# People who don't realise how good they have it: ATC Vs DAA dispute.



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

Air traffic controllers refusing to cooperate with new technology a.k.a. looking for a 6% pay rise and for them to contribute to their own pension.

I know a few ATC and all of them that I know came into the job with their leaving cert only and got trained up by their employer. The Irish aviation authority.

Their conditions are excellent. If it's quiet on a night shift as long as their is sufficient cover the others can go to beddy byes on the couch until they're called.I'd love to be able to sleep at work when it got a bit quiet.

Once their 2 years training is done (18,969k a year while training) they earn twice the industrial wage as a basic and overtime + shift allowance can add another third onto this. They do a great job, but it is their job . We all do a great job, Well done everybody for doing a great job.

Their pension is fantastic but they still want more , more , more and they'll scream and scream and scream until they get it.
"The Controllers make no contribution to their own pensions. The Authority, meanwhile, pays a contribution of 30.5% of salary for every member of staff. 
Controllers are significantly well paid. They are not being asked to take a pay cut. "


A reality check is needed by the ATC and alot of other spoilt employees around the state. Yet again another example of public servants living in cuckoo land.


----------



## Firefly (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

For such a small number of people they have some power...


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Air traffic controllers refusing to cooperate with new technology a.k.a. looking for a 6% pay rise and for them to contribute to their own pension.
> 
> I know a few ATC and all of them that I know came into the job with their leaving cert only and got trained up by their employer. The Irish aviation authority.
> 
> ...


 
Yup I'm sure looking after the safety and integrity of every plane that enters Irish airspace is that comfortable and cushy. 

That has nothing to do with the current debates and action (which I don't support), but let's not paint ATC as in anyway a cushy number.

Unfortunately I don't know what the extent of the new technology is and how much of an impact it will have. My only knowledge is that it is a tried and tested technology in place in other ATCs, so in ordinary circumstances isn't such a problem. I don't know the circumstances under which the employees were instructed to use it and the circumstances underwhich they refused and were subsequently suspended.

The pay and conditions issue is separate to this action and is still in discussion IIRC with the LRC.


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

They don't take anyone with a leaving cert, train them up and put them in the ATC so lets not pretend it is some cushy number.

Having said that, there doesn't seem to be any logical reason for this strike. 

I work for a small subsidiary of a foreign financial institution. We are currently fighting for our future in this Country and had senior directors due to fly in this afternoon for a meeting. We had to cancel that and arrange a telephone conference. Just thy type of picture that we want to create when trying to convince people of the benefits of being in this Country.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> I work for a small subsidiary of a foreign financial institution. We are currently fighting for our future in this Country and had senior directors due to fly in this afternoon for a meeting. We had to cancel that and arrange a telephone conference. Just thy type of picture that we want to create when trying to convince people of the benefits of being in this Country.


 
I sympathise, but only the other week France had ATC strikes, not long ago Italy was at a standstill because of a baggage handlers strike. It's not a judgement on Ireland no matter how much the media assists in portraying it as such, it's a sign of the times.


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> I sympathise, but only the other week France had ATC strikes, not long ago Italy was at a standstill because of a baggage handlers strike. It's not a judgement on Ireland no matter how much the media assists in portraying it as such, it's a sign of the times.


 
It is a judgement on Ireland if we are to go down the same road as those Countries and have massive industrial unrest that closes down our airports with 24 hours notice especially since we are an Island. Ireland is in competition with other Countries just like any company has to compete and moves like this reflect very badly on us. France and Italy are large enough and important enough to get away with things that we can't.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> They don't take anyone with a leaving cert, train them up and put them in the ATC so lets not pretend it is some cushy number.
> 
> Having said that, there doesn't seem to be any logical reason for this strike.


 


Sunny, You are wrong. They do take people with just their leaving cert and they do train them up. Where are you getting your information from.

I suggest you go to the IAA web page


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/air-traffic-control-strike-likely-to-escalate-442670.html


> Mr Kavanagh said airports could not operate in an environment of uncertainty and he called on controllers to resume normal working practices, to drop a pay rise claim and to pay a contribution towards their pension.
> 
> “They are among the best-paid public servants in the country,” he said.
> 
> ...



Sounds like a cushy number to me!
Of course, these poor darlings must be _entitled_ to the money. The glorious Irish sense of entitlement flows all the way down from TDs.

I actually feel sorry for Ryanair. Michael O Leary must be mad to stay in this sad joke of a country.


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Sunny, You are wrong. They do take people with just their leaving cert and they do train them up. Where are you getting your information from.
> 
> I suggest you go to the IAA web page


 
Didn't say they didn't. I said they don't just take *anyone *with a leaving cert. There are numerous other tests and requirements before they would even consider you. Only a percentage of people have the natural skills and are capable of doing the job just like airline pilots, surgeons etc. Its not all about training.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/air-traffic-control-strike-likely-to-escalate-442670.html
> 
> 
> Sounds like a cushy number to me!
> ...


 
You're right, damn them all the work-shy feckers.

Oh except that when they do work it requires continuous holding of concentration for prolonged hours. You can't just answer an email or book a flight (joke!). So they are given greater time off because the mental effort of being responsible for every single aircraft that entires Irish Airspace is quite tough. 

But, yeah, lazy gits should be thankful they've got a job.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> You're right, damn them all the work-shy feckers.
> 
> Oh except that when they do work it requires continuous holding of concentration for prolonged hours. You can't just answer an email or book a flight (joke!). So they are given greater time off because the mental effort of being responsible for every single aircraft that entires Irish Airspace is quite tough.


Same applies for many thousands of people across the world. Many people have mission critical jobs where lives are often at risk. 



> But, yeah, lazy gits should be thankful they've got a job.


Well we agree on that.
Plenty of people on the dole right now would love their cushy number. If they don't like their massive wages and perks, simply hold the country to ransom. Nice.

I hate ireland more and more each day.


----------



## colin79ie (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Planes over Eire at 1140

http://www.radarvirtuel.com


----------



## bb12 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

jeese! how on earth could you call it a cushy number!! it's probably the most pressurised job possible...from what i've read there's a huge dropout/fail rate in the training process...would never like to take on that responsibility since one moment's lapse in concentration could result in hundreds of deaths and what would you all say then?!


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> would never like to take on that responsibility since one moment's lapse in concentration could result in hundreds of deaths and what would you all say then?!


I would say that it's a very badly designed system that has no failsafes.

As I said earlier, thousands of people across the world regularly do mission critical work where lives can be at stake. Of course, in Ireland you have to get half the year off and massive amounts of money to do this work.

The gulf between public and private widens each day. Do these people not realise that once all the business that rely on airports go bust, there will be no one to pay their inflated wages?


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> I would say that it's a very badly designed system that has no failsafes.
> 
> As I said earlier, thousands of people across the world regularly do mission critical work where lives can be at stake. Of course, in Ireland you have to get half the year off and massive amounts of money to do this work.


 
No ATC system in the world is 100% failsafe. None. They all require human monitoring and that monitoring is intense and critical. I'm sick of this yardstick of unemployment numbers as justification for everyone either being lazy, lucky, cushy, or whatever other form of uninformed envy we want to trot out. 

And what's your point regarding "thousands across the world"? Who and how is that relevant. The relevancy is the standards for other ATCs and all err on the side of caution and have ample rest days. 

But well done for buying the media hype. Even the fictional characters in Springfeild have more common sense and are less alarmist than the population here at the moment.

The terms and conditions have nothing whatsoever to do with this strike. It was very bad form of the employer to release those details in order to score points and even worse that the media went with those details. 



umop3p!sdn said:


> The gulf between public and private widens each day. Do these people not realise that once all the business that rely on airports go bust, there will be no one to pay their inflated wages?


 
Again, there are plenty of examples of unreasonable expectations of private sector workers and plenty of examples of how their selfishness has resulted in job losses and closures. 

We have to sort out the genuine business needs for reducing T&Cs and those that are just employers taking advantage of the current recession.


----------



## Firefly (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Mr Kavanagh said airports could not operate in an environment of uncertainty and he called on controllers to resume normal working practices, to drop a pay rise claim and to pay a contribution towards their pension.

“They are among the best-paid public servants in the country,” he said.

“On average, they cost the Irish Aviation Authority €160,000 each. Earnings for the top 10% of controllers in the country last year ranged from €170,000 to €230,000.

“They work 182 days a year, they have 137 rest days, and 36 days holidays – in addition to 10 public holidays


-- Based on this they earn 880 euro per day on average. Seems very high to me. What do their equivalents at other (far busier) airports get paid I wonder?


----------



## Purple (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

While the strike by air traffic controllers is completely unacceptable (they should not be allowed to strike under any circumstances, just like the police) I don’t think their actions are reason to have  a general pop at the public sector. I just don’t see the link.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> No ATC system in the world is 100% failsafe. None.


Doh!
I said no failsafes, not 100% safe!

Like in deadman's handle for trains - that sort of thing.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> Mr Kavanagh said...
> “They are among the best-paid public servants in the country,” he said.
> 
> “On average, they cost the Irish Aviation Authority €160,000 each. Earnings for the top 10% of controllers in the country last year ranged from €170,000 to €230,000.
> ...


 
One more time. The strike is because a number of staff refused to work with new technology, they were suspended without pay. The union claim the new equipment has a knock on impact on the overall pressure of the job. No I personally have reservations about this statement and if false, then the employer is within their rights to suspend employees who refuse to cooperate. However, the IAA haven't countered this statement, they haven't issued any notice on the equipment, not a single mention.

Instead they've muddied the waters by releasing the pay and conditions. All I can ask is that all reasonable people look past this. I agree that's good pay, I agree that's great conditions of employment. But that's irrelevant at this time.

Yes I think the union and employees are being unreasonable in their blanket rejection of the offer. But that's their right and the case is to be heard by the LRC. Their actions and response on the pay and conditions has gone done the established, legal, reasonable path that industrial disputes should. Save criticism or not for the LRC case and the response to that.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> Doh!
> I said no failsafes, not 100% safe!
> 
> Like in deadman's handle for trains - that sort of thing.


 
So when an ATC goes the loo, the failsafe kicks in and all flights are grounded or sent on another loop of the airport? Unfortunately, juggling everything from a glider to a jumbo that crosses Irish Airspace isn't condusive to such black and white non-human related failsafes.

