Unions - geared up to oppose everything?
Discussion
dcb said:
There are a few things here.
1. Germany doesn't have the us'n'them culture of the UK.
They know they are all in it together. Maybe two world wars helped
form this opinion, maybe being in a republic, not a constitutional monarchy.
Would pensioning off Brenda and Phil the Greek and so leaving the Middle
Ages behind help move UK society forward ?
2. The German form of capitalism is much softer than the UK and US version.
Once you are employed in Germany, you are pretty much there for life.
In UK & US, there is a much more hire'n'fire mentality.
3. The UK tends to take a much more short term view than the Germans.
The UK tends to focus in on this year's balance sheet, the Germans tend
to take a strategic view.
Both countries could be viewed as some of the most successful on the planet,
so there are probably things to learn on both sides.
2. That is changing (and the rate of change is increasing).1. Germany doesn't have the us'n'them culture of the UK.
They know they are all in it together. Maybe two world wars helped
form this opinion, maybe being in a republic, not a constitutional monarchy.
Would pensioning off Brenda and Phil the Greek and so leaving the Middle
Ages behind help move UK society forward ?
2. The German form of capitalism is much softer than the UK and US version.
Once you are employed in Germany, you are pretty much there for life.
In UK & US, there is a much more hire'n'fire mentality.
3. The UK tends to take a much more short term view than the Germans.
The UK tends to focus in on this year's balance sheet, the Germans tend
to take a strategic view.
Both countries could be viewed as some of the most successful on the planet,
so there are probably things to learn on both sides.
When working in a factory I was part of the union committee. Life as a union rep bore no relationship to what I've read on PH. We were lied to by the bosses, time and time again. We'd have an agreement and they'd go back on it. The lads were once offered enhanced rates to get a special job out and it wasn't paid.
Fed up with being lied to, I left factory work and, after a brief period of being self employed where I discovered I had no talent for graphic art, I became a police officer.
The irony is that I was lied to time and again by Home Secretaries, agreements were ignored, and what was said to the public bore no relationship to what had actually gone on.
In this country the unions are the meekest in Europe. The German unions fought for board representation and got it. Even the labour party felt that went too far.
If the police were allowed a union they would be better paid. At the moment they can be kicked around by any HomSec wanting to appear butch for the top job.
The unions are not opposed to everything. They are there to represent the interests of their members. There are some that are political animals, but the vast majority of them just defend. Consider the fate of the police before slamming unions.
Fed up with being lied to, I left factory work and, after a brief period of being self employed where I discovered I had no talent for graphic art, I became a police officer.
The irony is that I was lied to time and again by Home Secretaries, agreements were ignored, and what was said to the public bore no relationship to what had actually gone on.
In this country the unions are the meekest in Europe. The German unions fought for board representation and got it. Even the labour party felt that went too far.
If the police were allowed a union they would be better paid. At the moment they can be kicked around by any HomSec wanting to appear butch for the top job.
The unions are not opposed to everything. They are there to represent the interests of their members. There are some that are political animals, but the vast majority of them just defend. Consider the fate of the police before slamming unions.
crankedup said:
Absolutely 100% this scenario and those like it were fairly common place during the previous recession and prior to that.
In addition many Unions offer membership welfare benefits including convelacent and a host of other benefits. Unfortunately many people read the Dail Mail or other rag and see Unions as purely aggressors.
Well this is pistonheads NPandE so it's hardly surprising. In addition many Unions offer membership welfare benefits including convelacent and a host of other benefits. Unfortunately many people read the Dail Mail or other rag and see Unions as purely aggressors.
We have a union at my (private sector) work that has a very cooperative and productive relationship with the employer. The union frequently produces cost saving initiatives and new innovative schemes that benefit both the employee and the company. It has 95% employee membership and isn't a political organisation in any way at all.
UK Unions... Traditionally yes.
However in some areas it is changing.
Last year IIRC - Vauxhall UK Unions for the first time ever.... managed to persuade GM to put a new model in the UK ahead of their German counterpart.
The flexible working practices etc etc.
But there is a long way to go in other industries.
However in some areas it is changing.
