[Misc] Will the Unions bring everyone to their knees?

[WhingForPresident]

If the lesser paid workers get more money, they spend it, which generates work for others. If rich people get more money, they put it into tax havens which removes it from circulation.
The Conservatives call it trickle down economics but their version is different to what we think.

View attachment 149070

I prefer this illustration:

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

Okay, how many people were polled across what demographic and how was it carried out?

I have no idea, and I am not an expert in statistics and am not going to find out. It was, however, widely reported by people I would trust.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Interesting interview with an RMT leader on the BBC. He claimed the Government were preventing a deal being done. He was asked is there a deal on the table that the Government has prevented, yes or no. We didn’t get a yes or no answer.

 

[Triggaaar]

I can't say I've got a massive opinion one way or the other on this strike but your point about doing the strike when it will do the most damage is surely the point of it? If you want to prove that the workers are key, underpaid and that the service provided is vitally important, what better way to do it?

Is the rail service key? Obviously. Does a strike prove that? Yes, but it didn't need proving.

But a strike doesn't prove that they are underpaid. Similarly the NHS, police, firefighters, teachers, army are all vitally important.

Which ones are more underpaid than the others I really don't know. Are the train drivers the worst paid (for the hours, conditions, skills required etc) out of that lot?

 

[Deleted member 2719]

Mate, I don't think there is anything to fight about here. Some chaps vote to strike, they strike, government will change the law so they can't do it again (I expect). Or they will call a general election with removing worker rights and union powers as part of their manifesto. We can all then have a vote on it. In the meantime, there is nothing that can be done about it. Whether you support the RMT or oppose them. It is what it is

I wouldn't want them to change the laws, but the unions have too much power, to reap havoc within our country.
I am sure you remember that between the unions and the rising fuel prices the country took some major collateral damage in the 70s.
We are heading that way.
Of course as predicted the teachers are piling in now.
If the union can't show some restraint then perhaps the laws should be changed, you can't bring the whole country down just because you have a few gobby power-driven union leaders trying to make a show.

 

[beorhthelm]

Interesting interview with an RMT leader on the BBC. He claimed the Government were preventing a deal being done. He was asked is there a deal on the table that the Government has prevented, yes or no. We didn’t get a yes or no answer.

its difficult to trust what Lynch says about negotiations when hes also stated he wants a summer of disruption. they've dug their heels in on no compulsory redundancies, which can be a difficult promise to give when you havent entered consultation with the workforce, so dont know numbers that'll take voluntry, who'll retrain, relocate etc.

whats also interesting is no other matters, pensions, safety, working hours, are sticking points at this point. either all fine, secondary or just waiting to get to those redlines.

 

[Napper]

Is the rail service key? Obviously. Does a strike prove that? Yes, but it didn't need proving.

But a strike doesn't prove that they are underpaid. Similarly the NHS, police, firefighters, teachers, army are all vitally important.

Which ones are more underpaid than the others I really don't know. Are the train drivers the worst paid (for the hours, conditions, skills required etc) out of that lot?

https://news.sky.com/story/rail-str...als-compare-to-what-train-staff-want-12638506

some good info on what the sectors earn here. Rail wise aside from drivers and higher paid roles the average is 33k. Guess its then down to whether the roles are worth more. Isnt the UK average now 36k ?

IMO -
Teachers 30k seems low
Police 24k - very very low IMO


Must admit , comparatively speking - 33k for a ticket office and train guard seems an ok wage for a fairly easy job

All opinions on that

 

[surlyseagull]

This will cause an avalanche of wage demands at a time when we are so vulnerable.
We are coming off the back of the worst financial stress we have ever been in since the war because of the virus, couple that with the war in Ukraine, which of course we want to help with financially as well as importing goods from them and you have got a very serious problem.
I don't disagree, we all need a rise in wages, and businesses also need a boost but we can't have it all, inflation is a killer and the timing is just not right.
Ask anyone who lived through the 70s

 

[Napper]

This will cause an avalanche of wage demands at a time when we are so vulnerable.
We are coming off the back of the worst financial stress we have ever been in since the war because of the virus, couple that with the war in Ukraine, which of course we want to help with financially as well as importing goods from them and you have got a very serious problem.
I don't disagree, we all need a rise in wages, and businesses also need a boost but we can't have it all, inflation is a killer and the timing is just not right.
Ask anyone who lived through the 70s

The directors , ceo , board members and shareholders all have record increases and earn 100's thousands.