There are plenty of failsafes in the system, but the issue with ATC is that they don't want to rely on technology to make the decisions and as the failsafes in ATC escalate to more and more manual/human control, even to pushing blocks of wood around on a table.

That's the point, no matter what you introduce the necessity of having a human interface (to speak to the pilots) and to be there in full concentration is essential to our safety when on a plane.


----------



## UFC (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I agree with everything *umop3p!sdn* is saying.

Many jobs require concentration throughout the day. Such as my own job.

Many jobs require continuous learning. Such as my own job.

It's called the normal working world.

What sickens me about this is they will probably get what they want.

This sort of nonsense is my main motivator for emigrating (in 6 months). Bye bye banana republic.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

We need an Irish version of Ronald Reagan.

Quote from August 3 1981

"But we cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government's reason for being"

"It is for this reason that I must tell those who fail to report for duty this morning they are in violation of the law, and if they do not report for work within 48 hours, they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated."


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



UFC said:


> I agree with everything *umop3p!sdn* is saying.
> 
> Many jobs require concentration throughout the day. Such as my own job.
> 
> ...


 
Its not a case of looking at a screen and concentrating. People seem to think that anyone can do the job if they are shown how. I am willing to bet that not one person that contributed to this thread would pass the recuitment process or even the vast majority of people on the site. It's not all about intelligence or ability. They have a rare skill set that is in demand. 

Their pay and conditions are completely seperate to this anyway. I don't with what they are doing but I wouldn't belittle their work either. There have been numerous examples of ATC's being repsonsible for crashes and near misses. I have a stressful demanding job but nobody dies if I mess up (apart from me!)


----------



## DB74 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

The strike is ultimately to do with the fact that some employees state that the new technology will add some pressure to their daily working life.

Presumably they want more money to compensate for this added pressure (or maybe more days off or whatever)

I would say that if the figures for salary and time off as quoted on this thread are correct, then they are already more than adequately compensated for the pressure of the job

So yes, their pay and terms and conditions are very relevant


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Statement from IAA

[broken link removed]


----------



## liaconn (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



UFC said:


> I agree with everything *umop3p!sdn* is saying.
> 
> Many jobs require concentration throughout the day. Such as my own job.
> 
> .


 
Yes, but there are not many jobs where a slip in concentration could result in the death of dozens of people.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> I am willing to bet that not one person that contributed to this thread would pass the recuitment process or even the vast majority of people on the site. It's not all about intelligence or ability. They have a rare skill set that is in demand.


How much are you willing to bet?
I've had jobs in the past that require extreme concentration, involving moving money around and updating live databases. Maybe no lives at stake, but certainly lots of money depending on whether or not I remembered to set a flag correctly, or I got a join correct. I didn't get anywhere near the perks of these people.
It sounds like you are judging everyone by your own standards.

UFC - lucky you! - where are you thinking of heading off to?


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> How much are you willing to bet?
> I've had jobs in the past that require extreme concentration, involving moving money around and updating live databases. *Maybe no lives at stake....*


 
And there ends your whole argument. Under no circumstances can you compare your experience with the lives of thousands of people each and every day, each and every week, month, year, etc.


----------



## bb12 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



UFC said:


> I agree with everything *umop3p!sdn* is saying.
> 
> Many jobs require concentration throughout the day. Such as my own job.
> 
> ...




this is just one example of what can go wrong if an ATC screws up. and he ended up paying the price with his own life.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Überlingen_mid-air_collision


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> Yes, but there are not many jobs where a slip in concentration could result in the death of dozens of people.


 

Bus driver, train driver, airplane driver, scaffolder, electrician, ferry driver.

There are lots of jobs. It's their job. It's what they get paid to do.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



bb12 said:


> this is just one example of what can go wrong if an ATC screws up. and he ended up paying the price with his own life.
> 
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_%C3%9Cberlingen_mid-air_collision


 

[broken link removed]

Scaffolder screws up


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> How much are you willing to bet?
> I've had jobs in the past that require extreme concentration, involving moving money around and updating live databases. Maybe no lives at stake, but certainly lots of money depending on whether or not I remembered to set a flag correctly, or I got a join correct. I didn't get anywhere near the perks of these people.
> It sounds like you are judging everyone by your own standards.
> 
> UFC - lucky you! - where are you thinking of heading off to?


 
I work as a trader in investment banking. I deal in tens if not hundreds of millions of euro every single day. It can be highly stressful and demanding. I am educated to Masters level.

I work 50-70 hours a week and my basic pay is less than what they get paid. Do I have a problem with what they get paid? No. They like most people in this country are overpaid but thats not their fault. 

Am I egotistical enough to believe I can do their job simply because I am used to pressure and stress. No.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Bus driver, train driver, airplane driver, scaffolder, electrician, ferry driver.
> 
> There are lots of jobs. It's their job. It's what they get paid to do.


 
...butcher, baker, candlestick maker...

Standard hours for pilot (or airplane driver):

8 hours in a 24 hr period, 30 hours in 7 days, 100 in a month and up to 1,000 hours in a calendar year.

Only 30 hrs a week! I do double that!


----------



## liaconn (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Bus driver, train driver, airplane driver, scaffolder, electrician, ferry driver.
> 
> There are lots of jobs. It's their job. It's what they get paid to do.


 
'Airplane drivers'  are extremely well paid.  

The other jobs you mention don't require the same level of intense concentration and precision of thought as an Air Traffic Controller's.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> I work as a trader in investment banking. I deal in tens if not hundreds of millions of euro every single day. It can be highly stressful and demanding. I am educated to Masters level.


Do you have the luxury of fail-safes? 



> I work 50-70 hours a week and my basic pay is less than what they get paid. Do I have a problem with what they get paid? No. They like most people in this country are overpaid but thats not their fault.


It's not difficult to get paid less than these air traffic controllers.
Do you get any other money in addition to your basic pay? - Have you also missed the point that these people are now holding the country to ransom for even more money? 



> Am I egotistical enough to believe I can do their job simply because I am used to pressure and stress. No.


You can't do this job, so no one else on this thread can either? sounds pretty egotistical to me.


----------



## QED (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Does anyone know what the ATC's are paid in other countries with a similar cost of living? And is it standard international practice to give so many days off? I expect that it might be, given the nature of the job.

This should be a fairly good benchmark of expected salaries and benefits.


----------



## QED (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



QED said:


> Does anyone know what the ATC's are paid in other countries with a similar cost of living? And is it standard international practice to give so many days off? I expect that it might be, given the nature of the job.
> 
> This should be a fairly good benchmark of expected salaries and benefits.


 
I found this -

The typical salary for airport controllers with 10-15 years' experience is £60,000.

Source: [broken link removed]

If the exchange rate is 0.90 and Irish employees need 33% more for higher cost of living, the comparable irish salary should be approx €90k. Once again in this country, we seem to believe we are worth more and can pay ourselves more than other countries.

And the U.S. - 

Median annual earnings of air traffic controllers in 2002 were $91,600. The middle 50 percent earned between $65,480 and $112,550. The lowest 10 percent earned less than $46,410, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $131,610.

Source: [broken link removed]


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> 'Airplane drivers' are extremely well paid.
> 
> The other jobs you mention don't require the same level of intense concentration and precision of thought as an Air Traffic Controller's.


 

It's actually only the passenger airlines that pay very well. Other typres of airplane pilot/driver get paid fairly average wages.Especially now that airplanes are highly automated.


----------



## liaconn (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Well, if they're not passenger airlines then they're presumably not responsible for the safety of passengers.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> Well, if they're not passenger airlines then they're presumably not responsible for the safety of passengers.


 

And what is your point exactly?


----------



## liaconn (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I said, in an earlier post, that other jobs don't involve the death of dozens of people if your concentration slips. You cited pilots and I said they were also well paid and then you came back and said only those carrying passengers. Which bears out my point, I would have thought.


----------



## DerKaiser (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> Instead they've muddied the waters by releasing the pay and conditions. All I can ask is that all reasonable people look past this. I agree that's good pay, I agree that's great conditions of employment. But that's irrelevant at this time.


 
Where I work, and this seems to be echoed all over, it is spelled out very clearly that when you move into the realms of the better paid the fortunes of your employer become your business i.e. you have to adopt a very flexible attitude.

The key point is pay.  I really don't believe that anyone earning more than double the average industrial wage should be unionised or in any way uncooperative.  

If you are a manager or at a similar pay level most people would agree that the emphasis has shifted from simply doing your job for a fair wage to taking on more responsibility in terms of the ultimate requirements of your employer.

It saddened me to see a while back to see that unions had negotiated guaranteed bonuses for senior managers in the public service.  If you are really worth that much then you don't need union protection.  The unions should really focus their energies on the lower pay end of the scale where people genuinely need to be protected from unfair work practices and remuneration.


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> Do you have the luxury of fail-safes?
> 
> 
> It's not difficult to get paid less than these air traffic controllers.
> ...


 
Of course I have fail safes but no system is perfect. I still make decisions.

Yes I do get more money in addition to my basic pay in the form of a performance related bonus. I haven't missed that point. If you read back, I am one of the first ones to give out about their action. I just don't belittle their jobs.

Statistically, the odds of one of the say 20-25 people who have posted on this thread having the required skills to operate as a ATC are large. For a start, most people (myself included) would not have the spacial awareness abilities needed to do the job never mind the other personality traits.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DerKaiser said:


> Where I work, and this seems to be echoed all over, it is spelled out very clearly that when you move into the realms of the better paid the fortunes of your employer become your business i.e. you have to adopt a very flexible attitude.
> 
> The key point is pay. I really don't believe that anyone earning more than double the average industrial wage should be unionised or in any way uncooperative.


 
Couldn't agree more. In a managerial capacity, when you take the "white shirt" you take the responsibility. I'm not entirely sure it's quite so universally accepted across the private sector though. Plenty of managers I've dealt/deal with do anything but accept their responsibilities.

Again, the pay before christmas for senior managers has nothing to do with this issue.

Whether or I think the pay of ACC is excessive (I do), they've disagreed with the current offer (which we haven't had full detail of only the one aspect of the pensions really) and have taken the correct route of the LRC. They haven't immediately walked out, they've engaged in the appropriate and proper resolution process. Until that ends, I can't judge them.

Like Sunny I take exception to the notion that they have an easy job. And I take exception to the media's reporting and obvious bias in this case. The publishing of their T&Cs was an underhand deliberate move to turn opinion against the employees.


