Scargill, still causing trouble
Discussion
Derek Smith said:
As the strike went on the police attitude to the strikers changed more than a little. Despite all the aggro, some of it really vicious, against the non-striking miners and the police, there was massive sympathy. I heard rumours of collections for the strikers. There's more than one striker fed on police issue sarnies.
I've seen one PC laughing about how much money he got from all the overtime being unceremoniously put down by an ex-squaddie who mentioned that there were families going hungry.
Every police officer I ever spoke with had nothing but contempt for Scargill but the odd thing was not for calling the strike or even the violence. The main thing was the self engrandisemnt and the sacrifice of the miners and their families on his alter.
There was criticsm of Thatcher as well, the suggestion being that she would ensure the miners were never a force again. Even those who stayed at work, and risked everything, were, in the opinion of many a police officer, and I bet many a non-strikign miner, betrayed.
It was a very strange time in the job.
The BiB wanted the strike to last as long as possible, why not they were certainly being well paid and who could blame them. Scargill was a chump the way he played his cards, who knows what may have become of the industry if he hadn't been such a militant.I've seen one PC laughing about how much money he got from all the overtime being unceremoniously put down by an ex-squaddie who mentioned that there were families going hungry.
Every police officer I ever spoke with had nothing but contempt for Scargill but the odd thing was not for calling the strike or even the violence. The main thing was the self engrandisemnt and the sacrifice of the miners and their families on his alter.
There was criticsm of Thatcher as well, the suggestion being that she would ensure the miners were never a force again. Even those who stayed at work, and risked everything, were, in the opinion of many a police officer, and I bet many a non-strikign miner, betrayed.
It was a very strange time in the job.
crankedup said:
Yes I know its a success and provides valued work, but it hardly fills the gap left by our own industry. Yup, great work by Thatcher, close down British industry and support the Japanese. You couldn't make it up.
I disagree, this is an utter nonsense. The Nissan plant provides far more work for more people, and has supported far more families for longer, without any reliance on annual subsidies. How would the same levels of investment have lasted when spunked up the wall supporting a dirty, dangerous, defunct and dying 19th century industry like mining?
Look also at the massive amount of inward investment Thatcher's Govts attracted to places like South Wales. To suggest Thatcher was supporting the japanese is insane. She was supporting Geordies and Taffs.
Andy Zarse said:
I'm not so sure. What always exasperated me about the miners and their communities was the singular lack of imagination they showed. For every Kes or Billy Elliott there was a hundred who never had - or were ever encouraged by the dismal state education system - any ambition other than to go down t'pit.
And on one level, why should they? The state subsidised wages from mining gave a very comfy living thank you. What they couldn't grasp was their livelihood had to be paid for by someone and they never could grasp that the money deducted from the meagre pensions of grannies who could ill afford it was lining their pockets. It was deeply resented.
The public largely hated the miners, rather like they hate bankers today; for similar reasons stemming from the unearned assumption of privilege.
I agree with the lack of education philosophy and kids followed Dad into coal mining. Indeed it was a generationally expected, but it is no different to many other industries of the time. Railway workers, And on one level, why should they? The state subsidised wages from mining gave a very comfy living thank you. What they couldn't grasp was their livelihood had to be paid for by someone and they never could grasp that the money deducted from the meagre pensions of grannies who could ill afford it was lining their pockets. It was deeply resented.
The public largely hated the miners, rather like they hate bankers today; for similar reasons stemming from the unearned assumption of privilege.
dockers, steel workers in fact it was the norm' most kids followed Dads footsteps. My guess is that many kids today would give their eye teeth to do that now.
If the mines had been kept open, or at least a % of them they would have been privatised just like many other publicly owned business. We can only wonder if that would have brought prosperity.
Living through the closures of pits simply as another joe public, I do not agree that miners were hated at all on the scale that you suggest, it seemed to me that they were holding the moral high ground and attracted public sympathy rather than hate.
fido said:
A tumour is a better analogy .. these unions started off with good intentions but inevitably destroyed the organisations they resided within.
I'm not sure you are fully conversant with the history of unions if you believe they started off with intentions you might regard as good. What has happened over the years is that they have become part of the establishment. The steelworkers refused to go in on the side of the miners, as did the overwhelming bulk of the trades union movement. The miners strike came within inches of overthrowing the government, or at the very least, Thatcher and the tory right wing. Had just a couple of the powerful unions fallen in with Scargill then things would have been very different.
Most unions are fine examples of democracy at work. There are pro tory unions as there are pro labour, or at least socialist, which lets out labour I suppose. In the main most unions membership is about as middle of the road as the population at large because, one would assume, they are the population at large.
When unions have gone on demonstrations or strikes en masse is when there are changes in the legislation that hurt them in particular.
