are industrial disputes ever legit?

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

That had already happened. Scargill at that time specifically wanted to destroy a democratically elected Government.
.

Somehow I don't think so.

In the 1980s and 90s, mining engineers who had spent all their working lives keeping pits running safely were given the task of now closing them down with a dreadful finality.
"When a pit is shut it's shut for good," says engineer Bob Matthews who rode the last cage out of Cotgrave colliery in Nottinghamshire in 1993.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3514549.stm

StevieJ

ILW wrote: »

Think your idea that 99% of the workforce getting boxing day off is way off the mark. Things have changed a lot over the last 30 years and it appears it is mainly the old unionised public sector that think they should be treated differently.
This is only anecdotal, but many of my family and friends work in Care, Retail, Police, and such things as road maintenance (gritting). Might have been a bit dodgy for many (not to mention life threatening) if they had all decided to "take the day off" as the tube drivers did.

I think the police,hospitals, gritters etc were also working 30 years ago, if needed.

ILW

StevieJ wrote: »

I think the police,hospitals, gritters etc were also working 30 years ago, if needed.

True, but the shops now open on boxing day, hence the need for tube drivers.

StevieJ

ILW wrote: »

True, but the shops now open on boxing day, hence the need for tube drivers.

The shops were always open on boxing day, not to mention the football and the racing. I was going to Old Trafford and did notice that Piccadilly station in Manchester was closed but the trams and buses were still running, does that mean the trains were not running?

julieq

markharding557 wrote: »

You're wrong workplaces with unions usually have better conditions than non unionised and less unfair sackings

Totally untrue. EHS is enforced by law (and possibly even more importantly by the fear of litigation), not by union scrutiny, and there is very stringent legislation around "hiring and firing".

Though arguably the unions had a strong role in raising the profile of both aspects of employment law.

riverboat2001

Okay, i'm not really asking for a fight just offering my point of view as requested by the OP.
Both Hubby and I work for LUL he for 24 years and me for 18.

I can't really comment too much about drivers dispute because that's not my area. But the general opinion that monkeys could drive trains is rather unfair. Drivers aren't trained for 3 months and paid 40k to sit in the cab and drive the train. They are trained for what to do when things go wrong, like one unders, bombs,derailments, stuck in tunnels for hours in the heat, delivering babies, identifying and fixing faults on thier trains when stuck in a tunnel,,,,etc ect, as each busy carriage holds over 1000 people, that's a lot of lives he/she may be responsible for. Who would you rather have driving your train?

I personally work on the stations, and have done for over 12 years, it is heart wrenching to see what was once a great company to be proud of bought to it's knees by bean counters who wouldn't know Customer Service if it bit them on the !!!!!

The current round of strikes is over HUGE job cuts, these are front line staff.
Already because of an overtime ban lots of stations are being left totally unmanned due to the lack of staff now!

My mum is 67 and regularly travels alone at night on the tube, and it worries me what would happen if she had a problem and there was no member of staff there to help.

Do i strike? yes. Do i agree with every strike, no, not at all....I haven't voted for a pay rise for over five years.

But i do think Bob Crowe needs to lose the chip on his shoulder and put across his point in a calm and succinct manner.

I also think BoJo should stick to his election promise to actually sit down with unions and create a no strike deal.

I can assure you LUL front line staff would love nothing more...we have mortgages too!

timbo58

ILW wrote: »

Not bad for a job that any fairly bright person could learn to do in three months.

not sure I would want someone who hadn't had proper training in full safety responsibility of hundreds of people with only 3 months training.
It takes a lot longer to learn to drive properly and not a job that just anyone could do either IME.
£44k is not a huge wage for a skilled inner london job IMHO.

Back on subject: most industrial action never actually takes place, but the threat of it being taken often keeps a poor management at the table for discussion.

I only talk from 15 yrs of experience in the rail industry where IME & IMHO management are largely target driven by senior directors who must enjoy brinkmanship as they lurch from one dispute crisis to another as they attempt to backtrack and ignore long standing agreements.

C_Mababejive

Of course there are plenty of circumstances where industrial action is justified.

Management in many sectors of industry try to exploit workers in many ways be it pay,working hours,rest breaks and safety issues.

People actually die and become ill at work in the UK.

If you happen to work in a cosy office or have a high grade management job then you may not know this.

Derivative

If your management is breaking the law, then sue.
The days of the Radium Girls are long gone.

Striking is more likely to make you look bad in the eyes of the public and your employer.
I know when I turn on the news and see cabin staff whining about 16 instead of 17 staff or whatever I think what a bunch of cocks, we have millions in this country trying to find work and you're being a !!!!ant.

olly300

EdgEy wrote: »

If your management is breaking the law, then sue.
The days of the Radium Girls are long gone.

Easier said then done.

If you know non-unionised people who have had personal employment disputes in any sector you would know unless the dispute would be of interest to the media, management have the upper hand due to having more money.

One reason people join unions, and one reason unions threaten to go on strike if they find an issue affects a lot of people.

I know of companies where the simple act of workers joining a union and then having union reps made the management comply with H&S legislation. For example it's very common for places to block or even lock fire exits - being a worker and complaining won't do anything but having a union rep to complain to gets the issue sorted.

One reason why some companies use to ban workers in the UK joining unions before the law changed is they didn't want their bad and illegal practises to be opened up to scrutiny.

EdgEy wrote: »

Striking is more likely to make you look bad in the eyes of the public and your employer.

Not necessarily if the reason you are going on strike is logical and can be explained.

You have to remember who owns media outlets and the fact that lots of media people are freelance so aren't unionised.

EdgEy wrote: »

I know when I turn on the news and see cabin staff whining about 16 instead of 17 staff or whatever I think what a bunch of cocks, we have millions in this country trying to find work and you're being a !!!!ant.

If there is a safety reason why they are striking then I'm all ears. Would you seriously like to be on a plane without enough crew to ensure you are safe?

However I don't believe what is reported in the media or what top union reps say as both have their own agendas. I do tend to believe individual workers and reps lower down the food chain.