----------



## DerKaiser (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> Like Sunny I take exception to the notion that they have an easy job. And I take exception to the media's reporting and obvious bias in this case. The publishing of their T&Cs was an underhand deliberate move to turn opinion against the employees.


 
Leaking T&Cs is definitely not the way to handle these things.  Neither side is coming out of this looking good.

Most people's predominant feeling is that we should try just get back to normality if at all possible because these strikes, hot on the heels of weather related disruption, are a kick in the teeth for the average Joe trying to go about their business as best they can in spite of the economic situation


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> I just don't belittle their jobs.
> 
> Statistically, the odds of one of the say 20-25 people who have posted on this thread having the required skills to operate as a ATC are large. For a start, most people (myself included) would not have the spacial awareness abilities needed to do the job never mind the other personality traits.



There are plenty of people who could do their jobs, and aren't over paid or holding the country to ransom. There are the obvious jobs like airline pilots, surgeons etc, but also the not so obvious ones like software developers that write mission critical software. The ATC do have failsafes, and guess who writes these systems? Even your job, who makes sure that the trades go through and aren't multiplied by a factor of ten every second Friday in June?

Thousands of people across the globe have jobs they need to concentrate on or lives will be lost. Everyone from Scaffolders to Therac 25 software developers.

Considering the profile of people who may contribute to this thread, there is a very high chance at least one would be capable of doing this job.


----------



## Latrade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DerKaiser said:


> Most people's predominant feeling is that we should try just get back to normality....


 
But then what would we have to talk about on here?


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> Considering the profile of people who may contribute to this thread, there is a very high chance at least one would be capable of doing this job.


 
What profile? It's no different to randomly picking 25 people off the street. What do you think the odds are of finding one person capable of being an ATC are?

I am not saying they are not overpaid. I am sure they are like most people in this Country. I am only saying that people seem to be suggesting that they are overpaid because anyone can do the job and thats it not that difficult. Thats simply not true.


----------



## DerKaiser (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> But then what would we have to talk about on here?


 
yeah, I didn't really apportion blame to anyone for the cold weather so I guess they've given me the opportunity to gripe for the first time in a while!


----------



## capall (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

There is something wrong when a small group of people can shut down the Irish airspace like this. Inconvenience 20,000 passengers ,damage business interests
Key infrastructure employees like this shouldnt be allowed to strike ,same goes for ESB. They are able to hold the country to ransom and have disproportionate bargaining power


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

No public or civil servant should be allowed to strike.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

May I remind everyone that IAA employees are not public servants. The IAA is a semi-state body. Public servants are subject to the Pension levy and the recent pay cut. Employees of semi-state bodies are not.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> What profile? It's no different to randomly picking 25 people off the street. What do you think the odds are of finding one person capable of being an ATC are?


That's an incorrect assumption.

Posters on this thread is far from a random sample of the population. They are people who are computer literate enough to contribute to this thread, care enough about their opinion to contribute. There might also be a bias towards employed people.


----------



## brigade (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> No public or civil servant should be allowed to strike.


 
Under any circumstances?


----------



## liaconn (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> No public or civil servant should be allowed to strike.


 
Why not?


----------



## Sunny (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> That's an incorrect assumption.
> 
> Posters on this thread is far from a random sample of the population. They are people who are computer literate enough to contribute to this thread, care enough about their opinion to contribute. There might also be a bias towards employed people.


 
My Granny moans alot and can e-mail. Doesn't mean I want her landing my plane.


----------



## WarrenBuffet (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Well i can tell you one thing I wouldnt like umop3p!sdn and Niallers looking after air control if i was on a plane over Ireland. Talk about taking a simplistic view!!

Good people of AAM  - i reckon these guys are WUMs. If not then god help them........


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> Well i can tell you one thing I wouldnt like umop3p!sdn and Niallers looking after air control if i was on a plane over Ireland. Talk about taking a simplistic view!!
> 
> Good people of AAM - i reckon these guys are WUMs. If not then god help them.


If people like me were in charge of air traffic control, you'd be able to be in a plane over Ireland, and not waiting in the departure lounge.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> Why not?


 
People in the Public sector should understand that in return for stable life long employment that certain things are expected of them apart from doing the job in which they're paid to do and that is continuity of service. Striking in the public sector should lead to losing your Job in my opinion. A country cannot be held to ranson by a greedy group of people.


As Ronald Reagan said in 1981

"We cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government's reason for being"


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



WarrenBuffet said:


> Well i can tell you one thing I wouldnt like umop3p!sdn and Niallers looking after air control if i was on a plane over Ireland. Talk about taking a simplistic view!!
> 
> Good people of AAM - i reckon these guys are WUMs. If not then god help them........


 
There is no need to take any other view than a simplistic one. 99% of industrial action can be brought back to one thing. Money. These people are just being greedy.


----------



## Teatime (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> There is no need to take any other view than a simplistic one. 99% of industrial action can be brought back to one thing. Money. These people are just being greedy.


 
3 of my friends lost their jobs in the past week. 2 of them were the only earners in their household. Pretty shocking to be honest. Starting to agree with Niallers...Industrial action like this is pure greed.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> There is no need to take any other view than a simplistic one. 99% of industrial action can be brought back to one thing. Money. These people are just being greedy.


I, too, agree with this.
Not only are they greedy but also short sighted. Their actions are helping to destroy the economy. Each business that closes down is yet another nail in the coffin.
Who is going to pay them?


----------



## WarrenBuffet (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

If you'll notice my post didnt mention the remuneration of ATCs - just that Niallers and umop _appear _to have a stunningly simplistic and myopic view of the world......there is no middle ground with these two! 

Therefore I would be willing to wager my house on it that they wouldnt get within an asses roar of the job even if they were willing to do it for free. To do a job where hundreds of peoples lives are at risk requires balance, a level head, ability to weigh options up......plus loads of other specialist requirements mentioned by previous posters.

As I said before I think they are WUMs - for god sake Niallers got the conversation going by dobbing in a few of his mates! In fact I wouldnt be surprised if they are one and the same person.


----------



## z104 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Would you care to elaborate on why this industrial action is taking place since you have such a deep world understanding of the issues.


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I've nothing else to add to this, and I'm certainly not going to be drawn into an argument as to whether I'm myopic, schizophrenic, or would make a good ATC or not.


----------



## WarrenBuffet (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

5 minutes between their posts! Hmmmmm


----------



## z107 (20 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Would you care to elaborate on why this industrial action is taking place since you have such a deep world understanding of the issues.


----------



## WarrenBuffet (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*


----------



## micmclo (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

..


----------



## brigade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> People in the Public sector should understand that in return for stable life long employment that certain things are expected of them apart from doing the job in which they're paid to do and that is continuity of service. Striking in the public sector should lead to losing your Job in my opinion. A country cannot be held to ranson by a greedy group of people.


 
Going by this logic, working in the public sector you basically have to take everything without any recourse. If that was the case the budget deficit could be almost halved by reducing the PS wage bill by 50%. 
Take it or lose your job! 
Very well thought out statement.

BTW, if this dispute is just about a 6% payrise I don't agree with it.


----------



## zztop (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> It is a judgement on Ireland if we are to go down the same road as those Countries and have massive industrial unrest that closes down our airports with 24 hours notice especially since we are an Island. Ireland is in competition with other Countries just like any company has to compete and moves like this reflect very badly on us. France and Italy are large enough and important enough to get away with things that we can't.


 


Yep, thats whats coming.360k public servants are not all fools.


----------



## z104 (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



brigade said:


> Going by this logic, working in the public sector you basically have to take everything without any recourse. If that was the case the budget deficit could be almost halved by reducing the PS wage bill by 50%.
> Take it or lose your job!
> Very well thought out statement.
> 
> BTW, if this dispute is just about a 6% payrise I don't agree with it.


 
Take everything! You make it sound like they work for low pay and have dreadful conditions. 

That's the gig. The good pay, good benefits, good conditions and job for life should be the trade off.
If people in the public service sector don't like it they should move to the private sector.

"We cannot compare labor-management relations in the private sector with government. Government cannot close down the assembly line. It has to provide without interruption the protective services which are government's reason for being" Ronald Reagan


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Since when did Ronald Reagan become so popular? Just waiting for the Maggie Thatcher quotes now.


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> May I remind everyone that IAA employees are not public servants. The IAA is a semi-state body. Public servants are subject to the Pension levy and the recent pay cut. Employees of semi-state bodies are not.


 
Bump because I think this became lost in the bickering.

For a good overview of the dispute (it goes back a while) there's a summary in the [broken link removed](begins page 13).

Couple of other things struck me.
Annual after tax profit for IAA = €12m
Annual traffic numbers through Irish airspace = 10m (I'm not sure whether that's people or what).
CEO received 10% Pay cut at end of 2008, but also had €81K (down from €90K) added to his pension as well as bonus of €62K.
A pay freeze was introduced for a year. Those 12 months were up at the end of 2009.


----------



## z104 (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> Since when did Ronald Reagan become so popular? Just waiting for the Maggie Thatcher quotes now.


 

Since he dealth with an ATC strike in the US in 1981. He gave them an ultimatum to go back to work within 48 hours or lose their job. He sacked 11,345 of them. No one group of people should be allowed to harm a country.

The air traffic controllers in this case are harming the country for their own greed.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> Whether or I think the pay of ACC is excessive (I do), they've disagreed with the current offer (which we haven't had full detail of only the one aspect of the pensions really) and have taken the correct route of the LRC. They haven't immediately walked out, they've engaged in the appropriate and proper resolution process.


 
I thought they stopped working in protest. Given their critical nature of their job and the risk to lives that you mention, is this engaging in the "appropriate and proper resolution process"?


----------



## z104 (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



WarrenBuffet said:


> If you'll notice my post didnt mention the remuneration of ATCs - just that Niallers and umop _appear _to have a stunningly simplistic and myopic view of the world......there is no middle ground with these two!
> 
> Therefore I would be willing to wager my house on it that they wouldnt get within an asses roar of the job even if they were willing to do it for free. To do a job where hundreds of peoples lives are at risk requires balance, a level head, ability to weigh options up......plus loads of other specialist requirements mentioned by previous posters.
> 
> As I said before I think they are WUMs - for god sake Niallers got the conversation going by dobbing in a few of his mates! In fact I wouldnt be surprised if they are one and the same person.


