Unsunny South East

fiachr_a

What are people's view on this piece?

http://www.irishtimes.com/life-and-style/the-unsunny-southeast-1.1823420?page=1

looksee

Er, right, so you have quoted half the content of the Irish Times, what aspect of it do you wish to discuss?

mike65

Ah well at least someone in Dublin bothered their arse to drive down and have a look.

lertsnim

I thought it was spot on.

Finnbar01

Doesn't Galway have a more favourable business rate than Waterford?

old gregg

Dunno, I've always seen Waterford as a potentially really cool place ruined by apathy. The Times article does little to lighten the buzz for those of us living here and striving to make it a brighter place. A load of **** really.

wellboytoo

old gregg wrote: »

Dunno, I've always seen Waterford as a potentially really cool place ruined by apathy. The Times article does little to lighten the buzz for those of us living here and striving to make it a brighter place. A load of **** really.

Surely a **** has a happy ending?

old gregg

wellboytoo wrote: »

Surely a **** has a happy ending?

depends on lube

mike65

Finnbar01 wrote: »

Doesn't Galway have a more favourable business rate than Waterford?

There is an analytical paper to be written about the divergent paths of the two cities since the early 80s but I'll let a better person than me get on with it.

dzilla

Theres been a few articles written like that. Everyobe knows waterfors is in trouble so not much of a shock reading it.

mike65

Waterford is on RTE radio right now.

Meh, Waterford would be better served if it had someone more thrusting in the RTE rabbit hutch. A very milky report.

Max Powers

no revelations in it; IDA ignoring us for decades and even more so now, govt inaction, lack of uni, etc etc. it fairly kills the militant union myth. All that highlighted accompanied by notable good work done by council to improve attractiveness of quays, VT, new street gardens etc. I thought comments by some in it about people being too negative have a grain of truth too.

Digital Society

Max Powers wrote: »

no revelations in it; IDA ignoring us for decades and even more so now, govt inaction, lack of uni, etc etc. it fairly kills the militant union myth. All that highlighted accompanied by notable good work done by council to improve attractiveness of quays, VT, new street gardens etc. I thought comments by some in it about people being too negative have a grain of truth too.

No smoke without fire.

Its not like people are making up stuff to give out about. Their giving out about the truth.

E.g Everything mentioned here.

Big dirty vicious circle.

TheVandal

It's easy for slap heads like the author to drive down from his ivory tower and spout his opinion; thing is though, I don't really see much substance to his story. It's sensationalised, centre-field drivel for the middle class Dubletts to swallow and feel mildly saddened for us suffering, blaa eating culchies, so that they can feel mildly good about feeling bad for someone else for a while.


Fight apathy! Or don't. whatever.

fricatus

TheVandal wrote: »

It's easy for slap heads like the author to drive down from his ivory tower and spout his opinion; thing is though, I don't really see much substance to his story. It's sensationalised, centre-field drivel for the middle class Dubletts to swallow and feel mildly saddened for us suffering, blaa eating culchies, so that they can feel mildly good about feeling bad for someone else for a while.

Just so you know, the author was Kathy Sheridan (a woman).

How is it "sensationalised"? I thought it was quite sober.

The only thing I took issue with is this nonsense about the M9 being like a "private road" compared to other motorways. This is a load of nonsense. The M9 traffic count at Danesfort for example is about 11,000 per day, which is similar to the level on the M7 at Borris-in-Ossory or the M8 at Thurles. The earlier bit of the M7 is only busier because it's in the Dublin commuter belt. This myth of the M9 being quieter than all the other motorways comes from the whole "sure why would you build a motorway down there?" objections when Martin Cullen was in office, and has turned into something of a media cliché - in the Irish Times office particularly. Frank McDonald trotted it out a few months ago.

smalltalk

fricatus wrote: »

Just so you know, the author was Kathy Sheridan (a woman).

How is it "sensationalised"? I thought it was quite sober.

The only thing I took issue with is this nonsense about the M9 being like a "private road" compared to other motorways. This is a load of nonsense. The M9 traffic count at Danesfort for example is about 11,000 per day, which is similar to the level on the M7 at Borris-in-Ossory or the M8 at Thurles. The earlier bit of the M7 is only busier because it's in the Dublin commuter belt. This myth of the M9 being quieter than all the other motorways comes from the whole "sure why would you build a motorway down there?" objections when Martin Cullen was in office, and has turned into something of a media cliché - in the Irish Times office particularly. Frank McDonald trotted it out a few months ago.

