Mind The Pay Gap? Tube Drivers 'To Get £55k'

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

It's time to invade Jersey, Isle of Man, Monaco, and the Cayman Islands!

Bagsy me the Caymans....

Unfortunately, Alan is just continuing down the financial route that helped get us into this mess (along with the Bankers who de-coupled risk and reward, and the consumers (i.e, us....) who borrowed and spent more than they could afford), which, as Ed Milliband's close ally Lord Glasman states in today's Guardian


In other words - face up to reality, and get some realistic policies.

YES we need to think less about the wellbeing of the very rich and more about the middle and working classes, we also need to deal with poverty, religous and poltical extremism, repressive dictorships abroad, reforms to public services, more john lewis style companies, better pay and coditions, and better law and order!

You forgot "World Peace", "Mom's Apple Pie", and cute fluffy kittens.

Unfortunately, like Ed M, you are good at trite phrases, which you then back up with meaningless polemic.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You forgot "World Peace", "Mom's Apple Pie", and cute fluffy kittens.

Unfortunately, like Ed M, you are good at trite phrases, which you then back up with meaningless polemic.

I feel the new labour leader is a disspointment, and anyway have you go any better ideas?

[Pog66]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

What I am saying is that Speacsavers can offord better pay and conditions!

As, by the same logic, can HMV, Blacks, Thorntons, Clinton's Cards.......but at what price? More job losses?

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Do you want more people forced into poverty as their costs of living rise to fund crazy wage settlements for others?

The usual logic here, no way of paying for anything other than vague comments about rinsing the rich.

We are already paying for the crazy wage settlements of bankers, CEO's Rich Shareholders and Footballers and the wages of people in other sports Look what happed when we got rid of unions from other areas of transport, RESULT: Less employment, worse jobs, less pay and other benifits!

---------- Post added at 12:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

I do support the union movement ,but only when their demands are reasonable .



Then the job will filled by non union staff either temporarily of permanently

much easier to get temps in to cover strikes when trains are driverless

Then those [Mod Edit] are Scabs (the Governmnent should ban strike breaking)!

---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 12:06 ----------

Originally Posted by Pog66

As, by the same logic, can HMV, Blacks, Thorntons, Clinton's Cards.......but at what price? More job losses?

They do not have Unionised workers, I would comprmise on the fact that in exchange for benifit and wage cuts in bad times, they should recive a decent share of the profits, and when times are good take back the wage and benifit cuts!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

I feel the new labour leader is a disspointment, and anyway have you go any better ideas?

Yes.

More appropriate regulation of the Financial Services, more coupling of the risk/reward links (you get it wrong, you don't get a bonus), balancing the UK Budget, spending on Infrastructure Projects, stop trying to pretend we are a World Power (with all the costs of Military Infrastructure that go with that).

What would you propose, besides homilies?

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

Then those [Mod Edit] are Scabs (the Governmnent should ban strike breaking)!

I think this is called irony ,you want to stand up for union rights and the worker but in doing so you wish to deny them the most basic right of all ,the right to freedom of choice .

And please stop swearing

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Yes.

More appropriate regulation of the Financial Services, more coupling of the risk/reward links (you get it wrong, you don't get a bonus), balancing the UK Budget, spending on Infrastructure Projects, stop trying to pretend we are a World Power (with all the costs of Military Infrastructure that go with that).

What would you propose, besides homilies?

I agree with the fact we need to spend a lot more on Infrastructure Projects and the fact we are not a world power (at least since WW2) and balancing the budget (but the very rich pay, not the middle and working classes) and better regulation of Financial Services!

---------- Post added at 12:17 ---------- Previous post was at 12:16 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

I think this is called irony ,you want to stand up for union rights and the worker but in doing so you wish to deny them the most basic right of all ,the right to freedom of choice .

And please stop swearing

Sorry for Swearing

The do not have to join a union, but they should honor a strike so it can work othervise employeers can explot them, which is not good for any of us!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

The do not have to join a union, but they should honor a strike so it can work othervise employeers can explot them, which is not good for any of us!

They should also have the freedom to choose if they agree with the strike not be forced by law to strike .
I'm sure that the British Leyland workers wish they hadn't listened to their union leaders as much ,they may have still have a industry to work in

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by martyh

They should also have the freedom to choose if they agree with the strike not be forced by law to strike .
I'm sure that the British Leyland workers wish they hadn't listened to their union leaders as much ,they may have still have a industry to work in

The demise of British Leyland was casued by under investnent and a reluctance or bank to make long term loans to the company, if we have followed the German model of having Unions sit on Company Boards and have State Develomennt banks then it would be very different.

