Striking and the courts

[Castiel]

I dont disagree that good employer employee relations are to be aimed for, again there is no need for unions to be able to achieve that, they may help but they certain are not a prerequisite for the relations to exist.

There is certainly no prerequisite for Unions to fulfil good employer-employee relations, however they can be the grease to ease those relations.

My issue is always been with individuals with militant tendencies, however good management and being a visible and approachable presence within the workforce can limit the effects of militancy on the workforce in most cases.

In my experience, strike action is as much the failure of management to effectively judge the needs and demands of the average employee against the militant and unreasonable aspirations of part of the Unions that represent them.

 

[Castiel]

But frontline and senior positions are not equal work and so comparing the two is largely irrelevant.

I am referring to front-line staff and the relevance and legislative responsibility to comply with the Equal Pay Act. Especially in occupations such as Train Drivers.

I suspect that you knew that however.

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

There is certainly no prerequisite for Unions to fulfil good employer-employee relations, however they can be the grease to ease those relations.

My issue is always been with individuals with militant tendencies, however good management and being a visible and approachable presence within the workforce can limit the effects of militancy on the workforce in most cases.

In my experience, strike action is as much the failure of management to effectively judge the needs and demands of the average employee against the militant and unreasonable aspirations of part of the Unions that represent them.

Agree. Although the only comment I would make is that its a lot easier when the business/economy is running smoothly.
When things aren't you tend to get much more militant focus coming from "workers"
Eg we have historically seen strikes due to factors which just have to happen, productivity, safety, globalisation = all affecting companies and having to have an effect on the workforce. Eg miners strike
Sometimes the unions just dont like the medicine and think that getting all the workers together will mean they can halt the inevitable
Yes I concede they were highly militant but I think at heart most trade union leaders are

 

[Danthus]

It's normally because the people at the face have no real responsibility and get to leave work behind when their shift ends

Nurses work shifts.

 

[Castiel]

Of course but his point which you are choosing to mis quote my response to was based on managers getting a rise/bonus when workers didn't.

Thats got nothing to do with equal pay for equal work, and all that jazz as you put it.

Again I have seen really good workers suffer from unionisation due to this. They would have been paid more due to higher effort etc, but they couldn't be due to unions insisting same pay rates for all doing same jobs (graded even though technically not the same job). Eventually they tend to get rewarded as they get promoted to lead hand/supervisor etc

Actually individual job grading is the remit of the employer. We do it across all roles above supervisory front line staff (who have a separate set of broader criteria). The union has no input into this and neither should they.

We have trialled some schemes within front-line services such as attendance and productivity bonuses, but without any real effect in improvements in those areas.

However, there is a requirement to comply with the Equal Pay Act and subsequent EU legislation along with the Single Status Evaluations within the public sector.

With regard to manual, some semi skilled and low grade clerical employment there is a need to assess the status of and apply equal T&C's to a wide range of occupations.

I repeat, this is not as black and white as people are making out.

 

[Meridian]

It's normally because the people at the face have no real responsibility and get to leave work behind when their shift ends

Whereas the job of management is to shirk responsibility by blaming all their mistakes on other people. Or pretending that they weren't mistakes and simply lying to their seniors. Although I can remember lots of cases of managers resigning after taking responsibility for their own major screw-ups. Wait, no I can't actually think of any. Not for the first time you are confusing theory with practice.


M

 

[Meridian]

But what has one persons salary got to do with anyone elses salary?

Congratulations on missing the point. I'll try to make it easy to understand: why does the misery go downwards, but the rewards go upwards? Why is that workers get laid off, shorter hours etc, but somehow the managers are never effected? And yes, I'm aware of the answer: because the same people set the terms for both.


M

 

[Mercenary Keyboard Warrior]

Congratulations on missing the point. I'll try to make it easy to understand: why does the misery go downwards, but the rewards go upwards? Why is that workers get laid off, shorter hours etc, but somehow the managers are never effected? And yes, I'm aware of the answer: because the same people set the terms for both.


M

Well I can't quote for your area as I don't know it. I certainly have seen senior people take large pay cuts, have bonuses stopped and equally take the pain as workers.
Normally senior people don't get sacked, even when they have done something wrong, they are asked to resign or a mutual deal is agreed. The negative press is normally much more damaging than compromising with a senior member of staff.
Equally I have seen people laid off and those remain get bonuses still, and I mean the lowest paid not the managers.

As much as some people don't like it you have to accept that sometimes companies get to a point they need to reduce heads. I left a previous job where 20% of the managers were leaving (I took voluntary redundancy as it suited me perfectly but the majority were forced to leave), it didn't affect "the workers".

At the end of the day managers in most organisations are just larger cogs in the same machine, they are just as dispensible, just as likely to suffer the same problems. As much as some people get chips on the shoulder about "the management" most of the time they are tasked to work a certain way and are doing it. The main difference between them and one of "the workers" is typically they will do the nasty job they have been asked to do and keep confidence when required.

I know a whole factory who went onto a four day week, but guess what the managers were pretty much working 5 days as normal (but for 4 days money) as the demands on them stayed just the same. "The workers" at least got to only work the 4 days and have 3 day weekends.