 
Is harming the country and holding the country to ransom and staging a wild cat strike the actions of a group of people with a "level head" and "the ability to weigh options up" to use your own words.


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Since he dealth with an ATC strike in the US in 1981. He gave them an ultimatum to go back to work within 48 hours or lose their job. He sacked 11,345 of them. No one group of people should be allowed to harm a country.
> 
> The air traffic controllers in this case are harming the country for their own greed.


 
He also had a law to back him up in his decision as the workers were violating a federal law. The Government here can't just sack people for taking industrial action.

I am all for no strike clauses for essential services but we don't have them apart from the army and the guards.

Also the US had enough non-striking controllers, supervisors and military controllers to minimise the disruption. Ireland doesn't and it takes at least three years to train someone.


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> I thought they stopped working in protest. Given their critical nature of their job and the risk to lives that you mention, is this engaging in the "appropriate and proper resolution process"?


 
The protest is relating to the suspension of employees and the introduction of new technology. 

Of course the employer claims it's related to the pay dispute, but officially this strike is over the suspension without pay.


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> The protest is relating to the suspension of employees and the introduction of new technology.
> 
> Of course the employer claims it's related to the pay dispute, but officially this strike is over the suspension without pay.


 
To be honest, I don't really buy that. They are co-operating with the new technology up the New Year and then suddenly stopped on the instructions of the Union. It has all the makings of a work to rule dispute. Whether you can suspend people for doing that is another matter but I don't think there is any doubt that it is related to their pay claim.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> The protest is relating to the suspension of employees and the introduction of new technology.
> 
> Of course the employer claims it's related to the pay dispute, but officially this strike is over the suspension without pay.


 
One more time.  
(hint: I never mentioned why/why not they are striking).

If you are management and some of your workers (for whatever reason) stopped what they were doing and putting the lives of people at risk as you mention, would you not have suspended them?


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I don't think anyone is accusing them of putting lives at risk. Didn't exactly just stand up and walk out and leave planes flying around in the sky. 

There is no excuse for the action and I certainly think that no strike clauses should be introduced into sectors like this. Same with the ESB etc.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> I don't think anyone is accusing them of putting lives at risk. Didn't exactly just stand up and walk out and leave planes flying around in the sky.


 
Not directly, but if you have 4 or 5 people sitting around not doing their job, it's not, I would imagine, the correct atmosphere for the remaining controllers, who have critical jobs to operate in. 

It seems also that even if they win this battle, they might well lose the 
war

Today's IT

Speaking in the Dáil, Minister for Transport Noel Dempsey described the stoppages at Dublin, Cork and Shannon as “inexcusable” and “unforgivable”.

He also indicated that the introduction of a “no strike” clause for personnel providing essential services would have to be examined in the wake of the dispute.


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> One more time.
> (hint: I never mentioned why/why not they are striking).
> 
> If you are management and some of your workers (for whatever reason) stopped what they were doing and putting the lives of people at risk as you mention, would you not have suspended them?


 
As sunny said, no lives were at risk, they didn't just get up when planes were landing or taking off.

Also I answered that here. I'm not defending the action as I not only have my doubts about the extent of the effect of the new technology but also that it isn't a knock on of the pay dispute. 

My power to suspend somebody is restricted by the circumstances under which they refuse to work and whether that refusal was reasonable given the circumstances (covered in other legislation such as health and safety). So to again answer the question: I don't know because we haven't been given the full circumstances as it appears to be only the employer's side that is given media coverage.

And my comment on the correct route was in relation to the current engagement with the LRC over the pay dispute. That is the correct route. 

But note in most of my replies it's the old caveat of "as much as we know". We don't know, we can suspect and we can debate those suppositions, but what we don't do is use a biased press release by the employer as our soul judgement in this case.


----------



## MrMan (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> Its not a case of looking at a screen and concentrating. People seem to think that anyone can do the job if they are shown how. I am willing to bet that not one person that contributed to this thread would pass the recuitment process or even the vast majority of people on the site. It's not all about intelligence or ability. They have a rare skill set that is in demand.
> 
> Their pay and conditions are completely seperate to this anyway. I don't with what they are doing but I wouldn't belittle their work either. There have been numerous examples of ATC's being repsonsible for crashes and near misses. I have a stressful demanding job but nobody dies if I mess up (apart from me!)


I had a crack at it when I was 20/21 and there were something like 1600 going for 25 places. I got through the initial interview and onto the aptitude test which was extremely tough and I got through that to the last 50. I didn't get passed the next interview even though I had a 50/50 chance of making it. I was naive to the interview process and was quizzed on many items as random as how jet engines work. 
I got called back the following year straight to the last 50 but in my mind I had moved on (I started to freak myself out about the responsibility side of things to be honest). I did the interview again and failed again. 
I was chuffed to make it through the aptitude test simply because of the numbers involved, but i don't believe it is a job to be taken lightly.


----------



## liaconn (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> Take everything! You make it sound like they work for low pay and have dreadful conditions.
> 
> That's the gig. The good pay, good benefits, good conditions and job for life should be the trade off.
> If people in the public service sector don't like it they should move to the private sector.
> ...


 
And if we didn't have the option to strike do you seriously think the Government wouldn't very quickly pull away any benefits, conditions and job security we have left????


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> And if we didn't have the option to strike do you seriously think the Government wouldn't very quickly pull away any benefits, conditions and job security we have left????


 
Unlikely because they still have to attract employees. People are not forced to join the public sector or remain there for life. If the public sector ever became so unattractive compared to the private sector, people simply wouldn't work there.


----------



## liaconn (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> Unlikely because they still have to attract employees. People are not forced to join the public sector or remain there for life. If the public sector ever became so unattractive compared to the private sector, people simply wouldn't work there.


 
So we'd have no public service, or one staffed only by people who couldn't get a job elsewhere?? Is that really what you want?


----------



## Shawady (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Does anyone know why the ATC were not on strike last December when other Impact members held a one day strike?There must have been some reason why they made an exception then.


----------



## z107 (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> So we'd have no public service, or one staffed only by people who couldn't get a job elsewhere?? Is that really what you want?


Don't we have that already ?

Well we soon will have that anyway with all the cuts that are going to happen.


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> So we'd have no public service, or one staffed only by people who couldn't get a job elsewhere?? Is that really what you want?


 
Where did I say that? I was simply pointing out that your doomsday predictions for public sector employees if their right to strike was restricted is misplaced. There are plenty of non-unionised companies whose employees have no right to strike that continue to attract and retain staff even during the boom years. And they are not working 200 hours a week on minimum wage.  Companies compete for employees just like employees compete for jobs. We are not talking about slave labour here. Everyone is free to change jobs. 

The problem with the public sector isn't what they got paid in the past, its that they need to realise the past is gone. Economic conditions have changed, their employer is broke and has to reduce pay and numbers. However, public sector workers are free to leave in vast numbers and take their chances in the private sector. Then the Government will have to pay more to attract staff to fulfill its functions. Simple market forces. More effective than strikes or not answering the phones if unions want to protect terms and conditions.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

If this escalates, what are the options for the Gov? I presume they could draft in the army and also get help from other EU states? Could someone operate the systems remotely with a local presence for non-technical work etc?


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> If this escalates, what are the options for the Gov? I presume they could draft in the army and also get help from other EU states? Could someone operate the systems remotely with a local presence for non-technical work etc?


 
The army wouldn't have anough people to cover all the airports. There are no real options for the Government. The Government's biggest advantage is that they have public support so if I was them, I would call their bluff. I have a feeling Impact will back down on this.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Surely there are contingency plans for a function like this?


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> Surely there are contingency plans for a function like this?


 
Why? What's the contingency if every pilot stopped working? Or if all the ESB workers walked out on the job?

It's not just a case of getting numbers in and giving them a couple of hours training.


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> Why? What's the contingency if every pilot stopped working? Or if all the ESB workers walked out on the job?
> 
> It's not just a case of getting numbers in and giving them a couple of hours training.


 
Or taxis, farmers, electrical contractors... all can effect business to some extent

Looks like the latest is it's likely they'll be in the LRC tomorrow. I think this is at the invitation of the LRC rather than a move by the individual parties, but it's unlikely they'll refuse the invitation.


----------



## brigade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> That's the gig. The good pay, good benefits, good conditions and job for life should be the trade off.
> If people in the public service sector don't like it they should move to the private sector.


 
The flip side, if it is so good why don't people from the private sector move to the public sector?
Would you be interested in a job in the public sector!


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> Why? What's the contingency if every pilot stopped working? Or if all the ESB workers walked out on the job?
> 
> It's not just a case of getting numbers in and giving them a couple of hours training.


 
I agree if everyone in the IAA stopped working or if everyone in the ESB stopped working, I'm just talking about the controllers. Are there contingency plans for this, such as agreements in place with the UK etc for something like Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity planning etc


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> I agree if everyone in the IAA stopped working or if everyone in the ESB stopped working, I'm just talking about the controllers. Are there contingency plans for this, such as agreements in place with the UK etc for something like Disaster Recovery/Business Continuity planning etc


 
What if just the people who operated the generation plants in the ESB went out on strike?


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I don't know  - that's why I'm asking!


----------



## Sunny (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> I don't know - that's why I'm asking!


 
There is no contingency. It's why some Countries have no strike clauses for key personnel like we do for the army and guards.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> There is no contingency. It's why some Countries have no strike clauses for key personnel like we do for the army and guards.


 

Maybe we're not too far away

NATS Services Ltd (NSL) has developed and put into service the world’s first full safety certified remote airport contingency control room ...

Heathrow can now be kept open even after a significant event affecting the main control tower

[broken link removed]

Who's to say someone in Heathrow couldn't land our planes?


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

And from their Service page

[broken link removed]

*Traffic management*


Development of new operating procedures
Airspace design
Traffic flow management tools and processes to optimise capacity
*Experienced controllers to manage ATC operations and training *


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> There is no contingency. It's why some Countries have no strike clauses for key personnel like we do for the army and guards.


 
What contingency any employer have for a strike (at least within the EU)? I wouldn't be aware of too much for short duration, little notice action.

The Heathrow contingency while fully certified has me a bit concerned in that there is no visibility of the aircraft at all and is totally reliant on equipment. However, that again is in the case of equipment failure not a strike.

I think the posturing by the Minister on "no strike clause" is just that. Him puffing out his chest to show he'll take 'em on. He won't and he can't.

