Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to The Lounge |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Do you not think people should be able to strike in pursuit of better pay/working conditions? A | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Thank the government for putting them in this position and that prick grant refusing to discuss with them | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
If something like this causes your life to be ‘hell’ consider yourself pretty lucky | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? " Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. " 
This isn't just about the drivers, it's about all the other workers. And safety.
Unfortunately, yes, strikes are inconvenient. Maybe the government and businesses should put their big boy pants on rather than stoking division and blaming a party who haven't been in power for 12 years? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I’m sure they’ve done it just to spite you
If something like this causes your life to be ‘hell’ consider yourself pretty lucky " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. " I've seen averages deliberately exclude cleaners to bring the average up. Oh, so cleaners aren't workers?  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell Thank the government for putting them in this position and that prick grant refusing to discuss with them " Not this government.... a previous government who got bukkaked by the unions. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. I've seen averages deliberately exclude cleaners to bring the average up. Oh, so cleaners aren't workers? "Train drivers are striking I think you will find as are London underground drivers. It's a disgrace | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I do agree with their rights to walk out as a way to enact change and improve conditions for themselves, especially as the rail companies have been squeezing them for years. However it seems strange that these actions intentionally hurt the public, rather than the companies, in doing so they undermine the support that they want. In this way it’s a rather selfish act. I work in hospitality, the conditions can be awful at times, imagine if all of the pubs, bars, cafes, coffee shops, etc, all went on strike because we want an extra break and another holiday day… " I think there are usually laws to stop them from hurting the companies. Withdrawal of labour is a last resort. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"imagine if all of the pubs, bars, cafes, coffee shops, etc, all went on strike because we want an extra break and another holiday day… " It would be like Lockdown | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. I've seen averages deliberately exclude cleaners to bring the average up. Oh, so cleaners aren't workers?
Train drivers are striking I think you will find as are London underground drivers. It's a disgrace "They're striking across the sector. The right wing media are lying about the effect across the sector to make it seem unreasonable. It's a disgrace anyone believes this bullshit. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. " Fair comment, but nonetheless salaries of RMT staff like ticket collectors, despatchers, maintenance staff are in the mid-£30k range - comparing favourably to nurses, care staff, teachers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
And this from a government who changed the laws re maritime workers enabling P&O to make thousands redundant and replace them with agency workers, and then kicked off at P&O when they did just that.
If you think this government is a.) Working for the population, b.) Capable of making rational decisions or c.) Full of MP's qualified to do the jobs they've been given.......
Then I have some magic beans to sell you.
A | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" ...and with so little notice as well... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Grant Shapps needs to be shipped off to Rwanda. Apparently the government want to change the law so that agency workers can be brought in to replace striking workers to prevent strike action causing any disruption. Causing disruption is the entire point of striking.
And this from a government who changed the laws re maritime workers enabling P&O to make thousands redundant and replace them with agency workers, and then kicked off at P&O when they did just that.
If you think this government is a.) Working for the population, b.) Capable of making rational decisions or c.) Full of MP's qualified to do the jobs they've been given.......
Then I have some magic beans to sell you.
A"Quite. How's workers rights gone for P&O, then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Where were you trying to get and what for ? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. Fair comment, but nonetheless salaries of RMT staff like ticket collectors, despatchers, maintenance staff are in the mid-£30k range - comparing favourably to nurses, care staff, teachers. " Where on earth do you get yr information from? Not all RMT staff are in mid £30k range and neither are most nurses. Yr info is as accurate as the press. Again someone who knows nothing claiming to know everything. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike. "There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers."I totally disagree. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? " Drivers aren’t on strike (facepalm) totally different union however drivers can’t work without the RMT staff who are pretty bloody important. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" People supposed to put wealth before health or work for free op? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree. " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"They deserve fairer pay " Agreed, but that would probably result in a pay cut  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers."You pressed "Post message" before listing those better ways. Probably an accident. Do continue.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike. "Seconded | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Disappointed but not surprised by this thread. " The divide and rule playbook at its finest, look over there but don't look at us at the top riding the gravy train till the wheels fall off.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations " How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. I've seen averages deliberately exclude cleaners to bring the average up. Oh, so cleaners aren't workers?
Train drivers are striking I think you will find as are London underground drivers. It's a disgrace "Drivers can’t work without station staff etc. Also the majority of underground staff are ASLEF. This is RMT. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"They are striking because of threats to jobs and changes to terms and conditions. The media tell you its all about pay rises, and you call them greedy bastards. You’d do exactly the same if your employer wanted to make you redundant or enforce you work more hours, more weekends, more nights. If you wouldn’t, then more fool you. The RMT are just the first to have a go. I’d imagine many more unions will follow suit. Remember, many perks of today’s employment (annual leave, sick pay etc) were fought for and won by unions ????" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. " So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Sad….so sad  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase..." Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts." Oh I remember the happy clappy seal days, I bet the essential workers haven't had that pay rise yet eh | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change." Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts. Oh I remember the happy clappy seal days, I bet the essential workers haven't had that pay rise yet eh" As I recall the government tried to *sell* them a badge, the fucking arseholes. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts. Oh I remember the happy clappy seal days, I bet the essential workers haven't had that pay rise yet eh As I recall the government tried to *sell* them a badge, the fucking arseholes." Pahahaha omg it just gets even more ridiculous doesn't it | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts. Oh I remember the happy clappy seal days, I bet the essential workers haven't had that pay rise yet eh As I recall the government tried to *sell* them a badge, the fucking arseholes. Pahahaha omg it just gets even more ridiculous doesn't it" I don't think there are depths to which this government won't sink. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change." This..
Every decent at work policy / condition of service that benefits all levels of society in their work place and daily lives has been fought for and they're taken for granted..
Those who want others to give up what they have need to wake up because the removal of such basic things under the con of modernisation will adversely affect all..
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The drivers have inflated wages already due to the unions. So next it will be teachers nurses and all the other public sector workers. There so inflammation will go up more coursing a recession but hey public sector workers aren't effected by a recession so they don't care. So you don't believe teachers and nurses deserve higher wages? Funny how the government are complaining about the sector wanting higher pay, yet are keeping awfully quiet about their annual pay increase... Amazing how support for essential workers amounted to some fucking clapping and no fucking action where it counts. Oh I remember the happy clappy seal days, I bet the essential workers haven't had that pay rise yet eh As I recall the government tried to *sell* them a badge, the fucking arseholes. Pahahaha omg it just gets even more ridiculous doesn't it I don't think there are depths to which this government won't sink." You're not wrong, personally I don't trust any of those overgrown school boys | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Yeah moaning they need a pay rise ,like everyone else,should be thankful they have a job " How much do you pay t'mill owner for permission to come to work? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
You pressed "Post message" before listing those better ways. Probably an accident.
