I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses!

[Lollix]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

It can be all too easy to have a view of unions as sterotypical defenders of idiotic demarcation, but the reality is often quite different.
National wage rounds over the years were negotiated by unions, and those of who worked in non-unionised businesses were happy enough to take the increases that were established by the trade union process.
In the case of the lower paid in service industries, union representation helps to avoid the use of slave labour. Anyone who has read Hsiao-Hung Pai's book "Chinese Whispers" will be aware of the exploitation of non unionised workers in the supply chain of some of the larger British supermarket operators. Thankfully, apart from some small issues in the mushroom business, we have not seen any of this abuse of people in Ireland so far, although the growth of these same supermarket multiples in Ireland is a cause for concern to anyone who wants to live in a just society. Where such abuses did happen in Ireland, it is only fair to say that it was the unions who highlighted it and sought redress for the victims.
Like many posters, I am no fan of the "not an inch" type of union bodies, but they serve a need and there are times when we all benefit. If we want to find scapegoats in the current climate, we need to look much higher up.

 

[rabbit]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

If we want to find scapegoats in the current climate, we need to look much higher up.

Its much more serious than finding scapegoats higher up, although the highly paid heads of unions do indeed have a lot to answer for. Our minimum wage is roughly one and a half times that of the UK, a G7 country....no wonder refugees are going across the border to buy groceries. Our costs are simply too high here. As I said earlier, for every three billion euro the governments spends this year - be it on public service, politicians, nurses, Gardai, teachers , social welfare, FAS , embassies, McAleese or whoever - the government is having to borrow one further billion euro.....we are borrowing 23 billion this year. We simply cannot afford to spend so much. The penny has not sunk with many public service mentality type people yet.....how long before the day comes when those we borrow of tell us SORRY...BUT no more MONEY...

​

 

[Lollix]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

The original question posed was whether the unions could be thanked for today's 1100+ job losses. The answer has to be that they are not to blame for the current crisis, although many of their members and the lower paid generally are certainly being asked to carry the can.
The crisis worldwide has resulted from an unregulated money market that ran riot with greed as its core value. In Ireland, this was compounded by planners and bankers who facilitated the huge oversupply of commercial and residential property, encouraged by politicians who were far too close to the construction industry. Remember Bertie Ahern's comments about people who urged caution? He advised them to go and commit suicide. What does he think now, cushioned as he is with a fat salary and a chauffer driven merc for life?
The unions may have played a small part in raising wage costs, but it was to a background of very high living costs related to overpriced housing.
I'm not an apologist for Trade Unions, and I may have differences with them from time to time, but there is no doubt that they are not to blame for this mess. If you want to find culprits, start with Ahern and the rest of the crowd who are linked with the "kid-glove" tribunals. Don't put all the blame on the people who had very little say in how this country was run for the last ten years. Ireland was run for the benefit of the few, same as now, and same as it will be when this mess is sorted. Those priveliged few not only won't end up in jail, but they won't be asked to take as much pain as the lower paid. Same as always.

 

[Complainer]

Re: Unions !

Rubbish. So what do you think is fair... no cuts??

I've already answered this question in my earlier posts, and just in case you missed it, my answer was not 'no cuts'. If you really are interested in my answer, feel free to go back and read my earlier posts. If you'd prefer to target one particular group of employees in an almost racist manner, keep on going...

 

[Caveat]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

I think unions prevaricate and procrastinate as a matter of course purely to justify their existence and salaries and rarely if ever act in the interest of 'the workers'. Largely they are an anachronism - unnecessary and often woefully informed and out of touch.

Heard a good one today - union rep (Louise O'Donnell maybe?) talking about public sector workers day of action in response to levy blah blah...

She actually said "contrary to the myth, most of these people are not well paid - a lot of them earn less than €60,000 PA"

Less then 60K? It's an absolute disgrace I tell you.

You would certainly never find any private sector worker earning less than 60K

 

[Complainer]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

You would certainly never find any private sector worker earning less than 60K

Another great example of criticising those on one side of debate for something they didn't say. Louise (not my favourite union official, it has to be said) didn't say this, so please don't exaggerate.

 

[dockingtrade]

Re: Unions !

I've already answered this question in my earlier posts, and just in case you missed it, my answer was not 'no cuts'. If you really are interested in my answer, feel free to go back and read my earlier posts. If you'd prefer to target one particular group of employees in an almost racist manner, keep on going...

I never targeted the ps workers. I was talking about the unions approach to this mess, so read my posts. My point was its the unions themselves causing the devide, by using the word DEVASTATION for a levy when 000s are losing thier jobs, thats is angering people, fair play to anyone in a job and who can keep a job. And your use of words like "spite" and "racism" are way out of order.

 

[Caveat]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

Louise (not my favourite union official, it has to be said) didn't say this, so please don't exaggerate.

No, of course she didn't say this and I never suggested that she did. I don't know where "exaggeration" comes into it.

She said what I quoted in my post.

'Less than 60K' is hardly poor - but she seemed to be using the figure to suggest that these people cannot afford the reduction in take home pay that the levy results in. My point is that many private sector workers are on less that 60K and they have taken hits in the form of redundancies, 3 or 4 day weeks, 10%+ reductions in salaries etc.

