Dublin Bus strike from Sunday 04/08 [called off - service resumes 07/08]

StreetLight

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

Are these bus drivers getting paid while they are on strike ?

No, not by the company. A trade union pays striking workers approximately €40 per day.

wolfpawnat

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

Are these bus drivers getting paid while they are on strike ?

Nope. They keep saying over and over they have lost 3 days pay or this. If that was untrue DB would refute it immediatey.

SandyfordGuy

Cie is insured by the state rather than having ro pay commercial rafes

foggy_lad

Courtesy Flush wrote: »

Are these bus drivers getting paid while they are on strike ?

Good question but no they should not be getting paid by dublin bus and it is unlikely that the unions will be paying strike pay at this stage. Those with families can apply to the community welfare office of their local health centre for a subsistence allowance for their wife and children but no payment will be made for themselves.

Would anyone know if many staff went out on holidays on saturday evening?

cichlid child

wolfpawnat wrote: »

You know they will blame this strike. I live next to the luas. You can't park here for love nor money. There are also a load more bikes locked along the fence to it. How many people will realise this will suit them more from now on? More punctual service and can carry more passengers, DB are shooting themselves in the foot.

Dont think they will lose that many customers you said yourself there is no parking for them to drive and then hop on the luas and once we get back to winter the bikes will be locked in the shed again.

Courtesy Flush

StreetLight wrote: »

No, not by the company. A trade union pays striking workers approximately €40 per day.

Be interesting to see how long the union would continue to support this

Michael D Not Higgins

Polar101 wrote: »

I think someone will soon say something like "traffic wasn't any worse than usual", which is because those of us who take the bus haven't bought a car yet.

If that's the case what's the anecdotal traffic like on the roads? Loads of extra bikes/taxis? LUAS and DART packed to the brim? People working from home/taking annual leave because they can't get in?

Michael D Not Higgins

enda1 wrote: »

They really should get the army in to drive the buses. Have free travel too for the period.

How does that help the company? Who pays for the army? Who covers fuel costs? Who maintains the bus?

RoryMac

Clare2222 wrote: »

HELP! Hi Kindof on the same subject, does anyone know of any sites where you can ask for a lift to work please while the bus strike is on? I thought I had heard there were some but can't seem to find them on google. . I'm travelling from North Circular Road/Hanlons Corner area (or even phibsboro) to Glasnevin/Griffith avenue direction/not far from Met office area as a landmark. Any help is greatly appreciated! Many thanks.

Is there a reason not to walk?

It wouldn't take more than 30 - 35 mins

enda1

Michael D Not Higgins wrote: »

How does that help the company? Who pays for the army? Who covers fuel costs? Who maintains the bus?

The company?

The company is owned by the taxpayer and its primary purpose is to provide a public transport system. So it should endeavour to provide that.

They are saving money by not paying the drivers during the strike too.

There is a precedent too

spank_inferno

I do love everytime there is a public service dispute the bar-stoolers come on with cries of "get the army in!".

As if they are a floating reserve of free labour covering all skills just waiting to pounce.

enda1

spank_inferno wrote: »

I do love everytime there is a public service dispute the bar-stoolers come on with cries of "get the army in!".

As if they are a floating reserve of free labour covering all skills just waiting to pounce.

Bar-stoolers?

Driving heavy vehicles is actually one of the primary skills of the army, and as I stated, there's precedent. It is one of the primary purposes of the army too - to aid in cases of civil need.

StreetLight

enda1 wrote: »

There is a precedent too

A different era when not as much attention was paid to Health And Safety issues as today.
Not just anybody, including an Army member, can hop into a bus and start driving. In addition to initial and on-going training given by Dublin Bus in relation to customer service, issuing tickets, how to handle a bus when in motion, etc., a bus driver must also be in possession of a CPC (Certificate of Professional Competence), specific to bus driving, issued by the Road Safety Authority under regulation from the European Union.
This is a strict requirement.

Seanachai

I'm walking 6.5 k in about an hour , a lot of it uphill , it's bearable because it hasn't been raining so far but it'll be a different story if it does. Hopefully it won't go on for the entire week or I'll be looking at shin splints or getting a bike.

Polar101

enda1 wrote: »

Bar-stoolers?

Driving heavy vehicles is actually one of the primary skills of the army, and as I stated, there's precedent. It is one of the primary purposes of the army too - to aid in cases of civil need.

Wouldn't it make more sense to solve the dispute instead? Having the army drive buses is not really a solution from this planet.

