Aer lingus ..Cabin crew strike

Sunny said:
Collective bargaining legislation will not be passed by FG. They simply came out with this with this idea during the Lisbon Treaty and has barely been mentioned since, if at all. There is no desire for it apart from the Trade Unions.
Click to expand...


Whereas there are no certainties in politics in this instance we can only rely on Leo Varadkar's unequivocal statement in September 2009 that the rights of workers to collective bargaining would become a reality in Irish Law , as well as a fundamental right in the European Charter , were FG returned to Government.

Working on a further probability that Labour form a substantial portion of the next Government then they will surely pursue as promised the introduction of this legislation.

Everything stated by FG , Labour and Sinn Fein to date adds weight to the belief that the unions are far from alone in wishing for this legislation.
 
Deiseblue said:
Whereas there are no certainties in politics in this instance we can only rely on Leo Varadkar's unequivocal statement in September 2009 that the rights of workers to collective bargaining would become a reality in Irish Law , as well as a fundamental right in the European Charter , were FG returned to Government.

Working on a further probability that Labour form a substantial portion of the next Government then they will surely pursue as promised the introduction of this legislation.

Everything stated by FG , Labour and Sinn Fein to date adds weight to the belief that the unions are far from alone in wishing for this legislation.
Click to expand...

Come on. Political parties promise every bit of legislation asked for by a vested interest group before an election. I am sure Sinn Fein do want it. Labour probably do too but to a lesser extent. FG don't want it. Or at least they won't when they are in power and companies like Intel are offering to invest billions of euro and get in their ear. They never even bothered to come up with an actual policy on the issue. They simply said they would support a law.
 
Sunny said:
Come on. Political parties promise every bit of legislation asked for by a vested interest group before an election. I am sure Sinn Fein do want it. Labour probably do too but to a lesser extent. FG don't want it. Or at least they won't when they are in power and companies like Intel are offering to invest billions of euro and get in their ear. They never even bothered to come up with an actual policy on the issue. They simply said they would support a law.
Click to expand...

I can only base my premise on the avowed intentions of the political parties in question to introduce this legislation.

You may feel that such commitments are pre-election wordplay but there is no factual evidence to support this supposition.
 
Deiseblue said:
I can only base my premise on the avowed intentions of the political parties in question to introduce this legislation.

You may feel that such commitments are pre-election wordplay but there is no factual evidence to support this supposition.
Click to expand...

No but I bet I can find a bigger list of promised legislation from FF's and Greens last manifesto that wasn't passed than was actually passed! Same for every Government I would imagine.
 
Sunny said:
No but I bet I can find a bigger list of promised legislation from FF's and Greens last manifesto that wasn't passed than was actually passed! Same for every Government I would imagine.
Click to expand...

Feel free but the three biggest parties post the coming election - Labour . FG and SF :D all have stated that they back the collective bargaining legislation & as such the passing of the required legislation should be done on the nod particularly as the unions will be strongly pushing for same.

Betcha there was'nt the same unanimity between FF and the Greens on all their proposed legislation !
 
Had a look at Leo Varadkars website and here is an extract from it;

Varadkar rejects Liam Doran’s ‘Uno Duce, Uno Voce’ outburst
December 3rd, 2009
Fine Gael Enterprise Spokesman Leo Varadkar TD has slammed union leader Liam Doran for telling critics of the proposed deal between unions and Government to ‘back off and keep their mouths shut’.

“The proposals being discussed by Government and trade unions will take 250 million hours out of the public service. This means fewer Gardaí on the beat, fewer hospital appointments and less education for our kids.

“It will also mean an across-the-board pay cut for all public servants with school cleaners and clerical officers taking the same cut as public servants on six figure salaries.

“Ordinary taxpayers, consumers, users of public services and their representative groups, and the Opposition have been shut out of these talks. We have a responsibility as politicians to speak up for them.

“Mr Doran’s ‘Uno Duce, Uno Voce’ remark is totally out of order. Ireland is still a democracy and we won’t be told to shut up.”.
Click to expand...

