Yearly Archives: 2016

Screen Shot 2016-04-25 at 17.23.54

A still from a video of a Traveller horse and wagon being stopped by gardaí in Dublin city centre yesterday during the Reclaim 1916 parade.

Pavee Point writes:

Here is a video from the Reclaim 1916 parade on [yesterday]. The experience was marred by gardaí telling us, at the last minute, that we couldn’t bring the horse and wagon up O’Connell Street. We believe that this was for genuine health and safety reasons. However, we feel that the situation wasn’t handled as it should have been.

It resulted in Pavee Point having to pull to one side and wait until the end of the parade to be able to bring the horse and wagon up O’Connell Street. Although we were stopped only a few hundred metres from the end of the parade, we felt it was important to finish the parade with the horse and wagon – important symbols of Traveller culture.

And we wanted to be able to make our statement walking past the Daniel O’Connell statue and arriving at the GPO – given the centenary anniversary that was in it. We’re glad to report that we did make it onto O’Connell Street to take our rightful place – and we got great crowd support. After all it was the people’s parade.

Watch the video here

Previously: Worth The Licence Fee

Screen Shot 2016-04-25 at 17.06.38

Non-driver employees accept Luas pay offer (RTE)

Screen Shot 2016-04-25 at 16.15.38

Radio Times reports:

It was 100 years ago today that the first radio broadcast took place from Dublin, and stations across the Republic are marking the occasion on-air.

At 5.30pm – the exact time of the first morse code transmission on April 25th 1916 – IBI and RTÉ radio stations will come together to air a special feature on the birth of a nation, and the beginning of radio.

It’s an 80-second morse code themed radio experience titled “The Sound of Sixteen” which imagines the battling sounds and dangerous atmosphere of the times.

Stations unite for the Sound of Sixteen (Radio Time)

The Sound of Sixteen

Thanks Boys & Girls

71i8+nZBfmL._SL1500_

Noel Mulryan made a complaint against the Road Safety Authority, claiming he was discriminated against as he wasn’t allowed wear a colander on his head in a photograph for his renewed driving licence.

Noel is a Pastafarian.

From the Workplace Relations Commission website:

The complainant states that on 9 September 2013, he applied to the Motor Tax office for a change of address on his driver’s license. He provided a form, passport sixed photographs and proof of address as required. The complainant also included a letter explaining that he was wearing headwear in his photo due to his religious beliefs.

The Complainant states that he received a letter dated 21 October 2013 explaining that after consultation with the respondent that his driving license application “was being refused on two grounds (i) the photo captured should have a clear view of the eyes/eyebrows/forehead area with minimal shadows (ii) while it is acceptable to wear head covering in accordance with religious beliefs, we do not believe that you have demonstrated that the use of head covering is related to a religious belief.”

The complainant submits that at this point he felt he was being discriminated against because of his religious beliefs. He had already explained in the letter accompanying his application that he was wearing a colander on his head for religious purposes i.e. as he is a Pastafarian.

The complainant did accept that his head covering could be smaller so he re-submitted his application on 23 October 2013 with new passport sized photographs.

He also included an accompanying letter with examples of other fellow Pastafarians wearing their religious headwear in official government issued documents. He received a letter dated 21 November from the respondent suggesting that his religious beliefs were a parody and as a result his license application would not be accepted.

And the decision?

Valerie Murtagh, adjudication officer at the Workplace Relations Commission, found:

In reaching my decision I have taken into account all the submissions, written and oral that were made to me. In accordance with section 25(4) of the Equal Status Acts, I conclude this investigation and issue the following decision.

I find that the claimant’s complaint does not come within the definition of religion and/or religious belief and therefore he has failed to establish a prima facie case of discrimination on the ground of religion. His complaint therefore fails.

Read the complaint and Ms Murtagh’s decision in full here

Thanks Marie

Topaz

Down Cash writes:

I visited a Topaz pump last week and used one of their card operated pumps where you pay at the pump rather than in the store.

When doing this you input a value of fuel you want, insert your pin and then pump. The pump cuts off when your car is full as usual, or pumps until the inputted value of fuel is reached. You are then supposed to be charged for the amount you pumped.

(Note: This was my first time filling this car and at the time I did not know fuel capacity or reserve capacity, my bad).

To my surprise when I looked at my account online two days later both the amount initially inputted (€60) and the pumped amount (€50) had been taken from my account.

On visiting the station they informed me this was to stop thieves with nothing in their account filling and running with no money in their account.

Today I received a reply from Topaz after querying this practice:

“As per our conversation I can confirm that Topaz charged your account for only the petrol dispensed i.e. €50, the €60 that was entered at the pump is being held by your bank and was not processed and should show in your account in 2-3 working days.”

(Note: I was told 4.5 working days for return of the money at the station).

In my account the €60 and €50 are gone from the account. At present I have no access to that €60.

I contacted my bank. They informed me that they’ve never heard of this and that they are not holding any money. The bank say all they can see is 2 transactions that are verified by my pin even though I only verified 1 transaction.

I saw no information that I would lose money for a week and was never informed of this important detail. I have rented cars and you are clearly warned about a hold of money on your account when renting the car, for damage etc reasons.

I thought I’d inform people in case they didn’t know, as I did not.

Anyone?