Well written but don't get the point of your rant. Complainer was saying that the point of the strike was that the public sector wouldn't take anymore cuts. You seem to be suggesting that you would accept cuts but they have to be done fairly. I am simply trying to understand why you were striking. Its a simple question that neither you nor complainer has answered. Was it a simple protest strike against the Government or were you trying to achieve something?
It was to make it clear to the Government that the Public Service wasn't a handy piggy bank for them to come to every time they need money. Most of us looked on it as a strategic action which would hopefully make them think carefully about implementing cuts fairly not just in this, but in the next budget.
Complainer was saying that the point of the strike was that the public sector wouldn't take anymore cuts. You seem to be suggesting that you would accept cuts but they have to be done fairly. I am simply trying to understand why you were striking.
....but again there is a perception that if people take a cut this year without protest, it will be the same this time next year.
I don't know if the strike will make any difference myself, but I can understand why people are protesting.
That was how I took the majority of views. Yes there will be cuts, but to make the point that you won't be an easy target and to force their hand into a more sustainable means of achieving cuts rather than just dipping into pay everytime they get the economy wrong.
I couldn't agree more with this stance, I'd feel the same.
I don't think that was the message the union leaders were giving in the build up and so this got lost on the majority of people. Look at the ICTU plans and other statements, it was all about not touching pay or numbers and taxing the "well off". It may have been a bluff and all huff and puff, but that's what was being put into the mainstream media.
That was how I took the majority of views. Yes there will be cuts, but to make the point that you won't be an easy target and to force their hand into a more sustainable means of achieving cuts rather than just dipping into pay everytime they get the economy wrong.
I couldn't agree more with this stance, I'd feel the same.
I don't think that was the message the union leaders were giving in the build up and so this got lost on the majority of people. Look at the ICTU plans and other statements, it was all about not touching pay or numbers and taxing the "well off". It may have been a bluff and all huff and puff, but that's what was being put into the mainstream media.
`I agree. The PR wasn't the best. Or maybe it was the old thing of 'we'll ask for €10 and maybe we'll get €5.' But nobody I know went on strike in the belief that this would mean no cuts. It was about ensuring we wouldn't be seen as a passive, easy touch in every budget between now and God knows when.
The frustating part is, if the government had put together some sort for plan at the start for cuts in pay and numbers over 3-5 years, once there was nothing too severe a majority of PS workers may have signed up for it. I'm sure this would have given a positive signal to the ECB and possibly had a good reaction for our credit rating.
I couldn't agree more with this stance, I'd feel the same.
I agree.
I agree.
`
I aggree.
I may be wrong, but doesn't such a plan have to either be announced as part of the budget or at least through the Dail process first? I'm not entirely sure the government was in a position to give any plan so far in advance of the budget.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?