That nonsense is very similar to the "Militant Waterford workers" Myth,when was the last strike in Waterford?It seems to me that there have been more strikes in Dublin in the last year then there has in Waterford in ten years.I cant back this up with figures but thats the impression thats given about Waterford every time the media trots that rubbish out

Brick Session

smalltalk wrote: »

That nonsense is very similar to the "Militant Waterford workers" Myth,when was the last strike in Waterford?It seems to me that there have been more strikes in Dublin in the last year then there has in Waterford in ten years.I cant back this up with figures but thats the impression thats given about Waterford every time the media trots that rubbish out

I have worked for 2 large companies in the services industries over the last 10 years with HR departments based outside of Waterford and in both companies the opinion was and still is that Waterford is very Militant.

One in particular in the contract cleaning industry with offices in all cities and it was the opinion that one particular union in Waterford was a complete anti company union and worked against the company at every turn. However, it was found that working with a more prominent union in all other locations was not as difficult as dealing with Waterford.

smalltalk

Brick Session wrote: »

I have worked for 2 large companies in the services industries over the last 10 years with HR departments based outside of Waterford and in both companies the opinion was and still is that Waterford is very Militant.

One in particular in the contract cleaning industry with offices in all cities and it was the opinion that one particular union in Waterford was a complete anti company union and worked against the company at every turn. However, it was found that working with a more prominent union in all other locations was not as difficult as dealing with Waterford.

It would be interesting to know if the HR departments already had it in their minds that Waterford workers were militant before they started dealing with them.
On the other hand I worked for fifteen years in a large multinational in Waterford which at one stage had nearly 2000 employees and I cannot remember one day in that fifteen years that was lost to industrial action.In the 30 odd years that the plant is operating in Waterford I think that there was one maybe two short stoppages and there are a few other plants in Waterford that have similar if not better records.The media don't want to know about these places when they can dig up an "auld striking docker" or two and trot out the old militant rubbish and they definitely don't see the work that goes on between unions and employers over years to keep jobs and facilitate changes in industries in Waterford.
I can Imagine the scene in Big Contract Cleaners inc HQ when Fiona (20 HR specialist) deducted the price of a lost mop head from Mary (48 cleaner)wages and Mary got stroppy oh those Waterford militants can be very difficult sometimes

Chiparus

There is no doubt that Waterford is more militant.

fuzzy dunlop

Chiparus wrote: »

There is no doubt that Waterford is more militant.

This nonsense has been discredited years ago. Its based on something that happened thirty odd years ago at a time when strikes were commonplace everywhere. You will find there is no hard evidence to back it up.

fuzzy dunlop

smalltalk wrote: »

It would be interesting to know if the HR departments already had it in their minds that Waterford workers were militant before they started dealing with them.
On the other hand I worked for fifteen years in a large multinational in Waterford which at one stage had nearly 2000 employees and I cannot remember one day in that fifteen years that was lost to industrial action.In the 30 odd years that the plant is operating in Waterford I think that there was one maybe two short stoppages and there are a few other plants in Waterford that have similar if not better records.The media don't want to know about these places when they can dig up an "auld striking docker" or two and trot out the old militant rubbish and they definitely don't see the work that goes on between unions and employers over years to keep jobs and facilitate changes in industries in Waterford.
I can Imagine the scene in Big Contract Cleaners inc HQ when Fiona (20 HR specialist) deducted the price of a lost mop head from Mary (48 cleaner)wages and Mary got stroppy oh those Waterford militants can be very difficult sometimes

Good post and as for HR departments they are more often than not next to useless. I worked in the largest manufacturing facility in Ireland with an extensive HR department and it was something of a convalescent home for people with "Burnout". They did not inspire anyones confidenence and I have seen this replicated on a smaller scale everywhere I worked. It is not to say none of them are professional. But most of them are frankly purveyors of buzz words they don't understand themselves half the time.

Chiparus

fuzzy dunlop wrote: »

This nonsense has been discredited years ago. Its based on something that happened thirty odd years ago at a time when strikes were commonplace everywhere. You will find there is no hard evidence to back it up.

No I work in Waterford and elsewhere, Waterford is more militant in my opinion and in the opinion of many people.

Ask a worker to do something in Waterford you get the "your not the boss of me" answer more than anywhere else.

fuzzy dunlop

Chiparus wrote: »

No I work in Waterford and elsewhere, Waterford is more militant in my opinion and in the opinion of many people.

