National Public Meeting Of Trade Unionists In Public Sector

by D_D Sat Feb 14, 2009 17:07

The meeting was a resounding success.

About 100 highly repesentative trade unionists from around the country gathered and called for support for the ICTU demonstaration on Saturday 21st February but also for all unions to ballot to come out alongside the CPSU day's strike on 26th.

The meeting demanded there be no levy and no pact that would include a levy or cuts. Speakers were overwhelmingly against the ICTU going back into talks at all that would lead to a so-called Social Solidarity Pact that would accept pay and service cuts. The message was let the millionaires and billionaires pay.

The meeting was clear about the need to link up with private sector workers.

There were many reports of large meetings of public sector workers all over and the anger expressed there. Members were looking for more than a Saturday protest from the ICTU.

An interim steering committee was established to carry on the work of this new body.

Two Waterford Crystal leaders got a standing ovation.

(The meeting and platform was notable for an unprecedented - in latter times - degree of unity from the left).

by civilian Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:47

Dear Mr. "Army", my bet is that the public service marches will pass off extremely peaceably because the public service workers would never jeopardize their cushy careers with a criminal conviction for public disorder or criminal damage. The gang who are throwing rocks at the Gardai in Mayo and who attacked the Unionists when they tried to march peacefully in Dublin are another matter. However, there are about two dozen of them and they can't be in bed or the pub, in Mayo, and be rioting in Dublin at the same time. My guess is that army won't need to shoot anyone.

As for Mr. "Answers", people in the private sector doing the same type of work done by clerical officers in the civil service are typically on minimum wage without job-security, pensions, or career-prospects. The only time the former meet the latter is when the latter arrive at the dole office to sign on. There the unfortunate private-sector wage slaves can experience the gratuitous, hostile, and insulting rudeness with which the public-service clerical staff let the unemployed know that they are little better than criminals.

by Answers please!!!!! Sat Feb 14, 2009 11:19

by Army, where's your sense of outrage that the bastards are trying to make US pay for the mistakes of THEIR wanker (oh sorry I meant banker!) and property speculator friends??? €41,000 is not that well paid, it's just above the average industrial wage!! Most Civil Servants in the Union I'm a member of, the Civil Public & Services Union (CPSU) don't even anything near that. Many would be lucky to earn half that (€20,000). Indeed some are so poorly paid that they're on FULL MEDICAL CARDS because theior wages are so shit. YES! YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT! Full Medical Cards! Another question for you by Army, if the Army is brought in to add the civil power (the Gardaí) because social unrest gets so out of the control that GardaI can't control it, which is quite likely in the next few months, will you use live ammunition against protestors if ordered to do so by your Commanding Officer (CO)? Answers please by Army!

by Asqa Sat Feb 14, 2009 10:11

Kieran Allen.....

by Army Sat Feb 14, 2009 08:28

I work in the public sector (Army) and support the public sector.

However I would like a representative of public sector unions to answer me ONE simple question.

The government says it will have to borrow 20 thousand million Euros this year .

€20 BILLION BORROWED THIS YEAR IS A FRIGHTENING ONE BILLION EVERY EIGHTEEN DAYS.
(More really...there is the little matter of paying interest on it.)

I see the horror story clearly.
That is why I take the levy on the chin.
I am very well paid (€ 41k per year + allowances) and the levy won't break my back.

The question is this:

Where are we going to get the money to pay it back?

Please answer.
.

by put up or shut up Sat Feb 14, 2009 02:33

in the interest of honesty, openess and transparency please name those signatories you say have a 'questionable' record on partnership. otherwise its only inneuendo, rumour and speculation and we'll have to assume you're a troll. provide proof and names not more vague evasive comments.

by Asqa Fri Feb 13, 2009 20:49

I agree that some of the signatories are opposed to social partnership as a principle. Some however have a questionable record on the issue. Some of the signatories have previously supported the unions trying to get better partnership deals with the bosses. What is written in this statement is similar because it says that there should be talks if certain conditions are met beforehand. There should be no partnership talks at all no matter what is agreed.

by . Fri Feb 13, 2009 00:22

Most of the signatries above are opposed to partnership in principle and not just because it's not the best deal that can be negoatiated. Some people oppose partnership deals because they think a better deal can be negotiated, whereas others, like most of the signatries above believe, quite rightly I think, that workers can never have a partnership with the government and the bosses (same people imo!), as we can never be equal partners with them, and we should use good auld old fashioned tried and tested trade union methods which worked for us before and will do so again! Of course even those of us fundamentally opposed to the partnership process do sometimes have to talk to the bosses and the government, usually after a strike, and preferably when you have them on the run.

by Asqa Thu Feb 12, 2009 21:37

My comment is not inaccurate. You should read the statement again this is what it says -

"New talks with the Government and IBEC should only take place in the context
of the withdrawal of the public service levy and the renewed commitment of
all public sector and private sector employers to adherence to the national
pay agreement. For ICTU to indulge in talks on any other basis would be a
capitulation to unilateral breaches of agreements and an encouragement to
recalcitrant employers such as the Construction Industry Federation."

It is as clear as day that this statement supports talks with the government and the employers - partnership talks!

by Worker Thu Feb 12, 2009 18:21

The last comment IS INACCURATE. They DO NOT support 'partnership'. Had you bothred to read the statement properly they're opposed to ICTU even talking to the Government while the pension levy is there IN ANY FORM. Please Delete that comment for it's inaccuracies.

by Asqa Thu Feb 12, 2009 17:35

Here we go again this group hasn't even had its first meeting and already it is issuing statements that support partnership talks with the bosses and the government!

by infoma-tion Thu Feb 12, 2009 16:59

Dear all, please circulate this notice to members

The national meeting of public Sector trade union members will take place on
coming Saturday, Feb 14 between 2.30 and 2.30pm in Davenport Hotel, Merrion
Sq., Dublin. A statement being issued to-day is appended below.

Paddy Healy 086-4183732

National Meeting of Public Sector Trade Union Members

Davenport Hotel, Saturday Feb 14, 11.30 to 2.30 pm

Statement

Speakers at the meeting will advocate a sustained campaign for the
withdrawal of the “pension levy” in public service beginning with a one day
strike

We believe that any lesser action would encourage the government to believe
that it can continue with this scapegoating imposition on public servants.

In this regard we are extremely disappointed at the weakness of the response
of the Irish Congress of Trade Unions to the unilateral imposition of the
levy and the abrogation of the national pay agreement in the public service

We congratulate the Civil and Public Services Union on its forthright
proposals which include a one day strike on FEB

We urge all public service trade unions to ballot members immediately and to
join in the stoppage proposed by CPSU.

We call on all trade unionists, the unemployed and their families to
participate in the national demonstration organised by ICTU for Saturday 21.
But we see this march as the prelude to a national work stoppage, a course
which we will vigorously advocate on the march itself.

New talks with the Government and IBEC should only take place in the context
of the withdrawal of the public service levy and the renewed commitment of
all public sector and private sector employers to adherence to the national
pay agreement. For ICTU to indulge in talks on any other basis would be a
capitulation to unilateral breaches of agreements and an encouragement to
recalcitrant employers such as the Construction Industry Federation.

The meeting will be addressed by a representative of the Waterford Glass
Workers. The necessity for the government to bail out workers in the private
sector whose pensions have been devastated will be emphasised.

Paddy Healy 086-4183732

by ICTU Wed Feb 11, 2009 17:09

Beggs and the rest of the well paid bastards have called for a public service protest on Saturday 21st to let people blow off steam. A Saturday!!! That will really frighten the government and employers.
These bastards must be forced to call a working day stoppage as a starter.