Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Sun Apr 12, 2020 5:32 am  

silver2 wrote:

By heavily unionized I assume you mean democratic.

That's an Oxymoron if there was one Unions and democracy

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Sun Apr 12, 2020 12:08 pm  

Sal Paradise wrote:

That's an Oxymoron if there was one Unions and democracy

Well, if the rules on union voting were applied to GEs and Brexit then we wouldn't have a Tory government and we wouldn't be leaving the EU. So, what form of democracy would you prefer?

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:11 am  

silver2 wrote:

Well, if the rules on union voting were applied to GEs and Brexit then we wouldn't have a Tory government and we wouldn't be leaving the EU. So, what form of democracy would you prefer?

What are you talking about - perhaps if we all followed what went on at the Unite at Falkirk

[Mild Rover]

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:50 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

What are you talking about - perhaps if we all followed what went on at the Unite at Falkirk

I’ve just read up on this, out of curiosity.

Again, out of curiosity, is your concern here with trade union entryism and block payment for membership, or the Labour NEC arbitrarily refusing to accept votes from new members?

I think it is an interesting problem/opportunity across the political spectrum. Local party organizations are often small, making them vulnerable to entryism. As we saw with UKIP-type folk joining the Conservatives in an effort to challenge remain/soft Brexit MPs and candidates. Whether that is a vulnerability of or opportunity for democracy probably depends on whether the entryists’ goals align with our own political principles.

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 7:59 am  

Mild Rover wrote:

I’ve just read up on this, out of curiosity.

Again, out of curiosity, is your concern here with trade union entryism and block payment for membership, or the Labour NEC arbitrarily refusing to accept votes from new members?

I think it is an interesting problem/opportunity across the political spectrum. Local party organizations are often small, making them vulnerable to entryism. As we saw with UKIP-type folk joining the Conservatives in an effort to challenge remain/soft Brexit MPs and candidates. Whether that is a vulnerability of or opportunity for democracy probably depends on whether the entryists’ goals align with our own political principles.

My point about the unions are that they are not democratic - if the all the people at their HQ had to go on to strike/no pay when they had a strike great - but they don't so the strikers are political football stuck in the middle with the most to use. In my experience they serve no real purpose - there are laws about working conditions, trying to remove anyone is now so difficult, wage negotiations are perfectly possible and have more to do with market conditions in my world lack of HGV drivers - they serve no purpose in fact in the private sector they are a distinct disadvantage to employment. In the public sector perhaps it is a different world?

Unions will do the wrong thing in one chapel so as to prevent the same situation happening elsewhere - its madness.

[Mild Rover]

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:11 am  

Sal Paradise wrote:

My point about the unions are that they are not democratic - if the all the people at their HQ had to go on to strike/no pay when they had a strike great - but they don't so the strikers are political football stuck in the middle with the most to use. In my experience they serve no real purpose - there are laws about working conditions, trying to remove anyone is now so difficult, wage negotiations are perfectly possible and have more to do with market conditions in my world lack of HGV drivers - they serve no purpose in fact in the private sector they are a distinct disadvantage to employment. In the public sector perhaps it is a different world?

Unions will do the wrong thing in one chapel so as to prevent the same situation happening elsewhere - its madness.

An official strike requires democratic support from members. The union HQ going on strike in sympathy would be an act of stupid self harm. It isn’t like a hunger strike.

Those laws about working conditions mightn’t exist without trade unions. While wage negotiations are possible, it is easier to ‘pick-off’ individual or small negotiators. That is, for example, a big part of why European healthcare is a lot cheaper than in the US, where a fragmented private insurance system lacks the power to secure better immediate value for its customers.

A lot of HR people do a fantastic job but ultimately they exist to protect the employer’s interests, leaving individual employees vulnerable to abuses of power.

It’s sad that we have had such an adversarial, distrustful relationship between workers and bosses in the UK and battled to compromises so often where interests diverged rather than finding them through partnership. The growing gig economy will require new approaches and the younger generation will have to work that out in their own way.

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 9:17 am  

The great problem is that the world & its mother needs ppe all at the same time & there wasn't enough stock piled anywhere because the problem & need wasn't anticipated. Perhaps a future solution would be to go back to fabric ppe that can be washed ,sterilised & reused.
My son is a HGV driver for a well known company delivering to small supermarkets & their pandemic ppe consists of 1 sanitised wipe per day.

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:29 pm  

Is Sin Bin sponsored by Momentum?

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Mon Apr 13, 2020 3:58 pm  

wire-quin wrote:

Is Sin Bin sponsored by Momentum?

Re: Health and Safety at Work Act 1974. : Tue Apr 14, 2020 10:57 am  

Mild Rover wrote:

An official strike requires democratic support from members. The union HQ going on strike in sympathy would be an act of stupid self harm. It isn’t like a hunger strike.

Those laws about working conditions mightn’t exist without trade unions. While wage negotiations are possible, it is easier to ‘pick-off’ individual or small negotiators. That is, for example, a big part of why European healthcare is a lot cheaper than in the US, where a fragmented private insurance system lacks the power to secure better immediate value for its customers.

A lot of HR people do a fantastic job but ultimately they exist to protect the employer’s interests, leaving individual employees vulnerable to abuses of power.

It’s sad that we have had such an adversarial, distrustful relationship between workers and bosses in the UK and battled to compromises so often where interests diverged rather than finding them through partnership. The growing gig economy will require new approaches and the younger generation will have to work that out in their own way.

We all know that voting against a strike if its called is difficult - the idea that its any way democratic is delusional - its like an election in Africa!!

I think your last statement is incorrect - we a distrustful relationship between employers and the representatives of employees who work to a set agenda in which the individual is lost. The guy/girl from the union wont lose their job if their intransigence leads to the employer taking a course of action that leads to loss of jobs. McClusky soon piped-down when Ratcliffe said enough is enough I don't need this I will close Grangemouth. To blame the employer all the time is unfair.