# What a bunch of morons



## Purple (8 Apr 2009)

[broken link removed]


----------



## Smashbox (8 Apr 2009)

_Management at the company said on Tuesday that a planned US$40 million investment at the facility would not proceed if the flexibility and work practice reform proposals were not accepted by staff. 

It said that this would lead to the eventual wind down of the plant which currently employs 465 staff._ 

Genuises.


----------



## thedaras (8 Apr 2009)

Purple said:


> [broken link removed]


 
Couldnt agree with you more... one of the SR technics workers,wife send an email into pat kenny,and it nearlly broke my heart.

They need to remember the effect their militant actions have on their futures..


----------



## DublinTexas (8 Apr 2009)

Let me see, a company is willing to invest US $ 40 Million in Ireland in this economic climate and all they want in return is that the workforce agrees that overtime in future is paid at a lower premium and only ½ of the time is paid and the other banked so that it could be taken off later?

And that is all, there is no pay cuts on their normal salary involved, it’s only the overtime that is the problem here?

And they reject it and congress is supporting them in this?

So instead of saying an investment of US $ 40 Million is going to make our jobs more secure and in the long run it will also create more jobs which means less overtime anyhow so we should support the company these people tell their company to take a hike?

When (and not if) that company winds down these people should not get any social welfare as they have caused this shutdown.


----------



## thedaras (8 Apr 2009)

DublinTexas said:


> Let me see, a company is willing to invest US $ 40 Million in Ireland in this economic climate and all they want in return is that the workforce agrees that overtime in future is paid at a lower premium and only ½ of the time is paid and the other banked so that it could be taken off later?
> 
> And that is all, there is no pay cuts on their normal salary involved, it’s only the overtime that is the problem here?
> 
> ...


 
This wouldnt be the first time either 
Employers are sick to the teeth of militant workers and their union leaders.
A roller for painting is a new regime for painters and they want more money for a change in work practice as they normally use brushes!!
Its no wonder that we dont see overseas employers here ,and when they do come here the unions are not part of the system


----------



## MandaC (8 Apr 2009)

A family member worked there and it was always very unionised.  One of those places where you could not plug something in if you were not an electrician.  Just heard on the news this evening that they are open to talk tomorrow!


----------



## samanthajane (8 Apr 2009)

I'm not surprised they want to talk now. Think it has sunk in what total planks they were. Ah it's only 40 million and 465 staff not much really!!!!


----------



## thedaras (8 Apr 2009)

I also know someone who works there and is just hanging around waiting to be made redundant!! hes near that age so couldnt give a fiddlers what happens to those he leaves behind,if there is a company at all left.

The older workers and those near retirment tend to be most millitant as they dig their heals in to the employers and wont have to suffer the consequences...


----------



## MandaC (8 Apr 2009)

thedaras said:


> I also know someone who works there and is just hanging around waiting to be made redundant!! hes near that age so couldnt give a fiddlers what happens to those he leaves behind,if there is a company at all left.
> 
> The older workers and those near retirment tend to be most millitant as they dig their heals in to the employers and wont have to suffer the consequences...




Would you believe that the person I know used to work there had the exact same conversation with me this afternoon.  Feels that they are waiting for some nice redundancy packages as most have many years service.


----------



## thedaras (8 Apr 2009)

MandaC said:


> Would you believe that the person I know used to work there had the exact same conversation with me this afternoon. Feels that they are waiting for some nice redundancy packages as most have many years service.


 
God! 5 degrees of separation! Ireland really is a small country


----------



## Pique318 (8 Apr 2009)

I didn't even read the linked article until the end and that was only to get the name of the company.

This is Ireland at the minute, in a microcosm. Ridiculous, and I agree about the social welfare comment above too. They're prepared to go to the Labour Court too ?? Why ? Are the judges golfing buddies of theirs ?


Oh and one more thing....can we stop the rot of the ICTU being referred to as 'Congress' as if they're some higher authority than the Dail or the Seanad...please ? Or maybe they already are


----------



## Pique318 (8 Apr 2009)

thedaras and MandaC....do you like Pina Coladas ?


