Tube Strike

Author
Discussion

blindswelledrat

25,257 posts

232 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
Part of the role of the union is to make sure their member's jobs can provide a decent home and salary for the workers. If they don't do that and if the workers don't demand it then they will not do the job, neither will anyone else. Tube driver (or fireman, policeman, nurse, etc, etc) will become a job that cannot be done by someone with a house, husband / wife, child and all related costs.
They will become the sole preserve of young, single, 5 to a room, people as they slum it round the world on their year off, in much the same way as bar and waiter jobs are now.
I don't disagree with your general point, but my whole issue with it is that I don't see any reason why the tube workers should have it so much better than every other industry, purely because they are lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.
WHy should the tube industry be allowed to trample over all the market forces that affect every other industry?
And why, when they have the best skills to salary ratio of any job (possibly in the world?) should they still negatively affect millions by demanding more? It's insanity. If the other Unions of other industries could get away with the same, we would be a bankrupt nation

Harry H

3,397 posts

156 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.

Harry H

3,397 posts

156 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.

roachcoach

3,975 posts

155 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
KTF said:
johnfm said:
Really surprised they haven't been training hordes of substitute drivers to take over.
Apparently they cant. A unions rule says internal applicants only: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2...
One might think the EU would be able to overrule or do something about that. Bound to be some edge case scenario or law.

eccles

13,728 posts

222 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Harry H said:
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.
I wonder if you'd feel the same if they said the same about your job?

zetec

4,465 posts

251 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Bunch of money grabbing tossers.

My view may be extreme but I have theatre tickets for tonight and what was going to be an easy journey home is now going to be a nightmare or expensive grumpy

Is it also true that the Unions have refused to put this new deal to the actual people it concerns, ie. the drivers?

blindswelledrat

25,257 posts

232 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
eccles said:
Harry H said:
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.
I wonder if you'd feel the same if they said the same about your job?
I cant speak for him but it would be fine by me. In fact I believe they already can (although I haven't had any cause to polish up on employment law as I don't spend half my life skirting the boundaries of employability)
The reason it wouldn't bother me, and millions of others, is that we know our employers wouldn't want to.
We are valuable and we don't take the piss. They would have nothing to gain because it would cost more to replace us.
This applies to pretty much every industry and every job except for Tube workers. Why is that fair? WHy should tube workers have so much better conditions than everyone else in the world?

fido

16,796 posts

255 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
crankedup said:
Take away 'workers voices' and we are left with a low wage economy and bully bosses who delight in treating staff as their personal door-mats. Of course this is OK for some people who are not involved with such businesses. Oh for a contented workplace!
Yes because protecting the rights of the tube monkeys to earn 50 large ones for pressing 2 buttons is about 'workers voices'. Good job while it lasts anyway ..

Cheese Mechanic

3,157 posts

169 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
zetec said:
Bunch of money grabbing tossers.

My view may be extreme but I have theatre tickets for tonight and what was going to be an easy journey home is now going to be a nightmare or expensive grumpy

Is it also true that the Unions have refused to put this new deal to the actual people it concerns, ie. the drivers?
Time the unions were made financially accountable for their actions. Cat and pigeons!.

Hackney

6,828 posts

208 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
blindswelledrat said:
Hackney said:
Part of the role of the union is to make sure their member's jobs can provide a decent home and salary for the workers. If they don't do that and if the workers don't demand it then they will not do the job, neither will anyone else. Tube driver (or fireman, policeman, nurse, etc, etc) will become a job that cannot be done by someone with a house, husband / wife, child and all related costs.
They will become the sole preserve of young, single, 5 to a room, people as they slum it round the world on their year off, in much the same way as bar and waiter jobs are now.
I don't disagree with your general point, but my whole issue with it is that I don't see any reason why the tube workers should have it so much better than every other industry, purely because they are lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.
WHy should the tube industry be allowed to trample over all the market forces that affect every other industry?
And why, when they have the best skills to salary ratio of any job (possibly in the world?) should they still negatively affect millions by demanding more? It's insanity. If the other Unions of other industries could get away with the same, we would be a bankrupt nation
I don't see any reason why the tube workers police, firemen, nurses etc, etc should have it so much better worse than every other industry tube workers, purely because they are not lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.

I just see it from the other perspective. It's not wrong that tube drivers have a voice to protest against what is essentially the cost of living in London. It's wrong that other industries don't have that voice.

johnfm

13,668 posts

250 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
crankedup said:
Take away 'workers voices' and we are left with a low wage economy and bully bosses who delight in treating staff as their personal door-mats. Of course this is OK for some people who are not involved with such businesses. Oh for a contented workplace!
It isn't the 'workers voices' though in most cases. It is the 'union voices' on a mandate of a small percentage of the workforce.

In this case, indefensible strike action.

Hackney

6,828 posts

208 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
eccles said:
Harry H said:
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.
I wonder if you'd feel the same if they said the same about your job?
Or if you'd be happy to have your tube driven by someone who spend the hours between attempts to get in the tunnel by any means necessary by getting pissed.

Hackney

6,828 posts

208 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
johnfm said:
It isn't the 'workers voices' though in most cases. It is the 'union voices' on a mandate of a small percentage of the workforce.

In this case, indefensible strike action.
This again?

johnfm

13,668 posts

250 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
johnfm said:
It isn't the 'workers voices' though in most cases. It is the 'union voices' on a mandate of a small percentage of the workforce.

In this case, indefensible strike action.
This again?
Yes.

