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 ABORTION RIGHTS Campaign returned a funding grant worth €23,000 from a US donor on advice from the Standards in Public Office (Sipo).
According to the Abortion Rights Campaign, the grant was received from Open Societies Foundation to fund “educational and stigma-busting projects”.
The story was first reported in the Irish Catholic newspaper.
The Open Societies Foundations is funded by US billionaire George Soros - a major backer of liberal causes around the world who supported a campaign by lobby group Sex Workers Alliance Ireland against planned new sex laws.
Sipo wanted proof that the grant wasn’t for political purposes, as under Irish law, it’s not permitted to use foreign donations for domestic political campaigns.
The Abortion Rights Campaign does not agree with Sipo’s advice, but said that “in good faith have returned the grant in order to comply with all regulatory frameworks”.
They said that it wasn’t alone in applying for foreign grants and that the majority of the Abortion Rights Campaign’s funding comes from voluntary donations from members and supporters.
The organisation, which has no paid staff and is run by dedicated volunteers, operates on a small budget.
Spokesperson Linda Kavanagh said:
Our focus remains on advocating for reproductive rights while striving to lift the stigma surrounding abortion in Ireland.
“Every cent we receive goes back into the movement towards choice, change and destigmatising abortion in Ireland.”
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
SIPTU will go in , have “very serious discussions”, Valeant will tell them take it or leave it, SIPTU walk out calling the company “unreasonable, unrealistic and un-engaging”, SIPTU tell the workers that they did their best, SIPTU go home to their pay checks, workers go home to type up their CV’s and figure out which bill is going to be paid this month.
could not have said it better 100% accurate
Well said Brian, SIPTU will sacrifice these workers to save their other vested interests in the public sector and elsewhere. If I was one of those workers I’d be concerned about leaving SIPTU to talk to the company.
Yeah, its the union who are the real problem here. Brilliant insight. Maybe you blueshirt neo liberal hacks should apply for a job in Valeant’s Human Resources/Exploitation dept?
I’m amazed any US multinational tolerates unions these days. This is a business decision, no amount of “serious talks” will change anything. They care about profit and dont give a monkeys about Waterford or the employees. Sometimes I think the Irish are a very naive race.
They are an Canadian company
80% of something is better than 100% of nothing, especially in a city savaged by unemployment.
So it 20% of something. Where do you draw the line?
The top 1% (and we can certainly include the CEO of the parent company) currently control 39% of the world’s wealth. They are of a mind that that is not enough.
The bottom half of the world’s adult population own 1% of the world’s assets.
The 1% say that is too much.
I suppose 1% is better than .001%, eh?
“So IS 20% of something..”
Seamus, I read somewhere at the weekend that there are 50 people in the world that hold the same wealth as the bottom half of the worlds population….Globalisation is the problem…when capital is free to move and companies can be “stateless” for tax purposes you get the current situation. Multinationals call the shots….and that needs to change.
Time to see if the SIPTU lads can earn their pay for a change. Don’t hold your breath.
The unions banging the table with their demands should be very helpful in encouraging B&L to depart Ireland for good.
What leverage do the unions think they possess? What are they going to do, strike?
valeant have their eyes on much bigger plans for Allergan, Bausch & Lomb is bottom of their list at the moment
Allergan employ how many staff????
They will lay off the 200 in B&L, the remaining staff will have to take the cuts or they will close up.
They will then take over Allergan (as soon as the board is changed) and do the very same thing in 12 – 18 months (if it takes that long)…
12k employees
Valeant repeat this with every company they take over. Walk in, squeeze the workforce for every cent and extra productivity, shut down R&D, then the moment a more advanced product comes on the market, shut the plant and buy the new guy, repeating the same methods. They have bought B&L because they are at the forefront of their industry. If the workers accept this, the plant will go within two years anyway. Better to fight now while you still have something to fight for.
Thanks for this. I read somewhere that Valeant had just acquired B&L, and I thought it was an odd coincidence. So Valeant is like a lot of companies who buy a firm, devalue it, maximise its profits by cutting everything possible, ultimately bankrupt the company, then sell off the pieces and move on. That puts this in perspective. I had thought there was something more to the story.
