Strike law reforms

[Tom Bombadil]

A good test, this, to flush out those who would never back anything proposed by the Conservatives, because they are the Conservatives. And the first catch has already been made I note.

Nothing but common sense going on here. FOR.

The usual attempt to stifle dissent from the Tory Goons.

 

[Bozza]

hopefully it will have the opposite effect and ensure more people join unions and vote for strikes in ballots.

And there we have it - leftie unionist dinosaurs summarised in one sentence.

You don't care whether there is actually a valid reason for people to strike or not, you just want them to. That'll show the fat cat bosses and, particularly, those evil tories, eh?

ALL OUT BROTHERS!

 

[Ernest]

And there we have it - leftie unionist dinosaurs summarised in one sentence.

You don't care whether there is actually a valid reason for people to strike or not, you just want them to. That'll show the fat cat bosses and, particularly, those evil tories, eh?

ALL OUT BROTHERS!

Certainly if their terms and conditions are being thrown away in the race to the bottom.

You must have a really secure job with a cast iron contract.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

Even though it removes the incentive to negotiate a settlement to genuine work place issues?

A business will become less efficient with agency staff and those staff will cost the employer more so of course there is an incentive to negotiate.

 

[Bozza]

Certainly if their terms and conditions are being thrown away in the race to the bottom.

You're changing your stance. Noted, thanks.

 

[cjd]

I'm a member of two trade unions. Withdrawal of labour is a last resort action. It involves a loss of pay and pension contributions so hurts the striker financially

I remember very well when Bozza held a poll on whether we should have an away section on NSC, that although the majority of voters requested an 'away section' , this was over ruled. One of your reasons for this, was that not enough of the members of NSC voted.

On this basis, as this is a public poll I am looking forward to seeing your name in the section;.."Excellent. A very good balance has been struck with these reforms".






PS; Do you want me to mention something about Ken Brown......or should I leave that to you ?

 

[El Presidente]

PS; Do you want me to mention something about Ken Brown......or should I leave that to you ?

Does he have shiny shoes?

 

[El Presidente]

I remember very well when Bozza held a poll on whether we should have an away section on NSC, that although the majority of voters requested an 'away section' , this was over ruled. One of your reasons for this, was that not enough of the members of NSC voted.

?

[MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] OUT, SACK the mods.

 

[seagulls4ever]

So if there is a 50% turnout, 80% of people will need to vote for the strike?

Doesn't seem wholly democratic to me.

I agree with the 50% turnout but I think it should be a simple majority from thereon-in. The 40% element should be taken away.

I don't see why the number of people who voted for the Tories is relevant though because although less than 40% voted for the Tories, the electorate had more answers to choose from than just yes or no.

 

[Ernest]

You're changing your stance. Noted, thanks.

No problem, if you ever need help just ask

 

[Simster]

So if there is a 50% turnout, 80% of people will need to vote for the strike?

Doesn't seem wholly democratic to me.

I agree with the 50% turnout but I think it should be a simple majority from thereon-in. The 40% element should be taken away.

Don't forget, this only applies to essential public services. You'd think that if a strike was deemed necessary, then a lot more than 50% ought to be turning out to vote for it.

As far as I'm concerned, some unions are merely reaping what they've sown.

 

[seagulls4ever]

A good test, this, to flush out those who would never back anything proposed by the Conservatives, because they are the Conservatives. And the first catch has already been made I note.

Nothing but common sense going on here. FOR.

You love your ad hominem attacks, don't you?

 

[clippedgull]

We spent the whole of last season with strikers ( not turning up for work! ). Even the 'agency' workers (Best etc) went out in sympathy with them.

What's worse, they all got full pay. Barber out!

 

[seagulls4ever]

Don't forget, this only applies to essential public services. You'd think that if a strike was deemed necessary, then a lot more than 50% ought to be turning out to vote for it.

As far as I'm concerned, some unions are merely reaping what they've sown.

What should be the turnout? The general election is deemed necessary and is clearly very important, but only 66% of people turned out for that. If 66% of people turned out for the strike vote you'd still need a lot more than a simple majority to win.

 

[Buzzer]

Bob Crow must be turning in his grave at the apathy from the Labour Party and wider trade union movement regarding this proposal. I'm not sure it's necessary at all for this legislation. A look at ONS statistics for strike activity over the last 20 years shows no upward trend, there's peaks and troughs linked to specific disputes but I'd say the most paralysing strike we've had in the last 20 years wasn't even official - it was the fuel depot blockade. Has the UK become paralysed by strikes and at the mercy of unions? I don't think so.

There's always going to be strikes, it's part of a healthy democracy and a fundamental part of the UK trade union movement's weaponry in its perceived war for workers' rights. I think aside from the relative merits in this 40% threshold there's most definitely an element of the Tories further weakening the political muscle of the trade unions and fair do's to the Tories if that's their aim as they see certain unions are a barrier to innovation and change. This and the legislation to have to opt in for political donations will hurt the union movement hard.

So why aren't Labour apoplectic with rage about it? Why are the trade unions not making this a huge issue for their members? This legislation will probably go through with nothing more than grumbles and whimpers from the opposition because although they're happy to take union money, after Miliband's humiliation they don't seem so keen to be associated with them but I'd have a darn sight more respect for the Labour candidate who draws the line in the sand on these issues and states that the Labour Party was founded by co-operatives and unions, its funded by co-operatives and unions and will oppose these measures because many of the freedoms and rights that UK workers enjoy today were hard fought through strike action and trade union pressure and it's still relevant. We probably wouldn't have a public postal service today, such that it is, if it wasn't for strike action by posties in the last 20 years.

 

[WATFORD zero]

So anyone doesn't vote, has therefore voted No ? Interesting take on voting and democracy

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Bring back slavery and all your problems are solved (except for the slaves).

 

[Chicken Run]

So anyone doesn't vote, has therefore voted No ? Interesting take on voting and democracy

Interesting way that you put that, my version fwiw is that anyone who doesn't vote negates their opinion on the matter!

 

[GT49er]

So anyone doesn't vote, has therefore voted No ? Interesting take on voting and democracy.

Excellent idea. Should be applied to the EU referendum!

 

[WATFORD zero]

Interesting way that you put that, my version fwiw is that anyone who doesn't vote negates their opinion on the matter!

So the law should stay as it currently is ?