----------



## MandaC (8 Apr 2009)

Pique318 said:


> thedaras and MandaC....do you like Pina Coladas ?



Now there is something really ironic....that is the song I hate most in the entire universe!


----------



## bamboozle (9 Apr 2009)

unfortunately, 12 years of Bertie blowing every spare cent this state raised in taxes has seen people of all classes/ages/professions living a life beyond their means which unfortunately they are now accustomed to,  these guys must be extremely unionised/stupid/blinkered not to consider this sort of action is reason alone for a company pulling out of Ireland and locating it somewhere where jobs and income are appreciated not expected.


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Apr 2009)

as someone who never got paid overtime but works plenty of it, nor time in lieu, who started off working at a pittance (training contract), where you do what needs to be done and no-one whips out their employment contract to whine that its not in their job description, all this stuff is staggering.

Am I being exploited?, no. I'm in a profession and, at this stage, am well paid, but I worked just as hard when I was on buttons. I abhor this trade union mentality - people who need to be seen to doing something to back the workers - they live an a parallel universe inhabited but 'fat cat' greedy employers exploiting workers. They should be told to roll the clock forward from 1913. Workers are not "entitled" to jobs, they are lucky if they have them. If employers have it so good why dont "exploited" workers go into business themselves??

With the amount of labour law on the books at the moment there is absolutely no positive role to be played by Trade Unions any longer, labour law protects workers, Trade Unions ruin the economy's competitiveness.


----------



## Sunny (9 Apr 2009)

Wasn't the vote to reject the proposals lost by only 30 votes or something. I feel sorry for the workers who had the sense to see the big picture and will now pay the price.


----------



## joker538 (9 Apr 2009)

betsy og said:


> as someone who never got paid overtime but works plenty of it, nor time in lieu, who started off working at a pittance (training contract), where you do what needs to be done and no-one whips out their employment contract to whine that its not in their job description, all this stuff is staggering.
> 
> Am i being exploited?, no. I'm in a profession and, at this stage, am well paid, but i worked just as hard when i was on buttons. I abhor this trade union mentality - people who need to be seen to doing something to back the workers - they live an a parallel universe inhabited but 'fat cat' greedy employers exploiting workers. They should be told to roll the clock forward from 1913. Workers are not "entitled" to jobs, they are lucky if they have them. If employers have it so good why dont "exploited" workers go into business themselves??
> 
> With the amount of labour law on the books at the moment there is absolutely no positive role to be played by trade unions any longer, labour law protects workers, trade unions ruin the economy's competitiveness.


 
+1


----------



## thedaras (9 Apr 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> as someone who never got paid overtime but works plenty of it, nor time in lieu, who started off working at a pittance (training contract), where you do what needs to be done and no-one whips out their employment contract to whine that its not in their job description, all this stuff is staggering.
> 
> Am I being exploited?, no. I'm in a profession and, at this stage, am well paid, but I worked just as hard when I was on buttons. I abhor this trade union mentality - people who need to be seen to doing something to back the workers - they live an a parallel universe inhabited but 'fat cat' greedy employers exploiting workers. They should be told to roll the clock forward from 1913. Workers are not "entitled" to jobs, they are lucky if they have them. If employers have it so good why dont "exploited" workers go into business themselves??
> With the amount of labour law on the books at the moment there is absolutely no positive role to be played by Trade Unions any longer, labour law protects workers, Trade Unions ruin the economy's competitiveness.


Brilliant post.
couldnt agree with you more.I have to laugh when I hear people say,I gave my life to the company...surely the company gave them a life ,in that the company gave them a job,which allowed them to have a life for themselves and their families.
The way some workers go on ,one would think they worked for nothing,or were doing a life sentance for little or no pay.
When asked to change work practices ,they go ape,and when the company pull out due to the militant practices of workers and unions ,they get on radio shows to complain...


