27% turnout yet they are still going on strike.
- Thread starter Danthus
- Start date
I think that you might be confusing cause and effect? In general, workforces which are treated well and fairly, don't unionise because there's no reason to. Workforces treated badly and unfairly are much more likely to try to fight back, which usually means forming or joining a union - the only realistic weapon that ordinary workers have. To quote someone or other: "There are no bad regiments, only bad generals". In theory at least, workers and managers want the same thing: the company/unit or whatever to succeed and to make more money. Most workers are aware that managers get paid more. But when managers start getting stupid, or the balance of power shifts far to far towards the managers, or the workers are treated like disposable cogs etc etc, the workforce will rebel. If the managers act sensibly, treat the workforce with respect, etc etc, conflict is rare. Why is that managers are always keen to claim responsibility for workplace relationship success, but not for poor industrial relationships? They're either responsible for both, or neither. Unions in Germany have rather more power than here, but it doesn't seem to hurt them? Of course companies there follow a different, co-operative, management model to the US-inspired "Victorian Mill Owner" The-Boss_is_always-Right-Even-When-He-Isn't approach so popular over here.
Last edited:
I'm not sure how removing money from people doing the actual work, and passing it to the people taking credit without doing any, is "most efficient distribution"? Unless you are a manager, where I'm sure it's the Right Thing.
This argument is no different to single people or couples with no children complaining that they have to pay towards the health and education of people who have had children.
Nor is education simply a choice between these two sectors.
Private sector education has historically been exclusive, it is naturual for society as a whole to provide education to those outwith those sections of society.
How does this impact on those within the mainstream public educational system? Do they have a choice? Not greatly in terms of private provision as an alternative as a whole I'd imagine, however is that a problem that exists because of the public commitment to educaiton or the lack of private education for the masses historically?
Dolph said:
What would be the ultimate aim?
I imagine it could be done through relief as a channel which is why I suggested it; while 'circular' as you often complain it would save the administration of an entire scheme.
For about the ninety-eight time I don't have a hatred of managers. I have a dislike of unnecessary and bad ones. Unfortunately, those categories seem to include about 80% of the ones out there, with the proportion increasing with company size. Managers are like fire extinguishers:
1) When you need them, you really need them.
2) Most of the time you don't need them, and they just get in the way.
3) They are best used by putting them somewhere out of the way, where they can't do any harm, until you need them.
4) If they get used when you don't need them, it will almost certainly make things far worse than they were.
5) They are quite good for propping doors open.
Where the analogy breaks down is the by and large, fire extinguishers aren't convinced of their own importance, and don't keep interfering in things they know nothing about. Nor do fire extinguishers keep coming up with stupid plans which won't work, and persisting in carrying out those same plans even when they don't work. Neither are any good at making decisions though.
I am more than happy to concede that managers are necessary. I've worked for some very good ones. I've also seen, worked for, been exposed to, or heard about, a massive number of utterly useless ones. One of the reasons the Dilbert cartoons are so popular is that PHBs are so common - probably outnumbering the bosses which aren't. So please stop putting wrong opinions in my mouth.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 29 Mar 2003
- Posts
- 57,778
- Location
- Stoke on Trent
My wife is a teacher, just had a 6 week holiday and now moaning she's got to go back.
Infant school teachers do get it easier though.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,442
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
No I am not, but I can understand its a general sentiment that is quoted and may sometimes be correct.
I think the constant decline in union power (via representing millions of people) clearly shows there is limited need for them now. If there was clearly such a need membership would be increasing not declining. Personally my view is most people see through them now.
Plus of course a lot of EU legislation has a farily high socialist leaning means the majority of the sorts of issue and thing unions historically were needed for are already being represented and argued elsewhere.
Not all unions are extreme, but its seems a lot really want to live in the past, funnily I am talking less about the on the ground members and far more about the senior "professional management" of the unions who always seem to be one ones majorly sabre rattling. The typical low turnout of voting I would argue means people do not heavily support the actions, they do not however feel so negative towards it that they will go out of their way to vote against. Very much like you get in general elections, local elections etc
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,442
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Actually its completely different, you need a better analogy or you need to think again about your argument.
One is about choice, you do not have a choice on your school spending but you can effectively double up by paying again for the SAME service by a different provider.
The other is about not paying in the first place.
Far more relevant would be to say compare NHS and private care, those taking private are partially (depends in individuals some will use private GP others NHS GP) opting out of NHS care.
If as argued there was a voucher issued which allowed you to move to another provider and you COULD use this to either fund or partly fund private education you would probably see a much higher take up. Most people cannot afford private education and therefore there is a pretty good case for saying there is no choice.
Most people I have come across in teaching quote the main reasons for taking it as perceived balance of holidays/pay/job security vs what they could achieve outside teaching.
I don't think it is, I'm happy with the analogy.
I understand the point raised by dolph, I've addressed it.
Yes, which ropes into Dolphs background thought process with public policy.
That is why I made the comparison, I am pretty sure this is why you did not get why I chose that analogy.
I think when speaking about education we should stick to education for examples.
I'm not adverse to the proposed solutions, I just don't see what problem is.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Having worked long enough in the Public Sector I know you couldn't trust it to organise getting drunk in a brewery. My issue if how the reality of the mostly underpaid, often female workforce is different from the reality of a cushy well paid job that most, non-Public sector workers, tend to think it is.
This workforce needs more protection. Such stupidly backwards schemes as "local pay" will only punish the poor more. You know, the very people society should be helping.
I don't think the teachers have a valid reason to strike. They always threaten strike at any, even seemingly minor, changes to T&Cs whilst the lower paid support staff often have no choice. There isn't enough in UNISOn and even if there was that union is so incompetent it wouldn't make a difference anyway.
Education really needs a shake up, but like you say it would be political suicide to do so. So we get the current crappy system where teachers, no matter how bad get a job for life and the cleaners, technicians, admins and TAs all get screwed over by not having a pay-rise (and thus pay cut) in years forcing them into spiralling poverty.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
Pingwing would have got a proper education if they weren't always striking
MW
*BOOM*
This is a strange comment to me.
Have teachers in England & Wales been receiving pay increases in the last few years?
I don't think the performance and appraisal system of teachers, of which arguably I know very little stastically, can be realistically and directly compared to low pay and living conditions of other workers elsewhere in the public sector, as if they are somehow intrinsic in the first place? As I understand it those earning under £20k or there abouts have - in the Civil Service at least - recieved marginal increases for a few years now to try and mitigate against the economic problems, and teachers and other workers are only just above this level in some cases.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
No, nor have I. However teachers, and other well paid Public Sector workers like myself are in a much better financial position to absorb the loss. Those low paid workers are not. There is a big difference between having to have one less holiday a year or buy a slightly less expensive car than there is make the choice between feeding yourself or your children. I know everybody in the Public Sector has effectively been on a pay freeze for years but I cannot find any sympathy for the well paid (and yes that includes sympathy for myself)
You can tell how clueless Governments are by how the continue to wage war on the poor. I mean look at Gordon Brown and the scrapping of the 10p rate. That worked out well for the low paid, didn't it?
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Aug 2007
- Posts
- 22,442
- Location
- Wilds of suffolk
Ok then I am out, if you can't see the flaw there is no point trying to discuss.
I'm lost now frankly, are you talking about pay freeze or market facing? Anyway I will say that I have sympathy with a lot of people, struggling is no longer the reserve of just the poor or low paid.
However, I'm still not sure on the validity of your initial comparison and I repeat that low paid workers have been getting wage fixed increases.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Nov 2004
- Posts
- 16,024
- Location
- 9th Inner Circle
I'm on about the pay freeze that Public Sector workers have been under for years. If people are on a teachers average salary (see earlier in the thread) and struggling then they have a massive problem managing their outgoings or are living a lifestyle way beyond their means.
As for fixed wage increases for the lower paid. Doesn't seem to be helping them. However, like I said, they don't have a militant union representing them so their voices go unheard.
It's not always that simple. I also fail to see how cost of living can be forcing thousands into real poverty, but even just two or three thousand pounds a year has what appears to be in your description a world of a difference?
It's situational, and not that simple to boot either. A lot of people are finding it tougher, and more people are finding themself in various states of poverty. There is no gaping chasm in the middle.
From my experience it's better than nothing, and low paid workers do have unions out to protect them. I can't comment on all, but certain the ones I've witnessed do.