Befor I joined the police I was in a unionised job. I was a printer. I became a union official and went in with the Father of the Chapel to discuss agreements with the management. In my time the union never, ever, went back on an agreement. Do you really need to ask me about whether the bosses did or not?
The police have no union. So they are pushed around as well only more so. The federation entered into agreements, legally binding they said, with the government only for them to be ignored by the government time and again. At least three times in 30 years. The workers, of course, were legally bound by the agreements so could do nothing similar.
What is destroying middle of the road unions is that they are repeatedly ignored by the employers/government. They are villified in a press only too keen to put the boot in. So the extremists get all the money.
Most trade unionsts abhore the RMT but what is the option? Sit back and see your income destroyed or join in with the strikes?
The present government has made its point of view quite clear. It will not negotiate with unions, bring them into discussions or accept them as a bone fide lobby group, unlike those from business interests who have not been voted in. What do they expect union members to do?
Other countries, most notably Germany, which isn't doing too bad after bailing out East Germany, and most of the EEC, has a much more inclusive view of unions. Their system is not perfect but it is certainly better than ours if you look at results.
The unions lost their voice in the 70s when labour lurched to the left and became unelectable. What let Thatcher in was the rejection of ultra left views of labour by the vast majority of the working class. Since then they haven't really had a voice as such. Blair was hardly the unions' friend.
The union movement started out as anti-government. It evolved but it will not stay that way for long if it is ignored.
crankedup said:
One example hardly demonstrates Thatchers success in rebuilding mining communities with work. Thatcher poured millions of pounds into defeating Unions in a attempt to satisfy the political agenda. Then poured more millions into supporting a Japanese company to set up shop here. Yes I know its a success and provides valued work, but it hardly fills the gap left by our own industry. Yup, great work by Thatcher, close down British industry and support the Japanese. You couldn't make it up.
Many Many other new companies invested in the Northeast throughout the late 80's and early 90's. Sadly Labour managed to drive quite a few of them away.Those millions poured into a 'Japanese company' as you so kindly put it have had a massive return on investment for the people in the area - you did not watch that video did you?
British industry closed itself down due to your beloved Unions and poor management / leadership. Look at British Leyland.
Andy Zarse said:
crankedup said:
Yes I know its a success and provides valued work, but it hardly fills the gap left by our own industry. Yup, great work by Thatcher, close down British industry and support the Japanese. You couldn't make it up.
I disagree, this is an utter nonsense. The Nissan plant provides far more work for more people, and has supported far more families for longer, without any reliance on annual subsidies. How would the same levels of investment have lasted when spunked up the wall supporting a dirty, dangerous, defunct and dying 19th century industry like mining?
Look also at the massive amount of inward investment Thatcher's Govts attracted to places like South Wales. To suggest Thatcher was supporting the japanese is insane. She was supporting Geordies and Taffs.
Andy Zarse said:
I disagree, this is an utter nonsense.
The Nissan plant provides far more work for more people, and has supported far more families for longer, without any reliance on annual subsidies. How would the same levels of investment have lasted when spunked up the wall supporting a dirty, dangerous, defunct and dying 19th century industry like mining?
Look also at the massive amount of inward investment Thatcher's Govts attracted to places like South Wales. To suggest Thatcher was supporting the japanese is insane. She was supporting Geordies and Taffs.
Erm, I have acknowledged that the Nissan plant is a success and provides valued work, so in what way is that utter nonsense. Unfortunately it is a Japanese owned Company, end of. I would have rather seen continued investment into our own industry, but I do and have acknowledged the disruptive Union influences within the business. As I always mention, Thatcher should have been more imaginative in the dealings with the industry rather than simply close it down. As was always the way with the U.K. competition from outside of our borders was simply not accepted as a threat and we sat back on our laurels. The car industry, motorbike industry, are two of the greatest examples of inept management we are ever likely to witness, that alongside the out of control Union power at the time. Even when the Japanese introduced some cars and motorbikes to the U.K. the threat was not taken seriously.The Nissan plant provides far more work for more people, and has supported far more families for longer, without any reliance on annual subsidies. How would the same levels of investment have lasted when spunked up the wall supporting a dirty, dangerous, defunct and dying 19th century industry like mining?
Look also at the massive amount of inward investment Thatcher's Govts attracted to places like South Wales. To suggest Thatcher was supporting the japanese is insane. She was supporting Geordies and Taffs.
Now 25 years too late the Government recognises that the closures of our industries has been a huge mistake (old farts like me have been saying that for years)and now want to see us return to manufacturing and exporting again. The return of the apprentice is a great move, again far far to late but its not cataclysmal, the U.K can rebuild.
Derek Smith said:
I'm not sure you are fully conversant with the history of unions if you believe they started off with intentions you might regard as good. What has happened over the years is that they have become part of the establishment.