Ask a worker to do something in Waterford you get the "your not the boss of me" answer more than anywhere else.

Well if you're not the boss of them then it's a fair cop. And anwhere I have worked has been the same. That is Waterford, Dublin, England, Europe and the States. Demonstrating authority you don't have is a no no anywhere.

sparkling sea

Chiparus wrote: »

No I work in Waterford and elsewhere, Waterford is more militant in my opinion and in the opinion of many people.

Ask a worker to do something in Waterford you get the "your not the boss of me" answer more than anywhere else.

Really? I would have agreed that this may have been the case historically but it was in the very distant past. The article posits that this image undeservable still lingers on - so sad, but if that is the reality then it really needs to be addressed. It is what it is, not point in arguing with reality.

Very few strikes in Waterford, people are much more aware of the value of actually having a job but perhaps perception is everything in the employment sector.

mike65

I think certain incidents stick in peoples minds - some gobdaw leaping on the bonnet of Bertie Aherns (or maybe Brian Cowens) car at WIT, the broken glass and arrests as workers got shirty and then sat in re redundancy pay at the Glass or was that Talk Talk?

Even the mass march two winters back re the WRH Cancer treatment facilities suggests people who are "difficult" even though the event was of course fully justified.

This stuff allied to the deep rooted folk memory of movers and shakers about Waterford as outlined in the article means the vibe hangs around like a bad smell.

Brick Session

sparkling sea wrote: »

Really? I would have agreed that this may have been the case historically but it was in the very distant past. The article posits that this image undeservable still lingers on - so sad, but if that is the reality then it really needs to be addressed. It is what it is, not point in arguing with reality.

Very few strikes in Waterford, people are much more aware of the value of actually having a job but perhaps perception is everything in the employment sector.

While there may be less public sympathy for strikes nowadays the unfortunate thing is that Waterford has the legacy and it does put companies off.

kayaksurfbum

Talking of unions, a guy in kerry told me today, "looks like the union are gona loose everyone their jobs in B+L" He said this just from what is reported in the news! And i have to agree with him.

The first headline was B+L seek cuts. The second headline is that talks with the union failed. The next headline will be B+L pulls out of waterford.

The union wont let them make the cuts and let the company stay.

This is giving waterford an even worse name.

fiachr_a

I heard several times over the years that back in the 1980s a bakery near the park in Waterford allowed in a union and the workers there eventually went on strike so the owner just closed up for good!

Silentcorner

I read that piece and thought it was rubbish. People have to understand that it is the media who are completely f**cked...this puts pressure on quality of content, this was an opinion piece without a single fact presented, how many people did she speak with, who were they, did she quote them all...it does mean however you need to fight that narrative, it can suck energy out of people...it can also allow apathy to develop, and that is where the real damage is done.

The fortunes of cities rise and fall, it is the nature of life in a city...Cork got a wallop during the 80s, Limerick is just coming out of a wallopping, Waterford may well be enduring one now, I will say this tho, the irony of it all is the The Irish Times that is on the way out...it has no future, narrative or no narrative that is a fact....Waterford will do what cities always do, recover and march on.

I spent a short time in Waterford recently, it has real potential, a good city centre...

fuzzy dunlop

kayaksurfbum wrote: »

Talking of unions, a guy in kerry told me today, "looks like the union are gona loose everyone their jobs in B+L" He said this just from what is reported in the news! And i have to agree with him.

The first headline was B+L seek cuts. The second headline is that talks with the union failed. The next headline will be B+L pulls out of waterford.

The union wont let them make the cuts and let the company stay.

This is giving waterford an even worse name.

A guy in Kerry told me something. Ah well that's it so. Case closed no more need for rationality or evidence based analysis. Especially that Waterford seems to be the only palce in the world that has unions:rolleyes: Talk about horse manure!

Chiparus

sparkling sea wrote: »

Really? I would have agreed that this may have been the case historically but it was in the very distant past. The article posits that this image undeservable still lingers on - so sad, but if that is the reality then it really needs to be addressed. It is what it is, not point in arguing with reality.

Very few strikes in Waterford, people are much more aware of the value of actually having a job but perhaps perception is everything in the employment sector.

Its not just strikes, a friend of the family bought a hotel in Waterford, had great plans but the hotel unions and difficulties with same made selling the whole site for a profit a much easier proposition.