Going on strike whilst on probation

jdturk

KME91 wrote: »

I have a case on my desk right now helping a member on probation, who took part in the strike action. we will defend all of our members regardless of how long they have been employed or whatever their employment position is.

Would you believe your member everytime if they said they were getting sacked because of their involvement in a strike or would you investigate as to whether or not they just were not upto the job.

annaleese

Aside from the point, I think you are right to strike and stand up for something you believe in. All too often recent generations have been far to relaxed. The 70's were full of people on strike!

Pete111

annaleese wrote: »

Aside from the point, I think you are right to strike and stand up for something you believe in. All too often recent generations have been far to relaxed. The 70's were full of people on strike!

Yes and what a golden age of prosperity and utopian living standards that was....:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

I'm sure their principles alone will keep the wolf from the door when the airline goes belly up and they lose their jobs. Also, I hear indignant self rightousness provides a warming glow that will no doubt help when these potentially soon to be ex-employees of a bankrupt airline can't afford to turn the heating on next winter....

bezzza

And so continues my rant on MY opinion of unions....

In this climate a strike gets you nothing but disgust from those of us unlucky enough to have already suffered the indignity of being made redundant over 18 months ago with no job in sight - will the union feed their members and their families like the miners union did (oh wait, they didn't!) - look how that turned out! As for the members who voted for the action, will they honour and respect those others who choose to fed and clothe and keep their families warm at night or will that dreaded word "scabs" raise its ugly head again - its all very well unions backing strike action as they get paid through everybody's dues - do the members get paid at full rate from this fund when attending strikes (I know for a fact they do not!). The union should encourage people back to work and to offer a solution to the problems and not the old "everybody out" mentality - with this current economy (recession over, my a**e!) jobs will be lost, some can be saved but some can't - where do you want the money to come from - reducing union dues maybe? Members wouldn't have to pay so much if the unions weren't so busy fighting breaches of contract for employees with less then 12 months service, would they? Rant over, back to the job hunting

Fridge3

KME91 wrote: »

and unions don't force people to take part in strikes. union members vote in favour of strikes. or not. the union acts on the wishes of the majority of the members. if they didn't want to go out on strike they wouldn't have voted for it. they did and they are. not only did they vote for it, but every member had the chance to go to a consultation meeting to consider whether or not there should even be a ballot on strike action. this action is coming very much from the members.

subsoniccoyote wrote: »

Around 1/3 of the members voted actually.

Approx 2/3 of these members voted for strike and 4/5 voted for other action short of strike.

Fridge3 wrote: »

So around 22% of PCS members voted to strike. Of course, that's not 22% of Civil Servants because not all are members of PCS or indeed any union so hardly represenative.

What happened to action short of strike?

Horace

Scab is a word that PCS likes to use if someone dares cross one of their picket lines.

PCS like other unions like to bang on about equal work for equal pay but when their employers start to implement these rules then they start whinging and going on strike. The trouble with the civil service is that it needs to be trimmed..it is a huge monster with people employed to shuffle paper and not do an awful lot. What needs to happen with the civil service is that they need to bring back the civil service entrance exam and that way they can employ better staff than those who are often illiterate and plain yes men. I certainly do not see PCS standing up for a probationer who could lose his/her job for going on strike - are you going to pay his/her wages? Don't forget to tell your members that when they go on strike they are not getting paid.

Fridge3

tcr wrote: »

PCS have already said fixed term/casual staff can go into work on strike days, without let or hindrance.

So the point of this thread is what, exactly ?

I don't think the OP falls into either of these catergories.

Fridge3

Horace wrote: »

Scab is a word that PCS likes to use if someone dares cross one of their picket lines.

PCS like other unions like to bang on about equal work for equal pay but when their employers start to implement these rules then they start whinging and going on strike. The trouble with the civil service is that it needs to be trimmed..it is a huge monster with people employed to shuffle paper and not do an awful lot. What needs to happen with the civil service is that they need to bring back the civil service entrance exam and that way they can employ better staff than those who are often illiterate and plain yes men. I certainly do not see PCS standing up for a probationer who could lose his/her job for going on strike - are you going to pay his/her wages? Don't forget to tell your members that when they go on strike they are not getting paid.

Be sure to vote on both polls

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2348267

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.html?t=2353245

viktory

mountainofdebt wrote: »

tbh I would take a day's holiday rather than run the risk of failing the probation.

Yes this might seem as a cowards way out but at the end of the day, would your colleagues support YOU if you failed your probation ?

Very short notice for leave. It could well be refused.

Savvy_Sue wrote: »

I didn't think you could normally book holiday for the day of a planned strike? Or maybe that was just where I worked.

Same where I work.

Fridge3

KME91 wrote: »

PCS hasn't created any situation. the government created the situation when they tried to shaft hundreds of thousands of poorly paid workers.

PCS, like all unions are good at plucking exceptional headline figures and implying that they apply accross the board. IIRC, tens of thousands reduction in redundancy was quoted.

So, care to add any context to that rather than headline figures?

How about you post some redundancy figures under current T&C's and comparable figures for the proposed T&C's for the following examples? Completeing the blanks in red together with how many affected employees would provide quite a representative cross section but feel free to add more.

• Lowest salary (what is this) and 2 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• Lowest salary (what is this) and 5 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• Lowest salary (what is this)and 10 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• Lowest salary (what is this) and 20 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• Lowest salary (what is this) and 30 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's

• £15k salary and 2 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £15k salary and 5 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £15k salary and 10 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £15k salary and 20 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £15k salary and 30 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's

• £20k salary and 2 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £20k salary and 5 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £20k salary and 10 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £20k salary and 20 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £20k salary and 30 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's

• £30k salary and 2 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £30k salary and 5 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £30k salary and 10 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £30k salary and 20 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £30k salary and 30 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&Cs

• £40k salary and 2 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £40k salary and 5 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £40k salary and 10 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £40k salary and 20 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's
• £40k salary and 30 years employment - £ redundancy current T&C's; £ redundancy proposed T&C's