"Yes, eight weeks without pay hurts, but there is a determination that makes you strong," said Mr Brian Dunphy, the first executive council member of the Irish Locomotive Drivers' Association to arrive at yesterday's special meeting in Dublin.
Assessing the mood of the ILDA workers, Mr Dunphy said: "The only thing now that will make people go back is the fear of losing their house. The men will resist as much as they can, but there comes a time when they might have to face being put out of their homes."
Mr Dunphy said ILDA was not holding the meeting to seek the support of the drivers, but as a listening exercise to hear them outline how they wanted the dispute to continue.
"I've seen it before," he said. "I was born at the gates of the Inchicore depot. All my people were drivers and firemen. There was a strike in 1950 that was very hard on the workers. Management didn't care. New, younger people come but they don't change the management, it changes them. I suppose its a culture thing, you would think they would change but they don't."
Past disputes were referred to. "1983 was very bad. The workers were out for 16 weeks, that was hard on families. Management gave them a loan of £150, that is what ended that one. This dispute is about that same attitude; the worse it is for us, the better management feels," he said.
Drivers spoke of the imminent back-to-school season. "How do you think we'll manage?" they responded to inquiries about their ability to sustain the dispute. Since their pay stopped, an adjustment in their tax-free allowances had given the workers a rebate of as much as £120 a week, but many said they had received less, and some had sought to have their mortgage payments put in abeyance for the duration of the dispute.
As he arrived, Mr Brendan Ogle told the waiting media the meeting was being held to attempt to find a "resolution to the problem which would allow the men to go back to working a safe agreement".
Attention was starting to focus on the issue of safety instead of "red herrings". He repeated his comment of Sunday that he wished the media would focus on the issues and "not my wallpaper". Later, during a break in the voting, Mr Ogle described the men's mood as very determined. Not one had criticised the leadership, he said, adding that "a few have criticised the media".
Although the membership rejected unanimously the wording of the Labour Court-Labour Relations Commission initiative, Mr Ogle said subsequent voting showed his members "accepted the Labour Court-LRC initiative".
"They did accept it, the Labour Court-LRC did not use words like `conditional' when they referred to a return to work and the Labour Court is a body which would use words wisely. They said there was an `expectation', that the drivers would return to work, and well, we all have expectations - the members accepted the initiative but not the expectation."
The explanation left most reporters scratching their heads. On a point of clarification, Mr Ogle said ILDA had received advice from public relations consultant Mr Fergus Finlay, and was happy with its interpretation of the Labour Court-LRC initiative.
As the last votes were taking place, the media compared notes and studied the motion which formed the basis of the last vote.
"Despite reservations about the legislative basis of a joint La bour Court-LRC initiative, this meeting welcomes the intervention of these two State agencies," read the motion. "We will co-operate to the maximum extent possible with that initiative."
"That's it," said a radio reporter underlining the word "possible" and reaching for a mobile phone, "they have rejected it."