We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

Debate House Prices


In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

British Work Ethic Condemned

1568101113

Comments

  • birkee
    birkee Posts: 1,933 Forumite
    diable wrote: »
    What was the reason for allowing them to screw you for 3 years?

    Would have thought the answer was obvious.
    Return to original post.

    It's better to be screwed in a job for three years, than stand on principle, and not be screwed on JSA.

    You put up with it until you find alternative employment.
  • ninky_2
    ninky_2 Posts: 5,872 Forumite
    edited 23 May 2011 at 5:59AM
    Cleaver wrote: »
    I would question this statement.

    the pr job done against the unions seems more to be about resentment of political funding than any rational thinking. it's the flip side of the coin that sees all banking as evil.

    it seems no coincidence to me that the removal of unionised labour has gone hand in hand with the rise of benefit culture. unions were (are) full of people with a pride in working.
    Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron
  • abaxas
    abaxas Posts: 4,141 Forumite
    ninky wrote: »
    unions were (are) full of people with a pride in working.

    Keep off the crack and get some help.
  • Generali
    Generali Posts: 36,411 Forumite
    10,000 Posts Combo Breaker
    Do unions increase productivity? Maybe according to The Economist:
    IF YOU'VE ever spent time in a union shop, in America at least, it's hard to believe they do. It is not that union workers are lazy, a favourite canard of the right; at least in my experience, union workers are higher quality than you would expect for the job they are doing. However, unions often offer resistance to new work processes that might increase efficiency, and not just ones that would decrease labour demand....

    ....an excess supply of [New York-based electricians who are] union members over available work, which gives the least competent room to sink out of the labour pool, as well as forcing them to compete with each other to hold the available jobs.

    This may explain why some unions are equally well known for their lack of productivity; the American teachers' unions are generally believed (by everyone outside of the teachers' unions) to be the primary obstacle to improving America's appalling public schools.[continues]

    The fact is that if you do more work for the same money you are by definition more productive, as long as the work you are doing is useful in some way.
  • ninky_2
    ninky_2 Posts: 5,872 Forumite
    Generali wrote: »
    Do unions increase productivity? Maybe according to The Economist:



    The fact is that if you do more work for the same money you are by definition more productive, as long as the work you are doing is useful in some way.

    it is true that unions can be resistant to change - the luddite mentality as it were. however i think overall this is overhyped as an issue. management can also be resistant to change. in fact generally the majority of humans are a bit change resistant.

    the only times unions resist change is if they think it is i their interests to do so. in many cases they are the instigators of change.

    any organisation or vested interest is going to slow the process of decision making. you could say the same about the banks and resisting regulation.

    imho the important thing in any economic system is to have a balance of vested interests so that there is no clear front runner as this increases the output of everyone. if we look at it like a race, if there is one clear front runner the others will likely give up somewhat and the front runner won't push themselves. if you have a more even field all the competitors are likely to go flat out as they see themselves as having a realistic chance of winning (or losing). one way of doing this in a free market economy is to allow the interests of capital and labour to be more closely matched in the ways they are allowed to express themselves. unions are a vital part of this.
    Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron
  • bendix
    bendix Posts: 5,499 Forumite
    ninky wrote: »
    unions were (are) full of people with a pride in working.

    I'm very impressed you managed to say that with a straight face.
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    ninky wrote: »
    the pr job done against the unions seems more to be about resentment of political funding than any rational thinking. it's the flip side of the coin that sees all banking as evil.

    it seems no coincidence to me that the removal of unionised labour has gone hand in hand with the rise of benefit culture. unions were (are) full of people with a pride in working.

    I remember the late 70s early 80s where much of the industrial unrest was caused by unions fighting each other.
  • ninky_2
    ninky_2 Posts: 5,872 Forumite
    bendix wrote: »
    I'm very impressed you managed to say that with a straight face.


    i presume some of the people at your esteemed firm are members of the law society and manage to do something resembling work?
    Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron
  • ninky_2
    ninky_2 Posts: 5,872 Forumite
    ILW wrote: »
    I remember the late 70s early 80s where much of the industrial unrest was caused by unions fighting each other.


    so what? families sometimes fight each other. should we do away with them too?
    Those who will not reason, are bigots, those who cannot, are fools, and those who dare not, are slaves. - Lord Byron
  • ILW
    ILW Posts: 18,333 Forumite
    ninky wrote: »
    so what? families sometimes fight each other. should we do away with them too?

    I was just addressing your assumption that unionised businesses tend to run more smoothly. It was/is quite often not the case.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.3K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 601K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 259.1K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.7K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.