That's slightly different though I guess - the previous poster was willing to deliberately inconvenience himself (wait 5 mins more) in order try to help keep someone in a job whereas you see the machine itself as an inconvenience and so want to be served by a supermarket worker.
30/11 Strikes.
- Thread starter wordy
- Start date
That's slightly different though I guess - the previous poster was willing to deliberately inconvenience himself (wait 5 mins more) in order try to help keep someone in a job whereas you see the machine itself as an inconvenience and so want to be served by a supermarket worker.
I'd be quite content with the 10k cap proposed by the recent review.
The polling firm Comres interviewed 1,005 adults by telephone across England, Scotland and Wales one week ago.
The poll indicates greater sympathy for the industrial action among women - at 67% - compared with men, at 55%.
Younger people, it also suggests, are considerably more supportive of the strikes than pensioners; almost four in five 18 to 24-year-olds back the action, a little under half of over-65s do.
At least it was a 100% turnout from these 1005 voters
Indeed. I wasn't suggesting I had any high moral reason for doing it...if it was cheaper and more convenient (or the till-totty were not as good looking) I would use the self-service.
It's not about a cheeky day off.
The highlighted part: That is how I feel about being a member of the union.
My specific gripe with my union is more to do with the way it is being run and the way they have handled general issues in the past and if I leave it's not because of what unions in general stand for but because of my union's poor management, misleading rhetoric and failure to stick to courses of action that they set in motion.
I think it is a key principle of being a union member that you support the will of the majority otherwise their is no point in joining in the first place. Alright, so I probably wont be as adversely effected by the pension reforms as many of the members but their position is weaker without the support of me and my colleagues. Conversely there might come a time when I am directly effected by something and I would expect their support as fellow union members.
As I said, I think it's key to how a union's membership should operate and if people can't commit to this then they should join in the first place.
Just my 2 pence.
I think my Union and many others are significantly off kilter for varying reasons, yet if I do strike it won't be for them or anyone else having any sort of negative influence on me but my own choice and my own willingness or refusal. I believe in trying to defend my rights, as futile as it may appear to recognise Fox's worthwhile contributions earlier on, and the only thing the Union has done in this respect is offer the opportunity to take action where I wouldn't otherwise have any sort of meaningful, or "detrimental", redress.
I agree in the principle of trade unionism and the protection of the mass, however I do have to concede a significant concern about the long term viability of low ballot turns outs continuing action like this. I don't accept it is undemocratic because people are simply offered the choice or not as an individual. There is a lot of myth and stigma with a picket line, but crossing them is hardly impossible. Many people do. A lot come forward strongly with the all out together line similar to what you have presented, and I just don't accept that intellectually in absolute terms. I'm not going to strike for an issue or position I consider wrong, and I certainly was never intimidated and bullied or prevented from crossing the picket - one that I used to help organise previously to that for good measure. If anything, I gave them all a lecture for being a bunch of unquestioning idiots and following the "party line". No serious cross words, nothing else and I went in. I could have just swanned past, it's not like the Gladiators that some seem to portray. But that was another dispute, and this time I do have a lot more sympathy with the concerns of, well everybody. A low mandate used in this manner is a concern to me, not because of my feelings on crossing a picket but due to political opposition. What the Union has said is largely irrelevent to me as I've got my information elsewhere. Information from the Government has been slim, it's looking like a failure all round to me. Government has failed in a fair and explained reform, and the Unions have failed to engage their members.
Fail fail fail. That's what the UK has stamped on it's forehead.
Last edited:
Better would be entirely subjective my dear.
I keep my money under the mattress
In all seriousness, I can't understand that someone losing their job is a good thing.
I can't deny that I don't appreciate technology, I guess I wouldn't be on this forum if I didn't. It must be that I just value people more.
Just a small point, the poll question did not ask whether the public supports the strike. it asked whether they thought the workers were justified in striking. it isn't quite the same.
the yougov poll 3 days earlier gave a different result and asked specifically about supporting the strike.
ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/archives/4346
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
At least it was a 100% turnout from these 1005 voters
maybe the unions should do telephone ballots?
I keep my money under the mattress
In all seriousness, I can't understand that someone losing their job is a good thing.
I can't deny that I don't appreciate technology, I guess I wouldn't be on this forum if I didn't. It must be that I just value people more.
I assume you don't buy anything online then, don't use emails and you only send letters via Royal Mail, and you don't use a phone... the list goes on...
Why you've singled out supermarkets is very bizarre, does a family member work at one or something?
given union history of bullying and intimidation in the union movement, this is probably a bad idea, just as car park votes were...
Oh you mean like your step mom maggie? I mean who ever did not agree with her was chopped!
She was the Biggest bully ever.
I would rather a verifiable paper count personally, I can't see civil servants and other public servants bullying one another over the phone - or otherwise - oddly enough. It's a very serious charge to be levelled at yourself.
Anyway, if you can't engage your membership enough to post the thing back then it doesn't matter how you do it your problems are elsewhere.
Yes I shop online, yes I use email. I have a landline but have never owned a mobile.
The supermarket thing is just a small gesture and is probably to do with the fact that I can see and talk to the people who could be affected. None of whom involve a family member.
Will be a sad and soulless day when every aspect of service is provided by robots.
Soldato
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Posts
- 16,234
- Location
- Newcastle/Aberdeen
Depends. Do people still have to have jobs to survive? Or is this the realization that lets people actually do what they want with their lives?
Considering how terrible most aspects of customer service are, I'm looking forward to a competent robot sorting things out.
Also, you've never owned a mobile phone?! Really?
Run along back to your fantasy world where we don't need money and everyone is rich. That's totally going to happen.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
The most disappointing aspect of this strike on Wednesday is that it is unlikely to achieve anything at all for the strikers who are going to get shafted anyway 
Run along back to your fantasy world where we don't need money and everyone is rich. That's totally going to happen.
maybe this whole financial crisis will actually liberate people from chasing the dollar and realise there is actually more to life ?
The only reason everyone needs money is because people attach moentary value to everything ? What if it was more like, I have skill x you have skill y, I have a job that needs doing but requires skill x and vice versa, exchange of labour does not need financial gain.
Its all a bit Star Trek Utopia / medieval peasant like, but in some ways this would be more favourable than getting reamed by the banks constantly. What do you think would have happened if governments world wide unilaterally decided to say **** YOU to the banks that were sinking and let them all fold ?
I very much doubt the end of world would have happened and we would suddenly find our selves in a post nuclear world like fallout ?