The reason the army and police have no strike clauses is the potential for civil unrest if they were to strike. While I ahve complete understanding and sympathy with those at the airport yesterday, I wouldn't put passenger inconvinience on a level with civil unrest.

RyanAir Aerlingus cancel or change flights all the time as a result people miss their connections and holidays are ruined. Where's RTE interviewing these people giving their "ruined holiday of a lifetime" woes.


----------



## z104 (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> What contingency any employer have for a strike (at least within the EU)? I wouldn't be aware of too much for short duration, little notice action.
> 
> The Heathrow contingency while fully certified has me a bit concerned in that there is no visibility of the aircraft at all and is totally reliant on equipment. However, that again is in the case of equipment failure not a strike.
> 
> ...


 
Air traffic control centres do not need to see the airplane , Only the control tower need visability. In Shannon the air traffic control is about a mile away from the airport. The control tower is manned alright.


----------



## Firefly (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> I think the posturing by the Minister on "no strike clause" is just that. Him puffing out his chest to show he'll take 'em on. He won't and he can't.


 
Could he not put it to the people to vote?


----------



## Latrade (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> Could he not put it to the people to vote?



He could. There may be problems with Article 6 of the European Social Charter (especially since Lisbon), but that's a small issue.

Can we have a vote on your T&Cs too?


----------



## podgerodge (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> Sounds like a cushy number to me!
> Of course, these poor darlings must be _entitled_ to the money.
> I actually feel sorry for Ryanair. Michael O Leary must be mad to stay in this sad joke of a country.



Michael O' Leary is earning a fair whack himself (For his stressful job?) - presumably you have no problem with that because you believe his populist nonsense?



umop3p!sdn said:


> Do these people not realise that once all the business that rely on airports go bust, there will be no one to pay their inflated wages?



Indeed.  Maybe Michael should lower his salary to save Ryanair some money.



UFC said:


> I agree with everything *umop3p!sdn* is saying.
> 
> Many jobs require concentration throughout the day. Such as my own job.
> 
> ...



So the main reason you are leaving the country and your challenging job is because - other people are defending their terms and conditions?  Wow.  What's the reaction of your friends and family when you say "I'm leaving the country - I can't stand other people striking" - Hope you're not moving to France !!





Niallers said:


> No public or civil servant should be allowed to strike.





Firefly said:


> Could he not put it to the people to vote?



Excellent.  The whole problem sorted by Niallers and Firefly.


----------



## S.L.F (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Niallers said:


> No public or civil servant should be allowed to strike.


 
Since this thread is about people who are not Public servants this is a most ill informed post. 



liaconn said:


> And if we didn't have the option to strike do you seriously think the Government wouldn't very quickly pull away any benefits, conditions and job security we have left????


 
Oh we know this bunch would be happy to go back on deals, they don't have any honour or scruples what-so-ever. Charlie McCreevy made legislation to ensure that 1% of GPD (or whatever) was put into a pension fund which Brian Lenihan raided.

The thing is that Brian Lenihan brought in Legislation to allow him to dip his fingers into it to pay his banker friends.

I would not trust them not to change legislation in a heart beat if it suited them.



Sunny said:


> Economic conditions have changed, their employer is broke and has to reduce pay and numbers.


 
Where does the money come from to pay the workers in question?

Is it from taxes or from the airports themselves?


----------



## ecstatic (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Anyone who says there not worth the money needs there head examined.

This is one of the most stressful jobs in the world with up to 20 planes on ur screen at one time.

Success rates from training range between 3 off every 20 and thats the people that are accepted to do the training. Thats after many cuts in the rounds before

Its one of the highest alcohol abuse / substance abuse jobs down to stress. Im aware off ATC controllers who dont generally talk for 1-2 hours after arriving home as still in the zone.

Anyone who begrudges these guys there money and sticking up for the rights is insane. France strikes about 7 times a year.

You cannot ban people from working on no pay its crazy.


----------



## ecstatic (21 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

FYI its up to 2K a day for a contract ATC person. Why not go hire a few and see how cheap it is seen as everyones on strike.


----------



## Latrade (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> Since this thread is about people who are not Public servants this is a most ill informed post.


 
How could you pick just that one from all the ill informed posts on here.

However, I think the confusion stems from this:



> *Mr Kavanagh* said airports could not operate in an environment of uncertainty and he called on controllers to resume normal working practices, to drop a pay rise claim and to pay a contribution towards their pension.
> 
> *“They are among the best-paid public servants in the country,” he said.*


 
So the boss of the IAA's Safety Regulation doesn't even know his own employees work for a state-sponsored body (making an after tax profit of €12m per year) and not a state body.


----------



## Firefly (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



ecstatic said:


> FYI its up to 2K a day for a contract ATC person. Why not go hire a few and see how cheap it is seen as everyones on strike.


 
I was asking for contingency and you have provided it, thanks!

Granted there is additional cost, but all business continuity plans involve extra costs. Therefore maybe we need to increase the % of contractors, so that if/when the permanent staff strike, the general travelling public / local economy are not made to suffer.


----------



## DB74 (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



ecstatic said:


> FYI its up to 2K a day for a contract ATC person. Why not go hire a few and see how cheap it is seen as everyones on strike.


 
How much is the strike costing per day?


----------



## DublinTexas (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

As a very frequent traveler I appreciate the work done by the controllers and I am all for paying people a fair amount (just as I ask my boss to pay me a fair amount) but this is ridiculous.

The employer introduced new technology that will make the system more secure but the employee refuses to get trained on it or use it or even decide that despite using it for 2 years they don’t want to do it anymore. So the employer suspends the individuals because they do not want to do the work they are hired and we get an all-out strike crippling our state.

We should speed up EUROCONTROL to allow for a single European sky which takes care of the non-approach activity, giving that we are a member since 1965 about time.

Than we should use NATS for example to hire temporary resources until we find people that are willing to do their job or find the service provider that will.

Than we tell the people that don’t want to do their job that they are no longer needed.

Let’s say my company introduces a new piece of software that I have to use daily and I refuse, do you think I’m going to work very long for my company or that anybody else in my company will go into strike for me?
Why is it always that the public service is treated differently?

I’m all for fair working conditions, be it in private or public service, in Ireland or in India but it’s ridiculous that we allow the country to be held hostage by our public service over and over again.

In certain countries public/civil servants are not allowed to strike in return for better pay/better pension and job guarantee. Why can’t we have that? Critical public services should not be allowed to strike in return for defined benefits.

Giving that I pay 3.90 € “Irish Airport Security Charge” for the want to be security staff at Dublin airport followed by an 8.23€ Irish Passenger Charge which contributes to the IAA/DAA and an extra Irish Air Travel Tax of at least 10€ to make up for the incompetence of the government I think I deserve to actually fly when I plan to fly.


----------



## Latrade (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DublinTexas said:


> We should speed up EUROCONTROL to allow for a single European sky which takes care of the non-approach activity, giving that we are a member since 1965 about time.
> 
> Giving that I pay 3.90 € “Irish Airport Security Charge” for the want to be security staff at Dublin airport followed by an 8.23€ Irish Passenger Charge which contributes to the IAA/DAA and an extra Irish Air Travel Tax of at least 10€ to make up for the incompetence of the government I think I deserve to actually fly when I plan to fly.


 
I can't disagree with the new technology issue, but I wouldn't limit any ire to the ATC. Many private company employees have fought similar battles for similar "selfish" reasons.

The reason I quoted the EUROCONTROL aspect is just an interesting stat from the Annual Report of the IAA, that Ireland has the 3rd lowest cost base for all EUROCONTROL signatories.


----------



## Firefly (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



podgerodge said:


> Excellent. The whole problem sorted by Niallers and Firefly.


 
I was responding to a post where it was stated that prohibiting civil services from striking can't be done. I asked why could it not put to the people to vote - ie a constitutuinal change if necessary. I never mentioned anything about sorting out the whole problem


----------



## S.L.F (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> How could you pick just that one from all the ill informed posts on here.


 
Ha...

Given the sheer number of ill informed posts here on AAM I'd be all day correcting people (and they of course my posts).

I picked Niallers post because Public and Civil Servants have already taken 2 hits (wage cuts) which most people hav enot taken where as the guys we are talking about have not taken a pay cut yet.

The difference must be pointed out.


----------



## z107 (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



> I picked Niallers post because Public and Civil Servants have already taken 2 hits (wage cuts) which most people hav enot taken where as the guys we are talking about have not taken a pay cut yet.


That's just the start. 
Public and civil servants need many more pay and job cuts so that Ireland can start to become competitive again. We need to try to close the private/public gulf that has opened up.


----------



## Birroc (22 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

For all the hits the public service have taken, is there any public servant that would leave his/her permanent job for a similar job in the private sector in the current economic climate? Not likely...and rightly so, much too cushy and safe!


----------



## smiley (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> For all the hits the public service have taken, is there any public servant that would leave his/her permanent job for a similar job in the private sector in the current economic climate? Not likely...and rightly so, much too cushy and safe!



What sort of a post is this? Is there anybody is any job who would be stupid enough to leave it in this present climate?

There are some serious 'chip on shoulder' types and 'whingers' posting here at the moment.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



smiley said:


> What sort of a post is this? Is there anybody is any job who would be stupid enough to leave it in this present climate?
> 
> There are some serious 'chip on shoulder' types and 'whingers' posting here at the moment.



+1

Cowan, Lenihan & Co and their spin boys have done a great job pitting the the Civil/Public sector against the Private sector while not going near the postmen/ESB/ATCs/CIE because if these guys strike then the country WILL grind to a halt.


----------



## bogle (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> For all the hits the public service have taken, is there any public servant that would leave his/her permanent job for a similar job in the private sector in the current economic climate? Not likely...and rightly so, much too cushy and safe!



Lots of the younger ones in my own work place have taken up the incentiveised career break scheme. They're off to top up their primary degrees with masters or postgrads. I doubt we'll see many of them back!


----------



## Deiseblue (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I see that IAA management have now acknowledged that a bona fide dispute exists between them and Impact and that the Labour Court will now address all pay,pension and new technology matters.
Bit late in the day I would have thought.
An example of appalling management surely !


----------



## brigade (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> That's just the start.
> Public and civil servants need many more pay and job cuts so that Ireland can start to become competitive again. We need to try to close the private/public gulf that has opened up.


 
So how much of a paycut needs to be taken on top of whats already been taken?


