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

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Depends which end of the telescope you look through.

Every strike inconveniences another worker, sends a small business into bankruptcy, increases prices, pushes up inflation, and costs the taxpayer more. And so the circle of wage demands goes round again.

Way to go

I put you on ignore many years ago (one of the first). I can see why. Your view is that of a Victorian sweat shop owner. For every chimney sweep who stays at home because he's ill, someone's chimney is not swept. Sick pay for chimney sweeps would simply be a drain on the economy, leaving the poor Victorian sweat shop owner with less money to make the economy go round, putting food on peple's tables, such as the family of the selfish chimney sweep. Four year old chimney sweeps should be schooled in the virtue of responsibility and hard work, or heaven knows what would happen to this great country of ours.

And....back on ignore.

 

[Uncle C]

I put you on ignore many years ago (one of the first). I can see why. Your view is that of a Victorian sweat shop owner. For every chimney sweep who stays at home because he's ill, someone's chimney is not swept. Sick pay for chimney sweeps would simply be a drain on the economy, leaving the poor Victorian sweat shop owner with less money to make the economy go round, putting food on peple's tables, such as the family of the selfish chimney sweep. Four year old chimney sweeps should be schooled in the virtue of responsibility and hard work, or heaven knows what would happen to this great country of ours.

And....back on ignore.

That's good.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Hidden amongst the noise, the bluster and the nonsense in this thread is this simple truth. The top end wage earners are absolutely able to pay more and they should on a reasonable, sliding scale.

Yep, that’s exactly it. There’s always a lot of noise about high earners disappearing elsewhere but I really don’t think tax rates are the main driver of relocation. These people are often not as irreplaceable as they claim as well. Both management and workers are actually protected from wage market forces by artificial barriers. There is an endless supply of both from developing countries if the country wants it. People will continue to line up on this thread and in discussion elsewhere to blame one side or the other when neither is economically indispensable.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Hidden amongst the noise, the bluster and the nonsense in this thread is this simple truth. The top end wage earners are absolutely able to pay more and they should on a reasonable, sliding scale.

We have a sliding scale now. What would you change it to?

 

[T.G]

...and the massive wages, dividends and bonuses doesn't ?? Also strikes are a two way process...if bosses ask for something unreasonable and decline to budge then they are creating the likelihood of a strike and inconveniencing others. However as always the focus is on the workforce who only have the option to withdraw their labour or accept the crap.

 

[Uncle C]

Yep, that’s exactly it. There’s always a lot of noise about high earners disappearing elsewhere but I really don’t think tax rates are the main driver of relocation. These people are often not as irreplaceable as they claim as well. Both management and workers are actually protected from wage market forces by artificial barriers. There is an endless supply of both from developing countries if the country wants it. People will continue to line up on this thread and in discussion elsewhere to blame one side or the other when neither is economically indispensable.

This country needs a wage cap, to include footballers.

 

[Badger Boy]

We have a sliding scale now. What would you change it to?

I would more strictly enforce it and reduce the ways (legal and otherwise) that income can be hidden to reduce the tax burden of the highest earners. It's not a war on wealth, people have worked hard for long periods of time to be earning high salaries and I respect them for doing so. But they should pay their fair share and it's in everyone's interests to contribute.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Shows how much impact their strikes have had.

Just change the initials to fit most unions. At the moment we have railworkers, barristers, nhs, doctors, teachers, airport staff all heading for the trough.

I don’t know about the others but it’s hardly a trough for teachers. As I’ve said I don’t think teachers will support a strike. If it happens you will see many teachers working as normal just as there have been many railway employees still working.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

This country needs a wage cap, to include footballers.

Set by whom ? If a business cannot budget to make a return (including wages) then it isn’t a great idea/market. It’s easy to lecture workers about finding a different job but the same applies to capital. Football is a little different because it is widely agreed that £250k+ a week is ridiculous and sport is supposed to be a fair competition. Regulating player wages would help achieve that aim.

 

[Machiavelli]

Shows how much impact their strikes have had.

Just change the initials to fit most unions. At the moment we have railworkers, barristers, nhs, doctors, teachers, airport staff all heading for the trough.

There's plenty more than that, as you'll find over the next year or two. And, no, they're not heading for the trough. Most of those have had pay cuts that have been continual for over a decade -- in my job, it's been between 20 and 25% since 2008, and we're looking at a further 7 or 8% added to that courtesy of this year's imminent pay 'offer'. Union members are voting to halt this travesty. In most instances, they're not even after a pay rise, merely seeking to limit the extent of the pay cut.
There are plenty that have had their snouts in the trough, and it's a valid critique to make (be careful though, you might get accused of engaging in class war) but, for some reason, you've fingered the wrong target. Now, why might that be?

 

[beorhthelm]

And yet people mocked me for proposing that income tax be set at a fixed %

Personally I would expect salary increases within a union membership/trade to be sought in terms of % increase. Increasing the % to a greater extent for lower paid earners is a communistic agenda designed to (eventually) have everone earn the same on a £ basis. I am very certainly not a communist, and would contemplate a higher % increase for lower paid workers only if the within-union differential across trades is palpably 'unfair'. I don't buy the latter as a generality, albeit there will be some unfairness due to the relentless jockying for position that goes on between unions, within workforces, between workforces and between employers, sometimes know as the operation of free collective bargaining in a market economy.

it does seem odd that uniform % are fair in one area, while unfair in another. also contradicts the RMT's own rule for the promotion of equality for all, their members will never be on equal pay. different grades of equality.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

it does seem odd that uniform % are fair in one area, while unfair in another. also contradicts the RMT's own rule for the promotion of equality for all, their members will never be on equal pay. different grades of equality.

