also more annual leave for bus éireann workers than privates give.

Why do bus Éireann drivers and their unions feel their work is so much more valuable than that of private company drivers who are also union members??

runawaybishop

cdebru wrote: »

Yes ? did I say something that sounded not serious?

An across the board cut reduces everyones wages by the same percentage, cuts to just shift pay only affect those who work shifts. Surely I don't need to spell it out for you.

The guy that works more overtime gets paid more than someone that is scheduled for basic hours - despite working the same amount of time. Premium should be cut first, not basic pay packets.

cdebru

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

Although management would be at fault if such a situation was allowed to develop like that.

Scheduled hours that led regularly being worked week in week out should not be paid at overtime rates they should be paid at normal rates other than if they are non scheduled

When Dublin Bus had 4 day week drivers they were paid flat rate for overtime till they had done the normal 38 hours work that 5 day drivers did. I presume it would be similar in Bus Eireann.

Rostered overtime in BE is not were someone gets overtime but actually works less than an normal week. It is where there working hours are over the normal 38 hour week. so for example if they were working 9 hours a day for 5 days that is 45 hours a week they would be paid 7 hours overtime. As they have worked 7 hours over there contracted hours.

SandyfordGuy

My point exactly runawaybishop

Patser

foggy_lad wrote: »

We all know of people who live in say Edenderry and get the meal allowance because they are working the 120 and have to take their lunch out in the "shed" in Edenderry despite only being a mile or two from home, they also get mileage allowances for starting work away from the base which would presumably be the bus depot at Broadstone even though they could fall out of bed into the bus they drove home the day before to Edenderry. most routes are the same.

Just to shoot this nonsense down. None of those drivers would be entitled to a meal allowance. If you're on a roster that is from a satellite depot - Edenderry, Kells, Newbridge - for example, that depot becomes your home base, so there is no away from base payment. Meal allowance really only exists for expressway drivers who have to take their break far away from their base/locker/car.

The meal allowance is €7, paid to a minority of drivers and for those who say no-one else gets it, what are 'expenses' that many, many travelling sales or business men claim.

As for Edenderry lads getting home for lunch. That's always been an ideal situation for driver and company, get a roster down where you live. Typical day would be busy commuter run in in morning, another trip back out, long break with time to go home, trip back in and busy commuter service back out. Long day but broken by a break at home. Absolutely no special allowances on it though. So Foggy you're wrong here.

cdebru

runawaybishop wrote: »

The guy that works more overtime gets paid more than someone that is scheduled for basic hours - despite working the same amount of time. Premium should be cut first, not basic pay packets.

Honestly you have things backwards upside down and completely messed up.

No one gets overtime unless they work over the normal full week be that 36 for clerical or 38 hours for drivers. Premiums are paid for working Sundays, Bank Holidays and for working shifts. Clerical staff do not work Sundays or Bank Holidays nor do they work shifts. Cuts to those payments only affect those that work shifts leaving those that don't have to work shifts with their full pay.

Clerical staff can work overtime and they would be paid overtime for hours worked over and above the current 36 hours they are contracted for. Drivers can work overtime and they will only be paid overtime for hours worked over and above the 38 hours they are contracted for.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

so for example if they were working 9 hours a day for 5 days that is 45 hours a week they would be paid 7 hours overtime. As they have worked 7 hours over there contracted hours.

But if they are working a 45 hour week every week then they should be contracted for that time and paid it at normal rate since that is their normal week that they are working regularly. It is bad management if that is not already the case and a gross waste of resources by the company.

Overtime should be what happens in exceptional cases when extra work is needed than what someone is working on an average day of work. It being worked every day is a sign of gross inefficiency in the way the pay system and contracts are drawn up.

This would be losing the company money which they shouldn't be losing and leading to the workers getting paid more than they would be in any well run company in which if someone was working extra hours every day for their role continuously, they'd be contracted to do this.

However there is a very easy way BE can cut down on the amount of overtime being paid if it's paid for people working beyond 38 hours regardless if it's regular or not and this will hit the pockets much more than any cuts that are on the table. Can you think what it is?

devnull

Patser wrote: »

Meal allowance really only exists for expressway drivers who have to take their break far away from their base/locker/car.

