Thatcher is dead...

Started by perseus, April 08, 2013, 12: PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

fred c

Quote from: whatabouthisthen on April 09, 2013, 09: AM

In the 80s, after the deplorable 70s most of us welcomed the curbs on the unions, after-all we voted for politicians to run the country not union officials.

Is this an example of Mrs Thatchers legacy & why Unions are neccessary ??? ??? Camerons "we are all in this together" soundbite is shown up for what it is in this article ( Bit surprised The Mail ran this )

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2306629/Bosses-pay-16---workers-1-rise-Growing-gulf-staff-revealed-average-chief-executive-earning-nearly-300-000.html

SRMoore

Except, Fred, the reality is that -as any private sector union member will tell you- the unions couldn't give a flying duck whether or not we got a pay rise. In fact they don't even engage with our company when it comes to negotiations. Just as long as we pay our subs and show solidarity with our public sector brothers & sisters they will send us a copy of pravda every month to remind us how evil the tories are.

fred c

Quote from: SRMoore on April 10, 2013, 08: AM
Except, Fred, the reality is that -as any private sector union member will tell you- the unions couldn't give a flying duck whether or not we got a pay rise. In fact they don't even engage with our company when it comes to negotiations. Just as long as we pay our subs and show solidarity with our public sector brothers & sisters they will send us a copy of pravda every month to remind us how evil the tories are.

As a long standing member of a union i can only tell you this simple fact about a trade unionism.

A Union is only as Strong as its Members.

Being in a union doesn`t give you a given right to improved pay & benefits..... you have to fight for them from the newest member to the oldest.

Ask yourself this........ Why are Unions less effective in the Private Sector ???

I`ll give you a clue.......... if your brave (Or Foolish) enough to stand up for yourself & your colleagues & take on the role of an accredited shop steward, you are quite likely to be the recipient of "The Black Spot"............ Don`t tell me it doesn`t exist Shane......... I have been the victim of it on several occasions as have several of my colleagues.

Another Legacy of Mrs Thatchers.

Thats all i am going post on this thread..... we hold differing views on Thatcher, lets leave it at that.

Stig of the Seaton Dump

I joined Unite the Union last year and have been bitterly disappointed.

They are not interested in fighting for a pay rise (mine has been 0% for years) they are not even interested in fighting major redundancies (I have seen good workers discarded like used tea bags).

When an announcement is made they huff and puff for 5 minutes, take no action and then send you a leaflet on ambulance chasing type injury claims or get a gift voucher if you can get some other mug to join.

...I was more than amused when subs went up over 4% and I got no answer to my comment that a pay rise of the same magnitude would be nice.

The union appears to be like HBC, complacent and highly paid directors surviving off the fact that there is little choice.

(I am persisting in the hope they improve and I vote for change when given the chance.)
I don't believe it.

SRMoore

#19
Speaking also as a union member (Unite) I can only tell you of my experience and that is that every time we have requested information/support/representation from our union branch we have been ignored.

None of our shop stewards have had any issue with being mistreated by the management of our company. In fact, we seem to have a decent working relationship with them which usually enables matters to be resolved quickly.
Just like the relationship HBC have with UNISON only the company isn't paying our union protection money to keep a good relationship. ;) That's the excuse HBC give us for the £100k a year union budget, right?

whatabouthisthen

Nice of the Durham Miners to hold a party in honour of Mrs Thatcher.

not4me

#21
I don't see how you can condemn nastiness by being even more nasty yourself. A bit of grace while making their own valid point would have done the image of the collieries far more good. There was an opportunity here to show that they were better than Thatcher - they flunct it.

whatabouthisthen

Fred c. I never said that there wasn't a need for unions but you can't have unions dictating to Parliament which started in the 60s and carried on into the fiasco of the 70s. It was because of this undemocratic behaviour that I then handed in my union membership.
You are still looking at this Union interference now in this town. Unison run the Labour Party. Why else was the  guarantee of 300 jobs being located to Hartlepool turned down last year - because it would have meant the loss of 47 jobs being transferred to the private sector and the weakening of union power. Edwin Jeffries was allowed in to the Labour Councillors meeting and access to the pink paper concerning the proposed contract. Why? Contractual information that only Councillors where allowed to see.

whatabouthisthen

Couldn't agree more not4me

SRMoore

Quote from: not4me on April 10, 2013, 02: PM
I don't see how you can condemn nastiness by being even more nasty yourself. A bit of grace while making their own valid point would have done the image of the collieries far more good. There was an opportunity here to show that they were better than Thatcher - they flunct it.

Absolutely agree. Dan Hodges (Labour man) wrote a piece for the Telegraph today which was pretty much spot on I thought.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100211461/if-labour-cant-show-restraint-today-it-will-say-more-about-them-than-it-does-about-margaret-thatcher/

fred c

#25
Quote from: whatabouthisthen on April 10, 2013, 02: PM
Fred c. I never said that there wasn't a need for unions but you can't have unions dictating to Parliament which started in the 60s and carried on into the fiasco of the 70s. It was because of this undemocratic behaviour that I then handed in my union membership.
You are still looking at this Union interference now in this town. Unison run the Labour Party. Why else was the  guarantee of 300 jobs being located to Hartlepool turned down last year - because it would have meant the loss of 47 jobs being transferred to the private sector and the weakening of union power. Edwin Jeffries was allowed in to the Labour Councillors meeting and access to the pink paper concerning the proposed contract. Why? Contractual information that only Councillors where allowed to see.

I did intend not to contribute further to this post.....However

I never said that Unions should be able to dictate to Government, Unions are there for the representation & protection of their members in dealing with Employers, if however your naive enough to believe employers are always blameless, there is nothing else i can add.

You are though perfectly correct in your appraisal of Some Union activity within HBC, you are also correct in your point about the possibilty of losing 47 jobs, but gaining a possible 300.

I would also suspect you are correct in your assertion about one of "The Orangutans" having access to Meetings where Council Business is discussed. (If true its Disgraceful)

On the point of "Union Involvement", i was in attendance at a full council meeting when a member of the public put forward to drummond ( I Believe ) the point of ratepayers funding the Unison Representative`s full & part time (at a cost of approx £100,000) & he should consider stopping the practice.......


mk1

The hysteria is way over the top.
Why so much effort wasted trying to force everyone to kneel in memory of the sainted Margret?
The majority of people could not care less so why don't those who see this as a great national tragedy weep on each others shoulders and leave the rest of us to get on with life.
Whenever there is such an event (death of a Royal etc) I simply switch off the telly and stop reading the newspapers  for a few days until sanity returns.

The woman was very divisive and for everyone who  gained under her rule there was one who lost out.
She was not universally popular so why try and claim otherwise?

SRMoore

Quote from: perseus on April 10, 2013, 03: PM
This is interesting too.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/09/russell-brand-margaret-thatcher?CMP=twt_gu

Russell Brand's take on things.
Interesting in the sense that it's completely random enough to have been written by Alan Barclay ;)

mk1

Quote from: Stig of the Seaton Dump on April 10, 2013, 09: AM
I joined Unite the Union last year and have been bitterly disappointed.


If I had a penny for everyone who joined a Union and then asked what they were they going to do for him.........................


SRMoore

I don't think anybody on this thread has even tried to claim Lady Thatcher was universally popular. In fact this is the most civilised discussion on the topic I have seen in recent days.

Members have accepted that each have their own opinions and accepted them whilst sharing their own.
Who would have thought it'd take Thatcher to make members of this forum behave like civilised adults towards each other - without the use of police ;)