30th of June strikes.

Slam62 said:
my experience is that the private sector had to put up with this years ago, that's why you won't get much sympathy.
Click to expand...

Careful throwing about the you's, I'm a private sector employee. I'm fully aware of the challenges the private sector faces.

Slam62 said:
public sector is totally different to private sector, it just amazes me this has taken so long, time to wake up and smell the coffee.
Click to expand...

I think it's time the majority of private sector employees woke up and smelt the coffee.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
MrMoonX said:
keep dreaming, they wont sack wildcat workers, they never have and never will, your tory fanboyism is laughable it literally is like thatchers wet dream listening to your posts about sacking strikers.
Click to expand...

Strangely, I have this bizarre idea that people should take responsibility for themselves, and understand the nature of the contractual employment relationship.

You seem to want to push for limited term contracts by refusing to allow any amendments to contractual terms on non-limited ones. Of course, that isn't what you actually want, it's just you are too myopic to see that is the consequence of your demands.

Your either a banker or jealous that workers are standing up for their rights because you dont have enough conviction to stand up for your own
Click to expand...

Surely you can do better than the fallacy of the excluded middle...
 
Dolph said:
Here's a simple test for everyone.

Sainsburys staff: If you could get a law passed forcing everyone to buy groceries from sainsburys, we could get more pay and a better pension.

Is the above position a reasonable one to hold?
Click to expand...

that would entirely depend on how much money Mr Sainsbury donated to the Tory party to get his law passed wouldnt it ? :p
 
Hehehe politics threads are always great fun to read, I actually think they should all be moved to the football forum as they follow the same my team is better than your team, you suck because you support team x instead of y kind of mentality :D
 
Dolph said:
No, not really. It is either reasonable or it isn't.
Click to expand...

That depends on who's judging the reasonableness of it.

I think it's reasonable for the strikes to be called, you don't - reasonableness is all a matter of perspective.

If only there was some independent, evidence based way to measure it.
 
amigafan2003 said:
That depends on who's judging the reasonableness of it.
Click to expand...

Is it reasonable to force people to pay over the odds just to inflate staff wages/terms and conditions beyond that required to fill the role at market rates?

That's probably a better question.
 
Dolph said:
Is it reasonable to force people to pay over the odds just to inflate staff wages/terms and conditions beyond that required to fill the role at market rates?

That's probably a better question.
Click to expand...

Of course it isn't. Then again I don't think wages are being inflated beyond market rates for similar roles.

If the jobs were so good you'd have people queuing out the doors for civil services jobs - you don't. A DM job at a local government office had 18 applicants. A insurance claims assessor role (similar roles/skills) at a multinational company who had an office round the corner had over 100 applicants.

Doesn't sound like civil service roles are very attractive to me.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Freakbro said:
This is only if you believe that cutting expenditure is the only way out of the situation, as the current mantra is telling you...over and over and over again, it's a common trick really isn't it, you just keep repeating a statement (or lie) long enough and people believe it.

Many core EU contries are increasing their expenditure right now, (including us btw) eg:

Germany increased public spending by 3.6% and it's deficit fell and GDP increased.

Greece slashed it's expenditure by -12.8% and it's deficit increased and GDP fell.

These are the 2 extreme ends, but there are plenty inbetween that show this trend.

Ironically all these cuts everyone is so convinced we need now are actually going to increase the defict and overall debt of this country in the short to medium term.

Then supposedly growth will kick in and that is what will get us out of this mess.

It's one huge gamble that all you guys are so sure is what is needed and will work, when even the guys implementing this are aware it's unknown and far from certain.
Click to expand...

Germany is increasing spending but they are still cutting their defecit.

As for ' you guys ', I am merely being a realist that cuts are inevitable and any government in power in the UK would have to shoulder them.
 
amigafan2003 said:
In your opinion.
Click to expand...

No, they are inevitable, Labour's fiscal incompetence has seen to that. We simply cannot go on spending more than we are bringing in via taxation on a regular basis, as we have done for the last 10 years. We also cannot raise taxes by an amount meaningful enough to close the gap as our history shows. this leaves the only option being a significant slowdown in the rate of increase of state spending (note it is not actually a cut) in order to close the fiscal gap.