Are they incapable of taking their lunch with them like drivers in other companies? Or is this forbidden?

runawaybishop

cdebru wrote: »

Honestly you have things backwards upside down and completely messed up.

No one gets overtime unless they work over the normal full week be that 36 for clerical or 38 hours for drivers. Premiums are paid for working Sundays, Bank Holidays and for working shifts. Clerical staff do not work Sundays or Bank Holidays nor do they work shifts. Cuts to those payments only affect those that work shifts leaving those that don't have to work shifts with their full pay.

Clerical staff can work overtime and they would be paid overtime for hours worked over and above the current 36 hours they are contracted for. Drivers can work overtime and they will only be paid overtime for hours worked over and above the 38 hours they are contracted for.

Hope that clarifies it for you.

It does, thank you.

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

No one gets overtime unless they work over the normal full week be that 36 for clerical or 38 hours for drivers.

A normal full week for someone should be the normal hours they work.

cdebru

Patser wrote: »

Just to shoot this nonsense down. None of those drivers would be entitled to a meal allowance. If you're on a roster that is from a satellite depot - Edenderry, Kells, Newbridge - for example, that depot becomes your home base, so there is no away from base payment. Meal allowance really only exists for expressway drivers who have to take their break far away from their base/locker/car.

The meal allowance is €7, paid to a minority of drivers and for those who say no-one else gets it, what are 'expenses' that many, many travelling sales or business men claim.

As for Edenderry lads getting home for lunch. That's always been an ideal situation for driver and company, get a roster down where you live. Typical day would be busy commuter run in in morning, another trip back out, long break with time to go home, trip back in and busy commuter service back out. Long day but broken by a break at home. Absolutely no special allowances on it though. So Foggy you're wrong here.

I thought as much, A lot of people running around here with half baked notions.

So it is 7 euro and only restricted to certain drivers in certain conditions, so you are not all dining in Patrick Guilbaud for lunch everday then ?

SandyfordGuy

Still avoiding my question

What is your connection with the industry.

The silence speaks volumes

the_syco

runawaybishop wrote: »

They were supposed to give 7 days notice the first time

Well, it's not like the Unions are above the law. Oh, wait...

Patser

devnull wrote: »

Are they incapable of taking their lunch with them like drivers in other companies? Or is this forbidden?

Not forbidden, they can if they want. However this is a long standing condition, if management want to change it they need to get agreement on it.

runawaybishop

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

Still avoiding my question

What is your connection with the industry.

The silence speaks volumes

I've used a bus before, why aren't you demanding that info from me? So what if they are involved, they are still allowed to have an opinion

devnull

Patser wrote: »

Not forbidden, they can if they want. However this is a long standing condition, if management want to change it they need to get agreement on it.

Whether it is long standing or not, such things are not sustainable in the current climate and some staff need to realise this, we are in a recession, though you'd never guess this.

Many people out there would be aghast that any such term happened in the boom times let alone now, and in a loss making company it certainly cannot be sustained, especially when it is a taxpayer funded one.

People are struggling to stay afloat in the recession and drivers still want to have lunches contributed to out of the tax of the public purse. That is greed in my book.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

But if they are working a 45 hour week every week then they should be contracted for that time and paid it at normal rate since that is their normal week that they are working regularly. It is bad management if that is not already the case and a gross waste of resources by the company.

Overtime should be what happens in exceptional cases when extra work is needed than what someone is working on an average day of work. It being worked every day is a sign of gross inefficiency in the way the pay system and contracts are drawn up.

This would be losing the company money which they shouldn't be losing and leading to the workers getting paid more than they would be in any well run company in which if someone was working extra hours every day for their role continuously, they'd be contracted to do this.

However there is a very easy way BE can cut down on the amount of overtime being paid if it's paid for people working beyond 38 hours regardless if it's regular or not and this will hit the pockets much more than any cuts that are on the table. Can you think what it is?

But it is a roster so they may not need the 45 hours from that driver every week his roster for next week might be a flat 38 or 42. Therefor you could be contracting him for hours you don't need, which would be a waste of resources. Also a lot of drivers in BE would be spare so it is not the same guy working 45 hours every week.

No unfortunately it is the nature of the work, it is not an office job were you can just send someone home at the same time everyday. Driving to various locations doesn't neatly fit into a 38 hour week.