Domenkidu

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what is stopping Dublin Bus in making these striking staff redundant and looking to replace them? surely if the company is losing so much money, there will come a time when they have to shut up shop and start again.

if the drivers are not happy, they should work elsewhere and stop holding the City to randsom.

That would be the Unfair Dismissals 1993 (Amendment) Act and its parent, the 1977 Unfair Dismissals act. The above would not be redundancy, it's dismissal. Redundancy requires one's position to be surplus to requirements. If there was ever any suggestion of the repeal of the Unfair Dismissals act, it should send shivers down the spine of workers from every sector. Whether or not one agrees with the strike it's amazing how many people are willing to suggest kicking out the capstone of employment rights legislation from the comfort of their keyboards.

Larbre34

Polar101 wrote: »

Wouldn't it make more sense to solve the dispute instead? Having the army drive buses is not really a solution from this planet.

Absolutely.

In the 1980's when the Army were called in to take over, they used their own vehicles, hardly ideal to ferry aul wans to the Post Office in a six tonne truck.

Then as now, if they tried to get the troops in to drive Dublin Bus fleet vehicles, they'd be burned out......

Michael D Not Higgins

enda1 wrote: »

The company?

The company is owned by the taxpayer and its primary purpose is to provide a public transport system. So it should endeavour to provide that.

They are saving money by not paying the drivers during the strike too.

There is a precedent too

The whole point of helping the company is so it can continue to provide the public transport services.

As mentioned before they wouldn't be able to drive the DB buses, so they'd have to use their own vehicles. Who pays for this? How does that resolve anything?

Agent Smith

end of the road wrote: »

because their a state run company who aren't entitled and rightly so not to deal with the unions, infact it should be illegal for any company not to recognise unions, and i wouldn't want to work for anyone who operates like Ryanair thanks, would rather no job

What if they don't want to be members of unions tho? I don't want to be.

Peppa Pig

Larbre34 wrote: »

Then as now, if they tried to get the troops in to drive Dublin Bus fleet vehicles, they'd be burned out......

By who?

StreetLight

Agent Smith wrote: »

What if they don't want to be members of unions tho? I don't want to be.

It is a condition of employment in Dublin Bus that all employees are a member of a recognised trade union.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

StreetLight

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Incorrect.

From Citizens Information: "It can be made a condition of employment that you must join a particular union upon accepting a job offer and remain in that union while you remain an employee in that job"

Link: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/industrial_relations_and_trade_unions/trade_unions.html

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Devilman40k

StreetLight wrote: »

Incorrect.

From Citizens Information: "It can be made a condition of employment that you must join a particular union upon accepting a job offer and remain in that union while you remain an employee in that job"

Link: http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment_rights_and_conditions/industrial_relations_and_trade_unions/trade_unions.html

You missed out this important piece

There is a view that this may not be constitutional, but this has not been tested in the courts yet. If you are already in the job without being a union member and are at a later stage required to join a union by your employer, you can refuse, as this is unconstitutional.

Michael D Not Higgins

Beat me to it Devilman

StreetLight

Having a certain view does not make the stipulation illegal.

Michael D Not Higgins

StreetLight wrote: »

Having a certain view does not make the stipulation illegal.

No, the courts will decide, but they haven't as no case has been brought about it. I'm sure it's easier to accept the status quo and hand over your union fees than take legal action, especially when the unions did so well for themselves during boom years.

LuckyLloyd

homerjay2005 wrote: »

what is stopping Dublin Bus in making these striking staff redundant and looking to replace them? surely if the company is losing so much money, there will come a time when they have to shut up shop and start again.

if the drivers are not happy, they should work elsewhere and stop holding the City to randsom.

Mad stuff Ted. Trust me that you wouldn't want a situation where they could dismiss workers taking Industrial action without legal consequences. Jobsbridge has proven that employers are still willing to use whatever legislative loophole that presents itself to exploit people. Even if you disagree with this strike or just plain dislike Unions, it is seriously short sighted to advocate the above.

ixoy

Question for Dublin Bus staff: We're told by a few that it's not just drivers on strike but clerical staff, engineers, etc.

Would these other staff all be part of the NRBU/SIPTU anyway and thus be forced to go on strike regardless because the bulk of the vote was taken by drivers? Did they have a choice if the driver vote pushed the whole thing towards strike action? Or are all drivers in the NRBU and everyone else in SIPTU?