It’s not so far fetched to think all multinationals would follow suit, in my experience having worked for one that was then bought over another multinational, and then took their jobs to Mexico where (slave) labour was 2 dollars an hour. They have no scruples just out to get what they can. For all the people who slag off the unions, if it had not been for Siptu we would not have gotten a decent redundancy deal, Siptu also provided training for all the members because the company would not.
I’m delighted these workers have their union backing them and I wish them all the best in their negotiations. Being in a union is our right and one that Jim Larkin fought for, why should workers feel ashamed to fight for their livelihoods. Most people who comment on this have not been in this position so they really don’t know what they are talking about.
Debbie you are right about unions in general….but lets look at what the unions in Ireland have done over the past decade and a half. Pressure from unions and a weak and feckless FF government doubled the cost of labour in Ireland from 1997 to 2011. The result was a loss of manufacturing jobs as we came from having a wage that was 70% of the EU average to 130% of the EU average. All of a sudden the likes of Mary Harney said that we don’t want “low end” jobs and that we were going for the “high salary-high added valve” jobs. She didn’t say that from any desire or strategy for growth…she said that because she knew that we had priced ourselves out of good manufacturing and semi-skilled jobs because of huge wage demands from the Unions. Then what happened…because we were losing manufacturing jobs Charlie McCreavey created a property bubble to keep the “party” going and in the process increased house prices from 2.5x average salary to 10x average salary. The combination of FF, speculators and the Irish Public Sector Unions have left this country broke… from a debt of 40 billion in 1997 to a deficit of 210 billion today.
I’m glad your union got you a good redundancy package…..but did you ever consider that the union just might have contributed to you losing it in the first place?
Been there. Worked for a german owned company who were great to work for, union/management agreement, decent conditions, the lot. Then an American multi took over. All of a sudden we were “loss making” and within two years the while thing was gone to Hungary. Was a shop steward at the time, so we checked companies house, where they were recorded as paying corporation tax on profits. We confronted them, to be told that their definition of profit was different to ours. All it meant was we were able to negotiate a better redundancy package, cos they couldn’t cry poverty.
No the union did not contribute to my losing my job, that was greedy Americans and an Irish mentality that says we should all bow down to the American way. I will also tell you that this belief that all multinationals pay good wages is a myth , I certainly don’t believe10 euros an hour is big wages.
this is the problem with the Irish economy high cost , medium productivity. If the workers there didnt have to support the quangos and all the other drains on their income everyone would be happy out.
Note all the demonstrators carrying signs in the streets protesting the “quangos”.
Why doesn’t Begg squeeze himself onto the Board and sort this out?!
Because it’s the private sector. Where common sense prevails.
While I’m no fan of Begg, I’m finding it hard to describe cutting ordinary workers’ pay while the CEO awards himself an extra $10 million as “common sense”.
Emily the CEO is paid on a performance basis so his loyalty is to the investors in the company and not the people working for him. The more he makes for the investors the more he makes for himself. His package is somewhat different from other CEO’s in that he had to invest in the company himself so that he has a vested interest in driving profits.
Good news if you are an investor, bad news if you are a worker.
Bad news, period. The formula for executive compensation is flawed.
A case in point: Pennsylvania Railroad. It became more profitable to sell off railroad right-of-way as real estate than it was to run a railroad. The result? The death of the railroad. New jet for the CEO.
The “profits-above-sweet-fecking-all” philosophy is what is bringing the world to the state where wealth is concentrating in a smaller and smaller group of individuals. Attempts at fairness through corporate taxation are being buried as corporations use their influen$e to purchase politicians and re-write laws governing behavior in the marketplace. Slash and burn capitalism is ascendant.
Emily, you’re right on both counts. The simple fact is we are dealing with vultures who want maximum profit at the expanse of everyone else…cutting pay by 20% is disgusting but it is better than being laid off….
Let them go if they don’t want to make a fair contribution to Irish society. The statement they are really making is that all Ireland is worth to them is tax avoidance and ‘tax planning’. They are a socially and economically corrosive force and in the long run Ireland is better off without them.