And this;

Work to rule will hurt vulnerable
With public sector unions escalating their work to rule this week, Fine Gael Enterprise Spokesman Leo Varadkar TD has warned their action is not an effective way to bring the message home to Fianna Fáil and the Greens, and will have a bigger impact on the vulnerable.



“The work to rule and go-slow which have been stepped up this week will hurt users of public services much more than they hurt the Government. These include children in schools, patients in hospitals, unemployed people looking for jobs and training, and pensioners seeking medical cards or other benefits. It will only serve to deepen the divisions in our society between the public and private sectors.



“Ireland needs public sector reform and savings, but the approach being taken by the Government and unions will make both much harder to achieve.

“The solution to this is clear. Both sides should accept Fine Gael’s long-standing approach to public sector reform:

• The Government should give an assurance that there will be no additional pay cuts in the next Budget;
• The unions should calls off their action and accept that people have a right to modern, well-run public services, and that this is not in the gift of the trade union movement;
• Negotiations should begin on the basis that the most recent pay cuts can be reversed over time as new contracts and new working practices in the public service are adopted sector by sector, provided these new contracts deliver better public services and real savings for the public.”
Click to expand...
.
 
Deiseblue said:
Feel free but the three biggest parties post the coming election - Labour . FG and SF :D all have stated that they back the collective bargaining legislation & as such the passing of the required legislation should be done on the nod particularly as the unions will be strongly pushing for same.
Click to expand...

Do you think with 400,000 people unemployed, the deficit running at 20GB a year to meet current spending, plus whatever we have to put into the banks that the wants of unions for mainly "safe" jobs should be a priority for any new government?
 
Firefly said:
Do you think with 400,000 people unemployed, the deficit running at 20GB a year to meet current spending, plus whatever we have to put into the banks that the wants of unions for mainly "safe" jobs should be a priority for any new government?
Click to expand...

Nope & I never suggested that the collective bargaining legislation was a priority , I merely pointed out that three major political parties had promised to back such legislation which I might point out encompasses all workers - something I welcome but an immediate priority - No , all in good time.

As I have pointed out before FG , Labour and SF are in favour of such legislation - unions are not alone in wanting this.
 
Deiseblue;
As I have pointed out before FG , Labour and SF are in favour of such legislation - unions are not alone in wanting this.
Click to expand...

Well anyone who is thinking of voting for the parties mentioned can challenge them on this now.
 
thedaras said:
Deiseblue;

Well anyone who is thinking of voting for the parties mentioned can challenge them on this now.
Click to expand...

Challenge them or seek assurances that they will introduce the promised legislation - depends on the prospective voter's viewpoint - couldn't see it as a problem for Labour or other left leaning voters.

Guess this will not be a huge topic on the doorstep though.
 
Naturally the challenge would be based on whatever the voters perspective is,somehow or other I think the answer from all the parties will be from the voters perspective also!

Why not email the parties and see what response is given, I would imagine it will be non committal.

If I email them saying I hope they don't intend to go forward with this,they will probably reply ,that they have no intention of,yet if you email them saying you hope they do go forward with it,I would imagine they would say,of course we are committed to this.
Its Mad Ted!
 
Sick to death of the constant issues with AL. I generally avoid them when I can and fly with someone else.
 
Bronte said:
Didn't understand the point about mealtimes. If you do two shifts to Paris in a day all of the time is not at work so they can have their lunchbreak then? Also I travelled Aer Lingus shorthall recently and the staff had brought their own packed lunch which they ate during the flight.

In relation to childcare. Surely by it's nature an air hostess job is not a 9 to 5 job nor can it be expected to be.
Click to expand...
The point about mealtimes is that they want to 30 minutes of their own break time for lunch or whatever during an 11 hour working day. Eating during a flight is not a break, as customers don't tend to worry about whether staff are on a break when they need their child's bottle warmed or whatever. They're looking for a 30 minute break each day.

We all work through lunch from time to time, but we also all take some time out from work to enjoy lunch from time to time too. That's all they want for meals.