Profits isnt it

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

its difficult to trust what Lynch says about negotiations when hes also stated he wants a summer of disruption. they've dug their heels in on no compulsory redundancies, which can be a difficult promise to give when you havent entered consultation with the workforce, so dont know numbers that'll take voluntry, who'll retrain, relocate etc.

Indeed, he contradicted himself on the Government interference claim when he said the union wouldn’t talk about anything until compulsory redundancies are taken off the table. That’s pretty unrealistic (deliberately so ?). So they haven’t actually talked about anything that could be interfered with in that case.

 

[nicko31]

I wouldn't want them to change the laws, but the unions have too much power, to reap havoc within our country.
I am sure you remember that between the unions and the rising fuel prices the country took some major collateral damage in the 70s.
We are heading that way.
Of course as predicted the teachers are piling in now.
If the union can't show some restraint then perhaps the laws should be changed, you can't bring the whole country down just because you have a few gobby power-driven union leaders trying to make a show.

Down with human rights, down with workers rights, down with freedom to protest, bring it on mouldy ....

 

[keaton]

https://news.sky.com/story/rail-str...als-compare-to-what-train-staff-want-12638506

some good info on what the sectors earn here. Rail wise aside from drivers and higher paid roles the average is 33k. Guess its then down to whether the roles are worth more. Isnt the UK average now 36k ?

IMO -
Teachers 30k seems low
Police 24k - very very low IMO


Must admit , comparatively speking - 33k for a ticket office and train guard seems an ok wage for a fairly easy job

All opinions on that

Not sure, dealing with drunk and abusive people, giving people on the spot fines with minimal support

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Indeed, he contradicted himself on the Government interference claim when he said the union wouldn’t talk about anything until compulsory redundancies are taken off the table. That’s pretty unrealistic (deliberately so ?). So they haven’t actually talked about anything that could be interfered with in that case.

Their case is making 2900 people redundant is going to compromise safety. This has been discussed earlier in the thread.
The train companies made £500million profit so why are they holding back?
See my post 355 on trickle down economics.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Their case is making 2900 people redundant is going to compromise safety. This has been discussed earlier in the thread.
The train companies made £500million profit so why are they holding back?
See my post 355 on trickle down economics.

Sorry, I haven’t read all the thread. I may then be repeating points made earlier. My thought is that the actual discussion should be aimed at agreeing staffing levels that do not compromise safety. Going into the meeting with a precondition that even one compulsory redundancy is unacceptable doesn’t seem like achieving that aim. I doubt any industry guarantees staffing levels fixed in time. The union has to accept that technology changes things.

Ps I agree with your post 355. It is a fact that if you want to stimulate demand in an economy you put more money into the pockets of poorer people. Not usually done in inflationary conditions though where demand is not the issue. That is not an argument for trickle down economics as I think that is just nonsense. As you say, the rich save a high proportion their money. Putting more money in their pockets will do nothing for investment in infrastructure.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

I wouldn't want them to change the laws, but the unions have too much power, to reap havoc within our country.
I am sure you remember that between the unions and the rising fuel prices the country took some major collateral damage in the 70s.
We are heading that way.
Of course as predicted the teachers are piling in now.
If the union can't show some restraint then perhaps the laws should be changed, you can't bring the whole country down just because you have a few gobby power-driven union leaders trying to make a show.

As far as retraint is concerned, unfortunately the carry on of Johnson since he took over has signaled anything but 'we are all in it together'. His flagrant disregard of his own Covid rules has triggered what? A change to the rules of parliamentary standards! If we were to rerun Covid with his new standards and process he can say he sought advice and took a view and his decision is final that he has done nothing wrong. These are the new rules. This is symptomatic of the piece and is gravely concerning.

We are clearly therefore not all in it together. Johnson is in it for himself. As is his inner circle. There has been much personal enrichment over Covid contracts and consultancies.

Hopefully we can get Jexit (the removol of Johnson) done at the next GE before the anger spills out across the wider employment sector because I no more like all these strikes than you.

In the meantime, laws will be changed, Union assets will be seized and strikers will be arrested. Make no mistake, this is a sinister government.

