Union bosses salaries

[crankedup]

P.M. Questions today a Conservative Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

[thinfourth2]

crankedup said:

P.M. Questions today a Conservative Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

A Conservative labour Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bank bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions banks concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions the banks. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members public. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

[Digga]

crankedup said:

P.M. Questions today a Conservative Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

I disagree and say it is in the public interest to highlight the fact that, whlst posturing about fairness and purporting to be of the working men these champagne socialists ride high on the hog's back - higher than some they condemn as greedy.

[Zod]

thinfourth2 said:

crankedup said:

P.M. Questions today a Conservative Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

A Conservative labour Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bank bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions banks concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions the banks. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members public. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

except that bank chiefs don't claim to speak on behalf of the poor, oppressed workers, whilst union leaders do.

[AJS-]

I'm inclined to agree, but when certain people in parliament seem to think that the bonuses paid to bankers and top executives are matters for political debate, I don't see why unions aren't fair game.Especially since unions are supposed to represent "the working man" and often complain loudly about "fat cat" pay themselves.

One could argue they are preying on the gullable and getting rich by it.

[Digga]

Zod said:

except that bank chiefs don't claim to speak on behalf of the poor, oppressed workers, whilst union leaders do.

And neither to they 'tax' them in the form of union subs.

[crankedup]

Digga said:

I disagree and say it is in the public interest to highlight the fact that, whlst posturing about fairness and purporting to be of the working men these champagne socialists ride high on the hog's back - higher than some they condemn as greedy.

In which case ALL SALARIES should be made public? Also Union members are in full knowledge of salaries paid within the Unions. As I said whatever we may think its not a public issue, no matter how upsetting it may be for some of us.

[TheEnd]

crankedup said:

the intelligence of those Union members.

lol

[crankedup]

thinfourth2 said:

A Conservative labour Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bank bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions banks concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions the banks. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members public. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

I disagree quite strongly over your assertion, it is and has been a matter of public interest since we had to 'bail out' some banks with public funds.

[Digga]

crankedup said:

Digga said:

I disagree and say it is in the public interest to highlight the fact that, whlst posturing about fairness and purporting to be of the working men these champagne socialists ride high on the hog's back - higher than some they condemn as greedy.

In which case ALL SALARIES should be made public? Also Union members are in full knowledge of salaries paid within the Unions. As I said whatever we may think its not a public issue, no matter how upsetting it may be for some of us.

There is obfuscation about union bosses salaries. They may be there if one chooses to seek them, but for many of the lowest paid workers especially, they are not common knowledge because the union bosses largely like to deploy the flattery of the "I'm and ordinary bloke, just the same as you" approach to pull the wool.

[thinfourth2]

crankedup said:

thinfourth2 said:

A Conservative labour Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bank bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions banks concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions the banks. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members public. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

I disagree quite strongly over your assertion, it is and has been a matter of public interest since we had to 'bail out' some banks with public funds.

So winky giving money to the unions is different exactly how

And the unions causing damage to the econmoy is different to the banks in what manner exactly?

[Cyder]

TheEnd said:

crankedup said:

the intelligence of those Union members.

lol

You bad man.

[thinfourth2]

crankedup said:

In which case ALL SALARIES should be made public?

Suits me

If someone earns more then me then either

A i don't want to do their job as its st

or

B I want their job and will try to get it

[0a]

The taxpayer pays tens of millions of pounds for union activity during work time instead of the unions funding this using their subs. Instead the unions pay £100k plus salaries, and give millions to the Labour party.

They are therefore partially publicly funded, and indeed have legal protection. We therefore have the right to know what the union bosses are getting for this so the conflict of interest that their position entails becomes obvious.

I for one would be happy to see a cap at the average wage of those they represent, or zero so union activity becomes voluntary. High salaries encourage union strikes and contrary positions so they can justify their position.

[Jasandjules]

crankedup said:

P.M. Questions today a Conservative Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

So anyways, what union position do you hold?

[Du1point8]

thinfourth2 said:

crankedup said:

thinfourth2 said:

A Conservative labour Member raised a question concerning the 'huge salaries' paid to Union bank bosses. I cannot see the relevance of public interest in this matter, its a private matter within the Unions banks concerned. Very disappointing to witness further attempts to allienate working people away from their Unions the banks. Also rather insulting the intelligence of those Union members public. Whatever our point of view on this subject it has no business in Parliament.

I disagree quite strongly over your assertion, it is and has been a matter of public interest since we had to 'bail out' some banks with public funds.

So winky giving money to the unions is different exactly how

And the unions causing damage to the econmoy is different to the banks in what manner exactly?

You mean like when winky Mcfknut gave X million to the the unions and then the unions 'donated' X million back to the labour party for their campaign and that is effectively money laundering?

[NDA]

crankedup said:

I disagree quite strongly over your assertion, it is and has been a matter of public interest since we had to 'bail out' some banks with public funds.

.....and the unions hold us to ransom whilst they negotiate even better pay, conditions and pensions.

[GeraldSmith]

Many of the unions link their pay to the pay of the people they represent so, for example, the NUT link their pay rates to teacher's pay rates.

[0a]

GeraldSmith said:

Many of the unions link their pay to the pay of the people they represent so, for example, the NUT link their pay rates to teacher's pay rates.

Link as in equal (near), or link as in a constant multiple of 10x

[Mattt]

I always wonder why the RMT Union sponsors football matches.

Is it so the self serving WGCE Bob Crow can go to matches for free, rather than paying for tickets out of his £130k salary?