SIPTU losing control?

[Thac0man]

I read this morning that the airport strike, due for Thursday, is not sanctioned by SIPTU. The strike is over a decision to stop an agreed 3.5% pay rise this year and is to take place from 4am till noon.

RTÉ News: SIPTU says airport strike not sanctioned

Now that SIPTU are back in partnership talks, how is it still loosing control over some of its membership? This action was announced in the period when ICTU was not engaged in the partnership talks they walked out on.

Is this symptomatic of a growing split between private and public sector representation? Can the two be reconsiled going forward or do the private sector workers see themselves as being both victim and supporter of more powerful interest groups in the ICTU? Thus they have to go it alone?

This strike is going ahead, without SIPTU aauthorisation and with a member of the ICTU sitting on the aerlingus board. It seems like a shot over the bows of both the ICTU and the employers.

[Charlie Hungerford]

It was sanctioned by SIPTU's leadership but then they decided to stab their airport branch in the back because of the ICTU talks. It was fully balloted for and they followed all the procedures from what this tax exile has been able to determine!

[Factorem]

SIPTU losing control is this government's worst fear.

[mmrebel]

As a member of siptu (i have too company requirment ) myself and id say about 90% of my colleagues have never supported them we have found them generaly speaking to be out of touch with the normal joe soap

[Thac0man]

It was sanctioned by SIPTU's leadership but then they decided to stab their airport branch in the back because of the ICTU talks. It was fully balloted for and they followed all the procedures from what this tax exile has been able to determine!

We might assume that sanctioned and authorised are then differant things?

The alternative is SIPTU are lying.

[johnfás]

As a member of siptu (i have too company requirment ) myself and id say about 90% of my colleagues have never supported them we have found them generaly speaking to be out of touch with the normal joe soap

You can't be forced to join a union as a condition of employment so held the Supreme Court in Education Company v Fitzpatrick and Meskell v CIE. If you don't want to be a member, quit and bring a Constitutional challenge - your name will likely be immortalised in Constitutional Law textbooks.

[FortyCoats]

Wild cat strikes outside of SIPTU would be a large step along the road to civil disobedience and civil disorder.

[mmrebel]

You can't be forced to join a union as a condition of employment so held the Supreme Court in Education Company v Fitzpatrick and Meskell v CIE. If you don't want to be a member, quit and bring a Constitutional challenge - your name will likely be immortalised in Constitutional Law textbooks.

Thanks i didn't know that, not sure its commonly known either, was under the impression we had to be.
Though if i was not part of the union i wouldn't be entitled to the various pay rises through out the years.
Next question who wants to back my constitutional challenge financially

[wombat]

You can't be forced to join a union as a condition of employment so held the Supreme Court in Education Company v Fitzpatrick and Meskell v CIE. If you don't want to be a member, quit and bring a Constitutional challenge - your name will likely be immortalised in Constitutional Law textbooks.

Unfortunately, workers can't afford to go to court.

[Colada]

Thanks i didn't know that, not sure its commonly known either, was under the impression we had to be.
Though if i was not part of the union i wouldn't be entitled to the various pay rises through out the years.
Next question who wants to back my constitutional challenge financially

Hahaha...ya hypocrite!