Pay talks breakdown - does this mean mayhem?

Complainer said:
Don't believe everything you read in the Mail.
Click to expand...

I must confess that I have never read the Mail (not being a big English soccer fan most of the content would be wasted on me) ... if I want to read a right-wing anti-Irish paper I would buy the Telegraph as I’m sure it would contain fewer puns. However I have considerable respect for your opinion (while frequently disagreeing with it) so I must see what the fuss is all about.
 
Complainer said:
Here we go again.....

I note that Purple conveniently ignores the substantive point of my post in favour of raising the usual targeted agenda. He conveniently selects the minimum wage staff of Tesco and Eddie Rockets for defence, while ignoring the staff of AIB/FBD, Tesco's well-paid management and extremely well-paid executives and Eddie Rockets well-paid operators.
Click to expand...
I was not aware that Eddie Rocket operatives were paid. I thought it was a franchise where the franchisee took considerable risk in order to run their own business. As for the rest... see my next point.

Complainer said:
For the record, I'm not proposing or recommending paycuts. I'm simply pointing out that if paycuts were to be considered a way forward, logic would dictate that you start with those that have a direct and immediate effect on the cost of living, rather than those that could have an indirect effect. It would be nice if those proposing paycuts could consider this specific issue?
Click to expand...
I don’t necessarily advocate pay cuts either but I do suggest that in an economic downturn the private sector constricts as a matter course. This is not the case in the public sector. This must be acknowledged and government policy should be determined by what is good for the country as a whole and not by the pressure that vested interest groups can bring to bear through institutionalised lobbying (social partnership) or political blackmail.
 
Complainer said:
Just FYI, partnership talks were about a lot more than pay. They were about creating an environment of social partnership, something which has generally been recognised from all sides as a significant contributor to the Celtic Tiger.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't this fall under the role of government? By excluding the opposition (and including many unelected lobbyists - be they employers groups or trade unions) the government is putting in place a very undemocratic process to tackle some major issues of governance.

Also I'm pretty sure bribing the public sector into not striking every week was not a major contributor to the so-called "Celtic Tiger" phenomenon.
 
And when we look around we don't have a hell of a lot in terms of world class education, infrastructure, building standards or health to show for all this 'partnership'. So what exactly were these 'partners' bargaining about in the first place?
 
I think they have a cheek looking for a pay rise when so many people are losing their jobs.They should consider themselves lucky they have a job.Any of them who are on more than the average wage around 33K should stop moaning and be thankful,Maybe and only maybe should those on less than average wage get an increase of no more than 3.80%.I know for fact that a big Swedish mobile company froze wages and bonuses for at least 18 months and that was about 1 year ago.And here we have people trying it on annoying really annoying.
 
Purple said:
I must confess that I have never read the Mail (not being a big English soccer fan most of the content would be wasted on me) ... if I want to read a right-wing anti-Irish paper I would buy the Telegraph
Click to expand...
I have to say that I love the Irish version of the Daily Mail. I have little interest in 75% of the content (caring little for sports coverage, so called celebrity or knickers & vicars stories) but I do enjoy the robust political coverage; can't go wrong for 70 cent. I see that today the unions are calling for a flat €30 (weekly) increase :).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top