----------



## oldtimer (9 Apr 2009)

Listening to the lady Trade Union official on Morning Ireland I almost cried for the unfortunate workers. She said the Company ''couldn't be trusted'' and local Management were not easy to deal with. Gosh, imagine the parent company officials in Germany having to listen to this. If I was one of those German officials I would jump at the opportunity to get out of this country. Don't know anything about this Company but assume they pay well. Will they be marching down O'Connell Street this week-end?


----------



## Pique318 (9 Apr 2009)

oldtimer said:


> Will they be marching down O'Connell Street this week-end?


Rotten fruit at the ready  Aim for the first person to mention 'Congress'


----------



## wavejumper (9 Apr 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> as someone who never got paid overtime but works plenty of it, nor time in lieu, who started off working at a pittance (training contract), where you do what needs to be done and no-one whips out their employment contract to whine that its not in their job description, all this stuff is staggering.
> 
> Am I being exploited?, no. I'm in a profession and, at this stage, am well paid, but I worked just as hard when I was on buttons. I abhor this trade union mentality - people who need to be seen to doing something to back the workers - they live an a parallel universe inhabited but 'fat cat' greedy employers exploiting workers. They should be told to roll the clock forward from 1913. Workers are not "entitled" to jobs, they are lucky if they have them. If employers have it so good why dont "exploited" workers go into business themselves??
> 
> With the amount of labour law on the books at the moment there is absolutely no positive role to be played by Trade Unions any longer, labour law protects workers, Trade Unions ruin the economy's competitiveness.



excellent post, completely agree.


----------



## bullbars (9 Apr 2009)

oldtimer said:


> If I was one of those German officials I would jump at the opportunity to get out of this country. Don't know anything about this Company but assume they pay well. Will they be marching down O'Connell Street this week-end?


 
Between Oldtimer and Betsy Og, the nail has been firmly hit square on the head on this one!

I'd say the board of that company and indeed many other similiar foreign companies have the world map out right about now wondering where they will shift operations to when they shut the Irish plant down. 
I used to work overtime when required but wasnt paid for it. But there was give and take, If I needed a day off for a wedding etc. nothing was said and I wasnt docked wages.


----------



## thedaras (9 Apr 2009)

Pique318 said:


> Rotten fruit at the ready  Aim for the first person to mention 'Congress'


 
I have my rotten tomatoe at the ready...


----------



## gillarosa (9 Apr 2009)

What makes them Moron's?  
Their Employer put a proposal to them in regard to a change in the working arrangement regarding shifts. It was rejected, the Workers Representatives have proposed that the LC become involved, its called negotiation. The Employer (many believe) are using the current economic climate as a weapon to bring in working patterns which have been rejected before. Working patterns that most of us would not be happy to work under in any Industry, for example to work a 7 day week if the Company dictates from May - October and bank time rather than be paid for all of it so you can be paid for the time the Employer decided they don't need you in situ for example February, what would you do for a month in February if you have a normal family life you can't up sticks and follow the sun as the kids are in School, can't do anything in the garden because its lashing rain outside, hey can't even go golfing with the LC Judges as a poster suggested some do. For those of you logging on here during your working day, whinging about not getting paid for overtime you need to put in to possibly catch up with the work you haven't completed because you have been on-line its actually comical.
Two posters claim to know the same carricature of a Unionised Worker in there and have certain knowledge of the situation, if they actually did  they would have real fact about the situation rather than the BS they posted about Redundancy, that is not the aim of the rejection of the proposal.


----------



## Betsy Og (9 Apr 2009)

gillarosa said:


> What makes them Moron's?
> For those of you logging on here during your working day, whinging about not getting paid for overtime you need to put in to possibly catch up with the work you haven't completed because you have been on-line its actually comical.
> quote]
> 
> talk about missing the point, the point is that we are not whinging, we dont whinge, we dont pay somebody to whinge on our behalf. But if you're happy to allow yourself be talked out of a job then fair enough


----------



## shanegl (9 Apr 2009)

> The Employer (many believe) are using the current economic climate as a weapon to bring in working patterns which have been rejected before.


 
Probably because their union reps have been putting that nonsense in their heads.