If we gave freedom for Employees to be Scabs then then and the rest of us will be exploited by employeers and we would all suffer lower wages and job losses!

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

The demise of British Leyland was casued by under investnent and a reluctance or bank to make long term loans to the company, if we have followed the German model of having Unions sit on Company Boards and have State Develomennt banks then it would be very different.

If we gave freedom for Employees to be Scabs then then and the rest of us will be exploited by employeers and we would all suffer lower wages and job losses!

Oh right, nothing whatseover to do with making a rubbish product and constantly going on strike then? I mean all those reliability issues and strikes must have done wonders for sales and customer loyalty.....

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by martyh

I think this is called irony ,you want to stand up for union rights and the worker but in doing so you wish to deny them the most basic right of all ,the right to freedom of choice .

And please stop swearing

Also ironic: The RMT go on about their democratic right to strike, but will happily strike when only a small fraction of their members have voted and, if the article Alan linked to is to be believed, in one strike apparently managed to ballet 300 signal boxes that either didn't exist, had burned down or never existed.

[Ignitionnet]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

If we gave freedom for Employees to be Scabs then then and the rest of us will be exploited by employeers and we would all suffer lower wages and job losses!

Ah the illiberal left at its finest. No need to worry about minor things such as personal freedom in pursuit of the socialist nirvana.

[Alan Fry]

Originally Posted by Osem

Oh right, nothing whatseover to do with making a rubbish product and constantly going on strike then? I mean all those reliability issues and strikes must have done wonders for sales and customer loyalty.....

Sorry, Also the products were rubbish, butn it was not the falut of the Trade Unions alone!

---------- Post added at 13:08 ---------- Previous post was at 13:06 ----------

Originally Posted by Stuart

Also ironic: The RMT go on about their democratic right to strike, but will happily strike when only a small fraction of their members have voted and, if the article Alan linked to is to be believed, in one strike apparently managed to ballet 300 signal boxes that either didn't exist, had burned down or never existed.

What about general Elections, If there is less than 50% voted, does that nullfy the reslut, may I go on about Shareholder Meetings, House of Commons and Lords etc...

And what about the fact that some members are too busy working to be voting!

---------- Post added at 13:09 ---------- Previous post was at 13:08 ----------

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Ah the illiberal left at its finest. No need to worry about minor things such as personal freedom in pursuit of the socialist nirvana.

You just don't get it you do! I care about perosnal Freedom, like freedom from povery and bad jobs, low wages etc

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

We are already paying for the crazy wage settlements of bankers, CEO's Rich Shareholders and Footballers and the wages of people in other sports Look what happed when we got rid of unions from other areas of transport, RESULT: Less employment, worse jobs, less pay and other benifits!

On the flip side: Tube workers get what they want. Due to the disruption, companies lose a lot of money. TFL have to increase fares to pay for what the Tube drivers demand. Thus people have to pay more. Those people will have to either have increased wages, or try and cut their own costs. Either way, other companies end up (indirectly) paying. If they pay too much, they risk financial trouble, or have to cut costs themselves (even the major companies have finite resources - ask the staff of Woolworths and Focus), which may result in store or office closures, and job losses.

In the mean time, the strike action persuades international companies to look at cities in other countries to put their headquarters. After all, their staff need a reliable transport infrastructure to get to work, and higher fares will mean higher wage demands. If even one of these companies closes their UK office, this can result in thousands of job losses.

You think that doesn't happen? I ready a couple of years ago that HSBC had already threatened to move their world headquarters from it's current home in Canary Wharf. A building that houses thousands of workers.

Then those [Mod Edit] are Scabs (the Governmnent should ban strike breaking)!

On the contrary, the Government should not only not ban strike breaking, but they should increase the number of jobs where striking is banned.

They do not have Unionised workers, I would comprmise on the fact that in exchange for benifit and wage cuts in bad times, they should recive a decent share of the profits, and when times are good take back the wage and benifit cuts!

Personally, I am not opposed to more companies doing profit shares in the same way as John Lewis does. It's worked well for them, their staff and their customers.

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:11 ----------

Originally Posted by Alan Fry

What about general Elections, If there is less than 50% voted, does that nullfy the reslut, may I go on about Shareholder Meetings, House of Commons and Lords etc...

And what about the fact that some members are too busy working to be voting!

Personally, I do think we should investigate ways to persuade more people to start voting.

Regarding your comment about members being too busy working, I'd argue that if ANY union member cared enough about a subject to want to strike about it, he or she would make the time to vote.

Although judging by what a couple of tube drivers I know have said about the job, I doubt that most of the membership would be too busy working to find time to vote..