why is there so much hostility towards trades unions here?

C_Mababejive

Unions are not the same animal as they were in the beer n sandwiches at number 10 days of the 1970's.

Modern unions are indeed very necessary for the protection of large groups of workers who would otherwise be exploited by aggressive companies and individual managers.

They are also necessary to provide support and collective bargaining for large groups of workers.

Collective bargaining actually assists most companies becuase the whole process is simplified and relationships are much more productive and co operative.

There are many people, some of them on MSE,who think that unions are just for men in overalls and for those in low grade/low paid jobs.

This is not the case.

I tell you that there are very few of us who could not be exposed to exploitation. Do not think that becuase you wear a suit to work or nibble a biro all day,that you are a "cut above" the Proletariat.

Unless your are at or near the top of the pecking order,there is always the chance that someone above,will sh*t on you in order to preserve their own position i times of crisis.

Even in my own company,a major blue chip international,there is danger of unfair treatment and exploitation and it is sometimes only the strength of character of the individual or support of a union which prevents encroachment.

As for free market economy blah blah blah..this is the kind of thing uttered by people who despise tradesmen and workers who they think are beneath them. sure lets have a free market then. Lets have a flood of Eastern blockers to do the so called "professional" jobs thus undercutting those people and disturbing their Guardian reading,insulated ,Quorn chomping middle England existences.

Generali

C_Mababejive wrote: »

Unions are not the same animal as they were in the beer n sandwiches at number 10 days of the 1970's.

Going back to the OP, I think the heart of the matter is that most people simply don't believe this and that if given half a chance they'd be trying to run the country again.

When the Tories won the General Election in 1987, Arthur Scargill called for a general strike to topple them !!!!!!. That's not that long ago!

ukcarper

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

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.

That would be true if there was full employment Goverments like a good level of unemployement so they can hold down wages

vivatifosi

Wookster wrote: »

Union actions at BA, Royal Mail and the London Underground in recent times show the utter disconnect between Unions and the real world.

They don't understand that there is a market, with real alternatives (aside of the Tube) and that by striking they are destroying the chances of the people they claim to represent.

A mate of mine at BA says the cabin crew are striking so that they can go and work with Ryan Air after BA goes bust :rotfl:

BA is an interesting case Wookster. You can't look at BA and see it as an argument one way or another. People who work there are represented by different unions which have taken different approaches to how they interact with the management. BALPA, the pilot's union agreed their way forward ages ago, and cabin crew at Gatwick and Heathrow are on different contracts. It isn't a one size fits all argument, or union response.

C_Mababejive

Generali wrote: »

Going back to the OP, I think the heart of the matter is that most people simply don't believe this and that if given half a chance they'd be trying to run the country again.

When the Tories won the General Election in 1987, Arthur Scargill called for a general strike to topple them !!!!!!. That's not that long ago!

Indeed..heady days...but who is worse? Thousands of ordinary hard working men who did a very dangerous job,hundreds of feet under the ground. Honest sweat,black skin,lung disease,bringing home an honest hard won days pay to their families..simply trying to defend their industry and way of life..

Or


The country, HM government and every single one of us being held to ransom by the curious and devious machinations of bankers who have wrecked the UK economy,escaped with the profits,have blackmailed HM government into bailing them out with an open chequebook AND,wait for it,every single one of us will pay the price now and for the next two decades whilst the champagne charlies live the high life.

Which situation has more honesty and justice about it?

Ordinary working people are just that. They largely know their place and only strike or take dramatic action as an action of last resort. any why? becuase it is the only course of action left open to them.

The economy of this country is now built on foundations about as solid as those which threaten Venice.

We now have to import gas and coal to burn as a primary fuel for our homes or to shovel into power stations.

kennyboy66_2

If unions are inherently evil as so many posters seem to believe, why was Germany so sucessful post war in creating a highly productive manufacturing economy.

They also had strong unions (although the numbers in unions in Germany are considerably diminished).

What about unions in places like Toyota (Derby) and Nissan (Sunderland) or Honda (Swindon), where despite all the car-industry problems these plants are amongst the most productive in Europe.

the_ash_and_the_oak

ukcarper wrote: »

That would be true if there was full employment Goverments like a good level of unemployement so they can hold down wages

This is the purpose of unemployment imo and precisely why any stated aims to reduce unemployment are a little disingenuous (though not aims to prevent increased unemployment)

lemonjelly

To me, unions are a bit of a mish-mash. They seem to have lost direction a little.

Some are stuck in the olden days, not exactly looking forwards. There are unions who look to maitain the status quo. A mistake in my eyes.

Also, unions are less certain as to what their role entails, with organisations like the toothless HSE.

They've had a bad press recently. Look at the fire service strike a few years ago. They seemed to be doing ok with their media campaign, then their leader stated publicly they wanted a 40% pay increase. Public support plummeted. I have a mate who is in the fire service, & we debated the strike many times. Whilst there were some points they had, they completely lost it with unreasonable demands.

Unions which see themselves as an evolving organisation have a role to play imo, particularly where they actively do seek to work in co-operation with employers to the benefit of employees & their members.

Regarding union reps, there are some good ones out there, but unfortunately a lot of bad ones too, who are in it to look out for themselves. I also feel that in some places management sideline reps, & do all they can to get them onside to their own ends.

A mate of mine works for a union. He has advised me that there are some quite draconian working practices there - not at all what was anticipated when he applied for the job. Management appears not good from what I am told.

They also appear to be struggling with subscriptions.

I wonder to what extent people are looking to cancel subscriptions to make savings in the current climate?

One last thing, there may be a time where you urgently need someone like a good union rep. I have had a situation myself where I was reliant on someone who knew employment law very well, & consider myself SO fortunate to have had their support at a difficult time. Had I not had that support, I could have been royally stitched up. Not only that, their moral support really lifted my spirits, making me aware I wasn't alone in believing a situation was unjust, & illegal. There may well be times for many readers of this thread where you need that kind of support.

I dread to think what could have happened to me had I not had it.

abaxas

People hate unions as they do not create wealth, they exist only to destroy it.

Wookster

vivatifosi wrote: »

BA is an interesting case Wookster. You can't look at BA and see it as an argument one way or another. People who work there are represented by different unions which have taken different approaches to how they interact with the management. BALPA, the pilot's union agreed their way forward ages ago, and cabin crew at Gatwick and Heathrow are on different contracts. It isn't a one size fits all argument, or union response.

I wasn't referring to the pilots or to other staff, just to the cabin crew who have recently balloted to strike. They just don't get that BA is in real trouble, really could fail and their actions aren't helping make BA competitive.