This sort of thing is like making a deal with the devil, and that’s exactly what the government has done. B&L and all the other multinationals can effectively demand anything they want and threaten to leave if they don’t get it. The reality of caving in at all costs to keep the company from pulling up stakes means they own us. Just like someone who’s sold his soul.
When the government says that Ireland is the best small country to do business, this is what it means: That the government cares more about the wishes of the multinational than about the welfare of the people. They will placate the demands of the former and stand idly by as harm befalls the latter. This is apparent in the article–it’s not cheaper labour than in the US and all the parties except labour have already been negotiating for months. Now that the ultimatum has been issued, they are profoundly silent.
Let them go ….I saw a man on the TV who has a family and a mortgage that needs to be paid… these vultures need to be tackled internationally and we should try to keep the jobs as bet we can in the mean time….for the workers sake.
I know there are real consequences to how this is handled. I’m not meaning to be hawkish just to be dramatic. I don’t want any loss of job in Waterford. I’d like the parties to try and work it out so that a compromise is reached and the plant stays open.
Valeant is not being reasonable. They are only pushing 2 choices. Other commenters are saying this is their modus operandi and that they are just a parasitic company and intend to pick the company clean before destroying it. And in any case, if Valeant is appeased, then 200 people lose their jobs anyway.
I like your idea of tackling it internationally. This is part of a much larger problem everybody in the developed world needs to face. I don’t think anything can change if nobody stands up to them, and if we don’t show some support for the only people who appear to be doing it. If we just accept this outcome then we have no hope of ever changing things.
Would you have preferred that B&L never opened a plant in Ireland?
B&L were just bought out by the company Valeant who is making this demand. This isn’t their first time doing this particular manoeuver.
Are you saying the only way a company would ever come to Ireland is if we had a ridiculously low tax rate and then let them avoid paying taxes to anyone anywhere? So Ireland has to slit its own wrist or sell itself into slavery just to get some FDI? Cause that’s exactly what you’re implying.
If B&L or other companies are the kinds of organisations that are socially and economically corrosive to the country, then yes, I would rather they not open a plant here if the only way they will come is to be allowed to do whatever they want. And if the government will not ask more of them than they have.
Remember that huge garment fire in Bangladesh that killed 1200 people? Well they traced labels they found in the debris to brands that are on our shelves and in our stores. And nearly all of the companies who sponsored those inhuman working conditions and wages has refused any real reparations to the families of those who died. Sooner or later we will have to acknowledge the fact that supporting companies whose only concern is cheap labour, and in this case who threaten to move shop if working conditions and wages aren’t as low as they can be, is wrong and is a stain on our collective conscience. We can’t really claim to have these human rights values if we let corporations disregard them so that we can have cheap products, and let them cheat society so that they will invest. At the risk of being too dramatic, blood money is still blood money even if you buy nice thngs with it.
I find it very hard to believe that like for like, the labour costs are cheaper for B&L in New York. Of course we’re not going to be allowed to see the calculations B&L have used to come up with this “fact” but I am extremely skeptical on this point. It’s always possible to fiddle any set of numbers in order to arrive at the conclusion you want to arrive at which in this case is a reason to demand redundancies and cuts in Waterford. I doubt their numbers would stand up against scrutiny against accounting standards. I wish they would spare us their fabricated nonsense reasons and just be straight with us and say they want out because they can get their stuff made in India for practically nothing and the Irish grants/assistance packages have dried up.
Did nobody else make the connection? 20% cut? Exactly the same cut that the state has imposed on it’s own employees! If Valeant get away with a 20% pay cut in an immensely profitable company, expect the same from most other American based multis. They are all watching this with interest.
If Valeant get away with a 20% pay cut in an immensely profitable company, expect the same from most other American based multis. They are all watching this with interest.”
– but its what the people voted for – more than 50% voted FF/FG in recent elections – the two parties along with labour that have helped in the destruction of the country – and are lapdogs for the Establishment.
How many times !!!!!!
My understanding is pay isnt great anyways . I can understand why workers are digging in to some extent. Goverment needs to be of more help here instrsd of been just frickin tax collectors. If the company goes ahead and does pay cuts the government should give more tax credits to the workers.
