+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 290
General Chat Thread, Unison and other Unions Strike 30/11/2011 in General; Originally Posted by zag 29% turnout is a joke. I think something like 22% actually voted in favor out of ...
  1. #31

    CPLTD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    4,096
    Thank Post
    1,409
    Thanked 664 Times in 513 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by zag View Post
    29% turnout is a joke. I think something like 22% actually voted in favor out of the entire union membership. I don't think thats democracy. Although I did see on bbc news comments that the conservatives are only in government on a 30% vote

    I will never strike, its just pure greed by public sector workers.

    We all have to do our bit in times of Austerity and I am fully prepared to take a cut in my pension if it means my kids wont have to pay off our deficit for all their lives.


    But what happens when your kids are still paying it anyway........


    Chris
    Last edited by CPLTD; 4th November 2011 at 11:17 AM.

  2. #32
    DrCheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,050
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 162 Times in 111 Posts
    Rep Power
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by dgardner View Post
    Why do you think we work 37 hour weeks? Why do you think we get holidays? Where do you think the NHS came from?

    All of this was achieved by the trade unions and old Labour.

    If Thatcher had her way back then, we'd still be sending kids up chimneys. The rich would have everything, and everyone else would have nothing. We'd be working 80 hours per week for next to nothing, with no rights at all.
    Yeah, don't try to pull that. If they were striking over rights such as that then yes, I'd be out there. But striking over a pension increase is just stupid. The current pension made sense when most people only lived a few years after retirement, but they now live more active lives for a much longer period of time. It's not unexpected that people will live full healthy lives into their 90s nowadays.
    As such, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to work longer and pay more for a longer retirement.

  3. #33

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,529
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by CPLTD View Post
    As you have seen in this case, the Government of the day can normally "Legally" make any changes they so decide and instead all you are left with is a compromise. Never what you started with in the first place......
    Life is about compromise. To expect to get what you want is not realistic. The way it works should be that the government make a proposal, the union make a counter proposal and they come to a compromise in between.

    What actually happens is that the government make a proposal, the union say no, make a counter proposal of 'keeping things the same', the government tries to compromise, and the union still says no.

    The same thing happened with BA. Its the same thing that happens with Royal Mail.

  4. Thanks to localzuk from:

    BatchFile (4th November 2011)

  5. #34


    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,105
    Thank Post
    256
    Thanked 450 Times in 251 Posts
    Rep Power
    142
    I would love to have voted, but the morons in my local council HR dept have inexplicably cancelled my union payments 3 times in 5 years now (along with cancelling my pension once, and getting my tax code wrong 3 times).

    I fully agreed the pension system needed revising, but the simple fact is, the current pension is fast approaching not worth bothering with.
    The biggest benefit to school/council/gov work is it's pension. Not so much what we get out of it, but because it's meant to be a safe, stable pension with little chances of it collapsing due to a bad financial year.
    Many of these positions pay considerably less than private sector equivalents salary wise, so the promise of stable, guaranteed pension with good payouts was where it became worthwhile; I can work for a high salary, and put my money away for a later day now, or I can work for a lower salary that pays better when I retire.

    I got a better pension with my last employer, it was worth a lot more, but was tied to the shares of the company, so could have gone tits-up at any point.
    If they want to fix the schemes then fine, but don't hit us with all of it at once.

    Assuming I stay around the same salary with the same payment plan, and work in local gov for the next 40 years, adding 2 years at the end is equivalent to a 5% hike in what I'm paying into the scheme.
    Now add in the 10% hike in payments each year, I'm taking a 15% hit.
    Now add in the fact that regardless, what I get back at the end is lower, probably by 5-10% than I would have got, I'm taking a 20-25% hit in my pension. Now add in the huge number of redundancies being made.... their grand plan was to fire as many of the lowest paid workers paid by the government as possible, as unemployment benefits come from a different pot and work out cheaper. The fact that by firing one of their exec's in each council they could pay for 3-10 front line workers doesn't compute.

    Fix the corrupt bankers, fix the loopholes in the pension scheme to stop pension-padding towards the end of retirement, and stop screwing up my future. For the sake of the current morons in charge trying to gain potential votes for the next election, attempting to pay off all debts now and screwing the country in the process, I'm not surprisingly a fan of these changes.

  6. #35

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    363
    Thank Post
    174
    Thanked 38 Times in 34 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by DrCheese View Post
    Yeah, don't try to pull that. If they were striking over rights such as that then yes, I'd be out there. But striking over a pension increase is just stupid. The current pension made sense when most people only lived a few years after retirement, but they now live more active lives for a much longer period of time. It's not unexpected that people will live full healthy lives into their 90s nowadays.
    As such, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to work longer and pay more for a longer retirement.
    I don't think you understand my argument.

    What I'm saying is, the intended purpose of a trade union is to fight for the democratic right of ALL of your public sector colleagues. Whether it is cleaners, canteen staff, IT staff, bin men etc.

    I'm not asking if you agree with what they are asking for.
    Last edited by Gardinho; 4th November 2011 at 04:15 PM.

  7. #36

    CPLTD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Northamptonshire
    Posts
    4,096
    Thank Post
    1,409
    Thanked 664 Times in 513 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1
    Rep Power
    263
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    Life is about compromise. To expect to get what you want is not realistic. The way it works should be that the government make a proposal, the union make a counter proposal and they come to a compromise in between.

    What actually happens is that the government make a proposal, the union say no, make a counter proposal of 'keeping things the same', the government tries to compromise, and the union still says no.

    The same thing happened with BA. Its the same thing that happens with Royal Mail.

    I think in this case is more what they were/are entitled to and were promised in the first place, rather than what they want! Would you not agree?


    Chris

  8. Thanks to CPLTD from:

    creese (4th November 2011)

  9. #37

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    363
    Thank Post
    174
    Thanked 38 Times in 34 Posts
    Rep Power
    40
    Quote Originally Posted by DrCheese View Post
    The current pension made sense when most people only lived a few years after retirement, but they now live more active lives for a much longer period of time. It's not unexpected that people will live full healthy lives into their 90s nowadays.
    As such, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask people to work longer and pay more for a longer retirement.
    We live longer, but we also work longer. Retirement age is on the rise, and with cost of living going sky high, many of us won't be able to retire until we're 70+.

  10. #38


    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,858
    Thank Post
    354
    Thanked 264 Times in 216 Posts
    Rep Power
    121
    From my point of view we already have to deal with low wages, low pay increments and lack of progression oportunity depending on your job. This was balanced with a decent pension, flexi hours and job security. The plus points being eroded will never be given back and without the power of numbes we will be powerless to just accept whatever we are given. While I don't fully believe it is realistic to expect what the Union is demanding I do believe that a comprimise can be made but without the strength in numbers the government will not listen.

    So for that reason I will be going on strike reluctantly. I would expect the full support of my Union should I need it, so I shall be providing my support to them.

  11. 3 Thanks to penfold:

    ButterflyMoon (4th November 2011), Gardinho (4th November 2011), jcollings (4th November 2011)

  12. #39


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    I've never been involved in a strike, but I'm in two minds about this now.

    The issue is that currently the scheme is a ‘Final Salary Scheme’. This means that the scheme would take your salary at retirement, divide it by 60 and multiply by your years of contribution. The Government propose a change to this to base the pension on ‘average earnings’. In most cases this would make members worse off at retirement.

    The Government are proposing to raise the retirement age, raise contributions and provide reduced benefits. The Government are not proposing that the employer contribution is raised, in fact they seem to have an objective to save money by cutting employer contributions ie another way of cutting wages.

    The LGPS is not under threat and is by no means financially wobbly. It has been independently reviewed as a healthy and viable scheme with more contributions going into it than payments being made.

    The real problem here is that if this is unopposed; then rather than another pay freeze next year (essentially a pay cut with high inflation) then we'll be looking at pay cuts next year.

  13. #40

    SimpleSi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Lancashire
    Posts
    5,829
    Thank Post
    1,476
    Thanked 595 Times in 446 Posts
    Rep Power
    170
    @CPLTD
    Your right in the fact that thats what unions were first set up for and in traditional proper jobs they used their muscle when they could to get better deals for their members.

    As you can see, a lot of school IT support staff are just in the union for perceived legal protection and you might be right - they might be better off paying directly for legal insurance.

    Although, I personally have never been in a union,because I wouldn't strike and I personally think its morally wrong to be in one and not back the majority vote if they decide to do so, I was interested to discover that the Voice union has a no strike position so I might join that for the legal help if needed.

    Si

    PS Unless a vote has riders attached to it, then most democratic descisions are decided by the people who actually turn up and vote.

  14. 2 Thanks to SimpleSi:

    CPLTD (4th November 2011), Gardinho (4th November 2011)

  15. #41

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    187
    Thank Post
    4
    Thanked 20 Times in 16 Posts
    Rep Power
    11
    It's not logical to forfeit a days pay and valuable work time for something you neither voted in favour of, or indeed support in any way. I'd also say that Unison were next to useless when we were going through the pay and benefits review, so I don't feel any great loyalty there.

  16. #42

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,529
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by CPLTD View Post
    I think in this case is more what they were/are entitled to and were promised in the first place, rather than what they want! Would you not agree?
    'Entitled', now that is a word I dislike with a passion. It is that word that has got us into such a mess with the benefits system and with unions.

    If you were promised something then yes you have a reasonable expectation that you will get it. However, for most people, they didn't expect that the global economy would be such a mess, or that several governments would raid pension pots and mess up the country's finances. So, your reasonable expectation has to change according to the state of the country's finances.

    It is ridiculous to expect that everything will stay the same with your pension when the rest of the economy and the government finances are basically ruined...

  17. #43


    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    8,202
    Thank Post
    442
    Thanked 1,033 Times in 813 Posts
    Rep Power
    341
    Quote Originally Posted by localzuk View Post
    'Entitled', now that is a word I dislike with a passion. It is that word that has got us into such a mess with the benefits system and with unions.

    If you were promised something then yes you have a reasonable expectation that you will get it. However, for most people, they didn't expect that the global economy would be such a mess, or that several governments would raid pension pots and mess up the country's finances. So, your reasonable expectation has to change according to the state of the country's finances.
    If your happy with employer contributions being cut - ie a cut in 'delayed wages' then presumably you would also be happy with a 'here and now' pay cut as well?

  18. #44

    localzuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Minehead
    Posts
    18,529
    Thank Post
    527
    Thanked 2,648 Times in 2,049 Posts
    Blog Entries
    24
    Rep Power
    925
    Quote Originally Posted by CyberNerd View Post
    If your happy with employer contributions being cut - ie a cut in 'delayed wages' then presumably you would also be happy with a 'here and now' pay cut as well?
    If it was a matter of '10% of the workforce being sacked, or everyone taking a 10% pay cut', then I'd take the pay cut, yes.

  19. Thanks to localzuk from:

    zag (4th November 2011)

  20. #45
    DrCheese's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    1,050
    Thank Post
    98
    Thanked 162 Times in 111 Posts
    Rep Power
    60
    I don't think you understand my argument.
    What I'm saying is, the intended purpose of a trade union to fight for the democratic right of ALL of your public sector colleagues. Whether it is cleaners, canteen staff, IT staff, bin men etc.
    I'm not asking if you agree with what they are asking for.
    So basically, even if I totally disagree with the reason for the strike, think the unions are being unreasonable, I should annoy my employer and strike anyway. Because 29% of the union voted yes?
    Ok then.



SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 3 of 20 FirstFirst 123456713 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Blue Skies and other ideal solutions
    By GrumbleDook in forum Blue Skies
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 14th May 2010, 11:05 PM
  2. Homeplugs and Freeview PVR for £30!
    By mrlegs in forum Hardware
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 22nd January 2008, 05:05 PM
  3. Senteo and other votting systems
    By chrisa in forum Hardware
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 4th July 2007, 02:03 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 30th April 2007, 07:10 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 26th March 2007, 08:03 AM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •