Unions and the Labour party

Soldato
Joined
14 Dec 2005
Posts
12,488
Location
Bath
http://news.sky.com/home/politics/article/16150641

On the news today they had some Union bloke whinging about how Labour have announced that if they get in power again they won’t recklessly spend again and won’t reverse every cut made by the current government (obviously the unions are annoyed that no-one else is going to pay for their cushy pensions any more). It wasn’t the above video, but that’s a good starter if you don’t have a clue what I’m on about!

Now I totally get that Unions started out for right reasons of Workers Rights, and founded the Labour party. But there’s two things I don’t get:
  • They were basically saying that by funding the Labour party the Unions should/have got to chose Labour’s policies. Isn’t the whole buying of policies thing meant to be banned? Or is there an exception for Labour/Unions and it’s only bad when it’s private Businesses trying to buy policy from Conservatives by donations?
  • The Union bloke was going on and on that Labour aren’t offering a real alternative (well duh, there is no money. No amount of wishing will magic up some money). If they don’t like the Labour party why don’t the Unions go and start another party? Call it New New Labour, Socialist something?


LOL Unions?
 
Don't you mean Lol Unions, Lol Labour?

Both of them are pointless, ancient groups of morons who are only in it for the glory of being a bunch of Communists.


All labour has done is turned into a hypocrite (isnt anything new) with a leader who frankly annoys everyone when he speaks, i swear i can feel the spit coming out of the TV whenever he opens that hole he calls a mouth. :o
 
unions are useless.

what should happen is if you don't like working for who you are working for then leave.

That is indeed my usual response to Unions. What got me today was that they were whinging "The party we donate money to isn't doing what we tell them", and I was ZOMGWTFBBQ ISN'T THAT BANNED.
 
Don't you mean Lol Unions, Lol Labour?

Both of them are pointless, ancient groups of morons who are only in it for the glory of being a bunch of Communists.
I'm worried that you actually believe that.

As for the above question, I don't know to be honest. What I do know is that the two Ed's new stance is probably not sincere, more an admission that the government's spin department is much more effective than the theirs, and that as they haven't managed to make any ground, beyond attracting disaffected Liberal Democrats, they should just adopt the government line. It's bad politics, it will give the government more political ammunition, not less.

The fact they are not offering an alternative is a political problem for the Labour party, there is no doubt about it. But it seems that they have given up even trying to, as Ed is just a poor politician.

A funny observation I have made is that Ed Miliband is a leader of the Labour party that was unable to command the support of the Labour party. His more intelligent, wittier, more articulate and outright better brother won more support from grass roots Labour party members, and more support from Labour party MPs. Ed only won with the support of the affiliated members. Since winning the election, he has made no ground in gaining additional support from the PLP, and about half of the grass roots members are satisfied with his leadership. In supporting the government's public sector pay freeze, he has basically lost the support of the unions, especially Unite and GMB. He now, essentially, has zero support within the Labour party machine. Hopefully he will be out of a job by the end of the year. :)
 
[FnG]magnolia;21056727 said:
It's telling that this was posted in GD rather than Speaker's Corner where it might have had a fighting chance of being worth reading.

+1.

I might have had actually contributed had it been in SC. Instead I'll just remark on the shocking ignorance of the OP and his cheerleaders and leave it at that.
 
good idea the unions should bankrupt labour and form a true left alternative, because labour are the same as the tory pigs

and LOL we have no money, i heard on news DC is seriously considering the jubilee yacht idea from one of his millionaire minister, love it when they can spend £60m on the stupid queen and cut benefits for the poorest and most vulnerable in society
 
[FnG]magnolia;21056727 said:
It's telling that this was posted in GD rather than Speaker's Corner where it might have had a fighting chance of being worth reading.

+ 1
 
[FnG]magnolia;21056727 said:
It's telling that this was posted in GD rather than Speaker's Corner where it might have had a fighting chance of being worth reading.

Clever people go in Speaker's Corner, I'm scared of posting there.

good idea the unions should bankrupt labour and form a true left alternative, because labour are the same as the tory pigs
I genuinely don't get why people PAY to join a Union and then the Union gives loads of money to the Labour party. Surely instead of whinging about no pay rises etc you could just not join the Union and thus have a few quid more cash in your pocket?


Even with our SU at University, they pay the NUS £50k a year. What do they get for it? That's £50K that could be going to the sports societies!
Heck I know Soton aren't even in the NUS! There's a fair amount of people at our Uni trying to convince the SU to quit the NUS.
 
Clever people go in Speaker's Corner, I'm scared of posting there.


I genuinely don't get why people PAY to join a Union and then the Union gives loads of money to the Labour party. Surely instead of whinging about no pay rises etc you could just not join the Union and thus have a few quid more cash in your pocket?


Even with our SU at University, they pay the NUS £50k a year. What do they get for it? That's £50K that could be going to the sports societies!
Heck I know Soton aren't even in the NUS! There's a fair amount of people at our Uni trying to convince the SU to quit the NUS.

not all unions affiliate to labour you know
 
I genuinely don't get why people PAY to join a Union and then the Union gives loads of money to the Labour party.

You do know that you can opt-out of contributing to the Labour party, right?

Surely instead of whinging about no pay rises etc you could just not join the Union and thus have a few quid more cash in your pocket?

Well done, you've identified the micro view. Now what are the consequences of such action being repeated on a macro scale?

Even with our SU at University...

Oh right, you are still a student. Makes sense why you don't get the relevance of unions. Perhaps when you join the world of full time employment and fall foul of irresponsible management (or even act irresponsibly yourself) then perhaps you may develop a fuller understanding.
 
Last edited:
Free legal defence.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_aid ?

Actually I can think of one reason; at schools you can just bet that some snotty nose kid will try the whole "teacher touched me" thing - I'd imagine being in the Union could be useful then :).



Oh right, you are still a student. Makes sense why you don't get the relevance of unions. Perhaps when you join the world of full time employment and fall foul of irresponsible management (or even act irresponsibly yourself) then perhaps you may develop a fuller understanding.
I worked for a gap year before Uni (to pay for Uni ya'know, rather than expecting someone else to pay for me). I didn't have any problems but, thinking aloud, if I had I'd have taken them to my line manager. If I wasn't happy with my line manager I'd have taken them to his manager. And if I still wasn't happy (i.e. I'm not happy with the company as a whole) I'd have voted with my feet - withheld my labour and quit. Free market and all that.
 
They were basically saying that by funding the Labour party the Unions should/have got to chose Labour’s policies. Isn’t the whole buying of policies thing meant to be banned? Or is there an exception for Labour/Unions and it’s only bad when it’s private Businesses trying to buy policy from Conservatives by donations?

Unions represent millions of ordinary people like you or me, who can easily opt out of the political fund if they don't want to support the Labour party. The Labour party was set up to be the political arm of the trade union movement with the aim of fostering social justice. The Conservative party on the other hand is bankrolled by an elite group of super-rich people with unclear aims and dubious influences. I know which worries me the most.

The Union bloke was going on and on that Labour aren’t offering a real alternative (well duh, there is no money. No amount of wishing will magic up some money). If they don’t like the Labour party why don’t the Unions go and start another party? Call it New New Labour, Socialist something?

Maybe they will. It was a very depressing message from Ed that imo aimed to tap into the masochist politics of middle England rather than any sound economic analysis.
 
I worked for a gap year before Uni (to pay for Uni ya'know, rather than expecting someone else to pay for me). I didn't have any problems but, thinking aloud, if I had I'd have taken them to my line manager. If I wasn't happy with my line manager I'd have taken them to his manager. And if I still wasn't happy (i.e. I'm not happy with the company as a whole) I'd have voted with my feet - withheld my labour and quit. Free market and all that.

Would you just walk away from the Public sector too?
 
I worked for a gap year before Uni (to pay for Uni ya'know, rather than expecting someone else to pay for me).

So what? I'm talking about the potential of being wrongly forced out of or having your terms and conditions eroded within a real career or stable job. One on which your responsibilities rest, such as a mortgage or the welfare of your family. Not some 'take it or leave it' gap year job...

I didn't have any problems but, thinking aloud, if I had I'd have taken them to my line manager. If I wasn't happy with my line manager I'd have taken them to his manager. And if I still wasn't happy (i.e. I'm not happy with the company as a whole) I'd have voted with my feet - withheld my labour and quit. Free market and all that.

Again, what it are the consequences of people simply "voting with their feet" on the macro scale? Geez, have some foresight please on how this would effect on the labour market in terms of conditions and pay.

PS. Your hypothetical scenario is not an example of witholding labour.
 
Back
Top Bottom