If thats the case then the gov should give tax credits to everyone who has had pay cuts in the last 6 years….thats not a workable solution!
How about the government charge them the same corporation tax as they pay in America.
Yeah great idea Pete,
Then multinationals will start pulling out of Ireland when they see Ireland messing with its corp tax and choosing to withdraw it at random.
You can’t just choose not to apply our corp tax to one company like you are suggesting,
So people should work for peanuts ?? If this happens will every other company do the same ??
what happens if everyone showed up to the ER with broken legs?
You are creating a “what if” situation that just won’t happen, you honestly think all multinationals will try cut people’s wages by 20%? seriously?
Just how paranoid are you?
so they should stand up for their principles and say no? then the company will make everybody redundant and move to another country with a lower cost base resulting in the whole workforce being let go makes sense. no not every other company will not do the same why would they? nonsensical comment typical knee jerk reaction.
They might is all I am saying. What’s there to stop them ?
They should refuse the ultimatum on principle, just because they don’t let anyone threaten them.
If B&L go, the government should act. B&L have lots of competitors for lenses; let the government ban the sale of all their products in the country. Then offer a slight discount to their competitors’ products. Then announce to the whole world what s c u m B&L are and start creating a negative publicity campaign to tell the world what happened.
Ireland’s not a big market. But I guarantee their will be lots of people who support the little guy standing up to a bully. If there’s anything likely to make B&L change course it’s negative publicity in the media.
Edit: apparently s c u m is an offensive word? Really? I thought I was being nice by using it.
Good man Rob, Your plan of attack is vote themselves out of a job, ban a company and then be sued for anti-competitive practices and Valeant will shit their pants because the Irish market for contacts will dry up. This will create a world wide campaign of negative publicity that will hit the front page of every newspaper with breaking news that big business walks all over the little guy. What a revelation!
good man rob ward again typical knee jerk reaction.
That’s exactly what I want. At what stage did B&L want to negotiate with their labour, or Siptu? Their first overture was a nuclear weapon: do what we want, in the two weeks we set, or we leave. There was zero loyalty shown to employees, nor was there ever in the slightest degree any sense of community to try and work it out together cooperatively.
I’m pretty sure you can’t sue the government for anticompetitive practise. They have a right to govern the markets any way they wish; that’s what tariffs and duties are.
I stand by the negative publicity. This kind of behaviour should be contested. It should not be accepted meekly.
Today it’s 20%. Tomorrow it could be anything else. Why not 50%? Withdrawal of pensions? Or anything else they can get away with legally. The point is, if they don’t fight, they will have no choice but to accept anything their handed. If B&L want a fight, then it’s a fight they should get. Both by Siptu and by the Government.
don’t get me wrong it is not nice what is happening in waterford but this gnashing of teeth and wailing from posters on this site is unrealistic, what needs to be done is looking at ways we can nurture ingenious industries so there is not an over reliance on multinational companies.
That’s a long term solution. This fight is immediate, it has according to Valient a 2 week expiration date.
Not sure why being aggressive about dealing with an ultimatum is criticised but delivering one isn’t.
Why is dealing aggressively with an ultimatum and a threat a knee jerk reaction but delivering one unexpectedly not?
The alternative is just appeasement. Those are the only options that have been extended. And appeasement never works.
Pete
The jobs would go even quicker if they followed your proposal.
Tax was not the reason for Bausch and Lomb when it first established itself in Ireland but its now a major part of the reason for staying as the alternative is higher and thus an incremental cost that can be avoided.
It seems to me that the IDA have played an outstanding role in preventing the Company from pulling the plug completely in Waterford . I understand that this was their original intention and negotiations with the IDA couldn’t have been shared with the Unions or the deal would have collapsed.
If SIPTU become aggressive or if a strike occurs then that’s the end and Waterford needs these jobs.
Why not? They’re giving tax credits to the people who are cutting their pay!
You don’t have to be paranoid. You just have to open your eye, Martin.
“The jobs would go even quicker…”
So you admit that that the jobs are going. And in the next breath you say “…Waterford needs these jobs.”
So if the jobs are going, what fecking difference does it make what that fecking IDA does?