Last year IIRC - Vauxhall UK Unions for the first time ever.... managed to persuade GM to put a new model in the UK ahead of their German counterpart.
The flexible working practices etc etc.
But there is a long way to go in other industries.
el stovey said:
crankedup said:
Absolutely 100% this scenario and those like it were fairly common place during the previous recession and prior to that.
In addition many Unions offer membership welfare benefits including convelacent and a host of other benefits. Unfortunately many people read the Dail Mail or other rag and see Unions as purely aggressors.
Well this is pistonheads NPandE so it's hardly surprising. In addition many Unions offer membership welfare benefits including convelacent and a host of other benefits. Unfortunately many people read the Dail Mail or other rag and see Unions as purely aggressors.
We have a union at my (private sector) work that has a very cooperative and productive relationship with the employer. The union frequently produces cost saving initiatives and new innovative schemes that benefit both the employee and the company. It has 95% employee membership and isn't a political organisation in any way at all.
crankedup said:
Seems to me that it's a misguided and rather simple minded attitude based upon activities of thirty years ago. Nobody wants a return to those bad old days, Unions are no different, the vast majority representing their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business.
The vast majority by number, maybe, but not by the volume of people they represent, as you clearly can't claim that the majority of public sector unions 'represent their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business'. At least not with a straight face.sidicks said:
crankedup said:
Seems to me that it's a misguided and rather simple minded attitude based upon activities of thirty years ago. Nobody wants a return to those bad old days, Unions are no different, the vast majority representing their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business.
The vast majority by number, maybe, but not by the volume of people they represent, as you clearly can't claim that the majority of public sector unions 'represent their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business'. At least not with a straight face.b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: I think some of it is that the union exposure many of us have is limited to seeing the likes of Len McClusky and Bob Crow when he was still alive.
I think they undo a lot of the good and useful work that unions can do - "no such thing as bad publicity" really isn't true.
Bob Crow was a fantastic union leader. He was paid by his members and his members did very well out of him.I think they undo a lot of the good and useful work that unions can do - "no such thing as bad publicity" really isn't true.
In some ways you could argue that he was as good as any FTSE100 CEO out there in terms of his results.
speedyman said:
The OP seems to be suggesting that he wants a one party state with no opposition.
The house of lords and the opposition bench within parliament provides the 'opposition', along with the national TV and media.But you have to accept that with our version of democracy the winning party DOES have a right to enact what it 'promised' within its manifesto.
Otherwise it is a betrayal to the voting public.
My main point on the OP was to suggest that as labour are failing throughout the UK, are the unions now going to step up efforts and oppose everything, no matter how petty and unreasonable it may be, just so that the left can show opposition to the Tories?
My guess is that the answer would be yes.
As labour have become disorganised, out of touch and have failed the UK on numerous levels, the unions are now feeling they may have no political voice, other than to become petty on issues that can gain media attention. And its well know that the left's tactic is to shout more and shout louder when their views are not being accepted.
ALT F4 said:
speedyman said:
The OP seems to be suggesting that he wants a one party state with no opposition.
The house of lords and the opposition bench within parliament provides the 'opposition', along with the national TV and media.But you have to accept that with our version of democracy the winning party DOES have a right to enact what it 'promised' within its manifesto.
Otherwise it is a betrayal to the voting public.
My main point on the OP was to suggest that as labour are failing throughout the UK, are the unions now going to step up efforts and oppose everything, no matter how petty and unreasonable it may be, just so that the left can show opposition to the Tories?
My guess is that the answer would be yes.
As labour have become disorganised, out of touch and have failed the UK on numerous levels, the unions are now feeling they may have no political voice, other than to become petty on issues that can gain media attention. And its well know that the left's tactic is to shout more and shout louder when their views are not being accepted.
As for the house of Lords, turn up have a kip and collect £300, ninety two are even hereditary peers, real democracy there.
We need opposition more when it's weak in parliment to hold goverments to account. No goverment should think it can do as it likes just because it's in power.
speedyman said:
With our version of democracy where a minority of votes as a percentage of the whole electorate decide the goverment then its all our right to oppose if we want to. I fail to see how a right wing privatly owned press with its own agenda is going to somehow support an alternative view.
