Reason you wont be protesting on the 10th December

so-crates · 5 Dec 2014

Firefly said:
My point is that it's clear for all to see now that this is primarily a tax. The low capped rates confirm that water preservation is not the goal here. Surely as a result, hundreds of millions could have been saved by just adding say 50e per quarter to the household charge and directing this to the local councils for water?

How long do you (not you personally!) think it will take Irish Water to even recoup the set up costs, never mind upgrade the network?

As for your scheme of a flat charge on the (now defunct) household charge and continuing with the status quo, you are assuming that having water management fragmented across multiple councils around the country is a good thing. It isn't. We need a national approach to managing our water supply if only for the simple reason that the population gradient is the reverse of the rainfall gradient (more people East, more rain West). The existing system is not sustainable. The set up costs were always going to be substantial - I accept that and understand it. The cost added by having to deal with the truculent minority attempting to blockade, interfere and generally misbehave is far more aggravating.

As for your query about when Irish Water will get down to the business of being Irish Water and upgrading the network (which by the way is not their only function), all existing upgrade projects have been continued and new have been started. Will they have to cut their cloth to suit the penurious measure forced on them by the behaviour of the self-important anti-water brigade? Possibly, I guess it depends on whether the government can find the money to plug the gap the idiots have forced.

The low, capped, rates are wrong but they are NOT what was intended or proposed. They are as a result of the government capitulating to pressure from the ridiculous and unpleasant campaign being waged by those that do not have the best interests of the country or our water management systems in mind. To present that as evidence that this is "primarily a tax" is disingenuous, it isn't evidence of that.

I'd rather pay the per usage charge and pay it honestly than "benefit" from this concession that has been made to the idiot brigade. Roll on 2018 when we will hopefully have become habituated to the concept and a more sane charging regime can be imposed (though no doubt the idiot brigade will be out in force again claiming their Pyrrhic "victory" now can and ought to be replicated)

Deiseblue · 5 Dec 2014

Delboy said:
Thats very disingenuous of you there. Imagine if the Govt had said there would be compulsory redundancies (Cork Park, Haddington or not), the Unions would have gone nuts and blocked the whole set-up for years.
There was no Croke Park etc back when the HSE was set up, but no compulsory redundancies then either.
So to paint the Unions as innocents in this is totally incorrect, though par for the course with yourself!

Why is the average age so high I wonder? Perhaps I could have a stab at that.
If I were a Local Authority manager and 2 years or so ago I knew IW was being set up and they were going to take over all aspects of Water Mgmt from all Local Authorities including the staff in those sections, well I would have started planning!
I would have enticed all those in the Local Authority that were surplus or beyond useless or awkward to deal with, into moving into the Water section. That would have meant giving some of them a re-grading or even promotion (so more money!) to ensure they made the move. I would have done this early so they were firmly in position before the transfer date, though I doubt IW cared if they were only put in the week before judging on how IW seem to spend their money so easily.
(didn't the CSO point out that the staffing levels in IW were double what they should be - I believe this helps explain why)

A lot of those staff were then put on to the 'bonus' scheme in IW after negotiations with the Unions, meaning they gave up their previously automatic increments. So I presume some more money was given to the staff in question to accept this.
'Bonuses' are now gone but the staff certainly won't give up whatever sweetner they got originally to accept that new pay deal.

So a lot of the transferred staff will have done well on the double here. Promoted or regraded within their local authority before they left, and giving a pay off of some sort to accept the new payscale regime in IW.
All for doing no extra work, or changing their way of 'working' (which for some I no doubt use that term loosely!)

And that is how we do business in Ireland!

Compulsory redundancies were never on the agenda - the Government stated unequivocally that compulsory redundancies were not on the table & the reduction in numbers would be achieved through natural attrition & programmes of voluntary redundancies - the Governments in question are to be commended on this eminently reasonable solution to a tricky problem .

Of course it is incumbent on Trade Unions to protect the jobs , terms & conditions of their members but thankfully in this instance due to the reasonable attitude of the Government as employers industrial action was not required.

As for your " stab " at outlining the local authority / Irish water connection I have filed that away mentally as fiction as your understanding of the situation is totally unsupported by any semblance of fact - if you would care to post such facts please feel free to do so .

Given that you asked me to answer some queries on the transfer of local authority workers to Irish Water recently ( you never thanked me for my reply incidentally )suggests that your understanding of such matters is pretty poor.

Delboy · 5 Dec 2014

My understanding is actually pretty good of how the PS works as I have spent over half my working life in there!

You can get floury with your language all you want about the Govt stating compulsory redundancies were never on the table etc. If they could have, they would have. But the Unions won't ever allow that and so we're left with a new PS monster, where double the staff requirements exist and the general public pay for it...a la the HSE!

flowerman · 5 Dec 2014

A very simple and straight to the point video about Irish Water and the money wasted on setting it up.
Its not about fixing water leaks,its about a money making racket and nothing more.Its also a jobs for the boys company too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVjqFA7HNwU#t=121

Lets not forget 81,000 euro a week on legal advice too.Must be some legal advice to get for that price per week.
Oh and Phil Hogan giving a load of his frends and ex councilers nice cushy jobs in various companies and on various boards the week before he leaves for his fat cat salary over in the EU.Jobs for the boys allright.

Deiseblue · 5 Dec 2014

Delboy said:
My understanding is actually pretty good of how the PS works as I have spent over half my working life in there!

You can get floury with your language all you want about the Govt stating compulsory redundancies were never on the table etc. If they could have, they would have. But the Unions won't ever allow that and so we're left with a new PS monster, where double the staff requirements exist and the general public pay for it...a la the HSE!

I have no doubt that your understanding of how the PS workers is pretty good but unfortunately your understanding of the Irish Water / Local authorities scenario is poor.

I would refer you back to my ( still unacknowledeged ) replies to the queries raised by you - let me rehash my reply as you obviously missed same :
" the local authority workers under service level agreements will continue to work for and be managed by the 34 Local Authorities to which they report & work for - I believe that such agreement expires in 2025 , apparently the average age of such workers is 49 !
Their terms & conditions remain UNCHANGED & such workers are Irish Water employees but are effectively seconded back to the local authorities , the bonus system applies ONLY to the 400 staff directly employed by Irish Water "

Hopefully the bonuses will be reinstated after their removal is challenged & the industrial mechanisms of the State are involved.

As to compulsory redundancies question , it never arose as the Government adopted the correct policies as responsible Employers in reducing staff numbers - no need for Union involvement .

Numbers in local authorities / IW will be reduced by natural attrition & an incentivised voluntary parting package - the humane & responsible solution !

Firefly · 5 Dec 2014

so-crates said:
As for your scheme of a flat charge on the (now defunct) household charge and continuing with the status quo, you are assuming that having water management fragmented across multiple councils around the country is a good thing. It isn't. We need a national approach to managing our water supply if only for the simple reason that the population gradient is the reverse of the rainfall gradient (more people East, more rain West). The existing system is not sustainable. The set up costs were always going to be substantial - I accept that and understand it. The cost added by having to deal with the truculent minority attempting to blockade, interfere and generally misbehave is far more aggravating.

As for your query about when Irish Water will get down to the business of being Irish Water and upgrading the network (which by the way is not their only function), all existing upgrade projects have been continued and new have been started. Will they have to cut their cloth to suit the penurious measure forced on them by the behaviour of the self-important anti-water brigade? Possibly, I guess it depends on whether the government can find the money to plug the gap the idiots have forced.

The low, capped, rates are wrong but they are NOT what was intended or proposed. They are as a result of the government capitulating to pressure from the ridiculous and unpleasant campaign being waged by those that do not have the best interests of the country or our water management systems in mind. To present that as evidence that this is "primarily a tax" is disingenuous, it isn't evidence of that.

I'd rather pay the per usage charge and pay it honestly than "benefit" from this concession that has been made to the idiot brigade. Roll on 2018 when we will hopefully have become habituated to the concept and a more sane charging regime can be imposed (though no doubt the idiot brigade will be out in force again claiming their Pyrrhic "victory" now can and ought to be replicated)

I get all that and I agree with you in theory. However, as we know too well in this country, extra taxes / charges have never resulted in better services in any meaningful way. That's why I am so sceptical that the infrastructure will ever be fixed regardless of whether the funds to directly to IW. As I mentioned earlier, there were plenty people on trolleys in the HSE during the Celtic Tiger. Going off point perhaps, and maybe I am lucky, but for all the cuts in spending by the government in recent budgets, I have yet to really feel the impact....the services were never really there!!

Leo · 5 Dec 2014

flowerman said:
You wouldnt go to McDonalds to buy a big mac burger and let be charged for it twice over,so why allow it to happen with water.You allready pay for the water through general taxation so stand up to FG,Labour and IW.Now is the time to do it.

But those currently connected to one of the more than 170,000 private wells in Ireland are paying for their big mac twice, and in mane cases more so. What's the equitable solution to that? Government to pay for every single well and treatment unit in the country?

