Central Bank: 800,000 adults don't want a job

[cremeegg]

How do you figure that they have so much strike power anymore than workers elsewhere?

Seriously ?

Ok assuming you are being serious and you don't know.

When LUAS goes on strike tens perhaps hundreds of thousands of commuters are unable to travel. The LUAS has a grip on public transport that while it falls short of a monopoly is large enough to disrupt not only LUAS users but all other commuters as well.

This disruption is not only widespread it is also severe. People are more than inconvenienced, they are unable to get to work, school, college, shop and so on.

When Dominoes Pizza workers go on strike, people have to settle for curry.

 

[TheBigShort]

When LUAS goes on strike tens perhaps hundreds of thousands of commuters are unable to travel.

So if say, Ryanair pilots went on strike, wouldn't they have the same strike power?
How about taxi drivers?

When Dominoes Pizza workers go on strike, people have to settle for curry.

True, consumers aren't really inconvenienced. But the business model, it's investors, it's brand and its future potential is.
If I invest money in a business and the employees go on strike, am I thinking about the inconvenience (or none) to consumers or about the return on my investment?

If I subsequently agree terms with the striking pizza makers, I will do so on the basis that it is worth my while (ie a return on my investment).
You may then consider that the pizza makers are grossly overpaid, but if consumers are buying the pizza and they are returning a profit on my investment I doubt if your opinion matters much.

 

[TheBigShort]

Here is more news involving trade unions in the private sector

https://www.irn.ie/article/22233

If it doesn't open, it relates to 7,000 employees in retail, including traders like Pennys and m&s, agreeing to improved terms and conditions.

 

[Purple]

So if say, Ryanair pilots went on strike, wouldn't they have the same strike power?

We can use Aer Lingus.

How about taxi drivers?

We can use buses or other transport.

True, consumers aren't really inconvenienced. But the business model, it's investors, it's brand and its future potential is.
If I invest money in a business and the employees go on strike, am I thinking about the inconvenience (or none) to consumers or about the return on my investment?

In the case of Public Sector strikes value for money and return on investment are not even considered.

If I subsequently agree terms with the striking pizza makers, I will do so on the basis that it is worth my while (ie a return on my investment).

Yes, or you could refuse, close the place and then open a similar business with no union.

You may then consider that the pizza makers are grossly overpaid, but if consumers are buying the pizza and they are returning a profit on my investment I doubt if your opinion matters much.

If you are paying them more than your competition and their productivity levels are the same then you will eventually go out of business.

 

[TheBigShort]

We can use Aer Lingus.

Being a smaller airline it's capacity to absorb Ryanair passengers will be limited. Sounds like major inconvenience to me.
But similarly, LUAS passengers can always use Dublin Bus

We can use buses or other transport.

Ditto LUAS passengers. So it was claimed that LUAS drivers have huge 'strike power' over other workers. You would appear to indicate that that is not so?

In the case of Public Sector strikes value for money and return on investment are not even considered.

Trans Dev is a private company. It operates LUAS.

Yes, or you could refuse, close the place and then open a similar business with no union.

Except Domino's I think is an international brand? Kind of tricky to establish a brand like that without having to dig deeper into your pockets and expect the same returns.
Also, if the new workers choose, they can join a union if they so wish.
Sounds very costly to me.

If you are paying them more than your competition and their productivity levels are the same then you will eventually go out of business.

Perhaps, but who said anything about paying them more? Most likely, if pizza worker's are going on strike it would be because they understand that they are being paid less than workers in a competitive business.

 

[Purple]

Being a smaller airline it's capacity to absorb Ryanair passengers will be limited. Sounds like major inconvenience to me.
But similarly, LUAS passengers can always use Dublin Bus



Ditto LUAS passengers. So it was claimed that LUAS drivers have huge 'strike power' over other workers. You would appear to indicate that that is not so?

True, the problem is that they are ultimately State contracts with a large element of State funding and there is a lot of (unionised) media pressure for the Government to get involved.

Trans Dev is a private company. It operates LUAS.

On a State contract. They wouldn't have won the contract without accepting a unionised workforce.

Except Domino's I think is an international brand? Kind of tricky to establish a brand like that without having to dig deeper into your pockets and expect the same returns.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Also, if the new workers choose, they can join a union if they so wish.
Sounds very costly to me.

True, but their new employer doesn't have to talk to the union.

Perhaps, but who said anything about paying them more? Most likely, if pizza worker's are going on strike it would be because they understand that they are being paid less than workers in a competitive business.