My interpretation of her comment was that we are supposed to feel empathy or sympathy for these people because they are on 'less than 60K' - or else why make the comment?

Or can you maybe hazard a guess as to the point of her example of the salary she quoted?

 

[Complainer]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

I never targeted the ps workers. I was talking about the unions approach to this mess, so read my posts.

Your opening sentence on this thread was "they are acting irresponsibly in not accepting that a cut in public sector pay" - if that's not targeting public sector workers, I don't know what is.

My point was its the unions themselves causing the devide, by using the word DEVASTATION for a levy when 000s are losing thier jobs, thats is angering people, fair play to anyone in a job and who can keep a job.

When I look at the official statements of the unions, I don't see any 'causing the divide'. I see many attempts to bring together public and private sector workers to ensure that those who can best afford to contribute to getting us out of the mess created by the bankers/builders/bowsies(FF) pay their fair share.
[broken link removed]
[broken link removed]
[broken link removed]

Today's Irish Times poll indicates that 41% of people believe the levy is unfair. It has to be changed.

And your use of words like "spite" and "racism" are way out of order.

Perception is reality. That's exactly how it feels to be a public servant over the last 3-6 months.

No, of course she didn't say this and I never suggested that she did. I don't know where "exaggeration" comes into it.

She said what I quoted in my post.

'Less than 60K' is hardly poor - but she seemed to be using the figure to suggest that these people cannot afford the reduction in take home pay that the levy results in. My point is that many private sector workers are on less that 60K and they have taken hits in the form of redundancies, 3 or 4 day weeks, 10%+ reductions in salaries etc.

My interpretation of her comment was that we are supposed to feel empathy or sympathy for these people because they are on 'less than 60K' - or else why make the comment?

Or can you maybe hazard a guess as to the point of her example of the salary she quoted?

No indeed, €60k is hardly poor, but yet again, that's not what she said. €60k isn't poor, but it isn't rich either. The issue is not really about how the 8% cut compares against those who have lost their jobs or are on short time. The issue is about how the 8% compares against those who are still working away quietly at the same or better salary than last year, keeping very quiet about it, and thanking Christ that they don't work in the public sector.

The public sector (as has been said ad nauseum by union leaders and others) is well prepared to pay its fair share. It is not prepared to pay an unfair share, as per the current proposal.

 

[jasconius]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

Strange how the last great bastion of unionism can put through a 2.5% increase on top of of average salaries of 70k ? before the unions agreed to disagree in Goverment Buildings.
Moreover they are exempt fom the Public Sector levy (even the Gardai could not duck that one), and all because of the unspoken threat of pulling the plug literally.
This, because of some paltry 5% shareholding which makes it exempt. And now we cannot get a price decrease for another 2 months !

 

[dockingtrade]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

complainer again you twist it to suit your point "they" refer to the union leaders. I agree the levy is unfair. All my post refer to the union leaders and my point is, again....If the unions accepted the cuts in pay are needed to be made, instead of a point blank "no" there would not have been an "unfair cut" across the board. If the union were doing their job they should have been negotiating a fair cut. All my posts refer to the union leaders not the workers.

 

[Purple]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses ! They have made this country seriously uncompetitive with their policies in many large companys and are directly responsible in many cases for 1000's of job losses over the last decade. Getting a little tired of it to be honest.

Yes. The current owners of SR Technics and the owners when it was Team Aer Lingus all tried to make the company competitive but the unions resisted their every move. When the same work can be done in France for 20% less the employees and their unions who resisted change and ignored what the market wanted have to take the blame.

 

[Complainer]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

If the unions accepted the cuts in pay are needed to be made, instead of a point blank "no" there would not have been an "unfair cut" across the board. If the union were doing their job they should have been negotiating a fair cut. All my posts refer to the union leaders not the workers.

It seems that your blaming the union leaders for the outcome of the negotiating process, when they held few cards in the negotiation. The levy was intentionally presented at the last minute by the Govt, knowing well what the unions would have no choice but to walk.

The unions accepted the need for cuts long before the talks, and long after.

 

[Purple]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

It seems that your blaming the union leaders for the outcome of the negotiating process, when they held few cards in the negotiation. The levy was intentionally presented at the last minute by the Govt, knowing well what the unions would have no choice but to walk.

Rubbish; the unions knew full well that pay cuts in some form or another were at the centre of the talks. They didn’t have the moral courage to stand up and be counted so instead they crawled away like craven dogs and let the government take the flak even though they knew well that cuts were necessary and unavoidable.

The unions accepted the need for cuts long before the talks, and long after.

Yes, but not for their members.

 

[dockingtrade]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

It seems that your blaming the union leaders for the outcome of the negotiating process.

yes, i believe the cut in whatever guise would have been fairer (still tough) if the unions accepted we need a pay cut, because then they can negotiate that cut.
Its easy for them to walk and convince their members their being attacked, they could have worked a bit harder for thier members. Someone on 15k pa, paying a pension levy is down the unions not the Govt, because they could have had some input into it.

 

[Complainer]

Re: I think it fair to say that the Unions can be thanked for todays 1100+ job losses

if the unions accepted we need a pay cut,

What is your basis for claiming that the unions didn't accept the need for a pay cut of some form?