The workers were going to be hung at midnight, but now, thanks to the intervention by the IDA and the generosity of their corporate masters, they’ll be shot a dawn instead.
I remind you that the parent company paid $8 billion for the company it’s dismantling. Why would they do that? To eliminate the competition, that’s why. B&L is history.
It’s not just 20% pay cut it’s also 20% less in your pension and 20% less in redundancy payment when it comes to cuts again
I went back, reread the article, and also looked for another source on the situation to try and make sure I covered the bases.
I am not sure what IDA has contributed to this process, and I’m not really critical of them one way or the other.
But there are some inconsistencies in this situation. Irish Times reported that B&L mgmt are saying that their payroll costs are 30% higher than they are in Rochester, but, when shown the same numbers, Siptu say that it’s not comparatively cheaper in Rochester. So this reason is at least contested.
We don’t know why the deal collapsed between the Government, the IDA, and B&L. We don’t know what they were asking for behind those closed doors. So it’s useless to speculate about their reasons, either for coming to Ireland or for why they dropped an ultimatum on the staff.
You were talking about jobs in Waterford–but if this proposal goes through 20% or 200 people will lose their jobs anyway. Also it’s interesting that of the 1100 employees, Siptu represents 900, and it’s 200 that are being immediately culled. Seems to imply that B&L are ditching the non-union jobs in any case. Maybe being a member of Siptu is the only thing that has protected employees thus far.
I’m not even complaining about a 20% reduction for the 80% in itself. Lots of employees have taken a voluntary pay reduction to help keep their companies solvent. Usually the company tells the employees their is a problem and asks for their help. That’s not even close to this situation. And it’s the methods used and the mindset behind it that are the problem. I don’t want a single job lost in Waterford. I also don’t want Valeant and other multinationals to feel that they can act with impunity, deliver any demands they want, and force compliance, or they walk. Everybody is saying the timeframe profferred in these talks is unreaasonable. It’s a hardline approach that doesn’t need to be.
They are behaving this way because they expect they can get away with it. And so many on here, at least ITT, people who complain daily about a weak government and having to socialise the losses for multinationals, and otherwise getting screwed by corporations, waffle on those convictions the first time they are really challenged, and the chance of loss real. If you don’t stand up and protect yourself when you are threatened, you will always be a victim, and if you don’t fight for the things you believe in, you are like to lose them.
The state did first. Valeant are merely following suit.
The state did what first? Not following.
Martin, pete’s got a point….we’re being shafted both ways…..I hope Charlie McCreavey is happy.
Great comment Rob
Was in response to the comment stating that believing all multis would follow suit with a20% cut being paranoid. The state did it first.
Serious lols at Rob’s suggestions. No doubt you’re one of these that moans about the ‘idiots in power’.
I haven’t moaned about anything. I’m trying to support the employees in Waterford who are being bullied by a parasitic firm who just bought B&L and who intends to squeeze them dry before dumping them unceremoniously. I’m trying to save 200 jobs by just not folding to idle threats and being prepared to fight back when threatened. I’m trying to advise people to show a bit of spine in the face of a bully. Although you didn’t add anything to the discussion other than being lame, I’m guessing you probably don’t care about what happens down there, and would probably think they should just take what Valeant says and go on. Those 200 folks who are going to be let go probably don’t mean anything to you at all.
Your comment makes you sound arrogant. Moaning about the idiots in power seems to meen you support the government and think those who oppose it are idiots. Well we just had this thing called an election, and you were just destroyed by it. That’s a taste of what 2016 has in store. And if you represent the government party line, then the electorate just told you that you’re an idiot. Enjoy.
We can bicker about this all day but at the end of the day manufacturing of this nature in Ireland is gone and if these workers want to earn higher wages then they need to reskill because we are in a knowledge economy.
SIPTU lost their ability to negotiate for the private sector due to years of national understandings etc…
By the looks of things this skill is irretrievable by today’s union officials.