If and when the company shuts down, they'll probably still be spouting the mantra that this was a "profitable" company and that head office are "greedy fatcats", all the while expecting the government to come in with some sort of bailout for them.

In these sort of situations, what you'll never hear these people admit is that their own entrenched militancy contributed to the end of their employment.


----------



## Complainer (9 Apr 2009)

Wow, so many chips on shoulders here in this thread, I feel a craving for a smoked cod coming on.

The reality of course is that the $40m investment is being waved around in the background as a carrot, but is not on the negotiating table. It is a possibility, but it is not on the table in the current negotiations. 

So take that away, and see how the big picture suddenly changes.


----------



## zxcvbnm (9 Apr 2009)

So what exactly happened here?

The crowd in germany told teh workers that unlessthe staff agree to some work practices they would move ya?

The staff voted against teh new work practices and the germans said that they were off so.

Is that the crux of it?


----------



## DonDub (10 Apr 2009)

Complainer said:


> Wow, so many chips on shoulders here in this thread, I feel a craving for a smoked cod coming on.
> 
> The reality of course is that the $40m investment is being waved around in the background as a carrot, but is not on the negotiating table. It is a possibility, but it is not on the table in the current negotiations.
> 
> So take that away, and see how the big picture suddenly changes.


 

The stark reality is that Ireland is a high cost location, for virtually everything - living,working,marrying,manufacturing, and dying.

There are endless examples of unions pushing employers to the brink, again and again, and when a company eventually reaches the end of its tether - the unions queue up to call for rescue plans, political intervention, or the Labour Court, to save the day.

SR technics might still be operating if the unions hadn't made the implementation of change painfully slow and expensive, over many years.
No company can defy the laws of the market-place, if you can't compete, you die.....it's that simple.....


----------



## Caveat (10 Apr 2009)

Complainer said:


> Wow, so many chips on shoulders here in this thread, I feel a craving for a smoked cod coming on.
> 
> The reality of course is that the $40m investment is being waved around in the background as a carrot, but is not on the negotiating table. It is a possibility, but it is not on the table in the current negotiations.
> 
> *So take that away, and see how the big picture suddenly changes*.



How exactly? Whatever the conditions/circumstances there was still a vote was there not?


----------



## Pique318 (10 Apr 2009)

> She said: “We warned management during 12 hours of talks at the Labour Relations Commission on Monday that further engagement was necessary if we were to reach an agreement that production workers at the plant would buy into.
> “Management insisted on putting the proposals in their present form to the workforce and the result was rejection. The obvious thing now is to re-engage.”




"We warned management" ???


So the unions are finally being played at their own game and the companies are calling their bluff ? About bloody time !!


----------



## Complainer (10 Apr 2009)

DonDub said:


> The stark reality is that Ireland is a high cost location, for virtually everything - living,working,marrying,manufacturing, and dying.
> 
> There are endless examples of unions pushing employers to the brink, again and again, and when a company eventually reaches the end of its tether - the unions queue up to call for rescue plans, political intervention, or the Labour Court, to save the day.


There are two sides to every story. For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'. For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head.



Caveat said:


> How exactly? Whatever the conditions/circumstances there was still a vote was there not?


Indeed, there was a vote. But it wasn't a vote on accepting the $40m investment. The $40m investment wasn't on the table for this vote. It was the PR spin waving around in the background.

I don't know enough about this issue to make a sensible comment about the vote itself. Most of those who jump on the 'morons' bandwagon appear to know even less then me.


----------



## DublinTexas (10 Apr 2009)

gillarosa said:


> For those of you logging on here during your working day, whinging about not getting paid for overtime you need to put in to possibly catch up with the work you haven't completed because you have been on-line its actually comical.


 
How would you know what my working times are? Just because I post during 9 to 5 you assume it's working hours for me? Not to mention that I don't get overtime.



gillarosa said:


> The Employer (many believe) are using the current economic climate as a weapon to bring in working patterns which have been rejected before.