Why should the majority of a workforce suffer for the actions of a minority? If a workforce is going to walk off a job, there should be curbs on a militant minority causing the other workers grief - not to mention other effects of indefensible strike action.

johnfm

13,668 posts

250 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
eccles said:
Typical!, blatant exaggeration, 53 days indeed! It clearly shows in that letter 52 days! biggrin
Guilty! Heinous misreporting of the actual conditions...

Du1point8

21,606 posts

192 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
eccles said:
Harry H said:
Wouldn't it be great if we could sack the lot of em.

Apparently there's a couple of thousand Africans in Calais who are desperate to get into a tunnel and would now doubt do it for a quarter of the price.
I wonder if you'd feel the same if they said the same about your job?
Or if you'd be happy to have your tube driven by someone who spend the hours between attempts to get in the tunnel by any means necessary by getting pissed.
Havent a couple of drivers been fired for drinking or turning up drunk? Seem to remember there was some strikes to try to get them reinstated too.

turbobloke

103,870 posts

260 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
johnfm said:
It isn't the 'workers voices' though in most cases. It is the 'union voices' on a mandate of a small percentage of the workforce.

In this case, indefensible strike action.
This again?
"The RMT said its members voted by 91% in favour of strikes"

Is that 91% of the total membership and if not, do you happen to know what the % would be expressed in that way? Also what % of the total workforce... then the rest of us would know what the mandate actually was.

Union bods speaking of the all-night tube as the mayor's vanity project are a credit to their members.

walm

10,609 posts

202 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Cost of living is a total red herring introduced to elicit some sympathy.

Don't get me wrong - I do have sympathy for ANYONE living in London and its ridiculous cost of living.

However, that IS NOT THE PROBLEM HERE.

RMT want better terms for overnight tube running.
That's it.
Without the overnight tube they seemed perfectly happy (at least temporarily).

blindswelledrat

25,257 posts

232 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
blindswelledrat said:
Hackney said:
Part of the role of the union is to make sure their member's jobs can provide a decent home and salary for the workers. If they don't do that and if the workers don't demand it then they will not do the job, neither will anyone else. Tube driver (or fireman, policeman, nurse, etc, etc) will become a job that cannot be done by someone with a house, husband / wife, child and all related costs.
They will become the sole preserve of young, single, 5 to a room, people as they slum it round the world on their year off, in much the same way as bar and waiter jobs are now.
I don't disagree with your general point, but my whole issue with it is that I don't see any reason why the tube workers should have it so much better than every other industry, purely because they are lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.
WHy should the tube industry be allowed to trample over all the market forces that affect every other industry?
And why, when they have the best skills to salary ratio of any job (possibly in the world?) should they still negatively affect millions by demanding more? It's insanity. If the other Unions of other industries could get away with the same, we would be a bankrupt nation
I don't see any reason why the tube workers police, firemen, nurses etc, etc should have it so much better worse than every other industry tube workers, purely because they are not lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.

I just see it from the other perspective. It's not wrong that tube drivers have a voice to protest against what is essentially the cost of living in London. It's wrong that other industries don't have that voice.
Fair point. I disagree with you violently but I suspect both of our opinions on this are so polar opposite that there isn't actually a middle ground.
Where does your opinion draw a line on this? Or don't you? What if they decided they would like £250k per annum and would strike until they got it? Why should they be able to bully the country into it for no other reason that they want it?.
Believe it or not, I am actually pro-unions, I just think that in recent times a great deal of their purpose has been replaced by much better employment laws, minimum wages and a good economy dictating that employees can leave bad employers and easily find other work. To me their purpose is to ensure fair conditions for their workers and not to do that these ones do.


johnfm

13,668 posts

250 months

Wednesday 5th August 2015
quotequote all
Hackney said:
blindswelledrat said:
Hackney said:
Part of the role of the union is to make sure their member's jobs can provide a decent home and salary for the workers. If they don't do that and if the workers don't demand it then they will not do the job, neither will anyone else. Tube driver (or fireman, policeman, nurse, etc, etc) will become a job that cannot be done by someone with a house, husband / wife, child and all related costs.
They will become the sole preserve of young, single, 5 to a room, people as they slum it round the world on their year off, in much the same way as bar and waiter jobs are now.
I don't disagree with your general point, but my whole issue with it is that I don't see any reason why the tube workers should have it so much better than every other industry, purely because they are lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.
WHy should the tube industry be allowed to trample over all the market forces that affect every other industry?
And why, when they have the best skills to salary ratio of any job (possibly in the world?) should they still negatively affect millions by demanding more? It's insanity. If the other Unions of other industries could get away with the same, we would be a bankrupt nation
I don't see any reason why the tube workers police, firemen, nurses etc, etc should have it so much better worse than every other industry tube workers, purely because they are not lucky enough to be unionised in an industry that can hold the country to ransom.

I just see it from the other perspective. It's not wrong that tube drivers have a voice to protest against what is essentially the cost of living in London. It's wrong that other industries don't have that voice.
Your bit that I made bold is what the labour market is. Simply open up tube driving applications to all. TFL will have to set salary and conditions at a rate where people are prepared to accept it for the demands of the job. If they pay £30k and 25 days/year leave the labour market will decide if that is worth the demanding sitting down and lever pulling. If nobody applies (because other industries/employers pay more for similar unskilled work) then TFL must offer more until they can attract labour.

The fact is that tube drivers/their unions have exploited the previous nationalised status they enjoyed. THey need to make hay, as this will all be over within 10 years.