Bad Bobs / Park Inn

wellboytoo

Bringthethunder wrote: »

Surprised by the amount of pro-Bank comments on this. People seem to forget it was only recently that we the tax payers bailed them out, is a little common courtesy towards workers a bit much to ask in return?

I don't think it's pro bank you're hearing it's the reality of commerce that is being spoken about.
In fairness it's probably the fact the banks are being spoken about as if they got something right for once that is so shocking to everyone .
I hear what your saying as regards the workers but labour law is so tight nowadays that There is no way of compromising in anyway.
The Banks actions are clearly defined pay everything or pay nothing! What would you do ?
In this case the staff were faster than the bank and will get a decision possibly sooner than normal because the bank were caught on the hop.

Wanderer2010

I fully support the workers in their attempts to get their redundancies and outstanding payments, its not nice at all for working families to be without no money but sadly I cant see the bank backing down and accepting a lower bid. Remember, the bank has a certain amount of risk to take in buying this premises and in this uncertain climate they are definitely not going to take a low offer and hedge their bets.

And unfortunately, while most people in Waterford will support the reason behind this sit-in, from an outside view, companies will just see a crowd of workers holding the bank to ransom and stirring the crowds via dramatic speeches with pro-union and anti-bank rhetoric all the while throwing their arms in the air for affect. Waterford already has a very, very bad reputation for union-loving workers steeped in entitlement and this sit in I fear will bring our cause back another while...I can see both arguments though so its difficult to see how this will be resolved.

cannonfoddr

I'm one of those who used to work in the Park Inn for the last 26 years.Suffice it to say the amount of inaccuracies in this thread I find unbelievable.Rather than get involved in slagging matches I would suggest anyone who wants to call up and have a chat with any of us as to the realities of our situation. It would be a real eyeopener trust me.

dzilla

Why dont you let us know your story and what the aim of your sit in is?

doublejj

best of luck to ben/chuck/ger/ and lads there...sound bunch,its my local and the amount of fundraisers these guys do for charity is unbelievable..

cannonfoddr

dzilla wrote: »

Why dont you let us know your story and what the aim of your sit in is?

Our aims are to firstly to get a reason as to why we weren't allowed to keep all or at least some of our jobs and secondly to secure our legal entitlements.I can't say much regarding details as discussion's are ongoing at the moment.

brian2614

cannonfoddr wrote: »

Our aims are to firstly to get a reason as to why we weren't allowed to keep all or at least some of our jobs and secondly to secure our legal entitlements.I can't say much regarding details as discussion's are ongoing at the moment.

I thought myself from the first day you were doing this sit in was to get what your entitled to,as in your redundancy package and anything else was owed to ya.Now it's turned into this "keep our jobs" scenario.If the bank don't want to accept the offer on the table that's there prerogative.I hope you get what your entitled to I really do but the more you talk in the press and on the radio about saving jobs to me sends out mixed signals about what your aims are.

mozattack

Dicky Pride wrote: »

There is a buyer lined up for the bar as far as I know and he would be unwise to let any of the staff go. .

Unwise to let any staff go?

Any buyer would be nuts to take the staff with them... it is a major problem for buyers and if the staff are any good they should reapply for the jobs and they will get them, if not, move on like the rest of those who lose their jobs.

Usually there would only be 1-2 members of staff needed for the new owner.

Baby4

This post has been deleted.

Tragamin2k2

dicky pride works for BOI ya heard it here first

Dicky Pride

mozattack wrote: »

Unwise to let any staff go?

Any buyer would be nuts to take the staff with them... it is a major problem for buyers and if the staff are any good they should reapply for the jobs and they will get them, if not, move on like the rest of those who lose their jobs.

Usually there would only be 1-2 members of staff needed for the new owner.

What I meant was, it would make sense to rehire some of them instead of a fresh start with new employees. That would play into the hands of paddy browns although that's probably next to go.

And yes, I'm a bank manager - So what?

brian2614

Baby4 wrote: »

It seems that although the workers were paid their final wages, they have not been given their P45s or any Redundancy paperwork (RP50). They will have a lot of difficulty in getting Social Welfare, etc until their P45s are issued. From what I have heard from one of their supporters- it seems that the company/owners are reluctant to issue P45s, as then they will be liable for redundancy payments also.

It may have turned into an 'Us Against 'the Man'' thing, but some of those men are entitled to substantial Redundancy payments, (which the government won't pay out until their P45s & RP50 forms are issued) so I can see why they would want to stage a sit-in.

So why are they quoted in the press saying the first "objective is to keep our jobs" and the same on the interview with newstalk.I don't think they know what they are doing to be honest.Yes the relative forms should have been sorted before the bank closed it 100%.I think myself even if the correct forms were given to the staff I think this "sit in" would have still went ahead cause it's clearly obvious that the staff aren't happy that the bank turned down an offer.Which tbh it's nothing got to do with them.They can do as they please with it.The Tweedys have a lot to answer to IMO so I think the staff would have been better having their "sit in" outside their houses.

sparkling sea

Are these guys still in the pub or was their paperwork sorted?