The childcare thing is a huge issue. Indeed, it is not a 9-5 job at present, and they work around that at present. The company want to be able to extend their shifts on demand with zero notice and add extra shifts on demand. They are trying to turn it into a job that can only be done by the young and carefree (and coincidentally I'm sure, cheap). Anyone with family commitments, whether children or an elderly relative will be unable to stay in the job.
 
Complainer said:
The point about mealtimes is that they want to 30 minutes of their own break time for lunch or whatever during an 11 hour working day. Eating during a flight is not a break, as customers don't tend to worry about whether staff are on a break when they need their child's bottle warmed or whatever. They're looking for a 30 minute break each day.
Click to expand...

Actually the issue is not that they are not getting a break, its that they are being given staggered breaks and they want their breaks off the aircraft.

Complainer said:
The childcare thing is a huge issue. Indeed, it is not a 9-5 job at present, and they work around that at present. The company want to be able to extend their shifts on demand with zero notice and add extra shifts on demand. They are trying to turn it into a job that can only be done by the young and carefree (and coincidentally I'm sure, cheap). Anyone with family commitments, whether children or an elderly relative will be unable to stay in the job.
Click to expand...

No - the company want to change a shift by up to 3 hours on the day it is rostered, and by up to 4 hours if any more notice than a day is given. They are not trying to add extra shifts on demand either.
 
truthseeker said:
Actually the issue is not that they are not getting a break, its that they are being given staggered breaks and they want their breaks off the aircraft.
Click to expand...
The issue isn't 'off the aircraft' - the issue is 'away from the customer', i.e. a real break.

truthseeker said:
No - the company want to change a shift by up to 3 hours on the day it is rostered, and by up to 4 hours if any more notice than a day is given. They are not trying to add extra shifts on demand either.
Click to expand...
They are adding extra shifts on demand. One of the suspended staff members was given 90 minutes to get to the airport to start a full shift on her day off. She couldn't get there, and was suspended.
 
Complainer said:
The issue isn't 'off the aircraft' - the issue is 'away from the customer', i.e. a real break.
Click to expand...

No. The issue is that the company want to stagger the breaks. The staff claim there is not time for a 30 minute break in the air on a short flight with the duties to be carried out. Hence, they claim, people who have their break staggered during flight time wont get a break. So they want their break off the aircraft.

Complainer said:
They are adding extra shifts on demand. One of the suspended staff members was given 90 minutes to get to the airport to start a full shift on her day off. She couldn't get there, and was suspended.
Click to expand...

Linky?

btw - I do not agree with the heavy handed actions of the company, but they negotiated with the union and the union agreed to the changes, but now that the company are implementing these changes they are all saying they did not agree to how the changes were implemented. Im not sure what the staff want, changes have to be made, their union agreed them. I doubt the company would want to renegotiate as whats to stop another lengthy round of negotations followed by the union reneging on agreements?
 
truthseeker said:
No. The issue is that the company want to stagger the breaks. The staff claim there is not time for a 30 minute break in the air on a short flight with the duties to be carried out. Hence, they claim, people who have their break staggered during flight time wont get a break. So they want their break off the aircraft.
Click to expand...
No, it's not a question of their physical location for the break - whether on or off the aircraft. The question is about not being visible to (and therefore available to) passengers during their break. So on aircraft is fine, if there are no passengers on the aircraft at the time of the break.

They want a break where they are not going to be interrupted.
truthseeker said:
btw - I do not agree with the heavy handed actions of the company, but they negotiated with the union and the union agreed to the changes, but now that the company are implementing these changes they are all saying they did not agree to how the changes were implemented. Im not sure what the staff want, changes have to be made, their union agreed them. I doubt the company would want to renegotiate as whats to stop another lengthy round of negotations followed by the union reneging on agreements?
Click to expand...
The union didn't agree to removal of an unterrupted break, or to operating on call.
truthseeker said:
Linky?
Click to expand...
Probably Morning Ireland interview, as I don't get to listen to anything else much at present, but honestly, I'm not 100% sure what interview I heard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top