Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
The Daily PollAMONG THE MEASURES included in the controversial Social Welfare Bill, due to be approved by the Dáil this afternoon, is a proposed cut to child benefit payments.
The Budget measures would see child benefit rate cut to €130 per month for each of the first three children.
The Department of Social Welfare is cutting spending by about €1 billion in 2013, from €14.1 billion to €13.1 billion – with the budget for child benefit payments to be cut by about 6.5 per cent, from €2.04 billion to €1.91 billion.
Joan Burton has previously expressed a preference to make child benefit subject to income tax, but that Ireland doesn’t currently have the IT systems to put that in place.
The Budget needed to cut spending by €2.25 billion, and the cuts to child benefit will cover a significant chunk of it – but if you are a TD voting on that today, would you vote in favour of the cut?
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
In fairness, a driver that can’t drive…
@⚡ Seánie ⚡: Right. How can it not be relevant to look at a driver’s record? I don’t understand that exemption. Anyone can have a minor collision, out and about, but you can’t help wondering how many years it takes to know your way around your own depot.
You’d feel sorry for DHL here..
@Cian O Donoghue: Couldn’t agree more. Sounds like he shouldn’t even be allowed ride a bicycle.
@Cian O Donoghue: absolutely! The law is an ass!
yep – same reason someone with 327 previous convictions gets a suspended sentence.
Since when does the law recognise the suspicion of ‘accident prone’? The guy can’t drive… but has the Labour Court ordered his re-instatement along with the cash or not?
@Cian O Donoghue: Its says something we feel sorry for a multi national but this guy is being compensated for being really bad at his job .Great country !!!
@Tensing Norgay: It’s called common sense. You should try using it some time. By taking this eejit off the road they probably saved a life, possibly even his own.
@Deborah Behan: why?
Is it not the company for not following proper protocols
That 70k compo is a lot cheaper a price to pay than if they had kept him on and he injured someone!
Surely 3 accidents is enough warning?
I mean, if your profession is driving, then surely you must be expected to drive perfectly? The man had three separate accidents in a company vehicle that he drives professionally. He deserved to be sacked, id say. Just as much as someone who repeatedly screws up the main aspect of any job deserves to be fired.
A ruling like that sets a worrying precedent for employers that encounter incompetency in the workplace
@skullbaggio: it’s only the wrc, where rulings are based on whims of wether you get a union or employer commissioner, and not based on precedence like “real” court. If it was legally binding, DHL would contest this (and probably easily win), but as it’s only the WRC they’ll just pay the cash, as it’s cheaper than going to the high court (and the employee would have been better of taking redundancy, as that would be tax efficient and look better on his CV).
@Gulliver Foyle: Did you read the article ? The company appealed the WRC decision to the Labour Court and still lost the case. Their grounds for dismissal were based on expired earnings which shouldn’t have been taken into account.
Mr Coughlan might have two years wages in his back pocket but now that the story gone public his reputation as a driver is in ruins. I know a man who like this got unfairly dismissed, he got his years wages in weekly installment, he himself got it put in the local paper thinking it would embarrass his former employer. It probably did in the short term however it did his reputation no good either and he never really has worked full time since as no other employer would go near him.
@mickmc: beat me too it, his reputation is tarnished! He’ll never work again as a driver. Clearly wasn’t fit for the job.
Maybe he should spend some of his compensation on driving lessons.
Whereas if they’d kept him on and he’d crashed and injured himself, DHL would be sued for negligently allowing an incompetent to drive.
Imagine how much compo yer man Frank Spencer would’ve gotten from all the jobs he was fired from?!
@Kevin Maughan: he must have gotten loads. Never saw him again after he disappeared from the small screen.
@Brendan Hughes: Ooooooh Betty we’re loaded!!!
@Brendan Hughes: He is Michael Ball , became a very successful singer
The dismissal was flawed because it took into account expired warnings. Not really fair considering what a clown this guy appears to have been. Not fair, but the company was procedurally incorrect.
Employment law is this country is so biased towards employees it’s not even funny.
@Alan Murphy: It is if you have a union to back you up, otherwise it’s not accessible.
Our last government (fg/lab) was supposed to change that, guess they never got round to it…
For a driver I would suggest the warnings run alongside your no claims bonus, diminish in strength each year and expunged after 5, prob not possible in employment law though
Friend of mine once sacked an accident prone factory worker. Not on the basis of causing loss to the company, but because he was a danger to himself and everyone around him. Left with 2m wages, no further action. DHL HR should probably have done better here.
Asked my friend if he felt bad about it at all. He said no. He was absolutely certain that the employee would eventually kill himself if he stayed in the job.
Is this where we are going?? It’s not politically correct to fire someone that can’t do their job??
Chap will find it near impossible to get company work again, insurance,plus no references ,no winners
So, fire a completely incompetent and dangerous driver: get major fine. Have a driver involved in an accident when you knew that he was dangerous: pay probably even bigger fine/compensation. It really seems to be almost impossible to fire someone. If even being a major danger to people’s life and being a massive liability to the company isn’t enough then what the hell is?
We can comment on this case, however the last labour court ruling, relating to the man with the two cups of coffee was off limits. How is this? Must be because it shows up how vile the hospitality industry is.
@Jonny:
This was the result of a Labour Court ruling, which can be made public, whereas a Rights Commissioners can not.
I would have thought a company like that should have an obligation to make sure their drivers were not a danger to the rest of us. Are other firms now less likely to act in the case of an incompetent driver?
I think in law you can’t take into account previous expired warnings. He served his 12 month warnings both times. Is that it?
Accidents can and do happen -maybe he was unlucky . Maybe If he wasn’t let go it would of cost DHL a whole lot more. But I feel DHL were the ultimate losers -award seems extremely high.
Maybe hes just UNLUCKY
@Perry2016: yeah, maybe that fence attacked his stationery van. I guess we’ll never know..
@Perry2016: or maybe it was those pesky Kerry fairies the Healy Rays have warned about. They have the country ruined.
Union Rule 26: Every employee must win ‘Worker of the Week’ at least once, regardless of gross incompetence, obesity or rank odour
Expensive fence to fix now !
Is it me or is 36K a year for a driver outrageous overpay? I’m genuinely asking here.
@Ths Fer: what would you suggest as a pay?
@Ths Fer: what would you suggest as a pay?
Paying this ape money cos he can drive fxxk I give up
have your say