 
This is another one of the lines straight out of the playbook of "congress", this is getting old. Sure some employers do actualy try this but not all of them. So to use this in every time a company tries to do a minor change is just watering this argument down.




gillarosa said:


> Two posters claim to know the same carricature of a Unionised Worker in there and have certain knowledge of the situation, if they actually did they would have real fact about the situation rather than the BS they posted about Redundancy, that is not the aim of the rejection of the proposal.


 
I can not comment to the validity of the poster but your premise that the rejection of the proposal is not redundancy is just wrong. They must have known that if they reject to move on overtime that the employer has a possibility to move these jobs. And while I not advocate that they should take what ever the employer asks them to do (in a kind of blackmail) the request of the employer here and the larger implications (added new investment) is not so big that you should risk a shut down of the company.

If I would be Lufthansa I would close the plant and move it to Germany where while the workers there sometimes also go on strike overall there is a working social partnership with responsible unions and employers and the I can use existing resources to merge with this arm of the organisation.


----------



## Purple (10 Apr 2009)

Complainer said:


> There are two sides to every story.


So what are the two sides here? You admit that you know bugger all about this but you still see fit to treat us to 1920’s style class warfare gibberish. 


Complainer said:


> For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'. For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head.


 What evidence do you have that “For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'”?... or is that just a flight of fancy based on nothing more than upper-middleclass socialist angst and a resentment of those that actually employ “the poor” and give them more than empty rhetoric?
Let’s for a moment suppose that you are correct and “For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head” So people should be paid what they need to sustain their lifestyle rather than in accordance with the value of their input/labour? The rest of the free world gave up on such absurd notions a few generations back. 
If an employee is not getting a fair wage for their work then they can move to a different job. If what they consider to be a fair wage is not available in the market place then their expectations are unrealistic.
You, like so many socialists, are confusing where the core social responsibility to engineer a just society lies. It is up to the people, through their government, to use the taxation system to redistribute wealth in society. If people are struggling financially why should their employer pay them a wage that they do not deserve and cannot justify which will make the business unviable in the medium term?



Complainer said:


> Indeed, there was a vote. But it wasn't a vote on accepting the $40m investment. The $40m investment wasn't on the table for this vote. It was the PR spin waving around in the background.


 There was no PR spin; the €40 million has been on the cards for many months. In case you hadn’t noticed there is a recession at the moment and air travel suffers during a recession. Jet engine overhaul is scheduled based on the hours each engine has been in use. Therefore when fewer planes fly fewer engines need to be overhauled. (5th year economics bit) _When supply is greater than demand there is a downward pressure on price._ If you don’t believe me have a walk around Dundrum shopping centre and look at all the sales. 
Anyway, back to the morons in question; they were too expensive in the boom and the sure as shinola are too expensive now. They are morons if they can’t see this, they are morons if they can’t see that their jobs are at stake and they are morons if they think a government and a people that are facing our biggest crisis since the foundation of the state have any apatite to help people who act in a moronic and self-destructive manner.


Complainer said:


> I don't know enough about this issue to make a sensible comment about the vote itself. Most of those who jump on the 'morons' bandwagon appear to know even less then me.


 You’re half right there.


----------



## DonDub (10 Apr 2009)

Purple said:


> So what are the two sides here? You admit that you know bugger all about this but you still see fit to treat us to 1920’s style class warfare gibberish.
> What evidence do you have that “For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'”?... or is that just a flight of fancy based on nothing more than upper-middleclass socialist angst and a resentment of those that actually employ “the poor” and give them more than empty rhetoric?
> Let’s for a moment suppose that you are correct and “For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head” So people should be paid what they need to sustain their lifestyle rather than in accordance with the value of their input/labour? The rest of the free world gave up on such absurd notions a few generations back.
> If an employee is not getting a fair wage for their work then they can move to a different job. If what they consider to be a fair wage is not available in the market place then their expectations are unrealistic.
> ...


 

Purple, I couldn't agree more.

