implication of not striking (UNITE)

SarEl

Bobl wrote: »

But if only 1/4 of the members voted for the Strike Action you would assume that the rest are against it, therefore they should not have to stand with the minority. I am aware of several Public Sector workers who will work as usual on Wednesday because they feel this is the wrong action at the wrong time.

No. People who are against it vote no. By an extension of your argument, since the majority of people in the country did not vote for this government, then they shouldn't be in power and they don't have a public mandate to do anything.

Chris_P wrote: »

My pension is very generous, and I feel striking is 100% wrong as the unions are basing it on false information. And I have morals. I'm not a sheep

And how do you figure that out? The way that the pension will be calculated will be based on a method that reduces the amount you will see - that's a fact not even the government dispute. The amount you pay will be increased - also a fact that the government do not dispute. And you will be working longer - the government have intriduced legislation to ensure that you do. So if both parties to the dispute actually agree what the outcome will be, precisely which bit of the information is false?

Torry_Quine wrote: »

It is a very important issue but I think that an individual has the right to come to their own decision as to whether or not it is right to strike over it.

Many have joined unions but that doesn't mean that they blindly follow the leadership whatever they decide.

(a) I did not at any time suggest that people cannot make their own decisions. People usually make their own decisons. But it doesn't mean they are good decisions.

(b) It wasn't the leadership who decided - it was a democratic vote of the membership. And as vaild a vote as any in the "political democracy".

Now I think I will just go and opt myself out of anything this government decides to do on the basis that I didn't vote for them, and neither did the majority of the country (35% didn't vote, so they must have voted against them, and if I add together anyone who didn't vote ConDem and add it to those - well clearly they aren't in power so I can just ignore them)

Torry_Quine

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

That rather negates the purpose of collective action though.

If the OP doesn't feel that s/he wants to strike, the best thing would be to leave the union.

It might well be but of course they may feel they have no choice in order to have help in any dispute.

SarEl wrote: »

(a) I did not at any time suggest that people cannot make their own decisions. People usually make their own decisons. But it doesn't mean they are good decisions.

(b) It wasn't the leadership who decided - it was a democratic vote of the membership. And as vaild a vote as any in the "political democracy".

Now I think I will just go and opt myself out of anything this government decides to do on the basis that I didn't vote for them, and neither did the majority of the country (35% didn't vote, so they must have voted against them, and if I add together anyone who didn't vote ConDem and add it to those - well clearly they aren't in power so I can just ignore them)

Yes the decision may not be a good one but we have the right to make wrong decisions and live by the consequences.

I have never said that the vote wasn't democratic. Many people do whatever the leadership says without thinking it through for themself.

VfM4meplse

Torry_Quine wrote: »

It is a very important issue but I think that an individual has the right to come to their own decision as to whether or not it is right to strike over it.

Many have joined unions but that doesn't mean that they blindly follow the leadership whatever they decide.

I couldn't agree more.

Unions take action for a collective benefit beyond their paying members. Many join to ensure they get fair representation on a personal level.

Chris_P_2

SarEl wrote: »

And how do you figure that out? The way that the pension will be calculated will be based on a method that reduces the amount you will see - that's a fact not even the government dispute. The amount you pay will be increased - also a fact that the government do not dispute. And you will be working longer - the government have intriduced legislation to ensure that you do. So if both parties to the dispute actually agree what the outcome will be, precisely which bit of the information is false?

True, but even after that my pension will be a lot better than if i paid the same into a private pension. And the reason it is better is that the taxpayer pays for a large majority of it., And considering the state of the economy, I fell it only right that we all have to accept things have ti change for the good of the country.

SarEl

Chris_P wrote: »

True, but even after that my pension will be a lot better than if i paid the same into a private pension. And the reason it is better is that the taxpayer pays for a large majority of it., And considering the state of the economy, I fell it only right that we all have to accept things have ti change for the good of the country.

Ah - proven wrong so change your argument? I seriously cannot believe people here - but I am not going to argue. You made up your mind before you posted and so I see no reason to try to dissuade you. I hope your union is more reliable when you need them, than you are as a member.

joebolton

I have been a member of PCS Union for the last 15 years ( including it's previous re-incarnations).

I broke the strike last time ( 30th June) and I will be going in on Wednesday.

I have decided the decent thing to do is to resign from the Union, as I no longer support the decisions made by the Executive.

SarEl

joebolton wrote: »

I have been a member of PCS Union for the last 15 years ( including it's previous re-incarnations).

I broke the strike last time ( 30th June) and I will be going in on Wednesday.

I have decided the decent thing to do is to resign from the Union, as I no longer support the decisions made by the membershipQUOTE]

I respect your decision to resign - but it is the membership who decide on strikes and not the leadersship.

Chris_P_2

SarEl wrote: »

Ah - proven wrong so change your argument? I seriously cannot believe people here - but I am not going to argue. You made up your mind before you posted and so I see no reason to try to dissuade you. I hope your union is more reliable when you need them, than you are as a member.

What do you mean "Proven wrong"?? Odd.

i am a member of a Union, yes. When I need their help, as in arguing against other changes in my contract such as changing to deemed work "bases" etc then that is where they might help IF THEY AGREE. I expect my union to do what's right for me, but not when I disagree with it. Like I said before, I have morals, my own thoughts, I am able to make my own judgements and see that the Unions stance is wrong imho, I am not a shepp - so I have evey right to not strike yet still work and be respecetd as a member. You Enjoy your day off. And your pension.

Yorkie1

Strange how these threads always descend into slanging matches one way or another.

You are entitled to your view, ChrisP. But to accuse every member of the public sector of being immoral or amoral simply because they choose a different outcome from you, is rather insulting.

conway01

I congratulate all those public sector workers, who are not fools, who are not going out on strike.