Do continue...."In other countries transport workers seeking similar improvements in conditions turned up to work and did their jobs as usual but with one major difference- they opened the barriers and did not charge for tickets for the day. They got what they wanted  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Don't blame the people. It was the Unions decision and they are getting shit for from their members C | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" These threads are always a good place to find people worth blocking. If you're pro tory and anti worker please don't talk to me | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"As much as I’d be pissed off if it affected me, I’d just suck it up and take it for the greater good. It’s always people that get screwed first when it comes to ‘difficult choices’ on money. I’m getting a shot pay rise this year and I can’t do anything about it, but if you can why not? It’s all just excuse after excuse about why we can’t give people pay rises due to financial factors, but there are so many factors k cocked that I cannot believe there are not other ways to make saving other than cutting peoples effective wages. I could rant for hours but I’ll shut up…. Peers to the spoke i say!" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
"So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable. I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I do agree with their rights to walk out as a way to enact change and improve conditions for themselves, especially as the rail companies have been squeezing them for years. However it seems strange that these actions intentionally hurt the public, rather than the companies, in doing so they undermine the support that they want. In this way it’s a rather selfish act. I work in hospitality, the conditions can be awful at times, imagine if all of the pubs, bars, cafes, coffee shops, etc, all went on strike because we want an extra break and another holiday day… " Maybe you should go on strike but you need to be organised. Is there a hospitality workers union, are the workers organised enough? I doubt it…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. " The answer is people don't ever think about the disabled in this country unless it's to point and sneer and say something under their breath about benefits. I've worked in care looking after disabled people and even my coworkers couldn't hide their contempt any time they saw someone in a wheelchair. It's embarrassing how much this country is conditioned into hating the less fortunate. An island of nasty bastards. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
You pressed "Post message" before listing those better ways. Probably an accident.
Do continue....
In other countries transport workers seeking similar improvements in conditions turned up to work and did their jobs as usual but with one major difference- they opened the barriers and did not charge for tickets for the day.
They got what they wanted "Did see that yes but it's a different structure and some of those taking action mean it is not safe to run the same level of service.. If anyone takes strike action that doesn't affect the users of the service or the production of goods and services etc no one including those who the workforce are negotiating with would take a blind bit of notice.. Sort of negates the point.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?"The fact that you don't understand how any of this works and think you can drill it down to a ridiculous black and white option doesn't invalidate striking. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell These threads are always a good place to find people worth blocking. If you're pro tory and anti worker please don't talk to me "I’m an anti Tory pro wanker…. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. The answer is people don't ever think about the disabled in this country unless it's to point and sneer and say something under their breath about benefits. I've worked in care looking after disabled people and even my coworkers couldn't hide their contempt any time they saw someone in a wheelchair. It's embarrassing how much this country is conditioned into hating the less fortunate. An island of nasty bastards. " There's certainly a pocket of society who hold contempt for disabled people. I've recently experienced excellent assistance on Avanti trains, but it requires actual human beings! Automated trains and station facilities would leave me stranded on the platform. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?"The rail workers are key workers who we all if we took part clapped, they were praised by the government and they were essential to keeping the country going.. And now.. Lambasted and being demonised by the same people in power who have just taken an 11% pay rise.. Sickening.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The rail workers are key workers who we all if we took part clapped, they were praised by the government and they were essential to keeping the country going..
And now..
Lambasted and being demonised by the same people in power who have just taken an 11% pay rise..
Sickening.."Tory virtue signalling rather than actually doing anything. Standard. (Then reversing the charge against people who actually do anything to help. Also standard) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The rail workers are key workers who we all if we took part clapped, they were praised by the government and they were essential to keeping the country going..
And now..
Lambasted and being demonised by the same people in power who have just taken an 11% pay rise..
Sickening.."This | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey?" Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr" It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" Fire the lot of them we have automated ticketing and self driving trains we dont need them bring back Maggie Thatcher she would sort them out | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The fact that you don't understand how any of this works and think you can drill it down to a ridiculous black and white option doesn't invalidate striking."Going on strike is a legitimate and valuable right and tool. But it isn't the only option and the current situation certainly does not warrant the Unions from deploying the "nuclear option" so soon. The reality for many (mainly blue collar workers) is days of lost wages, lost time and lost sympathy for the striking transport workers. The union boss described this as Class War, he could be right- Working Class Vs Working Class | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to." That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr" I'm sorry you are not amenable to the kind of thread drift that is standard on any forum. You might want to work on that. In the meantime, yes, I believe the strike is justified and that more strikes are coming. I'm a big girl and can handle inconvenience for the greater good, and so I will. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The fact that you don't understand how any of this works and think you can drill it down to a ridiculous black and white option doesn't invalidate striking.
Going on strike is a legitimate and valuable right and tool.
But it isn't the only option and the current situation certainly does not warrant the Unions from deploying the "nuclear option" so soon.
The reality for many (mainly blue collar workers) is days of lost wages, lost time and lost sympathy for the striking transport workers.
The union boss described this as Class War, he could be right- Working Class Vs Working Class "No one said that striking is the only tool except you. It has come to this. The fact that the ultra wealthy media and government are able to spin this against worker's rights is sad but ultimately unsurprising. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s a massive cheek to strike for more when they don’t even provide a good service in the first place. It’s like asking your boss for a pay rise when you’re underperforming AND none of us are getting any extra money - where do they expect the additional cash to come from? We can’t afford increased fares or tax subsidies. The way to get themselves out of this mess is to run more efficiently " Isn't "running efficiently" and "not underperforming" actually organisational-level issues, not employee-level? If the company is badly organised, isn't that an issue for senior management? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s a massive cheek to strike for more when they don’t even provide a good service in the first place. It’s like asking your boss for a pay rise when you’re underperforming AND none of us are getting any extra money - where do they expect the additional cash to come from? We can’t afford increased fares or tax subsidies. The way to get themselves out of this mess is to run more efficiently Isn't "running efficiently" and "not underperforming" actually organisational-level issues, not employee-level? If the company is badly organised, isn't that an issue for senior management?" You'd think. But personal responsibility is only for plebs | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't worry this government will eventually publish laws that will make striking illegal and everyone can happily go back to work in impoverished circumstances. Firms will then make further cuts and wages will fall increasingly behind. But as long as your isn't disrupted that's fine. Cake prices will also escalate btw as well as Jaffa cakes. " They've already worked on protest. It's coming. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Don't worry this government will eventually publish laws that will make striking illegal and everyone can happily go back to work in impoverished circumstances. Firms will then make further cuts and wages will fall increasingly behind. But as long as your isn't disrupted that's fine. Cake prices will also escalate btw as well as Jaffa cakes. They've already worked on protest. It's coming." Yes I know. I don't support this government. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s a massive cheek to strike for more when they don’t even provide a good service in the first place. It’s like asking your boss for a pay rise when you’re underperforming AND none of us are getting any extra money - where do they expect the additional cash to come from? We can’t afford increased fares or tax subsidies. The way to get themselves out of this mess is to run more efficiently Isn't "running efficiently" and "not underperforming" actually organisational-level issues, not employee-level? If the company is badly organised, isn't that an issue for senior management?" The organisation is made of employees. Also the unions prevent any progress when it comes to efficiency - by asking staff not to do certain things. For example, don’t open emails, don’t cover shifts, don’t speak to your boss at certain hours, don’t work a minute of overtime, don’t give equal shift patterns (older members are favoured), don’t take a train out if if means you’ll be late home, don’t attend meetings via zoom, don’t accept any contact unless it’s written etc etc The unions and the staff that are part of it are preventing the companies from modernising and becoming more efficient. I know because I had to work closely with them, and every negotiation and suggestion is thrown out the window without reason. (They absolutely hated when we suggested giving fair working hours to all employees and voted against it. They much prefer the biased system of giving the union members the best working hours based on how much they’ve paid in). The train companies are barely making a profit, losing staff non stop, and constantly paying out compensation due to this behaviour. This is why I have no sympathy. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
Tg x | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s a massive cheek to strike for more when they don’t even provide a good service in the first place. It’s like asking your boss for a pay rise when you’re underperforming AND none of us are getting any extra money - where do they expect the additional cash to come from? We can’t afford increased fares or tax subsidies. The way to get themselves out of this mess is to run more efficiently Isn't "running efficiently" and "not underperforming" actually organisational-level issues, not employee-level? If the company is badly organised, isn't that an issue for senior management? The organisation is made of employees. Also the unions prevent any progress when it comes to efficiency - by asking staff not to do certain things. For example, don’t open emails, don’t cover shifts, don’t speak to your boss at certain hours, don’t work a minute of overtime, don’t give equal shift patterns (older members are favoured), don’t take a train out if if means you’ll be late home, don’t attend meetings via zoom, don’t accept any contact unless it’s written etc etc The unions and the staff that are part of it are preventing the companies from modernising and becoming more efficient. I know because I had to work closely with them, and every negotiation and suggestion is thrown out the window without reason. (They absolutely hated when we suggested giving fair working hours to all employees and voted against it. They much prefer the biased system of giving the union members the best working hours based on how much they’ve paid in). The train companies are barely making a profit, losing staff non stop, and constantly paying out compensation due to this behaviour. This is why I have no sympathy." As I recall this was the argument for privatising British Rail. Clearly, that's gone so well  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| Reply privately |
"Hi, just popped in to say "UP THE WORKERS!" "  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Hi, just popped in to say "UP THE WORKERS!" " You're back! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Mr I'm sorry you are not amenable to the kind of thread drift that is standard on any forum. You might want to work on that. In the meantime, yes, I believe the strike is justified and that more strikes are coming. I'm a big girl and can handle inconvenience for the greater good, and so I will." Nah, I have absolutely no intention of working on that, along with drift, one of the beauties of forums is I can post my opinion about the responses given by others and not have to worry if some random doesn't like them
Well done on being a big girl, I'm sure it makes you feel warm inside.
As I said above, I don't know enough to form an opinion one way or another about this strike. I had hoped that by reading this thread I would have been able to learn something but have been disappointed. It is (as it's so often the case) full of comments by people unable to discuss a topic because no one is actually interested in listening to each others points and instead prefers to sit behind their ideological barricade and throw straw men at each other (to mangle several metaphors).
Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Mr I'm sorry you are not amenable to the kind of thread drift that is standard on any forum. You might want to work on that. In the meantime, yes, I believe the strike is justified and that more strikes are coming. I'm a big girl and can handle inconvenience for the greater good, and so I will. Nah, I have absolutely no intention of working on that, along with drift, one of the beauties of forums is I can post my opinion about the responses given by others and not have to worry if some random doesn't like them
Well done on being a big girl, I'm sure it makes you feel warm inside.
As I said above, I don't know enough to form an opinion one way or another about this strike. I had hoped that by reading this thread I would have been able to learn something but have been disappointed. It is (as it's so often the case) full of comments by people unable to discuss a topic because no one is actually interested in listening to each others points and instead prefers to sit behind their ideological barricade and throw straw men at each other (to mangle several metaphors).
Mr"Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr" I think given an 89% mandate on a 71% turnout indicates that for those taking the action they have a justifiable position, they've been trying to negotiate for months yet what's become apparent is the government are preventing a compromise.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr I think given an 89% mandate on a 71% turnout indicates that for those taking the action they have a justifiable position, they've been trying to negotiate for months yet what's become apparent is the government are preventing a compromise.. " It's only the right wing media trying to portray this as a snap thing with nothing else on the table, only using the highest wages, blaming rank and file for the actions of management. And those who believe them, of course. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr I think given an 89% mandate on a 71% turnout indicates that for those taking the action they have a justifiable position, they've been trying to negotiate for months yet what's become apparent is the government are preventing a compromise.. It's only the right wing media trying to portray this as a snap thing with nothing else on the table, only using the highest wages, blaming rank and file for the actions of management. And those who believe them, of course." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with any striking workers. If unions hadn’t formed and agitated for change we’d still be working for a pittance, with no thought for health and safety and being lucky if we get a half day off on a Saturday. Paid holidays? Sick leave? Maternity and Paternity leave? Not a chance any of that would have happened. I’ll take a bit of inconvenience if that is what is required for change. Direct action is what brought us child labour laws. I'm sure it was inconvenient to have to figure out a way to cope when you couldn't send toddlers in to fix the awkward tiny jobs. Much sad. Very bad. Unions suck hey? Tbf, this has absolutely nothing to do with the strike today. Saying that the unions did great things bringing us labour laws 100 years ago is completely irrelevant to today's strike. As is pointing out that people have a right to strike. Neither of these facts make the strike today a good thing. I'm not saying that it isn't good or right, I simply don't know enough about the situation to voice an opinion, I just wanted to point out that this thread is full of false equivalences and straw men on both sides. The discussions of other civil servants wages, the fact that jobs were protected during Covid, the discussions of MP's wages, stopping children working in coal mines etc etc are all irrelevant. Any discussion about the rights or wrongs of this strike should begin and end with what the striking workers are trying to achieve, that's it. Mr It's not a false equivalence. Strikes and action for change have been whitewashed over the course of history. So we get to "you can stand up for your rights, just ask nicely". I'm very glad that those who got toddlers out of factory work didn't ask nicely, because those with power don't give a single solitary fuck unless they're made to. That is an argument about whether striking is a good thing to allow. It is completely irrelevant to a discussion about whether this particular strike is justifiable or not. Mr I think given an 89% mandate on a 71% turnout indicates that for those taking the action they have a justifiable position, they've been trying to negotiate for months yet what's become apparent is the government are preventing a compromise.. It's only the right wing media trying to portray this as a snap thing with nothing else on the table, only using the highest wages, blaming rank and file for the actions of management. And those who believe them, of course." It's standard.. As was Chris Philp's attempt to distort the truth by lying last on Newsnight yesterday till he was accused of lying umpteen times by Mick Lunch.. He has no meaningful or relevant answers.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The fact that you don't understand how any of this works and think you can drill it down to a ridiculous black and white option doesn't invalidate striking.
Going on strike is a legitimate and valuable right and tool.
But it isn't the only option and the current situation certainly does not warrant the Unions from deploying the "nuclear option" so soon.
The reality for many (mainly blue collar workers) is days of lost wages, lost time and lost sympathy for the striking transport workers.
The union boss described this as Class War, he could be right- Working Class Vs Working Class
No one said that striking is the only tool except you. It has come to this.
The fact that the ultra wealthy media and government are able to spin this against worker's rights is sad but ultimately unsurprising."Nobody is against them getting a better deal, but why should they infringe (so soon into the dispute) on other worker's rights to get to and from work and earn a days wage? It's ok for office workers- they can WFH unimpeded, for others it's a far different story. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I can't wait for other sectors to strike and the same people to try to use the "innocent" rail workers, who would never ever strike, as a weapon to make them give up. Truth and memory are apparently no longer traits to aspire to." The memory of Boris's claim to not go back to the days of a low wage economy and to have a country with a high skilled workforce seem to be lost.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
I totally disagree.
So when one group of workers doesn't get what they want the only appropriate action is to massively inconvenience and fuck up numerous other groups of workers? Sounds fair and reasonable.
I wonder how many who two years ago clapped for carers now clap for those stopping the same carers get to and from work?
The fact that you don't understand how any of this works and think you can drill it down to a ridiculous black and white option doesn't invalidate striking.
Going on strike is a legitimate and valuable right and tool.
But it isn't the only option and the current situation certainly does not warrant the Unions from deploying the "nuclear option" so soon.
The reality for many (mainly blue collar workers) is days of lost wages, lost time and lost sympathy for the striking transport workers.
The union boss described this as Class War, he could be right- Working Class Vs Working Class
No one said that striking is the only tool except you. It has come to this.
The fact that the ultra wealthy media and government are able to spin this against worker's rights is sad but ultimately unsurprising.
Nobody is against them getting a better deal, but why should they infringe (so soon into the dispute) on other worker's rights to get to and from work and earn a days wage?
It's ok for office workers- they can WFH unimpeded, for others it's a far different story.
"My understanding is that it's up to individuals to find their own way around - at least that gets lobbed at me when I mention not driving. Funny how the argument is never consistent. It's not a right, it's a responsibility to figure out. As I've done all my life. You figure your shit out. Withdrawing labour is an absolute right. I'm sorry you don't support it. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I can't wait for other sectors to strike and the same people to try to use the "innocent" rail workers, who would never ever strike, as a weapon to make them give up. Truth and memory are apparently no longer traits to aspire to. The memory of Boris's claim to not go back to the days of a low wage economy and to have a country with a high skilled workforce seem to be lost.." A promise from Johnson is just a lie that hasn't been discovered yet. Although he is looking at raising the cap on top city earners. So there's that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell" It's not as if they decided right let's strike tomorrow, It's been known the dates for a fortnight, | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I can't wait for other sectors to strike and the same people to try to use the "innocent" rail workers, who would never ever strike, as a weapon to make them give up. Truth and memory are apparently no longer traits to aspire to. The memory of Boris's claim to not go back to the days of a low wage economy and to have a country with a high skilled workforce seem to be lost.. A promise from Johnson is just a lie that hasn't been discovered yet. Although he is looking at raising the cap on top city earners. So there's that." Saw that.. Gotta look after ones donors though.. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Anyone else enjoy the wonderful irony of the cover of the Sun newspaper yesterday? I thought that only happened if I voted Labour? I haven't had that much fun since the tories promised me Jeremy corbyn was a terrorist sympathiser then needed the DUP to make up the numbers with a £2bn bung as well. " It's fucking incredible that any of the problems we're in can be the fault of a party that haven't been in fucking power for 12 years. I just... I thought most of us grew out of "nuh uh, it wasn't me, it was my sister" in primary school. Personal responsibility, innit. Only for the plebs, not for our leaders | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out." Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I'm expecting widespread striking across a variety of occupations, if not a general strike, before the end of the summer. And street protests or even rioting if nothing changes before the end of the year. Constantly increasing numbers finding difficulty in buying food and keeping the electricity on is a powerful recipe for social unrest." Absolutely | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"The problem is that whilst the railway workers on strike feel they have a genuine grievance for doing this, it will play into the Tory plan of replace and re hire with lower paid agency workers with zero rights. Both Labour and Conservative govts have already dealt a fatal blow to entrepreneurship and contract working with the IR35 legislation, meaning there are now thousands of contract workers in UK public and private sector with no employment rights or benefits whatsoever. This will be rolled out to the railways and other sectors despite all the backlash P&O got for doing exactly this. " Ultimately this will just lead to social unrest. No one wants that. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black " But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times." And the present is showing that free market except when we decide to help our mates with legislation isn't working either. I'll take socialism over this shit show. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists " I'm not expecting anything - I clearly said I hoped, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't just go after your point, I clearly stated both sides are using straw man arguments and gave examples which included the discussion of the extra protection rail workers got during Covid by those who are against the strike. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant, saying they got a good deal two years ago so should shut up and accept a bad deal now is utter nonsense. I am genuinely struggling to see the relevance of fighting against child labour. Do you believe that those who think this strike is the wrong action also believe that child labour is right? Can you not see that it is possible to believe that striking should be allowed, is indeed a valuable and necessary part of democracy, has been instrumental in vital changes in our society and yet also believe that in this instance it isn't the right thing to do? Do you not see that it is perfectly possible to believe that striking to protect children is good, striking to protect jobs from technological progress is bad? And please believe me, I'm not suggesting that this is the case here, simply that some are suggesting it is. Arguing that a railworker is right to strike against losing pay or maintenance jobs or automated ticket machines or whatever the case may be because people were right to fight against child labour is a complete strawman. To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers."If there was a better way, they would have done that first. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
If there was a better way, they would have done that first."Not true. They were asked alternative ways multiples times over the years and said no to every suggestion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Solidarity with those on strike.
There's better ways to do it than inconvenience, compromise and disrupt fellow workers.
If there was a better way, they would have done that first.
Not true. They were asked alternative ways multiples times over the years and said no to every suggestion."Do you have examples of the alternatives? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. And the present is showing that free market except when we decide to help our mates with legislation isn't working either. I'll take socialism over this shit show." The free market isn’t as evil as it’s portrayed.. wealth generation benefits everyone but I agree there is always room for tweaks/adjustments and lessons can learnt .. but I will agree to disagree with you that socialism is the answer. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists I'm not expecting anything - I clearly said I hoped, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't just go after your point, I clearly stated both sides are using straw man arguments and gave examples which included the discussion of the extra protection rail workers got during Covid by those who are against the strike. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant, saying they got a good deal two years ago so should shut up and accept a bad deal now is utter nonsense. I am genuinely struggling to see the relevance of fighting against child labour. Do you believe that those who think this strike is the wrong action also believe that child labour is right? Can you not see that it is possible to believe that striking should be allowed, is indeed a valuable and necessary part of democracy, has been instrumental in vital changes in our society and yet also believe that in this instance it isn't the right thing to do? Do you not see that it is perfectly possible to believe that striking to protect children is good, striking to protect jobs from technological progress is bad? And please believe me, I'm not suggesting that this is the case here, simply that some are suggesting it is. Arguing that a railworker is right to strike against losing pay or maintenance jobs or automated ticket machines or whatever the case may be because people were right to fight against child labour is a complete strawman. To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr" Why should a passenger have any say in the working conditions of a member of staff? Work is exchange of labour for reward, not a popularity contest. If the consumers of my work product vote against my work product, they don't get to change my conditions. That's not how any of this works. And, as above - someone talked about a right to get to work. In any other context I've seen (as a non driver) people talk about the responsibility to figure it out on your own. People have had notice of strikes. Same as if there'd been a scheduled repair. Figure it out. Rights have to be fought for, and continue to be upheld. The labour movement encompasses all of these things, and fair pay for fair work. It's a spectrum going beyond childhood labour into owning people as property. You are arguing about this specific strike, but I am not. I'm talking about rights in general. When negotiations fail, strike is the final option. Some check on the enormous power of employers over us. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times." I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly " Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies  | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies "^ this | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr" They can only do what the legislation allows and that has been amended to make it harder for unions to take the step they have.. For them it clearly is the right action else they wouldn't have voted on that question, the law doesn't give much leeway .. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly " I agree with you I was only responding to someone else’s statement of £500m profits I’m pretty certain the railways are not sitting on bumper reserves but even if they were that can be easily decimated. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies "One 18 year booked into a hotel in London so she could take her exams, as she usually commutes by train. She didn't want to stay with friends as she wanted to be fully rested. Maybe that's an option for other people who need to be in work and can't work from home, but it will cost them from their pockets. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. " Don't you know we should all be in our homes never moving, working, having fun? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies
One 18 year booked into a hotel in London so she could take her exams, as she usually commutes by train. She didn't want to stay with friends as she wanted to be fully rested. Maybe that's an option for other people who need to be in work and can't work from home, but it will cost them from their pockets."Indeed. The company I used to rely on to get me to school renamed itself from City Rail, because ultimately more people called it Shitty Rail than not. I've had (sometimes multiple) transport backup plans since I was twelve. There are, of course, ways. Especially with notice. (I usually didn't have notice, I just planned every day for multiple cancellations and knew my alternate routes) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies "It would be a terrible thing if companies were not profitable! Profitable companies underpin things like the state & private pension provision. If companies were not profitable there would be no investment into pensions across the board. Contrary to popular belief the country does not sit on huge pension reserves or any reserves in general for anything like benefits etc..the state is in debt and doesn’t actually have enough money in the pot to pay for state pensions and other benefits. Without investment funds which rely on profitable companies we’d all be fucked! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Unions play an important role fighting for workers rights better conditions for workers etc… However we are heading for a recession with ever increasing inflation. Higher wages means higher costs which results in fares going up hitting everyone. Rail use has steadily decreased due to the pandemic and unlikely to return to pre pandemic levels due to the shift to wfh. Strikes and disruption to services risks rail use decreasing further which then means many services risk having timetables reduced permanently. This means less revenue for the railways which will ultimately lead to job losses in the long run. A longer term view needs to be looked at rather than continual threats of strikes. Because as it stands rail workers and the general public will all lose out. Maybe we could increase pay of workers from the £500m railway profits, or get a few bob from the £1m+ compensation of executives. Yes, I know, the executives are all victims and deserve a pay rise, because being servile is the new black But those £500m profits can be decimated pretty quickly if the railways are decimated due to continuous less use so that’s not necessarily a long term solution. I agree there is an uneven distribution of salaries but that is the case for most industries private & public sector. If you slash executive salaries you risk a talent drain where no one actual wants to manage the infrastructure making an already inconsistent service even worse. Redistribution of wealth and moving to a more socialist/communist model is not the perfect solution as history has shown numerous times. I’m not sure how accurate that 500m profit figure is. Especially considering there are multiple rail companies, not just one. Also you need to look at more than just profit; you need to see the expenditure too. I know one rail company spends close to a billion and only makes 20million profit. With margins that small they can’t afford to pay anyone more because they’re teetering on the edge of going bust. 20 million sounds like a lot, buts it’s actually a tiny amount of operational costs and one minor unexpected cost would destroy that reserve instantly Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies
It would be a terrible thing if companies were not profitable!
Profitable companies underpin things like the state & private pension provision. If companies were not profitable there would be no investment into pensions across the board.
Contrary to popular belief the country does not sit on huge pension reserves or any reserves in general for anything like benefits etc..the state is in debt and doesn’t actually have enough money in the pot to pay for state pensions and other benefits. Without investment funds which rely on profitable companies we’d all be fucked!"I'm sure the workers providing the labour for these profitable companies, who are struggling to pay their bills, are playing the world's smallest violin. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It would be a terrible thing if companies were not profitable! Profitable companies underpin things like the state & private pension provision. If companies were not profitable there would be no investment into pensions across the board. Contrary to popular belief the country does not sit on huge pension reserves or any reserves in general for anything like benefits etc..the state is in debt and doesn’t actually have enough money in the pot to pay for state pensions and other benefits. Without investment funds which rely on profitable companies we’d all be fucked!" Except corporation tax only makes up 8% of ALL Tax revenue in the UK. it is paying the mouses share of anything. Half of everything comes from income tax and NI contributions. Both things that would go up if Profits went down and wages went up | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists I'm not expecting anything - I clearly said I hoped, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't just go after your point, I clearly stated both sides are using straw man arguments and gave examples which included the discussion of the extra protection rail workers got during Covid by those who are against the strike. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant, saying they got a good deal two years ago so should shut up and accept a bad deal now is utter nonsense. I am genuinely struggling to see the relevance of fighting against child labour. Do you believe that those who think this strike is the wrong action also believe that child labour is right? Can you not see that it is possible to believe that striking should be allowed, is indeed a valuable and necessary part of democracy, has been instrumental in vital changes in our society and yet also believe that in this instance it isn't the right thing to do? Do you not see that it is perfectly possible to believe that striking to protect children is good, striking to protect jobs from technological progress is bad? And please believe me, I'm not suggesting that this is the case here, simply that some are suggesting it is. Arguing that a railworker is right to strike against losing pay or maintenance jobs or automated ticket machines or whatever the case may be because people were right to fight against child labour is a complete strawman. To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr Why should a passenger have any say in the working conditions of a member of staff? Work is exchange of labour for reward, not a popularity contest. If the consumers of my work product vote against my work product, they don't get to change my conditions. That's not how any of this works. And, as above - someone talked about a right to get to work. In any other context I've seen (as a non driver) people talk about the responsibility to figure it out on your own. People have had notice of strikes. Same as if there'd been a scheduled repair. Figure it out. Rights have to be fought for, and continue to be upheld. The labour movement encompasses all of these things, and fair pay for fair work. It's a spectrum going beyond childhood labour into owning people as property. You are arguing about this specific strike, but I am not. I'm talking about rights in general. When negotiations fail, strike is the final option. Some check on the enormous power of employers over us. " Absolutely agree with you that striking is and should remain a right that is open to employees, I'm not sure why b you felt you heeded to convince me of this? Whilst I agree you are perfectly entitled to argue this case on a thread such as this I personally believe such behaviour is harmful. In this instance, we have an action being taken by one disgruntled group of people that is vehemently opposed by another group of disgruntled people. I cannot see any possible way an already difficult and fractious situation can be resolved or even improved by introducing a totally separate argument - and that is a comment aimed at anyone who is using this situation to say striking should be banned as much as everyone arguing that it is a valuable right. Whatever the rights and wrongs of being able to strike (and again, I reiterate, I believe it is a necessary right) the issue isn't that - even I can see that and I'm not exactly clued up on this situation. At this moment in time, surely the important thing to debate - at least if you actually want to convince people to support the RMT, is the validity of this particular strike. Starting a side argument about the right to strike, throwing insults at politicians, dragging in random grievances with other political decisions doesn't seem to me to be a particularly constructive way to resolve any situation. Obviously, in saying the above I'm well aware that an Inaswingdress/Mr NBVN debate on a swinging site is unlikely to have any meaningful impact but it seems to me that the debate on here is a mirror of the actual debate in real life plus social media, in all it's forms, does influence public opinion. It's our best way of fighting back against a biased press so let's use it in the best way possible? Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It would be a terrible thing if companies were not profitable! Profitable companies underpin things like the state & private pension provision. If companies were not profitable there would be no investment into pensions across the board. Contrary to popular belief the country does not sit on huge pension reserves or any reserves in general for anything like benefits etc..the state is in debt and doesn’t actually have enough money in the pot to pay for state pensions and other benefits. Without investment funds which rely on profitable companies we’d all be fucked! Except corporation tax only makes up 8% of ALL Tax revenue in the UK. it is paying the mouses share of anything. Half of everything comes from income tax and NI contributions. Both things that would go up if Profits went down and wages went up" But increasing corporation tax risks companies moving to more favourable tax countries which results in job losses here thus reducing NI and Income tax revenue whilst increasing the need for state benefits for those losing jobs. Lower tax rates increase entrepreneurship and can ultimately lead to increased employment and higher tax revenue overall. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies "What a bizarre comment. Do you think companies should make a loss? A fraction of a percent profit margin is nothing. Most rail companies make between 0-2% profit. A lot of routes run in negative equity. They actually do want to be more responsible with how they spend, but the unions will not allow them to. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists I'm not expecting anything - I clearly said I hoped, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't just go after your point, I clearly stated both sides are using straw man arguments and gave examples which included the discussion of the extra protection rail workers got during Covid by those who are against the strike. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant, saying they got a good deal two years ago so should shut up and accept a bad deal now is utter nonsense. I am genuinely struggling to see the relevance of fighting against child labour. Do you believe that those who think this strike is the wrong action also believe that child labour is right? Can you not see that it is possible to believe that striking should be allowed, is indeed a valuable and necessary part of democracy, has been instrumental in vital changes in our society and yet also believe that in this instance it isn't the right thing to do? Do you not see that it is perfectly possible to believe that striking to protect children is good, striking to protect jobs from technological progress is bad? And please believe me, I'm not suggesting that this is the case here, simply that some are suggesting it is. Arguing that a railworker is right to strike against losing pay or maintenance jobs or automated ticket machines or whatever the case may be because people were right to fight against child labour is a complete strawman. To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr Why should a passenger have any say in the working conditions of a member of staff? Work is exchange of labour for reward, not a popularity contest. If the consumers of my work product vote against my work product, they don't get to change my conditions. That's not how any of this works. And, as above - someone talked about a right to get to work. In any other context I've seen (as a non driver) people talk about the responsibility to figure it out on your own. People have had notice of strikes. Same as if there'd been a scheduled repair. Figure it out. Rights have to be fought for, and continue to be upheld. The labour movement encompasses all of these things, and fair pay for fair work. It's a spectrum going beyond childhood labour into owning people as property. You are arguing about this specific strike, but I am not. I'm talking about rights in general. When negotiations fail, strike is the final option. Some check on the enormous power of employers over us. Absolutely agree with you that striking is and should remain a right that is open to employees, I'm not sure why b you felt you heeded to convince me of this? Whilst I agree you are perfectly entitled to argue this case on a thread such as this I personally believe such behaviour is harmful. In this instance, we have an action being taken by one disgruntled group of people that is vehemently opposed by another group of disgruntled people. I cannot see any possible way an already difficult and fractious situation can be resolved or even improved by introducing a totally separate argument - and that is a comment aimed at anyone who is using this situation to say striking should be banned as much as everyone arguing that it is a valuable right. Whatever the rights and wrongs of being able to strike (and again, I reiterate, I believe it is a necessary right) the issue isn't that - even I can see that and I'm not exactly clued up on this situation. At this moment in time, surely the important thing to debate - at least if you actually want to convince people to support the RMT, is the validity of this particular strike. Starting a side argument about the right to strike, throwing insults at politicians, dragging in random grievances with other political decisions doesn't seem to me to be a particularly constructive way to resolve any situation. Obviously, in saying the above I'm well aware that an Inaswingdress/Mr NBVN debate on a swinging site is unlikely to have any meaningful impact but it seems to me that the debate on here is a mirror of the actual debate in real life plus social media, in all it's forms, does influence public opinion. It's our best way of fighting back against a biased press so let's use it in the best way possible? Mr" I'm sorry you believe that my discussion is harmful. However, I do believe I am speaking against a biased press. And you've taken but one thread of what I've said, and continue to seem to think it's irrelevant, rather than part of the whole issue. It's also not *that* much of a side issue, given legislation against protest and changes in employment law. It's absurd to take it so far out of context that all that matters is whether people think the trains should be running. If fire/rehire exists, if protest has been curtailed, and if they're looking to find ways to put temporary staff in - that affects the security of the job and its conditions, plus their/our ability to speak up The majority of people in the union voted, and a majority of them voted to strike. That's not just some group of people. It's the majority of people whose conditions are under consideration. You asked what customers might think about a strike. Customers have as much say in rail worker conditions as they have in mine. In this and every case. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Maybe they should learn to exercise personal responsibility like people on minimum wage are asked to
Poor poor profitable companies
What a bizarre comment. Do you think companies should make a loss?
A fraction of a percent profit margin is nothing. Most rail companies make between 0-2% profit. A lot of routes run in negative equity. They actually do want to be more responsible with how they spend, but the unions will not allow them to.
"Lol ok | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. Don't you know we should all be in our homes never moving, working, having fun?" Or, heaven forbid, working! Commuting to London for conferences by wheelchair! Yikes | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Great eh? The taxpayer funds the railways for 2 years in the pandemic and the first priority of the TOCs is to pay out massive dividends the share holders ftfy " | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
" Then maybe you should read up on it rather than expecting a clear discussion on a swinging forum. It's also fascinating in general that those who deem themselves uninvolved or neutral only go after one side, consistently, in all of this. The other side has posted several facts that are demonstrably wrong or misleading, and yet you go after my point which is both correct and relevant. I know we can't expect truth or even internal consistency from the right, but I'd hope to find better from even self appointed centrists I'm not expecting anything - I clearly said I hoped, please don't put words in my mouth. I didn't just go after your point, I clearly stated both sides are using straw man arguments and gave examples which included the discussion of the extra protection rail workers got during Covid by those who are against the strike. As far as I'm concerned this is irrelevant, saying they got a good deal two years ago so should shut up and accept a bad deal now is utter nonsense. I am genuinely struggling to see the relevance of fighting against child labour. Do you believe that those who think this strike is the wrong action also believe that child labour is right? Can you not see that it is possible to believe that striking should be allowed, is indeed a valuable and necessary part of democracy, has been instrumental in vital changes in our society and yet also believe that in this instance it isn't the right thing to do? Do you not see that it is perfectly possible to believe that striking to protect children is good, striking to protect jobs from technological progress is bad? And please believe me, I'm not suggesting that this is the case here, simply that some are suggesting it is. Arguing that a railworker is right to strike against losing pay or maintenance jobs or automated ticket machines or whatever the case may be because people were right to fight against child labour is a complete strawman. To answer another reply (as it is very relevant to the above) the percentage turn out and vote outcome absolutely demands that this be taken seriously - it quite obviously is the considered opinion of a lot of people. However, this alone does not justify a strike or mean it is the right action. It is the collective opinion of one side of an argument. If for example a poll of 80% of passengers revealed 90% of then were against the strike would you accept this as a valid reason for saying the strike is wrong? I certainly wouldn't. Please forgive me if I've misquoted the figures, you get my drift. Mr Why should a passenger have any say in the working conditions of a member of staff? Work is exchange of labour for reward, not a popularity contest. If the consumers of my work product vote against my work product, they don't get to change my conditions. That's not how any of this works. And, as above - someone talked about a right to get to work. In any other context I've seen (as a non driver) people talk about the responsibility to figure it out on your own. People have had notice of strikes. Same as if there'd been a scheduled repair. Figure it out. Rights have to be fought for, and continue to be upheld. The labour movement encompasses all of these things, and fair pay for fair work. It's a spectrum going beyond childhood labour into owning people as property. You are arguing about this specific strike, but I am not. I'm talking about rights in general. When negotiations fail, strike is the final option. Some check on the enormous power of employers over us. Absolutely agree with you that striking is and should remain a right that is open to employees, I'm not sure why b you felt you heeded to convince me of this? Whilst I agree you are perfectly entitled to argue this case on a thread such as this I personally believe such behaviour is harmful. In this instance, we have an action being taken by one disgruntled group of people that is vehemently opposed by another group of disgruntled people. I cannot see any possible way an already difficult and fractious situation can be resolved or even improved by introducing a totally separate argument - and that is a comment aimed at anyone who is using this situation to say striking should be banned as much as everyone arguing that it is a valuable right. Whatever the rights and wrongs of being able to strike (and again, I reiterate, I believe it is a necessary right) the issue isn't that - even I can see that and I'm not exactly clued up on this situation. At this moment in time, surely the important thing to debate - at least if you actually want to convince people to support the RMT, is the validity of this particular strike. Starting a side argument about the right to strike, throwing insults at politicians, dragging in random grievances with other political decisions doesn't seem to me to be a particularly constructive way to resolve any situation. Obviously, in saying the above I'm well aware that an Inaswingdress/Mr NBVN debate on a swinging site is unlikely to have any meaningful impact but it seems to me that the debate on here is a mirror of the actual debate in real life plus social media, in all it's forms, does influence public opinion. It's our best way of fighting back against a biased press so let's use it in the best way possible? Mr I'm sorry you believe that my discussion is harmful. However, I do believe I am speaking against a biased press. And you've taken but one thread of what I've said, and continue to seem to think it's irrelevant, rather than part of the whole issue. It's also not *that* much of a side issue, given legislation against protest and changes in employment law. It's absurd to take it so far out of context that all that matters is whether people think the trains should be running. If fire/rehire exists, if protest has been curtailed, and if they're looking to find ways to put temporary staff in - that affects the security of the job and its conditions, plus their/our ability to speak up The majority of people in the union voted, and a majority of them voted to strike. That's not just some group of people. It's the majority of people whose conditions are under consideration. You asked what customers might think about a strike. Customers have as much say in rail worker conditions as they have in mine. In this and every case." I believe you're speaking against a biased press too. I think the press in this country has massive issues and a single person has far far too much sway over public opinion. I happen disagree with your approach - which is fine, there's lots of stuff I disagree with but no one takes any notice
You aren't reading what I actually said. I asked a rhetorical question regarding what customers think about a strike. I posed a hypothetical situation where customers were opposed to a strike, asked whether this should be taken as proof the strike was wrong and stated clearly that I didn't believe it should be. I was making the point that just because a large group of people believe something is right it doesn't make it so. The fact that those voting are directly affected by the outcome doesn't make the outcome any more or less right or moral either plus this ignores the fact that the rail using public are also affected by the outcome.
I'm sure you'd agree that the people voting for Brexit are all to one extent or another affected by the result but I suspect that in that particular instance you believe that 17 million people were wrong. Voting for what affects you doesn't make your vote any more meaningful or more likely to be "right"
I think we both want different things from this thread. You appear to want to convince people that any strike is always the correct action to take because a) the right to strike is important and b) it is democratically voted for. Personally, I hoped to understand a bit better the reasons for the strike as threads like these are often a great mine of information on what has been offered/rejected.
I am clearly not going to get the answers I want and you are not going to convince me that every strike is automatically the right course of action even while I continue to agree that *sometimes* it is
Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. Don't you know we should all be in our homes never moving, working, having fun? Or, heaven forbid, working! Commuting to London for conferences by wheelchair! Yikes "I'm not sure anyone is suggesting this. Given that a train is capable of moving hundreds of tonnes of equipment hundreds of miles with minimal human effort, I don't believe enabling a wheelchair to get on and off the thing is an insurmountable problem without people there to lug a cumbersome ramp along the platform. In fact, having read your comments before about the need to be on specific trains and rely on individuals doing their job correctly in order to travel by train I think a technological solution that does away with the need for a human operator, can be accessed easily and safely by everyone at any station at any time is actually a far better idea. Maintaining staffing levels to ensure the current poor service level is achieved instead of seeking technological ways to improve the situation just seems like a crazy thing to campaign for. Mr | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Poor service provided, way to expensive to travel on train. Union wants to protect jobs but automation would reduce jobs and costs and therefore in theory prices. You can't keep an industry in the dark ages just to keep jobs open, time to move on with driverless trains and unmanned stations How do disabled people board trains at unstaffed stations?? We don't have level boarding in the UK. Every single station requires manual ramps to be provided and I often need a push due to the steep incline. Don't you know we should all be in our homes never moving, working, having fun? Or, heaven forbid, working! Commuting to London for conferences by wheelchair! Yikes
I'm not sure anyone is suggesting this. Given that a train is capable of moving hundreds of tonnes of equipment hundreds of miles with minimal human effort, I don't believe enabling a wheelchair to get on and off the thing is an insurmountable problem without people there to lug a cumbersome ramp along the platform.
In fact, having read your comments before about the need to be on specific trains and rely on individuals doing their job correctly in order to travel by train I think a technological solution that does away with the need for a human operator, can be accessed easily and safely by everyone at any station at any time is actually a far better idea. Maintaining staffing levels to ensure the current poor service level is achieved instead of seeking technological ways to improve the situation just seems like a crazy thing to campaign for.
Mr"A technological solution would be lovely, but with UK rail infrastructure, it's a long way away. In the meantime, attempting to run on unstaffed stations or with reduced station staff would be a disaster for people like me. The needs of disabled people are FAR away from the minds of the people who do the strategic planning for things like rail infrastructure, that much is obvious. How many squillions of pounds were spent on the new Elizabeth line? Yet, they couldn't spare a few more quid to make it level boarding at all the stations? It would have been peanuts compared to the overall cost. The lifts to platforms 13/14 at Manchester Piccadilly have been out for a week. The only way to get to those platforms is to suffer the indignity of being strapped into an evacuation chair (and I mean STRAPPED) and bounced down the stairs, while someone wrestles your wheelchair and possessions down the stairs too. It's ridiculous. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
 | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I absolutely agree that workers have the right to strike if they or their union is unable to reach a compromise but there seems to be a lot of confusion going on in this thread over what this strike is about. Basically the RMT members (mostly support staff and signallers not train drivers) are striking because network rail are trying to introduce modernisation to the networks most of which will end up meaning job losses to members in the short to medium term. Like many other public sector workers they have not had a pay rise in over two years and are now fed up with 12 years of austerity. The transport secretary Grant Shapps has by law the final word in approving any deal made but is letting the situation escalate to a strike which I can only put down to either sheer stupidity or saving his own arse by appearing ideologically right! He may also realise that if the RMT get their way, then the negotiations with the train operating companies (underwritten by the government) may go the same way and cause massive inflation. It ain’t great because 12 years of austerity and 2 of pandemic have led to massive government debt with little investment in pensions etc and that song with our exit from Europe does not bode well for the future of this kingdom "If the job can be automated then it should be. There have been offers to retrain in different skills to prevent job losses and to help people transition into new roles. Look at our trains compared with Japan. It’s crazy how far behind we are and our punctuality is awful | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I absolutely agree that workers have the right to strike if they or their union is unable to reach a compromise but there seems to be a lot of confusion going on in this thread over what this strike is about. Basically the RMT members (mostly support staff and signallers not train drivers) are striking because network rail are trying to introduce modernisation to the networks most of which will end up meaning job losses to members in the short to medium term. Like many other public sector workers they have not had a pay rise in over two years and are now fed up with 12 years of austerity. The transport secretary Grant Shapps has by law the final word in approving any deal made but is letting the situation escalate to a strike which I can only put down to either sheer stupidity or saving his own arse by appearing ideologically right! He may also realise that if the RMT get their way, then the negotiations with the train operating companies (underwritten by the government) may go the same way and cause massive inflation. It ain’t great because 12 years of austerity and 2 of pandemic have led to massive government debt with little investment in pensions etc and that song with our exit from Europe does not bode well for the future of this kingdom
If the job can be automated then it should be. There have been offers to retrain in different skills to prevent job losses and to help people transition into new roles.
Look at our trains compared with Japan. It’s crazy how far behind we are and our punctuality is awful "But, we are affected by the Victorian design of our stations and the loading gauge that was adopted to cut costs so I don’t see us investing in the kind of infrastructure the Japanese have anytime soon. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"thanks for that, made my life hell Thank the government for putting them in this position and that prick grant refusing to discuss with them " This. You're mad at the wrong people. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I do agree with their rights to walk out as a way to enact change and improve conditions for themselves, especially as the rail companies have been squeezing them for years. However it seems strange that these actions intentionally hurt the public, rather than the companies, in doing so they undermine the support that they want. In this way it’s a rather selfish act. I work in hospitality, the conditions can be awful at times, imagine if all of the pubs, bars, cafes, coffee shops, etc, all went on strike because we want an extra break and another holiday day… " You think days of lost ticket sales doesn't hurt the companies? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"It’s frustrating for sure. But what option do they have? It’s a monopoly sector so they can’t move to a competitor, but are using food banks to supplement a real terms fall in wages (something like 8% I read somewhere). We still (just) live in a democracy. This is democracy in action. Train drivers are pulling £50 to £60k so not sure why they would be using food banks. Sure, cleaners etc earn less, but that would be expected, no? Train drivers are in a different union and aren’t striking. The government includes their pay to move the average up but it’s a con. Fair comment, but nonetheless salaries of RMT staff like ticket collectors, despatchers, maintenance staff are in the mid-£30k range - comparing favourably to nurses, care staff, teachers. " Using other industries who may be in an even worse position to argue against rail workers standing up for their employment rights is not the answer. The government want people to adopt this sort of infighting between different sectors, but the ordinary railwaymen and women aren't the bad guys here. Maybe if you want to quote salaries and pay rises, look at those of the industry big cheeses and politicians. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"I absolutely agree that workers have the right to strike if they or their union is unable to reach a compromise but there seems to be a lot of confusion going on in this thread over what this strike is about. Basically the RMT members (mostly support staff and signallers not train drivers) are striking because network rail are trying to introduce modernisation to the networks most of which will end up meaning job losses to members in the short to medium term. Like many other public sector workers they have not had a pay rise in over two years and are now fed up with 12 years of austerity. The transport secretary Grant Shapps has by law the final word in approving any deal made but is letting the situation escalate to a strike which I can only put down to either sheer stupidity or saving his own arse by appearing ideologically right! He may also realise that if the RMT get their way, then the negotiations with the train operating companies (underwritten by the government) may go the same way and cause massive inflation. It ain’t great because 12 years of austerity and 2 of pandemic have led to massive government debt with little investment in pensions etc and that song with our exit from Europe does not bode well for the future of this kingdom
If the job can be automated then it should be. There have been offers to retrain in different skills to prevent job losses and to help people transition into new roles.
Look at our trains compared with Japan. It’s crazy how far behind we are and our punctuality is awful "However you or the government dress it up as "modern", closing every ticket office in England, withdrawing guards from trains or reducing the in person monitoring of track conditions with the human eye can never be a positive thing. Yet contrary to what the government is claiming, the RMT have been far from averse to embracing new technology in the industry. Comparing the uk to Japan really is an "apples and oranges" situation. Maybe we'll be one step closer when HS2 opens - but look at the reaction that has generated so far in a fair proportion of the less well informed public! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"Doing at the wrong time. Kicking the country when it's down will make things worse not better." Yeah, maybe they should wait until the redundancies, closures, real terms pay cuts and increased safety risks have taken effect before they protest. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
"They are striking because of threats to jobs and changes to terms and conditions. The media tell you its all about pay rises, and you call them greedy bastards. You’d do exactly the same if your employer wanted to make you redundant or enforce you work more hours, more weekends, more nights. If you wouldn’t, then more fool you. The RMT are just the first to have a go. I’d imagine many more unions will follow suit. Remember, many perks of today’s employment (annual leave, sick pay etc) were fought for and won by unions ????" That's exactly what happened with the junior doctors. The new contract wanted 7 days of non-emergency service as well as emergency service but with no extra staff. It was unsafe and frankly rediculous as they had put no thought into the knock on effect across the entire sector. Who would do the extra cleaning? Who would provide the extra admin support? Yes part of the contract also meant they would be getting paid less for the same work which I think most people would find unfair to be paid so much one week and the next week be paid less for the exact same shift. However, the strike was mostly about the patient safety concerns as staffing is already stretched without trying to provide all services 7 days per week. The media just focused on the wages though and the general public went "doctors get paid enough as it is". | |||
(closed, thread got too big) | |||
| Reply privately |
| back to top |  |
