are industrial disputes ever legit?

julieq

abaxas wrote: »

Agreed,

But you can use attendance as a method of deciding who is going to go.

They may be linked, but they are not the same.

If the time off was linked to official strike action and the employee was made redundant on that sole basis in preference to a non-union employee, it would be viewed as indirect discrimination. Employment law is careful to ensure that indirect discrimination isn't possible.

Unofficial strikes are a different question altogether, as would be time off sick. Also it is sometimes possible for non-contractual benefits to be removed from strikers, as BA rather amusingly did with their cabin crews' travel perks, though I think that was reversed.

Employment law is generally very sensible and well balanced. That's one of the reasons it's not used that much. We all benefit from it, and that is one of very positive effects of the Trades Unions.

Wookster

Industrial action is justified in some situations.

Like Vivatifosi has said though, I cannot support any industrial action undertaken in the UK in the last 5 years.

It seems to me that Unions are run in the same way the banks are - only ever looking at the short term benefits, meaning that they might screw employers for a short term pay rise that pushes the company into bankruptcy... or they might strike for the government to spend money it simply doesn't have with no consideration as to the long term effects of over spending (see Ireland/ Greece for the worst examples).

Unions have a position of responsibility but their conduct is anything but. Its time for them to realise that they need to be on a mission to make their workforces work as efficiently as possible with their employers to secure long term stability rather than short term f.eckless gain.

ILW

AndyGuil wrote: »

Automate the underground completely like they do in other countries, bring it into the 21st century.

That would solve a lot of problems, and make the system more reliable.