By the way, can anyone remember reading about a union proactively engaging with management to ensure the future survival a company with a view to preserving jobs - I certainly haven't. They seem to see their sole purpose is to resist, delay and obfuscate -to seek more, for doing less.
Unions ,dare I say it, could be proactive -seeking to understand the commercial realities within which particular companies operate. By taking this approach, we could see 'real' partnership emerge, as against the 'phoney' version we have now.
This 'real' approach would surely create conditions for long term sustainable growth and employment.
Unfortunately, the chances of unions changing their approach is probably less than zero - and if so, they deserve to be consigned to the dustbin of history!!


----------



## thedaras (10 Apr 2009)

Purple said:


> So what are the two sides here? You admit that you know bugger all about this but you still see fit to treat us to 1920’s style class warfare gibberish.
> What evidence do you have that “For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'”?... or is that just a flight of fancy based on nothing more than upper-middleclass socialist angst and a resentment of those that actually employ “the poor” and give them more than empty rhetoric?
> Let’s for a moment suppose that you are correct and “For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head” So people should be paid what they need to sustain their lifestyle rather than in accordance with the value of their input/labour? The rest of the free world gave up on such absurd notions a few generations back.
> If an employee is not getting a fair wage for their work then they can move to a different job. If what they consider to be a fair wage is not available in the market place then their expectations are unrealistic.
> ...


 

Wow Purple!! What an incredible,sensible insight.
Wish we had people like you in govenment.
Agree with everything you say..well done


----------



## thedaras (10 Apr 2009)

DonDub said:


> Purple, I couldn't agree more.
> 
> By the way, can anyone remember reading about a union proactively engaging with management to ensure the future survival a company with a view to preserving jobs - I certainly haven't. They seem to see their sole purpose is to resist, delay and obfuscate -to seek more, for doing less.
> Unions ,dare I say it, could be proactive -seeking to understand the commercial realities within which particular companies operate. By taking this approach, we could see 'real' partnership emerge, as against the 'phoney' version we have now.
> ...


Excellent post dondub,would you and purple start a new policital party.please!!agree with you 100 %


----------



## Complainer (10 Apr 2009)

thedaras said:


> Excellent post dondub,would you and purple start a new policital party.please!!agree with you 100 %


Excellent idea - a hard-right party in Ireland. Why didn't anyone think of this before. It is bound to attract overwhelming support. Maybe you should call it, oooh let's see, how about the 'Progressive Democrats'?


----------



## Purple (10 Apr 2009)

Complainer said:


> Excellent idea - a hard-right party in Ireland. Why didn't anyone think of this before. It is bound to attract overwhelming support. Maybe you should call it, oooh let's see, how about the 'Progressive Democrats'?


 More smoked salmon socialist nonsense. There hasn't been a hard right party in Ireland since the Blue Shirts. There is no rightwing party at the moment. The PD's were in favour of the welfare state (as I am) and so only someone who is blinded by discredited socialist ideology or allows their political bias to overwhelm their rationality could describe them as a hard-right party.


----------



## circle (10 Apr 2009)

DonDub said:


> By the way, can anyone remember reading about a union proactively engaging with management to ensure the future survival a company with a view to preserving jobs - I certainly haven't.


 
This agreement between Mandate and Superquinn seems very progressive and sensible. Instead of engaging in protracted debate about the past (Dundalk store closure) the management, staff and union seem to be working well together for the best realistic shared outcome:
http://www.rte.ie/business/2009/0327/superquinn.html

It seems to me to be a template of how partnership should work in the wider economy.


----------



## Yachtie (13 Apr 2009)

Betsy Og said:


> as someone who never got paid overtime but works plenty of it, nor time in lieu, who started off working at a pittance (training contract), where you do what needs to be done and no-one whips out their employment contract to whine that its not in their job description, all this stuff is staggering.
> 
> Am I being exploited?, no. I'm in a profession and, at this stage, am well paid, but I worked just as hard when I was on buttons. I abhor this trade union mentality - people who need to be seen to doing something to back the workers - they live an a parallel universe inhabited but 'fat cat' greedy employers exploiting workers. They should be told to roll the clock forward from 1913. Workers are not "entitled" to jobs, they are lucky if they have them. If employers have it so good why dont "exploited" workers go into business themselves??
> 
> With the amount of labour law on the books at the moment there is absolutely no positive role to be played by Trade Unions any longer, labour law protects workers, Trade Unions ruin the economy's competitiveness.


