Aer lingus ..Cabin crew strike

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.


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.
 

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.
 

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.
 
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.

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.
 
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.

Feel free but the three biggest parties post the coming election - Labour . FG and SF 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;


And this;

.
 

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?
 
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?

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.

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

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

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.
 
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.
 

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.


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.
 
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.
The issue isn't 'off the aircraft' - the issue is 'away from the customer', i.e. a real break.

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.
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.
 
The issue isn't 'off the aircraft' - the issue is 'away from the customer', i.e. a real break.

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.

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.

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?
 
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.
The union didn't agree to removal of an unterrupted break, or to operating on call.
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.