Pizza company employees don't go on strike. Most strikes are in the State sector where there are no identical jobs elsewhere. When they are benchmarked against comparable jobs they are paid more and have better overall packages... and yet they still go on strike.

To be clear; if I ran a business and was forced to negotiate with a union (and have a unionised workforce) I would sell or just close the business. Nothing is worth that stress and hassle and the strain of watching the slow death of your business.

 

[TheBigShort]

True, the problem is that they are ultimately State contracts with a large element of State funding and there is a lot of (unionised) media pressure for the Government to get involved.

It was alleged that LUAS workers have greater 'strike power', hence union organization with them. I would dispute this.

On a State contract. They wouldn't have won the contract without accepting a unionised workforce.

That is their business. Nobody forced Transdev to take the contract. That was their choice, do you think they read the tender beforehand?
The strike came about because the company tried to circumvent agreements already made.

I'm not sure what you mean

You implied that it is simply a question of closing and opening another store. This is simplistic.
Many of Ireland's fast food outlets are run by individual investors buying into international franchises. That costs money. If the business model isn't working (striking workers indicates there is a problem) then investors risk losing their money. The option to simply close and re-open is not realistic.

True, but their new employer doesn't have to talk to the union.

Won't stop workers going on strike if they feel aggrieved enough.

Pizza company employees don't go on strike.

http://i.stuff.co.nz/business/91779165/kfc-pizza-hut-carls-jr-starbucks-workers-go-on-strike

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...to-coordinate-strike-with-allies-around-world

 

[Leo]

When LUAS goes on strike tens perhaps hundreds of thousands of commuters are unable to travel.

Another perhaps bigger problem in the LUAS scenario is that when the drivers go on strike looking for ridiculous levels of pay, the company not only lose out on fare revenue, but also have to pay €100k a day to the state for failing to provide the contracted service.

 

[TheBigShort]

Another perhaps bigger problem in the LUAS scenario is that when the drivers go on strike looking for ridiculous levels of pay, the company not only lose out on fare revenue, but also have to pay €100k a day to the state for failing to provide the contracted service.

Of course that is to ignore the facts laid out earlier that the company AGREED to pay these rates of pay. That is how, in part, it won the tender. Are you suggesting that the company should be allowed renege on the terms of the deal that won it a lucrative state transport contract?
On the other hand if they did manage to get away with paying less then the company would increase its profits, meaning higher stock prices and dividends for shareholders. The majority of whom are abroad.
That is wealth leaving the country in return for lower standards of living at home.
The LUAS drivers should be applauded for keeping money, as agreed, in the country. Who knows, they might spend some in your shop!

 

[Leo]

Of course that is to ignore the facts laid out earlier that the company AGREED to pay these rates of pay. That is how, in part, it won the tender. Are you suggesting that the company should be allowed renege on the terms of the deal that won it a lucrative state transport contract?

The double edged sword of loss of income and simultaneous fines in unfair on any company. Over 2,000 applicants for 29 driver openings suggests the jobs market believe Luas drivers were already very well paid. We're paying junior doctors half the rate Luas drivers get. If we're saying well done to Luas drivers, they got what they deserve, what happens the economy as a whole if everyone else uses that as the benchmark?

On the other hand if they did manage to get away with paying less then the company would increase its profits, meaning higher stock prices and dividends for shareholders. The majority of whom are abroad.

So we should turn our back on the global economy and see where we get on our own? Irish people shouldn't be allowed to own stock in non-Irish companies? Foreign investors shouldn't be allowed to invest in Irish companies?

 

[cremeegg]

So we should turn our back on the global economy and see where we get on our own? Irish people shouldn't be allowed to own stock in non-Irish companies? Foreign investors shouldn't be allowed to invest in Irish companies?

Yes and Ryanair should give back all the money it charged passengers flying between non Irish airports.

 

[TheBigShort]

The double edged sword of loss of income and simultaneous fines in unfair on any company.

You may think so, I may think so. The important thing is whether those that competed for the tender thought so.
It would appear that Transdev, and other applicants, didn't not consider this to be unduly unfair.

Over 2,000 applicants for 29 driver openings suggests the jobs market believe Luas drivers were already very well paid.

Yes, what is wrong with well paid workers? If the employer agrees to pay then what is the problem?

We're paying junior doctors half the rate Luas drivers get. If we're saying well done to Luas drivers, they got what they deserve, what happens the economy as a whole if everyone else uses that as the benchmark?