----------



## S.L.F (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> That's just the start.
> Public and civil servants need many more pay and job cuts so that Ireland can start to become competitive again. We need to try to close the private/public gulf that has opened up.


 
ATC are not Public nor Civil Servants so why are you talking about them.

But since you have I'll try to get you to see a couple of the reasons why there is a difference.

1. Sex---in the public sector (semi states, Public and Civil service) people get the same wage regardless of whether they are men or women whereas women in the private sector get paid less than men.

2. Education---in the Public Sector (especially in the Civil service) the level of education (3rd level) tends to be far higher in the Public Sector.

both of these factors put a good few % onto the difference between the 2 sectors



Deiseblue said:


> I see that IAA management have now acknowledged that a bona fide dispute exists between them and Impact and that the Labour Court will now address all pay,pension and new technology matters.
> Bit late in the day I would have thought.
> An example of appalling management surely !


 
It was very strange for the management to suspend workers last week when a LRC was organised for next Tuesday.



brigade said:


> So how much of a paycut needs to be taken on top of whats already been taken?


 
The paycuts that have taken place have nothing to do with the govt not being able to afford wages (bailing the banks out) or anything else, the reason the govt is cutting wages is so IBEC can drop wages in the Private sector and then chop the minimum wage


----------



## brigade (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> The paycuts that have taken place have nothing to do with the govt not being able to afford wages (bailing the banks out) or anything else, the reason the govt is cutting wages is so IBEC can drop wages in the Private sector and then chop the minimum wage


 
I'm just wondering what level of paycuts *umop3p!sdn* would find acceptable.


----------



## S.L.F (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



brigade said:


> I'm just wondering what level of paycuts *umop3p!sdn* would find acceptable.


 
The govt doesn't have the right to cut ATC wages.

It can suggest to the relevant authority what to do but doesn't have the power to enforce anything.

I thought this thread was about ATC not public or civil servants.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



brigade said:


> I'm just wondering what level of paycuts *umop3p!sdn* would find acceptable.



Probably enough that will eliminate the need for tax increases that would effect ALL taxpayers. Why should everyone pay when we can scapegoat one particular sector?


----------



## Birroc (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



smiley said:


> What sort of a post is this? Is there anybody is any job who would be stupid enough to leave it in this present climate?


 
The point is that the gulf in public & private sector wages, pensions and conditions remains so large with the result that there is no movement out or into the public sector which is not healthy. All organisations need new blood but when you have a job where you cant be fired if permanent(almost), promotions are not based on merit but on length of service and pensions are very generous, it means nobody will ever leave and stagnation.

In the 1970s & 80s people working in the PS (councils in particular) were seen as having cushy jobs and safe jobs but there was a perception that most were badly paid jobs. Now, they still have the cushy, safe jobs but the perception is that they are also highly paid when the whole package is taken into account. I think thats where people have issues with.


----------



## Lex Foutish (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> The point is that the gulf in public & private sector wages, pensions and conditions remains so large with the result that *there is no movement out or into the public sector* which is not healthy. All organisations need new blood but when you have a job where you cant be fired if permanent(almost), promotions are not based on merit but on length of service and pensions are very generous, it means nobody will ever leave and stagnation.
> 
> In the 1970s & 80s people working in the PS (councils in particular) were seen as having cushy jobs and safe jobs but there was a perception that most were badly paid jobs. Now, they still have the cushy, safe jobs but the perception is that they are also highly paid when the whole package is taken into account. I think thats where people have issues with.


 
I think a lot of people have a lot less issues about it since Public Servants had pay cuts totalling around 16% in the last year.

And, I thought the reason that there wasn't movement *into* the Public Service was a Government ordered jobs embargo..... Silly me!


----------



## gunnerfitzy (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> The point is that the gulf in public & private sector wages, pensions and conditions remains so large with the result that there is no movement out or into the public sector which is not healthy. All organisations need new blood but when you have a job where you cant be fired if permanent(almost), promotions are not based on merit but on length of service and pensions are very generous, it means nobody will ever leave and stagnation.
> 
> In the 1970s & 80s people working in the PS (councils in particular) were seen as having cushy jobs and safe jobs but there was a perception that most were badly paid jobs. Now, they still have the cushy, safe jobs but the perception is that they are also highly paid when the whole package is taken into account. I think thats where people have issues with.



Good point.

However between the pension levy and recent pay cuts do members of the private sector believe that the perceived disparity has been addressed? I'm a public sector employee who is on around the national industrial wage and have been my pay reduced by about 12%. Should it be reduced further?

It is not my intention to start a witch-hunt on any sector but where is the semi-states contribution to restoring competiveness?


----------



## liaconn (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> I was responding to a post where it was stated that prohibiting civil services from striking can't be done. I asked why could it not put to the people to vote - ie a constitutuinal change if necessary. I never mentioned anything about sorting out the whole problem


 
Oh yes, I can just imagine the impartial voting (not) from both public and private sector workers.


----------



## liaconn (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



umop3p!sdn said:


> That's just the start.
> Public and civil servants need many more pay and job cuts so that Ireland can start to become competitive again. We need to try to close the private/public gulf that has opened up.


 
Could you elaborate? Which particular areas and grades of the Public and Civil Service should be further cut (pay and numbers)? Everyone and every area or how would this be targetted?


----------



## liaconn (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> For all the hits the public service have taken, is there any public servant that would leave his/her permanent job for a similar job in the private sector in the current economic climate? Not likely...and rightly so, much too cushy and safe!


 
Out of interest, did you ever apply for a public service job? And why does job security automatically imply that the jobs themselves are cushy?


----------



## Purple (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> The paycuts that have taken place have nothing to do with the govt not being able to afford wages (bailing the banks out) or anything else, the reason the govt is cutting wages is so IBEC can drop wages in the Private sector and then chop the minimum wage



That's complete rubbish. For one thing most employers in the private sector are not in IBEC. You should also remember that wages were being cut in the private sector long before the government cut them for public servants.


----------



## Purple (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> why does job security automatically imply that the jobs themselves are cushy?



Very good point.


----------



## S.L.F (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Purple said:


> That's complete rubbish. For one thing most employers in the private sector are not in IBEC. You should also remember that wages were being cut in the private sector long before the government cut them for public servants.


 
I'm going to keep a note of this post so in a years time you can  admit you were wrong (I'm setting the alarm on my phone as we speak).


----------



## Birroc (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



liaconn said:


> And why does job security automatically imply that the jobs themselves are cushy?


 
Maybe you should ask that question to the 400,000 people on the dole.


----------



## aonfocaleile (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> Maybe you should ask that question to the 400,000 people on the dole.



Why? Do you not understand the concept that having a secure job does not equate to having an easy job? Suggesting that the question be put to those on the dole or to anyone else won't change the answer. Your suggestion demonstrates that you are either trolling by posting such nonsense or that you need to get yourself a dictionary. The public sector bashing has abated since the budget, yet you seem intent on stirring it up again.

You also made a comment that no civil/public servant would be inclined to leave their secure jobs at the moment. Firstly, it is a misconception that all public service jobs are secure. People on temporary contracts which have expired have been let go from all parts of the public service. I accept that these are not the majority in many areas, but as you seem intent on making sweeping generalisations, I feel its necessary to remind you of this. Secondly, no one in a secure job in *any* sector would leave their job at the moment without careful consideration. Its not a public sector thing, its basic common sense.

To say that there is no movement in or out of the public sector is also not correct. Movement inwards is certainly limited at the moment but thats solely down to a recruitment embargo. There is plenty of job shedding going on through incentivised retirements and career breaks however. I suggest you base future posts on the facts rather than hearsay and lazy headlines, which is what you seem to be doing.


----------



## Lex Foutish (23 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



aonfocaleile said:


> Why? Do you not understand the concept that having a secure job does not equate to having an easy job? Suggesting that the question be put to those on the dole or to anyone else won't change the answer. Your suggestion demonstrates that you are either trolling by posting such nonsense or that you need to get yourself a dictionary. The public sector bashing has abated since the budget, yet you seem intent on stirring it up again.
> 
> You also made a comment that no civil/public servant would be inclined to leave their secure jobs at the moment. Firstly, it is a misconception that all public service jobs are secure. People on temporary contracts which have expired have been let go from all parts of the public service. I accept that these are not the majority in many areas, but as you seem intent on making sweeping generalisations, I feel its necessary to remind you of this. Secondly, no one in a secure job in *any* sector would leave their job at the moment without careful consideration. Its not a public sector thing, its basic common sense.
> 
> To say that there is no movement in or out of the public sector is also not correct. Movement inwards is certainly limited at the moment but thats solely down to a recruitment embargo. There is plenty of job shedding going on through incentivised retirements and career breaks however. I suggest you base future posts on the facts rather than hearsay and lazy headlines, which is what you seem to be doing.


 
Very good post, Aonfocaleile. Have to say, I suspected a wee bit of trolling myself. A lot of sweeping statements..........


----------



## Purple (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> I'm going to keep a note of this post so in a years time you can  admit you were wrong (I'm setting the alarm on my phone as we speak).



The really strange thing is that I don't think you're joking 

Wages are dropping in some areas of the the private sector and yes, the minimum wage may well drop, but if it does it will have bugger all to with any secret agenda of IBECs.


----------



## JP1234 (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> Maybe you should ask that question to the 400,000 people on the dole.



Well speaking as *one* of those 400,000 I don't for one minute thing having a secure job means having it easy/cushy! I cannot speak for the other 399,999 however and neither should you or anyone else, employed or not. I get far more annoyed at people speaking on behalf of the entire unemployed population, it's very patronising particularly coming from people who haven't lost their jobs.


----------



## brigade (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Purple said:


> Wages are dropping in some areas of the the private sector and yes, the minimum wage may well drop, but if it does it will have bugger all to with any secret agenda of IBECs.


 
Your right, their agenda is not secret!

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lower-minimum-wage-to-halt-job-cuts--ibec-1932620.html


----------



## S.L.F (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Purple said:


> The really strange thing is that I don't think you're joking


 
See this space in a year



Purple said:


> Wages are dropping in some areas of the the private sector and yes, the minimum wage may well drop, but if it does it will have bugger all to with any secret agenda of IBECs.


 
How do you know it's not true since you admit it's secret?

IBEC is an employers body, Yes?

So it is in their interest for the min. wage to drop, Yes?

In fact it's in their interest for wages *all* across Ireland to drop (including all of us too BTW), the problem I have is *if* the govt is to target wages then it should be all across Ireland and not* just *target Public and Civil Servants (who were only hit a few short months ago).

In any case all this has nothing to do with the thread since it is about a semi-state body not Public or Civil servants.

*Edit* I've done a little of research on IBEC.

From here

http://www.ibec.ie/IBEC/Press/Press...macgill-summer-school-22-07-2009?OpenDocument



> In recent months *many* economists have argued the case for a sharp reduction in nominal wages in Ireland.


 
I love the 'many'



> A co-ordinated policy of wage reductions across both the public and private sectors would provide a significant boost to Ireland’s competitive position.


 
Wages again



> Up to now change has been slow and cumbersome especially in the public sector and in unionised employments in the private sector.


 
IBEC are notoriously anti-union and don't beieve in collective bargaining.



> It is impossible to ignore costs, including labour costs


 
Wages again


----------



## liaconn (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Birroc said:


> Maybe you should ask that question to the 400,000 people on the dole.


 
I am sure that most people on the dole would envy us our job security. I am also sure that the majority of them are intelligent enough to realise that the 350,000 jobs that comprise the public service are not all 'cushy'.


----------



## Purple (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> See this space in a year
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Maybe you should ask yourself if they have a point. 
The government can only reduce the wages of those they employ (we don't live in a socialist state like the Soviet Union) so cuts in the private sector have to be market led. I do agree that the public and civil service has taken a hammering in recent months but that's because their employer is bankrupt.


----------



## S.L.F (24 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Purple said:


> Maybe you should ask yourself if they have a point.
> The government can only reduce the wages of those they employ (we don't live in a socialist state like the Soviet Union) so cuts in the private sector have to be market led. I do agree that the public and civil service has taken a hammering in recent months but that's because their employer is bankrupt.


 
I'm not arguing with you about the bankrupt end of things but you have to ask why are they bankrupt and the answer is because they are bailing the banks out to the tune of billions and just to be totally clear the banks are a large part of IBEC.

Another funny thing I came across doing my searches IBEC is part govt funded and even more interesting them saying people should take wage cuts is the fact that their staffs' wages are not published.


----------



## ashambles (25 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

The bank bailout has almost nothing to do with our current account deficit, the deficit figures given by government are independent of money going to the banks which are characterized as investments, transfers from the NPRF etc.. 

So of the unsustainable 12% deficit we're running almost none of it is to do with the bank bailout, and much of it is to with ramping up government spending to match the tax intake from a bubble that couldn't last.  

It'd be great if the bailout was the cause as once we're finished coughing up to them, then everything would go back to normal.

Not saying the bailout isn't a huge problem - it is especially as the costs of it will be adding to the amount of interest we'll be paying which will show up in the deficit.


----------



## Purple (25 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

ashambles beat me to it.

 IBEC is mainly made up of the Banks (protected sector), the semi-states (protected sector) and the foreign Multinationals that are told to join when they are given their tax breaks and hand-outs upon setting up shop on our turf.
The idea that they represent the "private sector" is nonsense. 
IBEC represents that management of the non public part of the protected sector or the unionised sector minus the public sector.


Back on topic; aonfocaleile's post above is very well made. Air traffic controllers and their T&C's are not representative of the public or civil service or even other pseudo-private sector employees who negotiate directly or indirectly with the state.


----------



## bullworth (26 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I only have one question after reading about the perks of the job : How can I become an air traffic controller ? What do I have to do ? Anybody ? My calling in life has been wasted thus far


----------



## Latrade (26 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



S.L.F said:


> I'm not arguing with you about the bankrupt end of things but you have to ask why are they bankrupt and the answer is because they are bailing the banks out to the tune of billions and just to be totally clear the banks are a large part of IBEC.
> 
> Another funny thing I came across doing my searches IBEC is part govt funded and even more interesting them saying people should take wage cuts is the fact that their staffs' wages are not published.


 
So just to get this right, the bail out of the banks wasn't because they were on the point of collapse it was to save IBEC? 

As to the "public funding" is there a link to this or is that some state bodies are members of IBEC? Not exactly the same thing.



Purple said:


> IBEC is mainly made up of the Banks (protected sector), the semi-states (protected sector) and the foreign Multinationals that are told to join when they are given their tax breaks and hand-outs upon setting up shop on our turf.
> The idea that they represent the "private sector" is nonsense.
> IBEC represents that management of the non public part of the protected sector or the unionised sector minus the public sector.


 
The last Shane Ross "exposé" (based upon the published accounts) shows there's about 7000 members of IBEC. There just aren't that many Banks, semi-state or multinational employers in the state.


----------



## Purple (26 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Latrade said:


> The last Shane Ross "exposé" (based upon the published accounts) shows there's about 7000 members of IBEC. There just aren't that many Banks, semi-state or multinational employers in the state.



OK but weighting Joe Bloggs packaging limited and AIB the same is nonsense. The facts are that a) most IBEC members are not active within the organisation and b) it is dominated by the commercial semi-states and the banks.  
IBEC represents the employer side of the unionised sector. The big foreign multinationals are also forces to join but they don’t set the agenda.
ISME is more representative of the real private sector. (I am not involved in any such group; talking shops the lot of them)


----------



## Latrade (26 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Purple said:


> OK but weighting Joe Bloggs packaging limited and AIB the same is nonsense. The facts are that a) most IBEC members are not active within the organisation and b) it is dominated by the commercial semi-states and the banks.
> IBEC represents the employer side of the unionised sector. The big foreign multinationals are also forces to join but they don’t set the agenda.
> ISME is more representative of the real private sector. (I am not involved in any such group; talking shops the lot of them)


 
Couldn't agree more, I just disagree with Shane Ross' overly simplified view. As with all representative bodies, those who pay the biggest subs get the biggest voice irrespective of how truly representative they are of the majority.


----------



## Mucker Man (28 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0128/airport.html

The labour court backs the employers.


----------



## DB74 (28 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Where is the downside for IMPACT here?

Surely they should be forced to pay some form of compensation to the company?

It seems to me that the unions can adopt these bully-boy tactics without fear of reprisals from anybody.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (29 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DB74 said:


> *Where is the downside for IMPACT here?*
> 
> Surely they should be forced to pay some form of compensation to the company?
> 
> It seems to me that the unions can adopt these bully-boy tactics without fear of reprisals from anybody.



Financially... none. Employers have to pay compensation for any wrongdoing on their part. For example, If they had not paid an allowance that should have been paid then the employer would have to pay arrears. However the reverse does not happen.

In relation to whom they should pay compensation to, they should not only have to compensate the company but also the intending passengers on that day, the airlines and companies whoses exports were tried up that day. If they were forced to do this then I think they would spend a little more time examing options the next time they have a dispute rather than calling a snap strike and practically shutting down the countries airports.


----------



## Firefly (29 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Mucker Man said:


> http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0128/airport.html
> 
> The labour court backs the employers.


 
The last line of that link...

A separate Labour Court recommendation on a second dispute involving pay and pensions at the Irish Aviation Authority is due in the coming days.


----------



## Caveat (29 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> Financially... none. Employers have to pay compensation for any wrongdoing on their part. For example, If they had not paid an allowance that should have been paid then the employer would have to pay arrears. However the reverse does not happen.
> 
> In relation to whom they should pay compensation to, they should not only have to compensate the company but also the intending passengers on that day, the airlines and companies whoses exports were tried up that day. If they were forced to do this then I think they would spend a little more time examing options the next time they have a dispute rather than calling a snap strike and practically shutting down the countries airports.


 
+1 exactly.


----------



## Deiseblue (30 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Firefly said:


> The last line of that link...
> 
> A separate Labour Court recommendation on a second dispute involving pay and pensions at the Irish Aviation Authority is due in the coming days.



The Labour Court has confirmed that the 6% due under the national 
wage agreement should be paid in full to the ATC's.


----------



## Complainer (30 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> Financially... none. Employers have to pay compensation for any wrongdoing on their part. For example, If they had not paid an allowance that should have been paid then the employer would have to pay arrears. However the reverse does not happen.
> 
> In relation to whom they should pay compensation to, they should not only have to compensate the company but also the intending passengers on that day, the airlines and companies whoses exports were tried up that day. If they were forced to do this then I think they would spend a little more time examing options the next time they have a dispute rather than calling a snap strike and practically shutting down the countries airports.


So when management force unnecessary strikes by taking precipitive actions while negotiations are still in progress, I presume you'd like to hold them personally responsible for the costs of any disruption too - right?


----------



## gunnerfitzy (30 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

I would expect that the board of management to be answerable to the  relevant minister and face sanctions up to and including dismissal for  all decisions that they make. If that would happen in all semi state  companies then we wouldn't have situations like in FAS.


----------



## Complainer (31 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> I would expect that the board of management to be answerable to the  relevant minister and face sanctions up to and including dismissal for  all decisions that they make. If that would happen in all semi state  companies then we wouldn't have situations like in FAS.


Bit of a different expectation there, compared to your expectation for unions to be responsible for consequential losses - why the double-standard?


----------



## gunnerfitzy (31 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*

Because unions are not a part of the organisational structure of a company. They are an organisation external to the company itself. I would like to see personal responsibility taken at both employee and managment level. Managers and workers should answer personally for their decisions. Unfortunately you can't sanction individuals because a union voted to go out on strike for what was later proven to be unnecessary and unwarrented reasons. But you can sanction management.


----------



## Complainer (31 Jan 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> Because unions are not a part of the organisational structure of a company. They are an organisation external to the company itself. I would like to see personal responsibility taken at both employee and managment level. Managers and workers should answer personally for their decisions. Unfortunately you can't sanction individuals because a union voted to go out on strike for what was later proven to be unnecessary and unwarrented reasons. But you can sanction management.


No offence, but it sounds like you don't know how strikes work. Strike decisions are not made by unions. The decision to strike (or not) are made by a vote of union members. They may be supported or advised by the union, the decision is down to the members themselves. 

So if you want to hold unions financially responsible for consequential losses arising from a strike, you'll also need to hold IBEC or legal advisers or Dept Finance (whoever is advising management) financially responsible on the other side.


----------



## Firefly (1 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> No offence, but it sounds like you don't know how strikes work. Strike decisions are not made by unions. The decision to strike (or not) are made by a vote of union members. They may be supported or advised by the union, the decision is down to the members themselves.
> 
> So if you want to hold unions financially responsible for consequential losses arising from a strike, you'll also need to hold IBEC or legal advisers or Dept Finance (whoever is advising management) financially responsible on the other side.