Equality doesn’t necessarily mean all positions get paid exactly the same…that would be absurd.

 

[amexer]

Off subject but so glad I have spent most of my working life in businesses where everyone was an individual.and if there were increases they were given in accordance with attitude and input to job. Have for eg found it sad over years coming across outstanding teachers and civil servants knowing earning same as rank bad ones. In case of latter often earning more because of length of service

 

[A1X]

Shows how much impact their strikes have had.

Just change the initials to fit most unions. At the moment we have railworkers, barristers, nhs, doctors, teachers, airport staff all heading for the trough.

Most of whom people were out clapping on doorsteps for just two years ago when they were out risking their lives.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

it does seem odd that uniform % are fair in one area, while unfair in another. also contradicts the RMT's own rule for the promotion of equality for all, their members will never be on equal pay. different grades of equality.

I doubt that RMT advocates 'equality' by seeking that every worker earns the same in £ terms, so I can't see how it can be in violation of it's constitution, if that's what you are implying.

Care to post the RMT's rules on the promotion of equality?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Off subject but so glad I have spent most of my working life in businesses where everyone was an individual.and if there were increases they were given in accordance with attitude and input to job. Have for eg found it sad over years coming across outstanding teachers and civil servants knowing earning same as rank bad ones. In case of latter often earning more because of length of service

I can assure you that university staff do not earn primarily according to years in the job, but in accordance with achievement (what you might call attitude and input). The main diffrential is whether you are a lecturer, a senior lecturerer or a professor - the pay scales are very different. You don't become a senior lecturerer for being crap and you don't become a professor if you are merely tolerably capable. The same will certainly apply in other sectors. Most of the moaning is from the lazy and talented in the middle scale about the fact they earn no more than hard working plodders. There are different ways to earn the same amount. So be it. In my experience people are where they deserve to be in the payscale, albeit they are certainly not getting what they deserve in the wider context because the pay in the scale is no longer what it was.

Teachers have a great deal to moan about, but it will certainly not primarily be that shit colleagues are overpaid (unless falsely promoted). People can often steal a living but this is no longer because their union makes it so. It certainly was the case in the late 70s, though, and a mate of mine who worked on the railways knew people who hadn't done a day's work for years - just sat around drinking tea, with no comeback in part because all grades including managers were in the same union. Those days are largely long gone.

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

Off subject but so glad I have spent most of my working life in businesses where everyone was an individual.and if there were increases they were given in accordance with attitude and input to job. Have for eg found it sad over years coming across outstanding teachers and civil servants knowing earning same as rank bad ones. In case of latter often earning more because of length of service

Not true of teaching. Well, not entirely true because there are pay bands. However you have to rise through the bands by virtue of good practice and there is extra pay for taking on more responsibility such as head of year or department or being involved with teacher training etc.

 

[beorhthelm]

Off subject but so glad I have spent most of my working life in businesses where everyone was an individual.and if there were increases they were given in accordance with attitude and input to job. Have for eg found it sad over years coming across outstanding teachers and civil servants knowing earning same as rank bad ones. In case of latter often earning more because of length of service

its product of collective bargining, noble in intent but leads to uneven relation between effort and pay. the other problem is national pay scales that dont recognise regional living cost or market rates. someone in Tyneside or North Wales might be doing fine on grade x, while the same job in Sussex thats tight and people can get better money elsewhere.

[MENTION=1200]Harry Wilson's tackle[/MENTION], the RMT rules are here, i was being very literal.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

its product of collective bargining, noble in intent but leads to uneven relation between effort and pay. the other problem is national pay scales that dont recognise regional living cost or market rates. someone in Tyneside or North Wales might be doing fine on grade x, while the same job in Sussex thats tight and people can get better money elsewhere.

[MENTION=1200]Harry Wilson's tackle[/MENTION], the RMT rules are here, i was being very literal.

Promoting equality.

That does NOT mean that everyone earns the same. FFS!

 

[LamieRobertson]

Mate....I have been careful to not do what I used to do and be horribly rude to Mouldy. I like Mouldy, even though we differ in our views. I have however pointed out that this thread appears to be ill-judged and, once this became apparent, his continued grinding of the same axe has become unwise. In the end if he wants to devalue the currency of his opinion further by clinging on to the prejudice that made the thread pointless from the off, that is his choice.

Others have shown a deal of exasperation with all this. All the while that Mouldy keeps coming back with further whataboutery, the degree of exasperation is likely to increase rather than subside.

It's interesting to posit views that don't 'fit in' but pursuing them even when the last vestiges of their flesh have been flayed off them with relentless facts is foolhardy. You will also recall that the thread was started by Mouldy asking a question. You shouldn't ask questions if you are unwilling to take note of the answers.

Yes I noticed your posts…which were worthy of you…well constructed and dealing with the matter in hand

My point earlier was to do with ‘tackling the man not the ball’.

Anyway I’ve given my opinion as to how I was (rightly or wrongly) viewing the direction of the thread at the time and moved on.