Unfortunately most of you posting here have absolutely no idea of the complexity of rosters, and fitting them in with the work time directive etc etc.

cdebru

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

Still avoiding my question

What is your connection with the industry.

The silence speaks volumes

Learn to use the quote function and maybe the person you are directing the question to might answer you.

Otherwise it looks like a meandering rant you threw at the screen.

ArmaniJeanss

markpb wrote: »

I'm puzzled by this. How did the thousands of commuters from train-less areas like Navan get to work on Monday?

I know a few from Navan who carpooled as far as the nearest Dublin Bus stop (Dunboyne) and got the 70 bus whilst the car driver (non working wife) drove back to Navan.
Reverse trip in the evening.

Patser

devnull wrote: »

Whether it is long standing or not, such things are not sustainable in the current climate and some staff need to realise this, we are in a recession, though you'd never guess this.

Many people out there would be aghast that any such term happened in the boom times let alone now, and in a loss making company it certainly cannot be sustained, especially when it is a taxpayer funded one.

People are struggling to stay afloat in the recession and drivers still want to have lunches contributed to out of the tax of the public purse. That is greed in my book.

This term long precedes the boom. And as said can be lowered by agreement. You seem to prefer that management be free to cut anything and everything they want without any consulting of staff.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

Whether it is long standing or not, such things are not sustainable in the current climate and some staff need to realise this, we are in a recession, though you'd never guess this.

Many people out there would be aghast that any such term happened in the boom times let alone now, and in a loss making company it certainly cannot be sustained, especially when it is a taxpayer funded one.

People are struggling to stay afloat in the recession and drivers still want to have lunches contributed to out of the tax of the public purse. That is greed in my book.

Yeah 7 euro, if only we could get it back the trioka might not be here.

It is a 7 euro meal allowance for those who have to take their breaks away from a base where they could get a meal.
You would hard pressed to get a meal for 7 euro, and I would personally much prefer to know my driver had a proper meal during his working day.

listermint

Patser wrote: »

This term long precedes the boom. And as said can be lowered by agreement. You seem to prefer that management be free to cut anything and everything they want without any consulting of staff.

Boom or no Boom If something is not sustainable (that means a company cannot afford it or continue to operate) then it gets the chop.


Agreement ffs.....

cdebru

listermint wrote: »

Boom or no Boom If something is not sustainable (that means a company cannot afford it or continue to operate) then it gets the chop.


Agreement ffs.....

Yeah legal binding contracts what next?

Some of you would put William Martin Murphy to shame ffs....

Patser

listermint wrote: »

Agreement ffs.....

You've a problem with workers and management making n agreement all are ok with?

Your alternative being?

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

But it is a roster so they may not need the 45 hours from that driver every week his roster for next week might be a flat 38 or 42.

But earlier on you were saying some people were working overtime very regularly, so much so it would make them lose a lot of money if it was cut. If they would lose a lot of money they had to be working it regularly, therefore there is clearly money for the company to be saved by employing some drivers on contracts that are say 40-42 hours to save on paying overtime for what are scheduled hours.

Therefor you could be contracting him for hours you don't need, which would be a waste of resources. Also a lot of drivers in BE would be spare so it is not the same guy working 45 hours every week.

I did not talk about every driver, I talked about there being some drivers who could be brought on in with contracts that have extra hours. You assign such drivers to the duties where there is more likely to be the ones that need such extra hours (I'm sure they know where these are) and shift the other drivers on the 38 hour contracts to the routes where this is less likely required.

This can further be enhanced by instead of giving a driver a weekly hour to instead give them monthly hours, with models used from previous rotas to roughly predict how many hours would be required per month from a driver. Some companies in the private sector in other industries are even using annual hours and have reported huge gains in efficent working which has drove down overtime required and therefore salary bills without touching the base salary.

Driving to various locations doesn't neatly fit into a 38 hour week.

Exactly, but the current pay system that seems to think it does and counts anything else over that is overtime doesn't take that into account either since people are getting paid for overtime which isn't strictly overtime.

Unfortunately most of you posting here have absolutely no idea of the complexity of rosters, and fitting them in with the work time directive etc etc.

That is your opinion - however I may ask you what experience do you have of the above, since you claim everyone else is wrong, but are unable to say what experience you have to back up your ideas, but like to cast doubts on others.

