What are your views on unions & strikes?

I think we should still be sending little boys up chimneys to sweep them and they should be bl**dy grateful they're not just left to starve...

MaizieD

I think we should still be sending little boys up chimneys to sweep them and they should be bl**dy grateful they're not just left to starve...

That’s just silly

Nope, they don’t have my support at all.

GrannyGravy13

MaizieD

I think we should still be sending little boys up chimneys to sweep them and they should be bl**dy grateful they're not just left to starve...

That’s just silly

I'd be grateful for the chance to earn me crust yer 'onour....

Ever so 'umble, me.

So when there is nothing intelligent to add to the debate you mock…

Yes, I mock.

When people say we should be grateful to have a job, mocking seems quite the appropriate response.

I’m generally in favour and have belonged to one.
However not long before I retired a male colleague was IMO treated absolutely shamefully by his immediate bosses.

I still think there was an element of revenge, since one of said bosses was said to be a ‘man eater’, or perhaps ‘nympho’ might be a better term, and he had politely rejected her advances - this was in a very female-heavy workplace.

The union (we worked for the local council, so it was the public sector one - forget the name) did absolutely nothing to help him.
Since I was only very part time I’d never bothered to join, but the way they abandoned him still rankles.

I have no trust in unions , they and the Labour government kept Lord Robens as head of the NCB after the Aberfan disaster, the enquiry found he was ‘economical with the truth ‘
he lied.

30 years later papers were released telling the truth,

I've always felt a job was a reciprocal arrangement whether I was employed or self employed. I was mostly grateful to have work and those for whom I worked acted in a way which showed they were grateful for my work.

I don't mean that in wringing your cap and bowing my head way, but in a mutually beneficial way.

On the few occasions when I've not been treated well or felt the employer didn't appreciate my services I have left.

Unions ensure employment is more equal in my opinion...the worker has a voice and isn't a victim or chattel to unscrupulous bosses in the way those poor lads up chimneys and girls under looms were.

That said, I do not agree at all that people people have to be grateful they have a job.

I have always been in one and in my profession thought it was necessary for the support which was there if needed. I also feel that it is important to stand up for what you believe in.
I was a teacher and would tell students that they should join a union; at the time which one was up to them.

By students I mean P.G.C.E. ones.

Well, this seems interesting. I've just seen on twitter that the trains companies are willing to offer pay rises but the government (through the transport minister) have forbidden them to do so.

It's being suggested that the govt. view this strike as an opportunity to emulate Thatcher's treatment of the Miners' strike.
While trying to blame Labour for encouraging it (which Labour hasn't done).

So the government is acting as an agent provocateur... nasty...

I was always a supporter of unions until they and Greater Glasgow council joined forces to fight the women asking for equal pay ..it took years and millions of pounds that SHOULD have been spent on paying the women their dues.
When Labour lost to the SNP in the council the case was sorted quickly with backdated compensation offered .
I know theres some issues with compensation amounts as women were told not to discuss their payouts .
Labour will find it a long hard road back here and if the unions behave like this again they'll be shown the door too
They WERE meant to fight FOR the people not against them

When I was in employment I was in a union, I believe in collective bargaining and the fundamental right to withdraw your labour. (I will confess to mild to severe annoyance when my life is adversely affected by someone else's strike, I'm human not a saint) I now have members of my family employed in the frontline professions of medicine and policing. The medical members have the right to strike, for the policing members this is an illegal action. If you consider it a fundamental right to strike what are you doing to ensure police officers also enjoy that right or are you happy that they are denied it?

I don't see how it is up to anyone else to do anything to ensure that the police have a right to strike. If they want to get that right they would have to push for it themselves, then other unions could support them (although that is tricky with the legislation brought in by Thatcher).

The trouble is that the police have been used to crush other strikes, so if they went on strike themselves it would make things difficult on a number of levels. How would they be able to enforce anti-strike laws against others if they had been on strike themselves? Similarly, how could they claim a fundamental right to strike whilst ensuring that others are denied it? I suspect that they would struggle to get support from the TUC anyway, but maybe younger members might have forgotten Orgreave and similar.

The strike has my full support. Unions provide workers with support for working conditions and ensure safe working procedures. When we were part of the EU, we benefitted from their safeguards, such as number of hours per working week etc. Now, more than ever, workers need powerful unions to support them.

That's a good point.

The more we move away from EU protections, and potentially break away from Human Rights legislation, the more we are going to need support on a number of levels.

Wes Streeting apologies for saying on BBC QT that it was right for workers to strike

What next a labour minister not defending the workers.

Starmer and Streeting are a right sample if you ask me we could do better.

Anniebach

General strike ? I have records of the 1926 general strike, in journals by my g grandfather. The miners stayed on strike for several months, returned to work for less pay and longer working hours, not all were taken back to work,

So a general strike now, more food banks, soup kitchens

My family was the same Anniebach and I have photos to prove it. A privately educated great grandfather who was at odds with what he perceived as his capitalist relations who part-owned mines and a family rift that has never been mended.
My great grandfather is pictured with men who look like something from the American Dustbowl and a huge placard saying" Help the poor". My granddad is on the end looking like all the other men.
Not only did the miners return to longer hours for less pay some were actually put out on the street by the mine owners because they no longer had a job.
It did work for some but only those who were prepared to find work out of the Industry which my grandfathers did and actually reached a better potential than they would have to stay in the mines.
So a General Strike that cripples the country could lead to more hardship than before .
Maybe the right time to strike has to be chosen very carefully if there ever is a right time and I agree with the Ops who say Mrs Thatcher broke the strength of the Trades Unions. We have to judge for ourselves if now is the right time by family circumstances.

Doodledog Actually my final sentence was wrong, I should have said is it acceptable that some people don't have a legal right to strike? The army also don't have a right to strike, nor prison officers. I suppose I was musing what criteria are used to decide who has the right to strike and who doesn't.
As it happens my police family members don't think they should have the right to strike, but the lack of that bargaining power for pay and conditions does result in little to no improvement for them.
Orgreave was dreadful, but many (maybe most) of the officers today weren't even born then.

I feel for those who will not be able to get into work for at least three days next week and in all probability lose three days pay due to no fault of their own
No support here. DH was asked to do a 3 day analysis and appraisal in London next week which cannot possibly be done by zoom. The alternative is to drive up for 4 and a half hours and the same back. The loss of money isn't necessarily the issue, but letting people down is, when already business are dealing with a backlog.

How much lower can people standard of living go? We have vast numbers using the food banks, people deciding on heating/energy usage or eating, unable to go to work because of the cost of fuel, the NHS and the ambulance service on its knees and being unable to see a Dr. Yet the government is protected from most if not all, of this by their expenses system and their money. The train strike will be the first of many strike in the future as times get even harder and people struggle even more. I fully support this strike and a general strike

It costs strikers money as they won’t get paid, but the only power the workers have is to withdraw their labour.
United they stand but divided...they are weak and get ignored.

What else can they do? Obviously negotiate but employers generally obstruct because they are profit motivated.