Personally, I think the imminent closure threat is a bluff. There is no way they could relocate that quickly, or another existing plant pick up the slack that quickly. Valeant don’t relocate anyway, they just cut, bleed and shut in a couple of years. Even if Rochester could take up the slack, their product would then be subject to trade tariffs. It’s a bluff. Call it, and they’ll climb down for now,
S.I.P.T.U. are not worthy in representing these workers. A bunch of overpaid government yes men who are too far removed from the original purpose that unions once stood for. They couldn’t care less.why? Simply because in order to understand the pain of becoming unemployed you must live it. I can just see them in there now nodding heads and checking their watches. A union fee is now a donation and nothing more.
The collection of dues and fees for membership in the union is often done in payroll accounting, as I understand it. While this convenient, it creates a few more problem than is solves:
1.) The funds are delivered to the union from company management. Basically, a company check is made out to the union. After awhile, the union leadership (we won’t call them “management”) perceives that they are getting paid by the company.
2.) This relieves union leadership of the responsibility of meeting with the members. When the members come in each month to pay their dues, they can face-to-face with the leadership. It’s a connection that is broken in the payroll-deduction cycle. You’re not as likely to screw over the membership if you’re going to have your hand out to them later in the month. They might bite it off.
Well said Seamus….couldn’t agree more…the government should stop paying the union sub via DD and instead get each member to pay the sub directly. That way both the employee and the union will realise that one is beholden to the other.
Informaton about this case says that the plant has 1100 workers, 900 of which Siptu represents. 200 of which they don’t. And it’s 200 who are being let go, even if the rest take a 20% tax cut. Think it’s coincidence that the number of people being let go is the same number of people who aren’t represented by the union?
Siptu and the other unions may be imperfect. They might have been some times corrupt, or at others ineffective. We don’t seem to mind so much when lots of other institutions and organisations are both of those things, do we? In this case Siptu are literally the ONLY people fighting for the B&L employees. Maybe that should entitle them to a little bit of support?
Other 200 are TEEU, and they were also at the table today. They also fight like hell for their workers, more than any Irish based union. The big difference with the way this will go is that Valeant need the factory floor workers, so will try to keep as many as possible, albeit at a lower rate. They will cut all R&D jobs, most at CEO level, most senior and middle management, quality control, maintenance,,,,, basically any of the higher paid, skilled jobs. TEEU would represent most of these grades, minus the management. They are in for a war with TEEU.
There is only one course of action that can be taken to put a stop to a corporate free for all against Irish workers that will surely follow if Valient are allowed to get their way and asset strip B & L.
The Irish government and it’s statutory agencies must immediately impose hard sanctions on a selective basis on multinationals whom behave in this fashion to lay down a clear line in the sand – if you do not comply with Irish labour law and social standards – your company gets hit for repayment of all past state funding and assistance, assets frozen until this has happened and legally binding undertakings given for future conduct of business.
If the US and UK governments can freeze the assets of international terrorist organizations, why can’t all governments impose the same on the economic terrorists that are multinational corporations ?
Well that’s really interesting if that’s true. Thanks for that. That would pit B&Lmanagers and CEO, and employees against the Valeant management for their jobs. So they are basically attempting to gut the company… Hmmm well how will they run it? Will they replace any of those positions? What’s the end product of the plan? How do they dump the company after they get rid of everyone who doesn’t make the product? Do they sell the pieces off? Liquidate the assets? Sell out to someone else after a sort time? Do tell.
I basically said something like that too. Be prepared for a barrage of people who object because other multinationals will just move away. Those are the ones who will take the money no matter what it costs. Be prepared for how people saying it’s foolish to fight, or to set standards and enforce them. But you are right, a clear line in the sand is the only way things ever change. It’s just that everybody’s either in the corporate pocket or afraid of them, so things carry on the way they are.
Great comment.
There is only one course of action that can be taken to put a stop to a corporate free for all against Irish workers that will surely follow if Valient are allowed to get their way and asset strip B & L.
The Irish government and it’s statutory agencies must immediately impose hard sanctions on a selective basis on multinationals whom behave in this fashion to lay down a clear line in the sand – if you do not comply with Irish labour law and social standards – your company gets hit for repayment of all past state funding and assistance, assets frozen until this has happened and legally binding undertakings given for future conduct of business.
If the US and UK governments can freeze the assets of international terrorist organizations, why can’t all governments impose the same on the economic terrorists that are multinational corporations ?
have your say