It is not easy being in such situation and working out those things, that is without doubt but savings need to be made and the amount of overtime that is being paid both in hours and cash is not sustainable in the company. You claim it is not that high, but if it wasn't, a small cut to the rate wouldn't be resulting in lots of people moaning that they were going to lose a lot of money.

The majority of staff in a company frequently working hours beyond their contracted ones and largely depending on overtime and overly generous allowances and a small cut to overtime rates badly effecting pay rates of a lot of staff points to a pay and contracts system that is badly broken and in desperate need of a restructure from top to bottom, since it simply isn't working before or after the cuts, that much is obvious and it needs a complete overhaul from top to bottom as it's grossly inefficient.

listermint

cdebru wrote: »

Yeah legal binding contracts what next?

Some of you would put William Martin Murphy to shame ffs....

Patser wrote: »

You've a problem with workers and management making n agreement all are ok with?

Your alternative being?

This is how it goes and I have examples of the same in private enterprise

'Hi Guys you know that staff canteen we've had for the last 15 years'

'well unfortunately its costing us X to run in annually' 'We either ditch it or start sacking people' 'the alternate is everyone is let go and we shut down'


This is generally how it goes. See what you have there is called 'a perk' in private enterprise but some how youve managed to wrangle it into 'the norm'

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

It is a 7 euro meal allowance for those who have to take their breaks away from a base where they could get a meal.

Does the seven euro have magic power and suddenly makes a shop appear or their lunch magic itself in their hands?

It is their choice if they take a meal with them or not, if they don't want to don't moan about having to buy one.

It's something 90% of the population do every day in work. And the few that do have free meals in work tend to be A) not using taxpayer money and not losing money.

devnull

cdebru wrote: »

Yeah legal binding contracts what next?

Some of you would put William Martin Murphy to shame ffs....

Well I'd rather lose seven euro a day and have a job rather than to risk losing it over something so trivial.

daheff

Kumsheen wrote: »

Here is the article

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/varadkar-says-he-would-rather-another-bus-eireann-strike-than-a-poor-deal-29269519.html

Quote
"I would rather see us go back into a strike situation than have an agreement that doesn't deliver the necessary savings," he said.

He said there had to be a deal that "would stick".
Unquote

How much do BE save on a daily basis where there is a strike on (ie no fuel costs no wages overheads etc)? How long would it take to save the required amount for this year?

Its a trick thats been used a number of times to get the savings in....a strike saves money too ya know!! (but not for the workers)


actually just read this http://www.herald.ie/news/now-irish-rail-and-dublin-bus-staff-to-vote-on-strike-action-29269824.html
says the strike cost BE 200k a day for 2 days...

how is a company that could make 200k a day losing money over all???

SandyfordGuy

devnull wrote: »

But earlier on you were saying some people were working overtime very regularly, so much so it would make them lose a lot of money if it was cut. If they would lose a lot of money they had be working it regularly, therefore there is clearly money for the company to be saved by employing some drivers on contracts that are say 40-42 hours to save on paying overtime for what are scheduled hours.



I did not talk about every driver, I talked about there being some drivers who could be brought on in with contracts that have extra hours. You assign such drivers to the duties where there is more likely to be the ones that need such extra hours (I'm sure they know where these are) and shift the other drivers on the 38 hour contracts to the routes where this is less likely required.

This can further be enhanced by instead of giving a driver a weekly hour to instead give them monthly hours, with models used from previous rotas to roughly predict how many hours would be required per month from a driver. Some companies in the private sector in other industries are even using annual hours and have reported huge gains in efficent working which has drove down overtime required and therefore salary bills without touching the base salary.



Exactly, but the current pay system that seems to think it does and counts anything else over that is overtime doesn't take that into account either since people are getting paid for overtime which isn't strictly overtime.



That is your opinion - however I may ask you what experience do you have of the above, since you claim everyone else is wrong, but are unable to say what experience you have to back up your ideas, but like to cast doubts on others.

It is not easy being in such situation and working out those things, that is without doubt but savings need to be made and the amount of overtime that is being paid both in hours and cash is not sustainable in the company. You claim it is not that high, but if it wasn't, a small cut to the rate wouldn't be resulting in lots of people moaning that they were going to lose a lot of money.