And yes, I remember the 70s very well. However I think you're being very unfair on the current RMT and the teaching unions. Their position is a far cry from that of the likes of Scargill, a genuinely frightening man, and some of the other grey faced old communists of the TUC. Back then the unions wanted to run the country (by proxy, using a labour party whose leadership was 'elected' largely by the unions, and using the ludicrous 'block vote'). Labour managed to wrestle itself from the grasp of the unions and militant, first through the courage of Neil Kinnock (expelling arsehols like Hatton) and then through Blair. The RMT is not trying to overthow the government. Their case has been clear.

I am personally comfortably off and it will take some catestropic economic disasters for this to change. I can sit detached and observe the present events. I see restrained unions legally ballot for a legal strike. Incidentally this happens all the time and normally the members vote against a strike - my union must have had 20 votes over the last 30 years and voted for action only 2 or 3 times. I knew nothing about the RMT till I did some research. Like you I assumed they are a load of soppy SWP goons hell bent on revolution. They are not. Nor are the teachers.

If you are disturbed by more and more unions voting for action, look to the cause. Johnson. And don't applaud too soon if he unilateraly bans strikes. That's a tactic of the likes of the communist Chinese. Johnson and Xi Jinping, where the politcal spectrum becomes a circle. Removal of people's rights for the greater good is a bit like ****ing for virginity.

Anyway, as I said, the short term outcome is likely to be something that you'll approve. Just beware the long term consequences....at very least Johnson's chances of winning the next GE will disappear if he starts bullying first the RMT, then teachers, then nurses and doctors.....

Anyway - all the best

 

[surlyseagull]

The directors , ceo , board members and shareholders all have record increases and earn 100's thousands.

Profits isnt it

Don't disagree Napper and take your point.
I do wonder though how much sympathy the strikers would get if it turned into a nationwide strike and we had shortages and inflation at ridiculous levels because of it.
But the fors and againsts would take a lot more discussion than a couple of lines on Nsc.

 

[Machiavelli]

All hail the junior doctors who are demanding their real pay is restored to levels seen over a decade ago. For those that find it difficult, let's spell things out. The NHS is our greatest institution, yet it's been destroyed by 12 years of Tory rule. There is a recruitment crisis with over 100,000 unfilled vacancies. The Tories have slashed pay to NHS staff by over 20% since they've been in power. The junior doctors have said they're going out unless their pay is restored, which will also start to address the staff shortfall.

Yet, I'm sure we'll get all sorts of responses from those that will rely on said junior doctors for care that 'we can't afford it'. They should also note that nurses, teachers, and all sorts of other professions are in a similar position. The problem isn't the unions per se, the problem is the assault on the unions and their weakness over decades. Now might be the moment where those that are in the movement decide enough is enough.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/23/ready-to-strike-public-sector-workers

 

[Simster]

Is the rail service key? Obviously. Does a strike prove that? Yes, but it didn't need proving.

But a strike doesn't prove that they are underpaid. Similarly the NHS, police, firefighters, teachers, army are all vitally important.

Which ones are more underpaid than the others I really don't know. Are the train drivers the worst paid (for the hours, conditions, skills required etc) out of that lot?

It doesn't really matter who is paid the most or least across industries - the whole point of a fair taxation system is to even up some of the inequalities that the free market brings. If teachers or firefighters feel they are under appreciated then they need to go on strike too.

And yes, it does need proving that the rail service is key. Who are we to say they shouldn't strike if they've had a ballot for industrial action, a ballot for strike action, and over 70% think things are bad enough to justify a walk out with no pay.

By the way, I started off berating an intransigent union, but the more I've read about the facts, the more I've fallen full square behind the striking workers.

 

[amexer]

Many on here genuinely think people at lower pay ranges should be earning a lot more. Obviously this would have to come from somewhere. Do you think it should come from higher earners earning less or paying more tax. Do you think corporation tax should be increased.

 

[Machiavelli]

It doesn't really matter who is paid the most or least across industries - the whole point of a fair taxation system is to even up some of the inequalities that the free market brings. If teachers or firefighters feel they are under appreciated then they need to go on strike too.

And yes, it does need proving that the rail service is key. Who are we to say they shouldn't strike if they've had a ballot for industrial action, a ballot for strike action, and over 70% think things are bad enough to justify a walk out with no pay.

By the way, I started off berating an intransigent union, but the more I've read about the facts, the more I've fallen full square behind the striking workers.

I've been behind them all along, but only reluctantly. On [MENTION=4019]Triggaaar[/MENTION]'s point, I do think rail workers pay is decent enough, in large part because they're heavily unionised and can cause destruction. But it's nurses, teachers, care workers where the real scandal on pay lies.