The steelworkers refused to go in on the side of the miners, as did the overwhelming bulk of the trades union movement. The miners strike came within inches of overthrowing the government, or at the very least, Thatcher and the tory right wing. Had just a couple of the powerful unions fallen in with Scargill then things would have been very different.
Most unions are fine examples of democracy at work. There are pro tory unions as there are pro labour, or at least socialist, which lets out labour I suppose. In the main most unions membership is about as middle of the road as the population at large because, one would assume, they are the population at large.
When unions have gone on demonstrations or strikes en masse is when there are changes in the legislation that hurt them in particular.
Befor I joined the police I was in a unionised job. I was a printer. I became a union official and went in with the Father of the Chapel to discuss agreements with the management. In my time the union never, ever, went back on an agreement. Do you really need to ask me about whether the bosses did or not?
The police have no union. So they are pushed around as well only more so. The federation entered into agreements, legally binding they said, with the government only for them to be ignored by the government time and again. At least three times in 30 years. The workers, of course, were legally bound by the agreements so could do nothing similar.
What is destroying middle of the road unions is that they are repeatedly ignored by the employers/government. They are villified in a press only too keen to put the boot in. So the extremists get all the money.
Most trade unionsts abhore the RMT but what is the option? Sit back and see your income destroyed or join in with the strikes?
The present government has made its point of view quite clear. It will not negotiate with unions, bring them into discussions or accept them as a bone fide lobby group, unlike those from business interests who have not been voted in. What do they expect union members to do?
Other countries, most notably Germany, which isn't doing too bad after bailing out East Germany, and most of the EEC, has a much more inclusive view of unions. Their system is not perfect but it is certainly better than ours if you look at results.
The unions lost their voice in the 70s when labour lurched to the left and became unelectable. What let Thatcher in was the rejection of ultra left views of labour by the vast majority of the working class. Since then they haven't really had a voice as such. Blair was hardly the unions' friend.
The union movement started out as anti-government. It evolved but it will not stay that way for long if it is ignored.
Good post as near to the real world as likely to get.The steelworkers refused to go in on the side of the miners, as did the overwhelming bulk of the trades union movement. The miners strike came within inches of overthrowing the government, or at the very least, Thatcher and the tory right wing. Had just a couple of the powerful unions fallen in with Scargill then things would have been very different.
Most unions are fine examples of democracy at work. There are pro tory unions as there are pro labour, or at least socialist, which lets out labour I suppose. In the main most unions membership is about as middle of the road as the population at large because, one would assume, they are the population at large.
When unions have gone on demonstrations or strikes en masse is when there are changes in the legislation that hurt them in particular.
Befor I joined the police I was in a unionised job. I was a printer. I became a union official and went in with the Father of the Chapel to discuss agreements with the management. In my time the union never, ever, went back on an agreement. Do you really need to ask me about whether the bosses did or not?
The police have no union. So they are pushed around as well only more so. The federation entered into agreements, legally binding they said, with the government only for them to be ignored by the government time and again. At least three times in 30 years. The workers, of course, were legally bound by the agreements so could do nothing similar.
What is destroying middle of the road unions is that they are repeatedly ignored by the employers/government. They are villified in a press only too keen to put the boot in. So the extremists get all the money.
Most trade unionsts abhore the RMT but what is the option? Sit back and see your income destroyed or join in with the strikes?
The present government has made its point of view quite clear. It will not negotiate with unions, bring them into discussions or accept them as a bone fide lobby group, unlike those from business interests who have not been voted in. What do they expect union members to do?
Other countries, most notably Germany, which isn't doing too bad after bailing out East Germany, and most of the EEC, has a much more inclusive view of unions. Their system is not perfect but it is certainly better than ours if you look at results.
The unions lost their voice in the 70s when labour lurched to the left and became unelectable. What let Thatcher in was the rejection of ultra left views of labour by the vast majority of the working class. Since then they haven't really had a voice as such. Blair was hardly the unions' friend.
The union movement started out as anti-government. It evolved but it will not stay that way for long if it is ignored.
M3333 said:
Many Many other new companies invested in the Northeast throughout the late 80's and early 90's. Sadly Labour managed to drive quite a few of them away.
Those millions poured into a 'Japanese company' as you so kindly put it have had a massive return on investment for the people in the area - you did not watch that video did you?
British industry closed itself down due to your beloved Unions and poor management / leadership. Look at British Leyland.
You do not seem to be reading my posts, once again I acknowledged the Nissan plant and its success. Also acknowledged the hopeless management and Union power in our old industries. Tell me would you prefer all industry to be owned by any other Country rather then the U.K.? Why do you use the line 'your beloved Unions'? I am convinced that some of you do not read what I post but simply just make up posts that are just trolling.Those millions poured into a 'Japanese company' as you so kindly put it have had a massive return on investment for the people in the area - you did not watch that video did you?