The majority of staff in a company frequently working hours beyond their contracted ones and largely depending on overtime and overly generous allowances and a small cut to overtime rates badly effecting pay rates of a lot of staff points to a pay and contracts system that is badly broken and in desperate need of a restructure from top to bottom, since it simply isn't working before or after the cuts, that much is obvious and it needs a complete overhaul from top to bottom as it's grossly inefficient.

Totally agree with last paragraph the system is clearly failing everyone

bk

daheff wrote: »

how is a company that could make 200k a day losing money over all???

It isn't that they can make 200k a day, it is that even with a strike going, they still have many costs that have to be paid, while no revenue is coming in.

For instance electricity and security staff for all bus stations and depots. Insurance, management salaries (they aren't on strike), advertising, contract cleaners, etc.

Kumsheen

daheff wrote: »

How much do BE save on a daily basis where there is a strike on (ie no fuel costs no wages overheads etc)? How long would it take to save the required amount for this year?

Its a trick thats been used a number of times to get the savings in....a strike saves money too ya know!! (but not for the workers)


actually just read this http://www.herald.ie/news/now-irish-rail-and-dublin-bus-staff-to-vote-on-strike-action-29269824.html
says the strike cost BE 200k a day for 2 days...

how is a company that could make 200k a day losing money over all???

I didn't think of that but maybe you have a point. I suppose you have to weigh up all the bills that still need to be paid while the strike is on and fleet is grounded. Then compare it to the loss incurred during normal operations.

bk

According to the GoBE website, they are back to operating from Merchants Quay in Cork.

Victor

SandyfordGuy wrote: »

Your attack clearly shows that you have been around here in some other guise to make such comments.

If you have a problem with a post, report it.

Moderator

Daemonic

Has there been any news on when IE and DB will vote on the solidarity strike?

lilmissprincess

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/bus-éireann-services-to-operate-tomorrow-1.1394050

foggy_lad

Daemonic wrote: »

Has there been any news on when IE and DB will vote on the solidarity strike?

There will be at least 24 hours notice before the strike resumes, IE and DB siptu members will be voting tomorrow on solidarity strike action. Bus Éireann siptu members have already been balloted and their votes will be counted tomorrow.

http://www.thejournal.ie/bus-eireann-services-to-run-as-normal-tomorrow-910523-May2013/

Kumsheen

bk wrote: »

It isn't that they can make 200k a day, it is that even with a strike going, they still have many costs that have to be paid, while no revenue is coming in.

For instance electricity and security staff for all bus stations and depots. Insurance, management salaries (they aren't on strike), advertising, contract cleaners, etc.

Does anybody know what IE's annual losses are currently? Then we could work out a daily loss in normal operations and compare it to a grounded fleet on strike scenario.

errlloyd

I heard somewhere the DB have to give 7 days notice, true or false?

UCD exams might be cancelled if there is a strike, and I am slightly unprepared for Friday so they'd be giving me a dig-out.

Victor

bk wrote: »

It isn't that they can make 200k a day, it is that even with a strike going, they still have many costs that have to be paid, while no revenue is coming in.

For instance electricity and security staff for all bus stations and depots. Insurance, management salaries (they aren't on strike), advertising, contract cleaners, etc.

There is also the loss of goodwill from passengers, subsidy and advertising revenue.

Kumsheen

bk wrote: »

It isn't that they can make 200k a day, it is that even with a strike going, they still have many costs that have to be paid, while no revenue is coming in.

For instance electricity and security staff for all bus stations and depots. Insurance, management salaries (they aren't on strike), advertising, contract cleaners, etc.

Yeah, your probably right. The only figure i could find in an article mentioned a €20m loss so this works out at roughly €55K loss per day when everything is running normally.
Even though they are not using fuel or paying strikers salaries IE are probably still spending more than €55k a day during the strike on other expenses.

Does IE have to give back PSO subsides for the days it's not operating services?

Problem123456

errlloyd wrote: »

I heard somewhere the DB have to give 7 days notice, true or false?

UCD exams might be cancelled if there is a strike, and I am slightly unprepared for Friday so they'd be giving me a dig-out.

No they don't have to give any notice seen as they called the strike off for 48 hours

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

But earlier on you were saying some people were working overtime very regularly, so much so it would make them lose a lot of money if it was cut. If they would lose a lot of money they had to be working it regularly, therefore there is clearly money for the company to be saved by employing some drivers on contracts that are say 40-42 hours to save on paying overtime for what are scheduled hours.



