Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Martyn Sadler

Michael Foot Centenary

88 posts in this topic

Oh and they just decided one day to give people more money, less hours and a safer working environment did they?

 

??????

 

I realise the unions were key to creating some of our most important employment legislation but they no longer hold the key to protecting or enhancing our working environments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The closed shop really is a question about freedom. People shouldn't be compelled to join a Trade Union and companies shouldn't be compelled employ members of a Trade Union. We live in a liberal democracy not a pale imitation of a communist state. 

 

Institutionalising the privileges of powerful trade unions caused all sorts of problems for both the workforce and employers. Once in a position of privilege some Unions started to serve the self interests of their leadership and paid employees rather than the interests of their members. Also the closed shop meant Unions could effectively veto who was and wasn't employed and led to all sorts of Spanish practices. 

 

In cases were the internal democracy of the Trade Unions broke down all sorts of abuses went on. Arthur Scargill's casual disregard for the  views and interests of his members being the most blatant example.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If its a shelter built with your money on your land. I agree.

What has that got to do with it? You think you are entitled to sunbathe then enjoy the benefits of someone's labour?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

??????

I realise the unions were key to creating some of our most important employment legislation but they no longer hold the key to protecting or enhancing our working environments.

I agree with you here. My point was about making a difference in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

What has that got to do with it? You think you are entitled to sunbathe then enjoy the benefits of someone's labour?

If it isn't your shelter. Yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it isn't your shelter. Yes.

But it is my shelter, I just built it. More to the point, you didn't but feel entitled to use it for some reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But it is my shelter, I just built it. More to the point, you didn't but feel entitled to use it for some reason.

As I've said, if you built it with your money on your land, then you are perfectly entitled to keep it yourself. If, however, someone paid you to build it on their land, with their money, then say I can use it, budge up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I've said, if you built it with your money on your land, then you are perfectly entitled to keep it yourself. If, however, someone paid you to build it on their land, with their money, then say I can use it, budge up.

But they didn't. We are on a desert island. You choose to sunbathe, I build a shelter for when it's raining. There's nothing to stop you building your own so jog on.

The scenario you are talking about is one of a building contractor making a building for a customer, not something like I am on about

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

But they didn't. We are on a desert island. You choose to sunbathe, I build a shelter for when it's raining. There's nothing to stop you building your own so jog on.

I've already said i agree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a union gets pay rises and benefits for the workforce, then what right do non members have to claim those benefits?

 

 

non whatsoever, let them try and  negotiate their own pay, terms and conditions and see how far they get as individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

non whatsoever, let them try and  negotiate their own pay, terms and conditions and see how far they get as individuals.

Yeah why do we need equal pay legislation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What has that got to do with it? You think you are entitled to sunbathe then enjoy the benefits of someone's labour?

"Striking" isn't labour. You didn't do any work, you withdrew your labour in a bid to push up wage costs - essentially blackmail. If you won and got the money you wanted then rejoice but why get upset that other people also got the rise? There are reasons why the same job should be paid the same wage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Striking" isn't labour. You didn't do any work, you withdrew your labour in a bid to push up wage costs - essentially blackmail. If you won and got the money you wanted then rejoice but why get upset that other people also got the rise? There are reasons why the same job should be paid the same wage

'Please Sir, can we have a payrise?, our kids are starving'

 

'Do one, I can't afford it, sending my kids to public school isn't cheap you know'

 

'Well we with withold our labour until we get a living wage and conditions that don't endanger our lives'

 

'Go on then, see if I care'

 

(work stops, factory owner realises he has to pay them a reasonable wage, does so and work resumes)

 

'Good move everyone, by standing together we have shown that we are worthy of more than starvation wages'

 

Somehow, the factory miraciously keeps going and still makes a profit for many years to come. Of course, they could have relied solely on the goodness of the factory owner to pay them well enough to live  I'm sure the non union people would have talked them round. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Please Sir, can we have a payrise?, our kids are starving'

 

'Do one, I can't afford it, sending my kids to public school isn't cheap you know'

 

'Well we with withold our labour until we get a living wage and conditions that don't endanger our lives'

 

'Go on then, see if I care'

 

(work stops, factory owner realises he has to pay them a reasonable wage, does so and work resumes)

 

'Good move everyone, by standing together we have shown that we are worthy of more than starvation wages'

 

Somehow, the factory miraciously keeps going and still makes a profit for many years to come. Of course, they could have relied solely on the goodness of the factory owner to pay them well enough to live  I'm sure the non union people would have talked them round. :rolleyes:

Firstly that's not related to what I said. There was no argument put forward for why union labour should be paid higher than non-union labour for the same job.

 

Secondly wages are related to supply and demand. Low skilled jobs typically don't get many pay rises because there is always a ready supply of unskilled labour and the demand for it doesn't go up much in mature economies. Non-union labour can get huge pay rises in areas where there is a shortage of skilled labour. You don't tend to hear too much about trade unions among computer programmers for a reason.

 

Thirdly you are kidding that wage demands don't make business go under. What do you think "outsourcing" is all about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wage demands? In this day and age? What planet do you work on? I haven't had a pay rise for at least 6 years and am now being told to take a 15% pay cut. The options? Take it or eff off.

If people are happy earning a pittance and don't feel the need to ask for any more, then that's up to them. But they shouldn't reap the benefits of others who were prepared to stand up and be counted.

And besides, I am talking about the initial changes bought about by the trade unions, not especially today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Striking" isn't labour. You didn't do any work, you withdrew your labour in a bid to push up wage costs - essentially blackmail. If you won and got the money you wanted then rejoice but why get upset that other people also got the rise? There are reasons why the same job should be paid the same wageT

 

 

 

 

 

The strike, or threat of a strike is the only weapon labour has.  People are selling their labour, if the person buying that labour won't pay the asking price then those people are entitled to not sell that labour.  Business don't sell their products for less than they can afford to, why should labour be any different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The strike, or threat of a strike is the only weapon labour has.  People are selling their labour, if the person buying that labour won't pay the asking price then those people are entitled to not sell that labour.  Business don't sell their products for less than they can afford to, why should labour be any different?