Except junior doctors are permanent. They eventually become senior doctors. I'm sure they weigh up the pro's and con's. The pro's being vastly higher salaries than LUAS drivers in the long run.
But wait, you could be onto something. What happens the economy as a whole if everyone uses the junior to senior doctor model as a benchmark?
You are ignoring facts. The tendering process would not have stipulated the rates of pay. It would have a condition that rates of pay are at a minimum comparable with wages in the economy and in the transport sector. It was for the applicants to offer their pay rates and structures. Transdev offered the best rates.
Are you suggesting that the company should be allowed to renege on its agreements?

So we should turn our back on the global economy and see where we get on our own?

No. It's free trade, but generally what's good for working people here is generally good for the Irish economy as a whole.

Irish people shouldn't be allowed to own stock in non-Irish companies?

Never said that and don't agree with it. The more wealth transferred from other economies to this economy the better, in general.

 

[TheBigShort]

Except you are ignoring the point that the pay increases that the LUAS workers went on strike for were AGREED with their employer. Their employer won the tender for the LUAS contract, in part, because it AGREED it would it pay the drivers these amounts. It AGREED it would enter into negotiations with staff representatives every five years to discuss terms and conditions. That is how it won the lucrative contract.
But you think it's ok to renege on such agreements? The company is profitable, it is expanding, it's productivity targets are being met or exceeded. You think it's ok for it to withdraw from agreements?

I would thought these were straight forward questions to answer.

 

[cremeegg]

Except junior doctors are permanent. They eventually become senior doctors. I'm sure they weigh up the pro's and con's. The pro's being vastly higher salaries than LUAS drivers in the long run.

Like so many on the left you are firmly stuck in a 1950s mind set. Joe Higgins with his, "objects of beauty made by the unionised workers of Waterford Crystal in every Irish household", is an image that will stay with me for ever.

While certainly all consultants in the Public sector earn extremely high salaries, many with obscenely beneficial terms and conditions, and many consultants in the private sector earn very high incomes, not all junior doctors progress to the consultant ranks.

Many middle aged doctors earn LUAS driver levels of income.

As an aside i would apologise for dragging this thread off track, if I knew where the track was.

 

[TheBigShort]

As an aside i would apologise for dragging this thread off track, if I knew where the track was

A private company offers specific terms and conditions in a competitive tender process. It tries to renege on those terms despite increasing profits and productivity measures.
Do you think it is ok to renege on what it agreed, in order to win the lucrative state contract?
That was the track we were on.

 

[Firefly]

As an aside i would apologise for dragging this thread off track, if I knew where the track was.

That was the track we were on.

Seems right for a discussion about the LUAS in any case!

 

[cremeegg]

I really dont think that anybody except your self was on the track of the details of the LUAS dispute.

We were on workers not wanting a job, underemployment and wage pressures.

 

[cremeegg]

Now who put us there.

It's a catchy headline for sure but doesn't really say much. I might not want a job, but it doesn't stop me getting up in the morning to do a job.

The real issue is the lag between the official unemployment rate and the reality that that figure is made up of a lot of part-time workers who would actually like to see their hours increased. Hence, the claim, no inflationary pressure on wages.

 

[TheBigShort]

really dont think that anybody except your self was on the track of the details of the LUAS dispute.

We were on workers not wanting a job, underemployment and wage pressures.

Really, who brought up trade unions on the first place?

What TBS has identified is pressure on household budgets.

Pressure on wages is when employers are feeling pressure to increase pay.

That is not happening because Trade Unions are failing to do the hard work of organising outside the public sector.

They would rather increase the pressure on household budgets by hitting the easy targets in the public sector.

It a much easier life being a union organiser for nurses or teachers than for truck drivers or fast food workers.

You brought trade unions into it. I disagreed with your point. But I went on to give examples of good and bad trade union activism.
You disagreed with my example of good trade union activism

The Luas dispute illustrated all that is worst in Trade Unions.

Luas drivers are grossly overpaid because they have a huge strike power

I'm asking, relative to your comment that LUAS workers are grossly overpaid, do you think it's ok that the employer renege on what it agreed to pay?
Relative to your comment that LUAS workers have huge strike power compared to pizza worker's, I disagree again. I have given examples of fast food pizza worker's fighting their corner by going on strike.
If you don't want to continue the discussion on this track, which you largely contributed to, just say so.

 

[Purple]

but generally what's good for working people here is generally good for the Irish economy as a whole.

Really? High wages lead to high costs. High costs lead to a loss in competitiveness. The only way wealth is created is through increased productivity. Anything other than that is just moving wealth around. We have a small open economy which seeks to attract wealth in. If we are to do that through means other than tax harvesting we have to be more competitive than the next guy. That doesn't mean low wages, it means wages which are linked to productivity. In other words nobody should ever get a pay rise just for being employed for an extra year.