Delboy · 5 Dec 2014

Deiseblue said:
I have no doubt that your understanding of how the PS workers is pretty good but unfortunately your understanding of the Irish Water / Local authorities scenario is poor.

I would refer you back to my ( still unacknowledeged ) replies to the queries raised by you - let me rehash my reply as you obviously missed same :
" the local authority workers under service level agreements will continue to work for and be managed by the 34 Local Authorities to which they report & work for - I believe that such agreement expires in 2025 , apparently the average age of such workers is 49 !
Their terms & conditions remain UNCHANGED & such workers are Irish Water employees but are effectively seconded back to the local authorities , the bonus system applies ONLY to the 400 staff directly employed by Irish Water "

Didn't realise I had to make an acknowledgement!

Hopefully the bonuses will be reinstated after their removal is challenged & the industrial mechanisms of the State are involved.

Hopefully indeed!

As to compulsory redundancies question , it never arose as the Government adopted the correct policies as responsible Employers in reducing staff numbers - no need for Union involvement .

Correct polices! IW has twice the number of staff that it needs.
What the Govt did was bottle the issue as usual, and avoided making a hard decision. Much as they have done recently by backing down to the protests of a small minority.
Thats why this country is in a mess every few years or so

Numbers in local authorities / IW will be reduced by natural attrition & an incentivised voluntary parting package - the humane & responsible solution !

Not humane for the taxpayer for sure!

Deiseblue · 5 Dec 2014

Normally when I raise queries with someone & they answer them I would thank them out of politeness - doesn't apply to everyone I guess !

Hopefully I have now cleared up the confusion under which you laboured vis a vis the local authorities / IW scenario - again !

I cannot understand why people would cheerfully see workers thrown on the scrapheap - thankfully our elected Government feel the same.

flowerman · 5 Dec 2014

Leo said:
But those currently connected to one of the more than 170,000 private wells in Ireland are paying for their big mac twice, and in mane cases more so. What's the equitable solution to that? Government to pay for every single well and treatment unit in the country?

If you are connected to a private well and can prove it to FG/Labour then you should be rewarded for it in some way in the form of some form of a tax break perhaps?.

I know what you are saying Leo and I do agree with your point,but its unjust and unfair on EVERYONE in some way shape or form.

The video I posted just above your post about Enda Kenny,IW and massive waste of money makes a very good point though and it is a "straight to the point" video.

Ceist Beag · 5 Dec 2014

Deiseblue said:
I cannot understand why people would cheerfully see workers thrown on the scrapheap - thankfully our elected Government feel the same.

That's one view on it. Another would be to say, I cannot understand why people would cheerfully pay twice as much as they need to in order to get a job done. Unfortunately our elected Government didn't see the need to address this.

Delboy · 5 Dec 2014

Deiseblue said:
Normally when I raise queries with someone & they answer them I would thank them out of politeness - doesn't apply to everyone I guess !

Hopefully I have now cleared up the confusion under which you laboured vis a vis the local authorities / IW scenario - again !

I cannot understand why people would cheerfully see workers thrown on the scrapheap - thankfully our elected Government feel the same.

Well, I hope the AAM servers can stand all the extra traffic of people thanking each other on a regular basis! But thanks indeed for your feedback and clarifications.

But let's not say you have cleared up any confusions.

I cannot understand why anybody would gladly pay people to 'work' in jobs that don't really exist....smacks of the USSR to me. But there you go, each to their own

roker · 5 Dec 2014

It should be called an Austerity demo. it not about water, it is about Austerity, corruption and cronyism, Why did Irish water refuse to have free meters from Siemens? because there are cronies with business interest involved, they are already €1.5m over budget for fitting meters. Why are the top people on such high wages? and bonuses before a drop of water is supplied?

Marion · 5 Dec 2014

Hi Roker

You should perhaps send an email to the organisers? There is still time for them to change the headline banner!

It would also be very helpful for those who think they will be marching in relation to the water charges.

Many will travel up from the country by road and rail and it would be important that they know in advance what they are actually marching for.

Many others will be making the effort from Dublin.

Those who are working will have to take a day's holiday. Fair play to them. No doubt there will be a number who will pull a sickie

Regards

Marion

Ps: Hope those who pull a sickie don't appear on the News. That'd be deadly altogether

Deiseblue · 5 Dec 2014

Delboy said:
Well, I hope the AAM servers can stand all the extra traffic of people thanking each other on a regular basis! But thanks indeed for your feedback and clarifications.

But let's not say you have cleared up any confusions.