If we don't do this now, we will end up being forced to do it later when the pain will be far worse, and we'll actually have to cut, rather than just not increase.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Tax justice.


Queue the liberal right wingers dismissing this as "we'll lose big business" etc - I don't care anymore.
Click to expand...

The PCS tax justice campaign is a fantasy, for a start it conflates avoidance (a legal right confirmed by the courts) with evasion (illegal) and tries to treat them the same, while at the same time arguing against the one thing (a much simpler tax system) that could actually address avoidance and save costs in tax offices.. It also presents fantasy figures around the Tobin Tax and is generally just completely disconnected from reality.
 
MrMoonX said:
its a shame beaker and his mates had to announce their plans whilst they were in negotiations with the unions, just shows they are paying lip service to consultation, oh what a surprise, its about time we had a good old national strike
Click to expand...

Several days after the some of the unions involved announced the completion of a 3 week strike ballot and issued the results on the issues being negotiated around?

What amazingly hypocrisy.
 
amigafan2003 said:
Careful throwing about the you's, I'm a private sector employee. I'm fully aware of the challenges the private sector faces.



I think it's time the majority of private sector employees woke up and smelt the coffee.
Click to expand...
From what I'm hearing actual expected turn out and support from the private sector union members is looking to be low at best although of course it will vary by area.

If unions and strikes were more about protecting genuine and reasonable pay and conditions for employees I suspect they'd have better membership numbers and support from the wider public. Whilst I tend not to naturally agree with amigafans default point of view I understand and respect it.

The political rantings of unionists(?) like MrMoonX is the sort of rhetoric that drove the average person away from the unions. Whilst I couldn't draw any widespread conclusions from the relatively small sample of union members I speak to, an awful lot (I'd even go as far as the majority) of them see the union as an insurance policy and set of benefits rather than an ideological political movement these days.

Whilst they might be prepared to consider action if they're own jobs were directly threatened, a very small minority have mentioned they would be prepared to take direct strike action in support of other unions or people.

The key word that comes up time and time again is "reasonable" demands or expectations.

If the unions requests are seen as "reasonable" they will get wide spread support. Unfortunately in the case of public sector pensions I can't help but feel that whilst understandable if it was your pension, a lot of people outside the public service have little sympathy as it's not seen as "reasonable" given the situation the country and wider public is in when it comes to pensions.

Perhaps its just a case of not communicating it in a way that the "average" worker having to make do with a personal & state pension has empathy for. /shrug
 
Von Smallhausen said:
Well let's ditch my opinion as it counts for nothing, I agree.

Do you discount the IMF backing as insignificant ?
Click to expand...

I do as it happens. You're talking of the IMF as if they have any credibility.

There are probably more articles out there criticising IMF policy than there are approving of it. But hey, you shouldn't believe everything you read :p
 
Biohazard said:
Hmm. Ignorant statement is ignorant.

There are twice as many private sector pension schemes being subsidised from the state than the public liability.

Instead of this inane barrage of mis informed assaults, the private sector would do well to sort out it's own back yard before it throws stones at the public.

If these private entities cannot afford their own schemes and need money from successful businesses they should no longer be trading.
Click to expand...

One problem, none of the private sector pension schemes being subsidised are still accruing additional entitlements and new joiners.

the proposal to protect existing entitlements and change them moving forward mirrors exactly what is done with the private sector pensions in the protection scheme...
 
amigafan2003 said:
I do as it happens. You're talking of the IMF as if they have any credibility.

There are probably more articles out there criticising IMF policy than there are approving of it. But hey, you shouldn't believe everything you read :p
Click to expand...

What about the OCED and the IFS?

What alternative sources do you propose?
 
Dolph said:
Personal insults are hardly a convincing retort, probably all you've got if your posts are anything to go by, but hardly convincing.

Everyone won't wildcat, as your own strike ballots have shown, the number of people who actually care is small. With the jobs market as it is, a quick call to recruitment agencies could easily replace enough dismissed workers to keep the service going. Might even save us some money in the long term as we'd see exactly how overmanned the public sector is ;)
Click to expand...

doubt it.
Agency staff cost 2x what they are paid and have to be paid the same as they person they cover.
ergo you would see costs double
also they wouldn't know what they where doing as from my exp the jobs that most back office people do in the NHS are madly convoluted because of silly things like IG etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom