Osborne loses his nerve in the face of Union solidarity

tartanterra

discoass wrote: »

I know exactly what u are on about which is why I questioned you.
What year did your pay go up because of it.
Because mine didnt

You truly are bonkers.

If you are going to say something , then say it.

I have no idea what you are getting at, or what your point is.

discoass

tartanterra wrote: »

You truly are bonkers.

If you are going to say something , then say it.

I have no idea what you are getting at, or what your point is.

lol.........

I`m saying in a nutshell,you didnt contribute to your pension.
the 13% then 7% indeed could be 75% and it would still make no difference to your take home pay

DiggerUK

Road_Hog wrote: »

.....Nope, I'm just fed up of other people who expect others to pay for their comfy retirement.....

If the bile that is thrown at public sector workers, was instead directed at the masters of the universe who caused this mess, then a certain logic would be introduced to this and other threads.

As has been pointed out, the billions pumped in to the banks was unfunded, and it is coming out of taxpayers pockets. And I have yet to hear of a poverty stricken master of the universe in their retirement.
..._

ruggedtoast

Road_Hog wrote: »

I don't want to join a union (they're useless) and I don't want direct action and nor am I moaning. I'm pointing out the differences to you, between public and private sector.

Can I remind you which whinger started this thread?



Nope, I'm just fed up of other people who expect others to pay for their comfy retirement.



I certainly don't want or expect to have anything handed to me on a plate, whereas you do and expect me to pay for your gold plated pension.



I've fixed your quote for you.



As for that last comment, I think you've lost it.

One of us has a union, and one of us doesn't. One of us has a pension, and one of us doesn't. And one of us thinks unions are useless.

Road_Hog

ruggedtoast wrote: »

Well this thread's turned out nice.

Any chance of my 25% back, yet?

Now, I've worked in the public sector, as a temp, back in the mid '80s and I've never met a bigger bunch of shirkers in my life.

The following is not made up, I can say hand on my heart that I worked at the following places fro real, for about two months each, during 1987/88.

The first was at the DLO (it's kind of the place that does the maintenance of council housing, council owned buildings) Greenford, Middlesex. I worked in the office, in the accounts department. It was a 9 -5 job and the daily routine consisted of the following.

In amongst passing the odd invoice and checking purchase orders, the day ran roughly like the following. We had a morning 20 minute coffee break, but that only started once you had reached the canteen, so 5 minutes was allowed to get to the canteen and 5 minutes to return.

So at about 9:30 am (30 minutes into the day), the discussion turned to what turn the morning coffee breaks would be taken. There were 3 or 4 of us working around the table. So it was like, who's going at 10:00, who's going 10:30 and who's going at 11:00.

Once the last person was back from the morning break, the conversation turned to the lunch break. Who's at 12:00, 12:30, 1:00 and 1:30.

Then from 2:30, it was who was going for the afternoon coffee break first, then 3:00 and 3:30. An then the discussion of leaving time, powering down the VDU units, etc. The whole day revolved around taking breaks.

My other job, was at Ealing (West London) Housing benefits office. Many of the staff used to come in early (flexi-time) at 8:00 am, when there were no supervisors or managers and they would do nothing until one of them came in. Another favourite trick was lunchtimes. The offices were a mixture and some were Portacabins at the time. As the staff were on flexi, they all had to clock in/out, but the clock in machines were on the outside of the building.

Many/most, would go to the canteen for lunch (have 30 minutes), then clock back in and drop their stuff off at their desk. They would then go out to the shops (on the pretence that they'd gone to the toilet, and the offices were on the high st.) and do a bit of shopping/take an extended lunch.

If that wasn't bad enough, they had no concern for people claiming housing benefit. If someone had sent everything in with their claim, but accidentally only attached 5 months worth of bank statements instead of 6, they would do nothing to help. I'd say to them (remember I was only a temp), hold on, can't we ring them up and tell them, so that they can come down and drop off the missing statement, they might get made homeless if their claim isn't paid. The staff were like, "nah, all we're obliged to do is send a letter within two weeks informing them of the error". At which point I reminded them that they might have been chucked out by that time and wouldn't it be good, just to give them a call, instead of sending them a letter in two weeks (it literally would have been two weeks the way the system worked).

The answer was, "no, we'll send them a letter, it's their problem".

dunstonh

arrrr .....the race to the bottom

Sadly it is. I wish it wasnt. However, we have to look at society today that is what we have.

Consumers favour price over quality. A firm offering a good service but charging more is seen as a rip off. A firm offering something cheap is accused of not offering quality. We no longer teach responsibility or promote responsibility. Instead we look at your rights and how you can claim/complain etc to get money. No pride in what is done. No respect.

The whole thing is to cater for the lowest common denominator rather than aiming to the highest. We reward failure and criticise success.

Road_Hog

ruggedtoast wrote: »

One of us has a union, and one of us doesn't. One of us has a pension, and one of us doesn't. And one of us thinks unions are useless.

I was in a union once, my very first job, when I was 16, USDAW. I got made redundant after 12 months, I didn't even get a visit from the union rep. I don't want to hand over money to a union.

I have a pension, I've 20 years service in a good pension, however it isn't so good for current members, but that doesn't affect me, because mine is deferred. So, if I have a pension does that mean you don't? I'm also a landlord, so I have a second pension, well actually, a third if the State pension is still going when I retire.

I certainly think unions are useless, run by overpaid fatcats, who do nothing for their money.

Guess who's paying for his champagne?




"The RMT boss, in a grey suit with his green union badge on the lapel, ran up a £650 bill with four left-wing "brothers" during a 3½-hour lunch at Scott's in Mayfair."

What happened to beer and sarnies?

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/3637921/Bob-Crow-quaffs-champagne-at-650-Mayfair-lunch.html

discoass

Road_Hog wrote: »

I was in a union once, my very first job, when I was 16, USDAW. I got made redundant after 12 months, I didn't even get a visit from the union rep. I don't want to hand over money to a union.

I have a pension, I've 20 years service in a good pension, however it isn't so good for current members, but that doesn't affect me, because mine is deferred. So, if I have a pension does that mean you don't? I'm also a landlord, so I have a second pension, well actually, a third if the State pension is still going when I retire.

I certainly think unions are useless, run by overpaid fatcats, who do nothing for their money.

Guess who's paying for his champagne?




"The RMT boss, in a grey suit with his green union badge on the lapel, ran up a £650 bill with four left-wing "brothers" during a 3½-hour lunch at Scott's in Mayfair."

What happened to beer and sarnies?

l

whats this gotta do with bob crow?
think you`ll find it was his birthday
and union members pay his wage

and...

tartanterra

discoass wrote: »

lol.........

I`m saying in a nutshell,you didnt contribute to your pension.
the 13% then 7% indeed could be 75% and it would still make no difference to your take home pay

Taken from the AFPRB 30th report 2001.

These were the historical adjustments made to military pay to take account of the pension.

4.10 Since comparisons commenced in 1981, the pay adjustments recommended by
the Review Body have been as follows:
1981 11% of comparator pay
1986 10% of comparator pay
1991 9% of comparator pay
1996 8% of comparator pay
1997 7% of comparator pay

You could have done this research yourself, but as we have seen, you don't research - you just spout off.

Road_Hog

DiggerUK wrote: »

If the bile that is thrown at public sector workers, was instead directed at the masters of the universe who caused this mess, then a certain logic would be introduced to this and other threads.

As has been pointed out, the billions pumped in to the banks was unfunded, and it is coming out of taxpayers pockets. And I have yet to hear of a poverty stricken master of the universe in their retirement.
..._

Interesting, but the OP had a dig at the Tories and Osborne. NuLab over saw the banking crisis and Gordon Brown was the man responsible for giving them taxpayer's money.

Who do you hold responsible for the banking crisis and money being given to the banks?