We are all in this together.

JAzz · 20 Jul 2012 at 11:55

elmarko1234 said:
But 100k wage for being top of an organisation is low, compared to normal private sector businesses.

Those businesses in general generate profit and that is what the head of those companies are paid to do.

How can these guys speak for the so called honest hard working man when the likes of Bob Crow are on £100k+ and then live in a council house which is subsided by the government? They pay millions to the Labour party just so they can influence policy themselves yet when Business does that it is seen as wrong and immoral.

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 11:55

elmarko1234 - comparing the job of a union leader to that of the prime minister (whom, incidentally, earns less than a lot of the union leaders do) for the lulz?

Skull · 20 Jul 2012 at 11:56

Duke said:
I can see why getting 20% turnout in a ballot to strike on the day before the Olympics opens requiring a lot of 'skill, experience and intelligence'.

I suspect there may be slightly more to the job of running a trade union than that

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 11:57

I'm genuinely interested: like what?

estebanrey · 20 Jul 2012 at 11:59

elmarko1234 said:
What percentage of the population actually voted for Cameron again?.

Technically very few as only people in Witney could do so.

Efour · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:02

Dj_Jestar said:
elmarko1234 - comparing the job of a union leader to that of the prime minister (whom, incidentally, earns less than a lot of the union leaders do) for the lulz?

but he didn't - he points out that no one actually votes - then they moan about the results anyway. Thats how i interpret it

elmarko · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:03

JAzz said:
Those businesses in general generate profit and that is what the head of those companies are paid to do.

How can these guys speak for the so called honest hard working man when the likes of Bob Crow are on £100k+ and then live in a council house which is subsided by the government? They pay millions to the Labour party just so they can influence policy themselves yet when Business does that it is seen as wrong and immoral.

Unions exists to protect the rights of workers, businesses exist to make money.

The Labour party was founded by unions to ensure the workers of the UK has a political voice, I fail to see why it would be unusual that an organisation designed to protect workers (a political issue) would have political links.

The motivation between donations by private businesses is to allow them to make more money (not a political issue).

The motivated for donations by unions is to protect workers rights (a political issue).

Is it that hard to understand?.

Nobody is forced people to become union members, they obvious deem the money worthwhile.

I pay into my union because I believe supporting workers rights is important, nobody makes me do it & it's completely optional.

The actions of individual union leaders/bosses which may be dodgy are not evidence against unions - just that some people is positions of power become corrupted & greedy.

This isn't an article designed to "shame a few bosses for bad behaviour & greed" - it's designed to whip up anti-union sentiment in the population with a clear political agenda.

estebanrey said:
Technically very few as only people in Witney could do so.

you know what I mean.

Efour2 said:
but he didn't - he points out that no one actually votes - then they moan about the results anyway. Thats how i interpret it

Well, more that 20% currently in society seems sufficient for our political system - why not for everything else?.

Duke · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:04

Moses said:
They always seem like stupid *****, whenever they're on any broadcast news.

Hard not to when you have to pump out the same rhetoric each time, hmm just like Labour.

Cosimo · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:09

aardvark said:
good old socialists, looking after the people.

They like their champagne just like the rest of us.

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:10

Animal Farm.

elmarko · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:11

aardvark said:
good old socialists, looking after the people.

They do a better job than the Tory government, the private sector or the average person.

You wouldn't even have the vote if it wasn't for them (which I'd wager you use to vote against them) - oh the irony.

dazzerd · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:12

Moses said:
They always seem like stupid *****, whenever they're on any broadcast news.

You mean they speak like normal people not inbred toffs?

Ahleckz · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:15

Women's war effort did much more for them in enabling their right to vote than any TU has ever done.

Bleek · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:16

Number_25 said:
"We're all in this together"

Says a man who doesn't have a first clue of what actual work or living in austerity is actually like. (David Camoron *as in moron*)

I'd vote David Cameron over Ed Milibland, any day of the week!

And Ed Balls? Now there's your definition of moron.

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:17

Ahleckz said:
Women's war effort did much more for them in enabling their right to vote than any TU has ever done.

He's probably referring to Chartism.

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:17

Is anyone going to answer the question I asked earlier?

Ahleckz · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:30

Dj_Jestar said:
He's probably referring to Chartism.

Which didn't actually do anything, directly. Nor did it address women. It's OK, I'm used to elmarkos crazed and blind love of trade unions.

Dj_Jestar · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:31

He probably comes from a mining background.

JAzz · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:43

elmarko1234 said:
Unions exists to protect the rights of workers, businesses exist to make money.

The Labour party was founded by unions to ensure the workers of the UK has a political voice, I fail to see why it would be unusual that an organisation designed to protect workers (a political issue) would have political links.

The motivation between donations by private businesses is to allow them to make more money (not a political issue).

The motivated for donations by unions is to protect workers rights (a political issue).

Is it that hard to understand?.

Thank you for enlightening me with your wisdom.

Unions are fighting their own agenda not just worker rights. Going on strike and putting national security at risk during the Olympic period should be accepted? What about the BA cabin staff going on strike when they already are the best paid in the industry yet BA as a company was struggling? Unions just want more and more and have no interest in keeping those businesses or even government viable and healthy. If they don't get their way resort to bullying tactics...

You didn't comment about Bob Crow, what right does he have to preach when he is playing the system himself? Surely if these guys are representing the common man and doing it for worker rights then they should be paid a similar amount as these workers.

Don't get me wrong I'm not totally against unions they have done a lot of good for the common worker but I think history has taught us an important lesson about what happens when unions have too much power.

aardvark · 20 Jul 2012 at 12:58

elmarko1234 said:
They do a better job than the Tory government, the private sector or the average person.

You wouldn't even have the vote if it wasn't for them (which I'd wager you use to vote against them) - oh the irony.

the idea that tories/business men are evil/after your money, and that socialists/unions are honest/altruistic/looking after the best interests of the public is laughably naive.