I cannot understand why anybody would gladly pay people to 'work' in jobs that don't really exist....smacks of the USSR to me. But there you go, each to their own

Let's not be disingenuous , admit it - you thought all the workers transferred from the local authorities were on bonuses & were bought off to sign off the incremental system - absolute nonsense , let me reiterate their terms & conditions remain UNCHANGED , the only IW workers who were signed up to the bonus system are the 400 employed directly by IW - apparently of which slightly more than 100 were recruited from the local authorities .

As compulsory redundancies are simply not going to happen - facts have to be faced ,the local authority workforce will reduce by approx 1000 over the short term by natural attrition & voluntary severance .

Such are the facts & no amount of carping is going to change matters - it's done & dusted & no amount of discussion here is going to change that .

Sunny · 5 Dec 2014

If 100,000 people decide to march around the country for whatever reason, why can they not be respected instead of been ridiculed by people who think they are intellectually superior because they alone understand the concept of water been a precious resource that needs to be paid for. Not everyone who will protest is a political and economic imbecile who is taken in by the likes of SF and people like Paul Murphy. You might not agree with them and you might be more than happy to pay water charges and with everything else the Government does but it doesn't mean you are somehow superior to somebody who might decide to protest at the weekend.

By the way, the protests will be a damp squib. If not, the government are finished because its not about water then.

Marion · 5 Dec 2014

I Can't say that I feel intellectually superior to people on AAM!

There are some who can be influenced by strong people. There are others who don't care one way or the other.

We live in a democracy.

We can all voice our opinions. Whether we agree with them or not is irrevelant.

I would sincerely love to pay less taxes. I am a single earner.

This might be achieved by everybody paying a share of some expenses - for example water - to lessen the burden on those of us who pay taxes. it would be great to see a sharing of the tax burden. I can't recall who said it above but I agree totally: I really don't wat to pay for the neighbour who runs the tap indiscriminately! I am totally of the opinion that people should pay per use.

At the end of the day, we all have our agendas.

Marion

flowerman · 5 Dec 2014

Marion said:
I Can't say that I feel intellectually superior to people on AAM!

There are some who can be influenced by strong people. There are others who don't care one way or the other.

We live in a democracy.

We can all voice our opinions. Whether we agree with them or not is irrevelant.

I would sincerely love to pay less taxes. I am a single earner.

This might be achieved by everybody paying a share of some expenses - for example water - to lessen the burden on those of us who pay taxes. it would be great to see a sharing of the tax burden. I can't recall who said it above but I agree totally: I really don't wat to pay for the neighbour who runs the tap indiscriminately! I am totally of the opinion that people should pay per use.

At the end of the day, we all have our agendas.

Marion

Maybe if the likes of certain Irish musicians and businessmen who constantly like to waffle on about "how great it is to be Irish" and "the Irish people bailed out Ireland" paid their taxes here in Ireland then things might be a tad better for us all.

Im sick and tired of 1 Irish musician who allways pops up at these high profile media events and says how great it is to be Irish.

If you are "so proud to be Irish" then why dont you and your band mates pay your taxes here in this country.

But as is usual Mr Enda Kenny is more than happy to be photographed with him at these events.
My stomach churns when I see the 2 of them standing side by side together smiling for the cameras.

PatrickJ · 6 Dec 2014

+1 Flowerman.

roker said:
It should be called an Austerity demo. it not about water, it is about Austerity, corruption and cronyism, Why did Irish water refuse to have free meters from Siemens? because there are cronies with business interest involved, they are already €1.5m over budget for fitting meters. Why are the top people on such high wages? and bonuses before a drop of water is supplied?

Exactly. It really got under my skin. Why not name it Property Repossession, LPT or USC? Would this determine how many would actually turn up on the 10th as neither three actually effect a certain element in this country.

Where are all the landlords on this forum who have been stung left, right and center by rent allowance recipients?

We have already been vindicated. Where were the socialists when your tenant in receipt of rent allowance refused to pay you? I could go on and on.

Leper · 7 Dec 2014

PatrickJ said:
+1 Flowerman.

. . . . . .
Where are all the landlords on this forum who have been stung left, right and center by rent allowance recipients?

We have already been vindicated. Where were the socialists when your tenant in receipt of rent allowance refused to pay you? I could go on and on.

Thank you Patrick, I never was aware that landlords were pressganged into accepting rent allowance recipients, right, left and centre.

Basic Credit Management practices would ensure some kind of payment for rent.

Please go on and on.

Reason you wont be protesting on the 10th December

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

flowerman

Guest

Registered User

Registered User

Moderator

Registered User

Registered User

flowerman

Guest

Registered User

Registered User

Registered User

Moderator

Registered User

Registered User

Moderator

flowerman

Guest

Registered User

Registered User

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency