why is there so much hostility towards trades unions here?

simongregson

adr0ck wrote: »

one important point - some unions stop their members getting jobs by not allowing them to take a pay cut when they would be perfectly happy to take one (if it meant actually getting a job) - this is going on with the teachers union quite a bit at the moment

Which teacher's union is that then? There are national pay scales for teachers and a national contract and conditions of service, so the union would be doing their job in protecting the contract of all of their members, who might well be the next in line for a similar pay cut. The only schools not covered by this are academies and these mostly pay the same rate or better, otherwise all their decent staff would leave!

I have to say that as somebody involved in a trade union (a role incidentally I don't get paid for) our main objective is to secure good industrial relations, we do this by discussing our members concerns and often a compromise is needed to solve the problem. By acting together we prevent our members from being exploited as individually they are not in a position to do this. I have never been on strike because I have never had to.

Now, imagine some of the commentors on this thread running a company and you can see why the braziers would be burning!

Thrugelmir

simongregson wrote: »

Now, imagine some of the commentors on this thread running a company and you can see why the braziers would be burning!

Very assumptive comment.

smamst

I got bullied to join a Union by a colleague who was the Union representative where I used to work, and it was a case that if you didn't join we will make your life a misery.

She our union rep was a raving lunatic alcoholic but the management just couldn't get rid of her. Trust me she was in her 50s and just plain scary.

Snooze

donaldtramp wrote: »

Trade unions whole mission is to drag everyone down to the lowest denominator.
They "protect" jobs by strangling companies to protect employees from the inevitable march of technology and change in society. This leads to companies closing down, EVERYBODY losing their jobs and Britain as a whole suffering.
Look at British Leyland (everyone was on strike almost all day every day), The Post Office standing up for outdated working practices that should have gone in the seventies, holding back installation of new equipment that would allow the Royal mail to compete in the modern world.
In the private sector where I work, NOBODY is a member of a union. If you don't like the job/pay/conditions YOU have to do something about it rather than holding people/our country to ransom.
Unions are determined to hold back change and improvement in our society by force and this government has cowed down to them for too long.
If everyone went out and did their job the very best they could and didn't complain about what they didn't have and entitlements they weren't getting, Britain would be a better place.
As for the unions being democratic, don't make me laugh. It's the only place where communists and people with pictures of Lenin rise to the top. For example Bob Crowe.

Agreed. Unions just protect the idle and lazy from ever having to do a proper days work. It's simple, if you don't like the terms of your job then leave and go and find one you do like.

R

Danstar_2

Snooze wrote: »

Agreed. Unions just protect the idle and lazy from ever having to do a proper days work. It's simple, if you don't like the terms of your job then leave and go and find one you do like.

R

Exactly, we are moving to a free-er market. Your pay and conditions reflect this. Unions are a form of communism for laborers.

If you are unhappy with current pay and conditions you can ask for a pay rise/improvements - if this is denied then you have three options:

1 - Believe you are at your current market value and stick with them or;

2 - Believe you are better than this and seek 'better' employment elsewhere as your market value allows this or;

3 - Improve your market value through education/training/qualifications


Thatcher gets a lot of stick for what she did but, bar the unpopular but fair poll tax, she sorted out the communist entrechments of trade unions in our economy.

Which recession would you rather be in - 1970's with unemployment, strikes, 3 day working week and the country on meltdown or 2007-9 with the prospect of growth likely and considerably less unemployment and, generally, less striking.

nickmason

Don't forget to look out for laws of unintended consequences....
In a unionised workplace, non union members suffer. Particularly as HR naturally side with management, as the union sides with (member) employees. Nothing malicious or malevolent, but that is not certainly my experience.

torontoboy45

Danstar wrote: »

Exactly, we are moving to a free-er market. Your pay and conditions reflect this. Unions are a form of communism for laborers.

If you are unhappy with current pay and conditions you can ask for a pay rise/improvements - if this is denied then you have three options:

1 - Believe you are at your current market value and stick with them or;

2 - Believe you are better than this and seek 'better' employment elsewhere as your market value allows this or;

3 - Improve your market value through education/training/qualifications


Thatcher gets a lot of stick for what she did but, bar the unpopular but fair poll tax, she sorted out the communist entrechments of trade unions in our economy.

Which recession would you rather be in - 1970's with unemployment, strikes, 3 day working week and the country on meltdown or 2007-9 with the prospect of growth likely and considerably less unemployment and, generally, less striking.

y'see, this kind of comment is typical of what I half-expected here: trade unionists = communists. constant harking back to the 70's.

reasoned and balanced exchange of views? nah. how could I have been so bloody naive, expecting people to post without wheeling out history?

along with others you obviously didnt read my OP properly.

re yr 3 options: the 4th option is to withdraw labour, which is my right under law.

christ, I wish I'd never asked the question.

Generali

I think a part of the problem people have with unions was they didn't reform themselves and there has no recognition of which I am aware of the appalling behaviour they allowed employees in the past. Every reform was bitterly resented and AFAIK still is.

The TUC (link) wants a return to secondary strike action, a ban on the use of replacement labour and access to company data to enable the union to identify all workers (presumably) regardless of whether or not they wish their data to be accessed.

On a more personal level, a friend of mine was bullied out of a union recently because she started a relationship with someone who was rich. She took a short flight in a private plane for which she was villified, bullied and ultimately was asked to leave the union. Thankfully we're not back to the days of the closed shop as in the 1970s she'd have lost her job for not being a member of the union.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

In the 1970's all the clueless, upstart, arrogant, confrontational, self destructive, talentless jumped up little sh1ts became union reps.

Today they become health and safety inspectors instead.;)

But seriously, Unions are dying. There is no place for them in a free market. Labour is a commodity. You should sell it to who you wish at a market price. If you think you can get a better deal, go elsewhere. If I can get a better deal by switching to a different provider of labour, I should be able to do so too.

ThrowingStonesAtYou

torontoboy45 wrote: »

re yr 3 options: the 4th option is to withdraw labour, which is my right under law.

If you mean hand in your notice and pi55 off and let somebody else who wants to work have your job instead, I am quite happy with this.