Businesses that collaborate to fix prices are illegal. Workers that collaborate to fix labour costs are legal.

 

But that wasn't my point.

 

My point is that striking is not work. It does not produce anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wage demands? In this day and age? What planet do you work on? I haven't had a pay rise for at least 6 years and am now being told to take a 15% pay cut. The options? Take it or eff off.

If people are happy earning a pittance and don't feel the need to ask for any more, then that's up to them. But they shouldn't reap the benefits of others who were prepared to stand up and be counted.

And besides, I am talking about the initial changes bought about by the trade unions, not especially today.

It's not me that's on a different planet if you think that union and non-union staff being paid differently is going to end well for union members. Don't imagine that the unionised guys will be paid more for very long.

 

When trade unions go on strike, the non-union staff often have to cover for them and if the trade union damages the business then they also lose out.

 

Unfortunately if you don't have an in-demand skill then pay rises are few and far between and that's got little to do with unions. They can try to bid up the wage rate but in the end, they are just speeding up the inevitable outsource to China.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not me that's on a different planet if you think that union and non-union staff being paid differently is going to end well for union members. Don't imagine that the unionised guys will be paid more for very long.

 

When trade unions go on strike, the non-union staff often have to cover for them and if the trade union damages the business then they also lose out.

 

Unfortunately if you don't have an in-demand skill then pay rises are few and far between and that's got little to do with unions. They can try to bid up the wage rate but in the end, they are just speeding up the inevitable outsource to China.

This is drifting away from the original point, which was that employers would not have raised pay or improved conditions without the initial union movement. That it is a different situation today is undeniable. But many people have decried unions, whilst happy to take the benefits that it has provided for the vast, vast majority of workers in this country.

As for outsourcing work, this is happening more and more, and will only drive our wages down irrespective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is drifting away from the original point, which was that employers would not have raised pay or improved conditions without the initial union movement. That it is a different situation today is undeniable. But many people have decried unions, whilst happy to take the benefits that it has provided for the vast, vast majority of workers in this country.

 

I'm not overkeen on medieval barons either but I still think Magna Carta should apply to me. I'd be surprised if you didn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 You don't tend to hear too much about trade unions among computer programmers for a reason.

 

That's because the one at our place is SATA, basically USDAW and is terrible.  I've watched them sit back and allow the company to take away our sick pay because we are classed as one homogonous group along with the call centre staff, and so when call centre sickness went up to 20% we lost our sickness rights, despite having 1% sickness in the department, and the union just said it was outside their remit to get involved. I'd love Phil's scenario of getting my own T&Cs.  Also I assume in John's scenario he would be happy that union workers would be the first to be laid off during any hard times, due to their improved pay and conditions making them less profitable than non union workers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's because the one at our place is SATA, basically USDAW and is terrible.  I've watched them sit back and allow the company to take away our sick pay because we are classed as one homogonous group along with the call centre staff, and so when call centre sickness went up to 20% we lost our sickness rights, despite having 1% sickness in the department, and the union just said it was outside their remit to get involved. I'd love Phil's scenario of getting my own T&Cs.  Also I assume in John's scenario he would be happy that union workers would be the first to be laid off during any hard times, due to their improved pay and conditions making them less profitable than non union workers?

Companies have a right to withdraw a benefit if it is abused. They do not have a right to withdraw statutory T&C's.

Anyway why would you feel the need to worry about sick pay with 1% sickness absence?

I work in the employment industry and by far and way the biggest problem is over generous packages rather than abuse of workers rights. We must address the balance.

It amazes me that my father in law who was employed as a shop fitter, could retire at 55 and play golf for the rest of his life.

This situation has arisen due to union power over stretching companies and the country. I don't think we need to be thanking the unions too much for the fact that I'm paying for his retirement. I'm happy for him but he's not alone. There's a whole host of people now hitting their sixties awash with golf clubs, new cars and trips to Portugal, moaning about low interest rates when they haven't 2 O levels between them and 30 years service in a factory. The self same people a generation younger like myself, can only dream of that lifestyle and it's not because of waning union power.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Companies have a right to withdraw a benefit if it is abused. They do not have a right to withdraw statutory T&C's.

Anyway why would you feel the need to worry about sick pay with 1% sickness absence?

I work in the employment industry and by far and way the biggest problem is over generous packages rather than abuse of workers rights. We must address the balance.

It amazes me that my father in law who was employed as a shop fitter, could retire at 55 and play golf for the rest of his life.

This situation has arisen due to union power over stretching companies and the country. I don't think we need to be thanking the unions too much for the fact that I'm paying for his retirement. I'm happy for him but he's not alone. There's a whole host of people now hitting their sixties awash with golf clubs, new cars and trips to Portugal, moaning about low interest rates when they haven't 2 O levels between them and 30 years service in a factory. The self same people a generation younger like myself, can only dream of that lifestyle and it's not because of waning union power.

 

And what's wrong with that? Isn't that how it should be?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Companies have a right to withdraw a benefit if it is abused. They do not have a right to withdraw statutory T&C's.

Anyway why would you feel the need to worry about sick pay with 1% sickness absence?

 

Seriously?

 

Because 1% is an average figure.  If you are the unlucky one to be ill twice during a whole year you lose the first three days pay of the second sickness period.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And what's wrong with that? Isn't that how it should be?

30 years work for 90 years life?  That's not going to work in the long run is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - April 2017

League Express - Mon 10th April 2017