Is it only me???

angiebhfx

jdturk wrote: »

Seems to me that they were reducing staffing levels due to neccessity and maybe they thought that purely just defending themselves may cost more than the extra 6 weeks pay?

My job was important they couldn't produce monthly management reports stop branch cash theft without me doing my job, I did bank reconciliations on a system whereby each deposit had to be matched against the nominal ledger this had to be done manually and no-one else knew how to do this job, so a) how could they make a decision that my job was redundant when they didn't know what I did and b) how could it be redundant when that particular role still needed to be done it couldn't be bypassed without installing a new computer system which would have cost more than my salary.

They singled me out and IMO I believe it's because I knew my rights and I wouldn't tow the line. If they believed they were in the right then they could have defended themselves at tribunal and I would have left empty handed.

angiebhfx

Diesel44 wrote: »

Health and safety is a big thing these days.
Hourly week limited to 48 hours, with an opt out option.
Safety clothing.
Risk assessment on all jobs.
Food breaks in a proper canteen enviroment.
The correct tools and training for the correct job.
Well it is where I work.

I know and agree with you but companies have to stump up this cost because they not only have a legal obligation but a moral one to, to protect their staff and their customers.

Incidentally we never had a canteen or a place we could go and sit to eat our lunch and we were more than a mile away from an establishment where we could eat hot food inside so I think if they had a visit from Environmental Health Services they would have been told they were breaking the regulations for banning the consumption of hot food on the premises.

My employee had an a clause in their contract whereby when you singed the contract you automatically opted out of the 48 hour per week rule. I was the only person it seems that read my contract understood the clause and opted back in.

I think we have forgotten that "we work to live and not that we live to work although I think some employers would like us to think it's the other way around.

angiebhfx

Thank you everyone for taking the time to add your comments. I really enjoy a good debate. You have your opinions and I respect that. I can learn something from other people and I am more likely to get the truth from experiences than I am from watching the news or reading the papers, both I think are full of spin more so than in politics. So again thanks. I look forward to reading more comments later on.

Best regards

Angie

angiebhfx

hermum wrote: »

Maybe not all of us like being held to ransom by people who want to call a strike because they can't get their own ways, if it was a child it would be called a tantrum.
Don't like your job, your conditions, your employer, find another, that does suit.

I have always looked for other jobs if I am unhappy and moved on. I usually move on after a couple of years anyway otherwise I stop learning because I become too complacent which eventually leads to boredom. However, I have a lot of experience and I have been lucky to get seven interviews in recent times, however I have not managed to secure employment at this time.

I have always been good at being interviewed and have usually secured employment on the first interview I have gone for, but in today economic climate there are people out there that have more qualifications, more experience and are cheaper than I am despite the fact I have lowered my salary expectations. Employer criteria has become much narrower and if you haven't say, used a particular piece of software for e.g then you will be discounted. It's a lot more difficult so your argument isn't as straight forward as you would imagine at the moment.

I took a risk, excepted redundancy when I could have fought, thought I would secure employment but haven't and as a result I have lost my home and have had to declare myself bankrupt. Had I known this would happen before I excepted the redundancy then I probably would have fought but a part of me believes that had I won then my place at the company would have become untenable and my life would have become a misery so I am not sure that the outcome would have been any different only delayed.

fleagle21

angiebhfx wrote: »

BA cabin crew are fighting for there pay and conditions.

Try being in the British forces in afghanistan... and before anyone says, "they can just leave if they don't like it" if all of them decided to do that it would be back to national service. THEN people would know what poor pay and conditions were, with no option whatsoever to strike.

fleagle21

angiebhfx wrote: »

.I took a risk, excepted redundancy when I could have fought, thought I would secure employment but haven't and as a result I have lost my home and have had to declare myself bankrupt.

Sorry to hear that though hope you find a way through it all soon

frivolous_fay

I can't speak for all unions, but the London Ungerground workers and their interminable tantrums left a bad taste in my mouth. I seem to recall one or two of the incidents were due to 1) staff being disciplined because beer cans had been found at an office 2) a guy being fired because he was caught playing squash while on the sick with a gammy leg. I could be wrong, it might have been all about the money.

(Not work safe)
http://www.last.fm/music/Amateur+Transplants/_/London+Underground

angiebhfx

fleagle21 wrote: »

Try being in the British forces in afghanistan... and before anyone says, "they can just leave if they don't like it" if all of them decided to do that it would be back to national service. THEN people would know what poor pay and conditions were, with no option whatsoever to strike.

Fleagle I know what poor pay and conditions our armed forces have and I think it's a total disgrace. I don't think the government is honest enough when it comes to try and recruit our soldiers. Families live in second rate accommodation pay is rubbish it's a very tough job and you could die. I also think it's very misleading that when you come out you should be able to walk into a job - not true. And at the end of it all the people they tend to recruit are young vulnerable and generally naive people that don't yet get that life can be sh.te!!!

Soldiers should have the same rights as civilians do but as the military seems to like to do it's business behind close doors then I assume that you don't. I feel for all our service men and women where ever they serve. Whish there was something I could suggest you do to highlight their plight. Somehow can't see their being allowed to have a union.

As there is no national service people make a choice to go into the armed forces and there is those that choose not to. Shouldn't mean that those that haven't shouldn't have the liberty to protest.

Am I correct in assuming that you are a soldier or you know someone who is? If so knowing what you/they know now would you /they still have joined up?

angiebhfx

fleagle21 wrote: »

Sorry to hear that though hope you find a way through it all soon

Thank you that is very nice of you.

My attitude is every cloud... I am a lot happier now I am not working at that company. I am young enough for it not to make to big of an impact on me financially and now I have to just look forward, I lost a possession that's all but I have learnt a lot of valuable lessons. I will hopefully be able to help other people in similar positions if i manage to become a CAB adviser.

meritaten

Horace wrote: »

I am an ex-branch secretary of Unison, I used to work in the higher education sector. Unions have their place when it comes to dealing with disciplinaries, grievances, health & safety, pay negotiation but there are those unions that want to call strikes because they can. I know that when Unite called a strike and expected us to follow - we didnt because it was better to work to rule than it was to go without pay.

BA's staff were asked to take a pay cut and in some instances work without pay - those on the ground accepted but those in the air chose to strike forgetting that the ground staff didnt have the same perks as them e.g. staying in 5* hotels on stopover with spending money. What has happened is that there is now an us and them situation between all the staff at BA, those who took a pay cut and those that didnt and then went on strike.

It should be remembered that the union personnel who call the strike are often full time paid officials of the union (getting a fantastic salary unlike those that they represent who are on lesser pay), they get paid no matter what but the union member doesnt get paid for striking.

I also remember what it was like in the 70's when the unions brought this country to its knees..miners strikes meaning that we had regular power cuts, bins weren't emptied, the dead remained unburied, our once great car industry - now defunct because of strikes every 5 minutes.

Thankfully, I am no longer in a union and would never join one again, we used to be put under enormous pressure to go on strike in support of the NHS or whoever even though it was not in the interest of our members but it was something that the union wanted us to do.

how on earth can you blame the miners for the dead going unburied and bins not being emptied? if this is an example of your logic then I am sure Unison are extremely grateful you are no longer a branch secretary. and your attitude stinks by the way - Unison represent a great number of people who are underpaid and overworked and I can just bet you were one of those Union reps who told them ' the management are cutting wages we have agreed to that as you should all be grateful you have jobs'!!!
oh and your job in Unison - Well paid was it?and did you follow the time honoured tradition of Union reps who @rselick management and get a nice well paying sinecure in Industry???