 
No offence, but it sounds like you do


----------



## gunnerfitzy (1 Feb 2010)

Apologies for my ambiguity. I do realise that strikes are voted on by the members of the union. However should that vote be carried it is all union members walk off the job if I am not mistaken. What happens when a union member votes no to strike action but the vote is carried?
To me that means the unions have much more than an advisory role.


----------



## MOB (1 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> So when management force unnecessary strikes by taking precipitive actions while negotiations are still in progress, I presume you'd like to hold them personally responsible for the costs of any disruption too - right?



Eh - just a quick reminder of how unions work;  members vote and decide whether or not to strike.   I don't think management can actually force people to strike.  

Joking aside, I am sure that situations could arise where union members have no reasonable option but to strike.  But I don't think it is right to characterise this as having been one of those situations.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (1 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



MOB said:


> Eh - just a quick reminder of how unions work;  members vote and decide whether or not to strike.   I don't think management can actually force people to strike.
> 
> Joking aside, I am sure that situations could arise where union members have no reasonable option but to strike.  But I don't think it is right to characterise this as having been one of those situations.



Completely agree


----------



## Complainer (2 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



MOB said:


> Eh - just a quick reminder of how unions work;  members vote and decide whether or not to strike.   I don't think management can actually force people to strike.
> 
> Joking aside, I am sure that situations could arise where union members have no reasonable option but to strike.


As you noted, there are situations where management provoke a strike, and leave staff with no other reasonable option.



MOB said:


> But I don't think it is right to characterise this as having been one of those situations.


Just for the record, this wasn't a strike. This was a meeting for union members called during the less busy hours of the day to discuss suspensions of  staff by management on issues that were going before the Labour Court at the time. Management escalated, union responded.


----------



## Purple (2 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> As you noted, there are situations where management provoke a strike, and leave staff with no other reasonable option.
> 
> 
> Just for the record, this wasn't a strike. This was a meeting for union members called during the less busy hours of the day to discuss suspensions of  staff by management on issues that were going before the Labour Court at the time. Management escalated, union responded.



They aren’t paid to call or attend union meetings. If they want to have such discussions they should do so on their own time. Since they did have their meeting on company time (rather than doing their job) they were, in effect, on strike.
It has now been agreed that the ATC staff who were suspended for refusing to do their job were in the wrong. Since they were in the wrong their managers were correct to suspend them. Since the management was correct to suspend them it was wrong for the union to escalate matters.


----------



## gunnerfitzy (2 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> As you noted, there are situations where management provoke a strike, and leave staff with no other reasonable option.
> 
> 
> Just for the record, this wasn't a strike. This was a meeting for union members called *during the less busy hours of the day* to discuss suspensions of  staff by management on issues that were going before the Labour Court at the time. Management escalated, union responded.



Personnel on duty should not be at these meetings. If that was a factor why not have the meeting at 2am? Not at 2pm during the working week.



Purple said:


> They aren’t paid to call or attend union meetings. If they want to have such discussions they should do so on their own time. Since they did have their meeting on company time (rather than doing their job) they were, in effect, on strike.
> It has now been agreed that the ATC staff who were suspended for refusing to do their job were in the wrong. Since they were in the wrong their managers were correct to suspend them. Since the management was correct to suspend them it was wrong for the union to escalate matters.



What he said!


----------



## Complainer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> Personnel on duty should not be at these meetings. If that was a factor why not have the meeting at 2am? Not at 2pm during the working week.


I guess they were home in their beds at 2am, like most sensible people, so it wouldn't really be practical to have a meeting then!


THere are two sides to every story. You conveniently forget to mention that the Labour Court also ruled that the controllers should get the 6% increase that they were fighting for.


----------



## Caveat (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> You conveniently forget to mention that the Labour Court also ruled that the controllers should get the 6% increase that they were fighting for.


 
So the effrontery and sense of injustice caused by newfangled technology can be bought then?

A bit like the teachers who despite banging on about conditions and class sizes opted for more money instead of a reduction in class sizes when they were given the choice.


----------



## DB74 (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> THere are two sides to every story. You conveniently forget to mention that the Labour Court also ruled that the controllers should get the 6% increase that they were fighting for.


 
I haven't seen this reported anywhere.

Have you a link?


----------



## Howitzer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DB74 said:


> Have you a link?


----------



## Complainer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



DB74 said:


> I haven't seen this reported anywhere.
> 
> Have you a link?


You're not suggesting that Irish media could be a tad one-sided in relation to industrial disputes, are you?

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/air-traffic-controllers-should-get-pay-hike-labour-court-110948.html



Caveat said:


> So the effrontery and sense of injustice caused by newfangled technology can be bought then?


Well, if you read the article, you'll find that wasn't the case. The pay deal wasn't linked to the new technology. But I know you'll use the fact that it wasn't linked to new technology as something else to moan about now. Damned if you do and damned if you dont eh? Do keep on jumping to those conclusions though - it is far easier that looking at the facts.


Caveat said:


> A bit like the teachers who despite banging on about conditions and class sizes opted for more money instead of a reduction in class sizes when they were given the choice.


I don't recall teachers getting any choice on such matters. What particular dispute/decision are you referring to here?


----------



## Sunny (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Caveat said:


> So the effrontery and sense of injustice caused by newfangled technology can be bought then?
> 
> A bit like the teachers who despite banging on about conditions and class sizes opted for more money instead of a reduction in class sizes when they were given the choice.


 
Amazing isn't it.


----------



## DB74 (3 Feb 2010)

LOL

I didn't mean anything by that request actually

I just couldn't find anything on RTE or the Times

Thanks anyway.


----------



## Sunny (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> I guess they were home in their beds at 2am, like most sensible people, so it wouldn't really be practical to have a meeting then!
> 
> 
> THere are two sides to every story. You conveniently forget to mention that the Labour Court also ruled that the controllers should get the 6% increase that they were fighting for.


 


Complainer said:


> Well, if you read the article, you'll find that wasn't the case. The pay deal wasn't linked to the new technology. But I know you'll use the fact that it wasn't linked to new technology as something else to moan about now. Damned if you do and damned if you dont eh? Do keep on jumping to those conclusions though - it is far easier that looking at the facts.


 
You were the one that linked them. The stoppage to attend the union meeting was unjustified. The Labour Court ruled as such.


----------



## Complainer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Sunny said:


> You were the one that linked them.


Eh, no - I didn't.


Sunny said:


> The stoppage to attend the union meeting was unjustified. The Labour Court ruled as such.


Any of the reports that I saw didn't note any court ruling on the issue of the stoppage/meeting. The union agreed not to have any further meetings and the 14 suspended staff were reinstated before they even got to the Labour Court. Have you a link to any reports of the Labour Court ruling on the issue of the stoppage/meeting?


----------



## gunnerfitzy (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> I guess they were home in their beds at 2am, like most sensible people, so it wouldn't really be practical to have a meeting then!



Practicality for union meetings is not of interest to the travelling public or irish businesses. But at 2pm they were being paid to be at their place of employment doing their job.




Complainer said:


> THere are two sides to every story. You conveniently forget to mention that the Labour Court also ruled that the controllers should get the 6% increase that they were fighting for.



'Forget to mention' implies that I knew that fact and didn't mention it. How is it inside my head? 

And the 6% increase had nothing to do with the strike/meeting as far as I know. That was due to the suspensions management authorised because of employees refusing to work with new technology.


----------



## Complainer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



gunnerfitzy said:


> Practicality for union meetings is not of interest to the travelling public or irish businesses. But at 2pm they were being paid to be at their place of employment doing their job.


Nope, they wouldn't have been paid for their time at the union meeting.



gunnerfitzy said:


> 'Forget to mention' implies that I knew that fact and didn't mention it. How is it inside my head?


Sorry, I misunderstood. You don't know too much about this issue at all then, but you continue to comment about the little bits that you've picked up from the right-wing press.



gunnerfitzy said:


> And the 6% increase had nothing to do with the strike/meeting as far as I know. That was due to the suspensions management authorised because of employees refusing to work with new technology.


The IAA were quite happy to throw the increase into the melting pot from their first statement on the matter;
[broken link removed]
[broken link removed]


----------



## Caveat (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Complainer said:


> The IAA were quite happy to throw the increase into the melting pot from their first statement on the matter;
> [broken link removed]
> [broken link removed]


 
How do you make that out, that they were 'quite happy' ?!

They merely mention, in your link,  that there was 'a demand for a pay increase'.

I don't understand your comment.


----------



## Complainer (3 Feb 2010)

*Re: People who don't realise how good they have it*



Caveat said:


> How do you make that out, that they were 'quite happy' ?!
> 
> They merely mention, in your link,  that there was 'a demand for a pay increase'.
> 
> I don't understand your comment.


Gunnerfitzy stated that "the 6% increase had nothing to do with the strike/meeting". I was simply pointing out that IAA disagree with him. But maybe he knows more about it than they do?


----------



## gunnerfitzy (3 Feb 2010)

I believe you will find that that IMPACT have stated that 'the action is in direct response to the staff suspensions.'

[broken link removed]

The industrial action was due to the suspensions. The suspensions were due to the workers refusing to work new work practices.

I think IMPACT is a better reference for why their members took industrial action rather than the IAA. Unless IMPACT is being misleading....


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2010)

gunnerfitzy said:


> The industrial action was due to the suspensions. The suspensions were due to the workers refusing to work new work practices


 Exactly, and since the Labour Court has found that they were wrong to refuse to work what were deemed to be minor changes it stands to reason that the suspensions were appropriate.


----------



## Complainer (4 Feb 2010)

gunnerfitzy said:


> I believe you will find that that IMPACT have stated that 'the action is in direct response to the staff suspensions.'
> 
> [broken link removed]
> 
> ...


I've seen the light now. I've seen how you get a better understanding of the big picture by taking the narrowest possible interpretation of one side of a story. I look forward to using this new approach in all aspects of my life.


----------



## Purple (4 Feb 2010)

Complainer said:


> I've seen the light now. I've seen how you get a better understanding of the big picture by taking the narrowest possible interpretation of one side of a story. I look forward to using this new approach in all aspects of my life.



Well you've been doing it here for years, so why not?


----------