British industry closed itself down due to your beloved Unions and poor management / leadership. Look at British Leyland.
Johnnytheboy said:
Derek Smith said:
Most unions are fine examples of democracy at work.
That's why they fought so hard to retain the closed shop and to keep out strike ballots. 
Johnnytheboy said:
That's why they fought so hard to retain the closed shop and to keep out strike ballots.
Have you seen the growing discontent of workers in China? How long do you think it will be before they form Unions for their representation to bring some fairness into their work places? Sounds a familiar story to our own from the early days, those at the top abusing those at the bottom, its why Unions were formed to fight against such actions. Its started again now under the current Government, work for nothing in those big Corporations. Unions in the U.K. simply brought some much needed balance and then of course over stepped the line, during the 1970's, of common sense.crankedup said:
As somebody mentioned earlier, its all in a different era. Something had to be done but I will always maintain that the Government of the day not only destroyed Unions but they destroyed swathes of society and towns which have still not recovered. They took away the livings of not only coal workers but all of the supporting SME behind the industry.
I am not supporting the role of Scargill and his Union, the idiot should have led with moderation and compromise, the same goes for that Government. Cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Mines, and coal were pretty much doomed, since the clean air act ended the smog of the 1950s, and north sea gas appeared. The union reaction was merely to hasten the end, and obstruct every attempt to modernise or diversify.I am not supporting the role of Scargill and his Union, the idiot should have led with moderation and compromise, the same goes for that Government. Cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Edited by crankedup on Sunday 19th February 12:37
The car industry, along with most big employers, was viable, but doomed by weak management and strong, politically motivated unions. This stopped progress, investment and competition with mostly fatal results.
The crunch came as the unions fought for control of the country against the government. Democracy won, an elected government could not allow itself to be beaten by an unelected pressure group.
It wasn't the government that caused the damage, it was the electorate. They voted for parliament to run the country, not unions.
eldar said:
Mines, and coal were pretty much doomed, since the clean air act ended the smog of the 1950s, and north sea gas appeared. The union reaction was merely to hasten the end, and obstruct every attempt to modernise or diversify.
The car industry, along with most big employers, was viable, but doomed by weak management and strong, politically motivated unions. This stopped progress, investment and competition with mostly fatal results.
The crunch came as the unions fought for control of the country against the government. Democracy won, an elected government could not allow itself to be beaten by an unelected pressure group.
It wasn't the government that caused the damage, it was the electorate. They voted for parliament to run the country, not unions.
Agree with point one- although coal can be processed into a clean fuel. Yes Scargill was a chump.The car industry, along with most big employers, was viable, but doomed by weak management and strong, politically motivated unions. This stopped progress, investment and competition with mostly fatal results.
The crunch came as the unions fought for control of the country against the government. Democracy won, an elected government could not allow itself to be beaten by an unelected pressure group.
It wasn't the government that caused the damage, it was the electorate. They voted for parliament to run the country, not unions.
Agree with point two.
Sort of agree with point three, but I maintain the Government should have been more imaginative in a closures programme, feeding in other industries whilst closing others. Also I do not recall the Government having the mandate to shut down our coalfields, much like the current Government not having a mandate to impose major structural changes in the NHS.
Globs said:
Yup - that's NuLabour to a tee, with comrades Balls, Brown and Bliar dishing out most of the abuse.
How I despair for those using selective edits out of context to make random comments. But I do not disagree that New Labour in their final term of office were a disaster. Prior to that even the Conservatives supported some of New Labours spending plans, even up to 2007.crankedup said:
Globs said:
Yup - that's NuLabour to a tee, with comrades Balls, Brown and Bliar dishing out most of the abuse.
How I despair for those using selective edits out of context to make random comments. But I do not disagree that New Labour in their final term of office were a disaster. Prior to that even the Conservatives supported some of New Labours spending plans, even up to 2007.Plus the comment was in context because you were describing the abuse from the people at the top upon the people at the bottom. By punishing and taxing the working man, stealing his pensions and giving away his rights and money to the EU that's exactly what NuLabour did. Punish the people at the bottom. And that's without s
tting on the unemployed by creating a benefits trap for them, which knackers them (and costs the working man even more.NuLabour were the worst thing that happened for the worker in many decades, and their union backers were as much to blame in crushing the honest worker under their elite boots. A disgusting, imoral party, all of them scum.
Globs said:
crankedup said:
Globs said:
Yup - that's NuLabour to a tee, with comrades Balls, Brown and Bliar dishing out most of the abuse.
How I despair for those using selective edits out of context to make random comments. But I do not disagree that New Labour in their final term of office were a disaster. Prior to that even the Conservatives supported some of New Labours spending plans, even up to 2007.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff