I am not fully conversant about this post as I do not know what grades are involved. There is an embargo on recruitment to the public service for years and the HSE is not recruiting. It uses the services of on-call agencies which is more costly than recruiting a fulltime person.One of the largest employers in the country, the HSE, sub-contracts certain services to employers who treat their employees in this fashion. No regular hours, no guaranteed hours, very little prior notice of being needed at work. The work isn't even seasonal as it involves covering for (apparently) unpredictable spikes in demand for services or sick leave. The HSE unions won't support the changing of these arrangements for non-members as it would mean addressing the incredibly high sick-leave rates of some of their members.
Aye, sure!The sick leave situation in the public service has been addressed under the Haddington Road Agreement and staff are on the receiving end of an austere programme which sees them on Half Pay and Nil Pay fast. I feel the unions have left their members down with such a programme.
Before I comment can you say what Indo report?Aye, sure!
I recall a recent report in the Indo showing sick leave as high as ever
Local authorities are failing to initiate any significant clampdown on absenteeism, despite workers taking an average of 11 sick days every year.
http://www.independent.ie/business/...staff-absent-for-11-days-a-year-31071993.html
Almost one-in-four councils have failed to put in place systems to monitor sickness rates among staff, despite high absenteeism rates which run at twice those of the private sector.
Here's 1 as an example
You mentioned the PS, not the HSE. Anyways, we're just taking this off topicThe Indo was talking about County Councils there. We were talking about sick leave in the HSE. Remember? I don't know what statistics the councils use.
Sorry, Delboy, you are correct I mentioned the PS. However, the only sick leave figures available to me are HSE staff. If you can source them you will see that the HSE has come to grips with the sick leave situation.You mentioned the PS, not the HSE. Anyways, we're just taking this off topic
I agree. It's a disgraceful practice and should have been consigned to history years ago.A huge shout out to Dunnes stores whose intransigence has brought the question of zero hours/low hours contracts front & centre .
It will lead to the institutionalised bullying of employers, particularly small employers, by the usual slew of self serving unions, so I disagree on that one.JoanBurton's undertaking that collective bargaining legislation is to be introduced by the summer is also good news.
What a grossly offensive comment. Some would, most wouldn't. Employers are no different from employees when it comes to morals and ethics; there are some bad but most are good.If Dunnes got away with what they had been offering it would only be a matter of (short) time before every employer in the country jumped on the bandwagon.
That's hardly surprising. Unions have a long history of complicity in the exploitation of the weak and vulnerable in order to promote the interests of their members.One of the largest employers in the country, the HSE, sub-contracts certain services to employers who treat their employees in this fashion. No regular hours, no guaranteed hours, very little prior notice of being needed at work. The work isn't even seasonal as it involves covering for (apparently) unpredictable spikes in demand for services or sick leave. The HSE unions won't support the changing of these arrangements for non-members as it would mean addressing the incredibly high sick-leave rates of some of their members.
That could apply to just about every state service provider.The HSE is being run for its employees not its clients.
Any group that uses its power or position to gain more power or position at the expense of others is engaged in exploitation. Unions sometimes do it, employers sometimes do it and sometimes even employees do it. The objective is balancing the power and interests of different groups. When Unions are too powerful then businesses are put out of business, non members are exploited and those employees who disagree with the union are treated without mercy. There is plenty of legislation to protect employees from their employer, and rightly so. There is little or no legislation to protect employers, or the population at large, from the actions of over zealous unions.I wish to point out the staff is not exploiting anybody and neither are the unions. Neither of these employs people. Anyway back to the subject afoot. . .
What a grossly offensive comment. Some would, most wouldn't. Employers are no different from employees when it comes to morals and ethics; there are some bad but most are good.
A rather naive statement from somebody as eloquent as Purple. Not only is it anti trades union it suggests that employers hold the high ground on morals and ethics. He concedes that some are bad and most are good i.e. sure some are bad, but sure you wouldn't mind that.
By far the biggest trades union in this country is IBEC. It is not called a union but it has harder clout and agenda than any hardened trades union; it is there to represent employers and use its might almost at will dictating what should and should not happen even where it has no members. Its main agenda is profit for its members who seem willing to pocket as much as they can from any situation. Dunnes senior management would be a good example of this kind of greed.
My point is that employers and employees are just people, no better or worse, no more ethical or un-ethical than each other.A rather naive statement from somebody as eloquent as Purple. Not only is it anti trades union it suggests that employers hold the high ground on morals and ethics. He concedes that some are bad and most are good i.e. sure some are bad, but sure you wouldn't mind that.
I agree that IBEC is a union (while, ironically, the ICTU isn’t). I disagree that they have much power as it is the Unions with the nuclear option of striking but I am no fan of theirs, in their capacity as a lobby group, either.By far the biggest trades union in this country is IBEC. It is not called a union but it has harder clout and agenda than any hardened trades union; it is there to represent employers and use its might almost at will dictating what should and should not happen even where it has no members. Its main agenda is profit for its members who seem willing to pocket as much as they can from any situation. Dunnes senior management would be a good example of this kind of greed.
IBEC has a licence to negotiate as a union and so it is one.Last, to go with your aside on ibec. If it is a trade union, how come under the new lobbying legislation its interactions with the government and civil service isn't protected and exempt like the "trade unions"? Its old FUE activities are trade union, but that's mostly its IR/HR service, the bulk of operations are individual sectors and policy. A social partner is not automatically a trade union and I think you imagine it has far more power than it actually does in determining policy.
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?