As for the house of Lords, turn up have a kip and collect £300, ninety two are even hereditary peers, real democracy there.
We need opposition more when it's weak in parliment to hold goverments to account. No goverment should think it can do as it likes just because it's in power.
Minority of votes deciding the outcome is what western democracy is.As for the house of Lords, turn up have a kip and collect £300, ninety two are even hereditary peers, real democracy there.
We need opposition more when it's weak in parliment to hold goverments to account. No goverment should think it can do as it likes just because it's in power.
It is the model that is advertised across the world as being the "free world", the "ideal"....the US and UK even go as far as sending planes loaded with bombs in order to install this model of democracy in to countries that do not follow the way it should be.
Your opposition to the government comes from the opposition in parliament - you voice your concerns to your local MP and they represent the people of the constituency either in favour or in opposition within the house of commons.
And again - the house of lords is there to counter the 'free will' of the elected government. The fact that it is still there suggests that the majority of people accept it and think it is effective. (No matter how much 'kipping' is done).
oyster said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: I think some of it is that the union exposure many of us have is limited to seeing the likes of Len McClusky and Bob Crow when he was still alive.
I think they undo a lot of the good and useful work that unions can do - "no such thing as bad publicity" really isn't true.
Bob Crow was a fantastic union leader. He was paid by his members and his members did very well out of him.I think they undo a lot of the good and useful work that unions can do - "no such thing as bad publicity" really isn't true.
In some ways you could argue that he was as good as any FTSE100 CEO out there in terms of his results.
Its just a shame that somehow all the [u] ordinary people [/u] he and his members f
ked over for their own personal enjoyment couldn't get payback and refuse to serve them for 48hours at a time.ALT F4 said:
speedyman said:
With our version of democracy where a minority of votes as a percentage of the whole electorate decide the goverment then its all our right to oppose if we want to. I fail to see how a right wing privatly owned press with its own agenda is going to somehow support an alternative view.
As for the house of Lords, turn up have a kip and collect £300, ninety two are even hereditary peers, real democracy there.
We need opposition more when it's weak in parliment to hold goverments to account. No goverment should think it can do as it likes just because it's in power.
Minority of votes deciding the outcome is what western democracy is.As for the house of Lords, turn up have a kip and collect £300, ninety two are even hereditary peers, real democracy there.
We need opposition more when it's weak in parliment to hold goverments to account. No goverment should think it can do as it likes just because it's in power.
It is the model that is advertised across the world as being the "free world", the "ideal"....the US and UK even go as far as sending planes loaded with bombs in order to install this model of democracy in to countries that do not follow the way it should be.
Your opposition to the government comes from the opposition in parliament - you voice your concerns to your local MP and they represent the people of the constituency either in favour or in opposition within the house of commons.
And again - the house of lords is there to counter the 'free will' of the elected government. The fact that it is still there suggests that the majority of people accept it and think it is effective. (No matter how much 'kipping' is done).
Do you really believe that? They almost always toe the party line with some rare exeptions.
sidicks said:
crankedup said:
Seems to me that it's a misguided and rather simple minded attitude based upon activities of thirty years ago. Nobody wants a return to those bad old days, Unions are no different, the vast majority representing their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business.
The vast majority by number, maybe, but not by the volume of people they represent, as you clearly can't claim that the majority of public sector unions 'represent their membership in positive ways as part of a team with the business'. At least not with a straight face.otolith said:
speedyman said:
The government only gets a majority in parliment because of our first past the post system. More people did not vote for them when all votes are counted nationally, so how democratic is that.
Which of the other smaller minorities would you like to get its way?Mandalore said:
I think you will find... to many-many people working in and around London, Bob Crow was a self obsessed thug with a Napolean complex.
Its just a shame that somehow all the [u] ordinary people [/u] he and his members fked over for their own personal enjoyment couldn't get payback and refuse to serve them for 48hours at a time.
As already stated ,his job was to better the wages and conditions of his members.Its just a shame that somehow all the [u] ordinary people [/u] he and his members f
ked over for their own personal enjoyment couldn't get payback and refuse to serve them for 48hours at a time.This he did very well.
Which part do you find confusing?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff