Strikes to go ahead

LydiaJ

torontoboy45 wrote: »

the issue relates to the emotional subject of pensions; I'm not sure if the teaching profession are 'as one' in toppling - a la scargill - a government.

I really don't get your reasoning on this. are you suggesting that teacher unions are headed up by scargill-wannabee leaders* intent on regime change? or are they articulating the view that most teachers aren't really interested in working longer, paying more and getting less?

gen, I respect your views on HP's/global economics, etc. but your take on UK labour relations needs serious updating.

with respect, of course.

* I'll include the association of teachers and lecturers, which has balloted its membership for strike action - the first time in 127yrs. like I say: funny things, pensions.

Certainly the teachers I've been talking to regard this as about the pensions issue, nothing to do with party politics.

Masomnia wrote: »

I can understand them being upset about the pensions, but I don't think the strikes are the right way to go about making their point.

Again, the teachers I've been talking to would be more than happy to find some other way of making their point if they felt there was any realistic probability of being listened to. Can you suggest what would be a better way?

One thing is certain, and that's that there's a great deal of inaccurate information about. Within the last few weeks I've had people tell me that the TPS is entirely affordable, and that the problems have already been dealt with by changes that were brought in within the last few years (eg new entrants already on career average rather than final salary, scheme in surplus for this year, etc). In the same time frame I've also had people tell me that the TPS is sucking huge quantities of money out of central government and adding massively to the deficit.

They can't both be right, but they were certainly both sure of their assertions.

ETA DS tells me his teacher discussed the pensions issue briefly with the class (of 10 year olds) today. He told them he was very upset and angry about the threat to his pension, and would like to strike on Thursday, but had decided not to because it would mean cancelling the concert for which the school choir have been practising so hard. Doesn't sound like someone determined to topple a government to me.

torontoboy45

Masomnia wrote: »

It was off the top of my head, admittedly, and I can't be @rsed to find a link now. I'll do it tomorrow, promise.

And I totally agree, but that just means our electoral system needs to be more democratic. But, it's not exactly comparing like with like.

I can understand them being upset about the pensions, but I don't think the strikes are the right way to go about making their point.

sorry masomnia but it is comparing like with like: either you've got a clear mandate or you haven't. using that strict criterian, the coalition have no right to govern but suggest 'pure majority' to determine ID ballot outcomes! hypocrisy at its best.

and how would you suggest they make a better way of making the point? a get-together over tea and cupcakes in ye olde coffee shop?

this is the 1st time OH has been on strike (20yrs service) and she's furious that the coalition has chosen to play footsy with her contract of employment. I can't blame her.

Generali

torontoboy45 wrote: »

the issue relates to the emotional subject of pensions; I'm not sure if the teaching profession are 'as one' in toppling - a la scargill - a government.

I really don't get your reasoning on this.

gen, I respect your views on HP's/global economics, etc. but your take on UK labour relations needs serious updating.

with respect, of course.

* I'll include the association of teachers and lecturers, which has balloted its membership for strike action - the first time in 127yrs. like I say: funny things, pensions.

I think I didn't make myself clear by including the Scargill bit. My point is that the strikers had a go at keeping their contracts the same when they voted. The party that supported their position was defeated so now they are having a second go by force, ie denying kids a part of their education.

Ok this is just a day or two but presumably there is much more to come.

I don't think the teachers' unions are full of revolutionary communists .

martinthebandit

for a view from the other side of the fence (so to speak) have a read here.

http://www.labourlist.org/all-the-single-parents

It does get onto the issue of public sector strikes

Kennyboy66

Generali wrote: »

Is it undemocratic for public sector workers to strike? After all, effectively they're saying that the political party they bank roll failed to get in so they will withdraw their labour in an attempt to force a different government to change policies.

At least Scargill was open about wanting to bring down the Tories. After the election (in 87?) he called on the TUC at the TUC conference to have a General Strike IIRC at least.

Ridiculous.

Is your whole premise that the election was a referendum on pensions ?
Even the Tories are going against what they said about public sector pensions in their own manifesto - they said womens pension age would not rise to 66 until 2020.

Some unions (ATL - first national strike ever for example) are not politically affiliated to anyone.

Is it therefore democratic for them to strike but not the NUT ?

The idea that public sector employees can keep their old golden pensions is risible, but to suggest that they can't campaign / strike for the best eventual terms is just as daft.

Kennyboy66

Masomnia wrote: »

The strikes are undemocratic in every way. The ballot only had something like a 30% turnout, and of those only something like 60% wanted the strike. So they don't even have a majority of the members voting for it. How they get away with that I have no idea.

Thats democracy for you.

Both main teachers unions had turnouts of 35% and 40%.

This is higher than some recent general election turnouts not far from where I live.
The average council election turnout nationwide is 35%


Vote to strike was 92% for NUT and 83% for ATL.

Generali

Bit harsh there Kennyboy66! It was just an idle thought on the bus this am.

Really2

Generali wrote: »

Bit harsh there Kennyboy66! It was just an idle thought on the bus this am.

But you did speak about Labour

Sometimes on this forum that is a comment too far.:)

Kennyboy66

Generali wrote: »

Bit harsh there Kennyboy66! It was just an idle thought on the bus this am.

Sorry chief,

The teachers are on a bit of a hiding to nothing really, but I feel a lot of sympathy towards them at the moment as they are demonised by the Daily Mail tendency.

Daughters teacher (primary school) this year has been outstanding, truly inspirational - one of those teachers she will remember for the rest of her life.

Kennyboy66

Really2 wrote: »

But you did speak about Labour

Sometimes on this forum that is a comment too far.:)

Labour are hardly in the vaguard of protesting against the changes.

Mostly it is pretty hard working, normal people, doing jobs that often must be fairly tough - just wanting to have a reasonable retirement to look forward to.

Be nice if politician and the judiciary showed the lead and reformed their pensions first.