I did not talk about every driver, I talked about there being some drivers who could be brought on in with contracts that have extra hours. You assign such drivers to the duties where there is more likely to be the ones that need such extra hours (I'm sure they know where these are) and shift the other drivers on the 38 hour contracts to the routes where this is less likely required.

This can further be enhanced by instead of giving a driver a weekly hour to instead give them monthly hours, with models used from previous rotas to roughly predict how many hours would be required per month from a driver. Some companies in the private sector in other industries are even using annual hours and have reported huge gains in efficent working which has drove down overtime required and therefore salary bills without touching the base salary.



Exactly, but the current pay system that seems to think it does and counts anything else over that is overtime doesn't take that into account either since people are getting paid for overtime which isn't strictly overtime.



That is your opinion - however I may ask you what experience do you have of the above, since you claim everyone else is wrong, but are unable to say what experience you have to back up your ideas, but like to cast doubts on others.

It is not easy being in such situation and working out those things, that is without doubt but savings need to be made and the amount of overtime that is being paid both in hours and cash is not sustainable in the company. You claim it is not that high, but if it wasn't, a small cut to the rate wouldn't be resulting in lots of people moaning that they were going to lose a lot of money.

The majority of staff in a company frequently working hours beyond their contracted ones and largely depending on overtime and overly generous allowances and a small cut to overtime rates badly effecting pay rates of a lot of staff points to a pay and contracts system that is badly broken and in desperate need of a restructure from top to bottom, since it simply isn't working before or after the cuts, that much is obvious and it needs a complete overhaul from top to bottom as it's grossly inefficient.

If you work over the normal contract hours that is overtime, doesn't matter how often.

Even if you contracted people for 45 hours you are still going to have to pay them for those hours, it would obviously be inherently unfair to have someone doing the same job one work 38 hours one works 45 and they get the same wage. It would also be inherently unfair if the driver contracted for 38 hours received overtime rates after 38 hours whilst the 45 hour contract guy would not get that rate till he had worked over 45 hours, so when they both worked 45 hours, the 38 hour contract driver would be substantially better off.

As hard as it is for you guys to get your head around this, transport work is not regular 9 to 5, it involves overtime sometimes overtime you the employee neither sought nor wanted. If you are driving from A to B and the bus breaks down or an accident closes the road for an hour or 2 you end up working overtime, it is the nature of the job.

cdebru

listermint wrote: »

This is how it goes and I have examples of the same in private enterprise

'Hi Guys you know that staff canteen we've had for the last 15 years'

'well unfortunately its costing us X to run in annually' 'We either ditch it or start sacking people' 'the alternate is everyone is let go and we shut down'


This is generally how it goes. See what you have there is called 'a perk' in private enterprise but some how youve managed to wrangle it into 'the norm'

A staff canteen is not part of your contract, is it ? wages are there in lies the difference.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

Does the seven euro have magic power and suddenly makes a shop appear or their lunch magic itself in their hands?

It is their choice if they take a meal with them or not, if they don't want to don't moan about having to buy one.

It's something 90% of the population do every day in work. And the few that do have free meals in work tend to be A) not using taxpayer money and not losing money.

And 90% of the population have somewhere to go and heat, eat said meal and wash their hands go to the toilet.

I presume the 7 euro is to compensate for the difference they are likely to have to pay for a meal, compared to what they would have to pay in a subsidised staff canteen.

cdebru

devnull wrote: »

Well I'd rather lose seven euro a day and have a job rather than to risk losing it over something so trivial.

You are presuming the labour court deal was rejected over that issue, it is highly unlikely that was the reason for rejection since a BE employee has informed us that the vast majority of BE staff do not receive that payment.

cdebru

errlloyd wrote: »

I heard somewhere the DB have to give 7 days notice, true or false?

UCD exams might be cancelled if there is a strike, and I am slightly unprepared for Friday so they'd be giving me a dig-out.

IF, DB staff voted for a sympathy strike and IF that was legal they would need to give 7 days notice.

If however BE went back on strike and BE employees placed pickets on DB depots and if DB staff refused to pass said pickets you would likely only find out on the day it happened.