 


thedaras said:


> Brilliant post.
> couldnt agree with you more.I have to laugh when I hear people say,I gave my life to the company...surely the company gave them a life ,in that the company gave them a job,which allowed them to have a life for themselves and their families.
> The way some workers go on ,one would think they worked for nothing,or were doing a life sentance for little or no pay.
> When asked to change work practices ,they go ape,and when the company pull out due to the militant practices of workers and unions ,they get on radio shows to complain...


 


DonDub said:


> The stark reality is that Ireland is a high cost location, for virtually everything - living,working,marrying,manufacturing, and dying.
> 
> There are endless examples of unions pushing employers to the brink, again and again, and when a company eventually reaches the end of its tether - the unions queue up to call for rescue plans, political intervention, or the Labour Court, to save the day.
> 
> ...


 


Purple said:


> So what are the two sides here? You admit that you know bugger all about this but you still see fit to treat us to 1920’s style class warfare gibberish.
> What evidence do you have that “For every 'union pushing employers to the brink', there are the 'employers pushing employees to the brink'”?... or is that just a flight of fancy based on nothing more than upper-middleclass socialist angst and a resentment of those that actually employ “the poor” and give them more than empty rhetoric?
> Let’s for a moment suppose that you are correct and “For every employer struggling to deal with the high-cost location, there are many employees struggling to deal with the high-cost of location, and put/keep a roof over their families head” So people should be paid what they need to sustain their lifestyle rather than in accordance with the value of their input/labour? The rest of the free world gave up on such absurd notions a few generations back.
> If an employee is not getting a fair wage for their work then they can move to a different job. If what they consider to be a fair wage is not available in the market place then their expectations are unrealistic.
> ...


 
There is nothing I could add to those BRILLIANT posts which IMHO deserve a round of applause.


----------



## diarmuidc (23 Apr 2009)

Is this Darwinian principles in action in the job market?
http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0422/lufthansatechnik.html

From the looks of things, this is giving morons a bad name!


----------



## Purple (23 Apr 2009)

I heard some poor bewildered gob-daw on the radio from the union. Even the bearded brethren want to accept what's on offer but the older employees seem to be knifing their younger co-workers in the back and selling out their future so that the old timers can get a big pay-off. That's solidarity for ya!


----------



## kinnjohn (19 Jul 2021)

I saw this tread for the first time today
What a bunch of Morons, 
Interesting to have a look at this company 10 years later,
Enjoy,


----------



## Purple (20 Jul 2021)

kinnjohn said:


> I saw this tread for the first time today
> What a bunch of Morons,
> Interesting to have a look at this company 10 years later,
> Enjoy,


Yea, the place closed in 2013 and 400 people lost their job. The older employees shafted the younger ones and the Union backed them then criticised the company for closing the plant. What a bunch of morons.

They have now opened a new repair centre employing a fraction of the previous number. As far as I know it's 30-40 people.


----------



## kinnjohn (20 Jul 2021)

Purple said:


> Yea, the place closed in 2013 and 400 people lost their job. The older employees shafted the younger ones and the Union backed them then criticised the company for closing the plant. What a bunch of morons.
> 
> They have now opened a new repair centre employing a fraction of the previous number. As far as I know it's 30-40 people.


I know it closed in 2013, I was at the auction when machinery was sold,
I was interested in their coating equipment, they withdrew anything of the good listed on the catalog on the day of the auction,


----------



## Purple (20 Jul 2021)

kinnjohn said:


> I know it closed in 2013, I was at the auction when machinery was sold,
> I was interested in their coating equipment, they withdrew anything of the good listed on the catalog on the day of the auction,


We made most of their MRO tooling.
Anyone who was any use there got work elsewhere and now we make tooling for them.


----------

