Strikes on the horizon

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

PS It never seems to amaze me how the lefties ignore the common working man on zero hour contracts or minimum wage (or both) being exploited with no job security or benefits. It's all me me me (or us us us if you're in the public sector gang) and there was me thinking that the socialists actually cared.

 

The likes of the Guardian have been banging on about zero hours contracts for ages. You do remember that the minimum wage was brought in by "the left" and opposed by "the right"?

 

Have you done anything to support the common working man on zero hour contracts or minimum wage (or both) being exploited with no job security or benefits or do you just use them as a convenient stick to beat public sector workers?

 

Your line of argument is just whatabouttery: no one who has a "decent" job should ever complain or strive for better conditions because another group of workers has it worse off. It's a recipe for a race to the bottom and in that scenario the "common working man" gets an even poorer deal.

[Johnny Bognor]

The likes of the Guardian have been banging on about zero hours contracts for ages. You do remember that the minimum wage was brought in by "the left" and opposed by "the right"?

 

Have you done anything to support the common working man on zero hour contracts or minimum wage (or both) being exploited with no job security or benefits or do you just use them as a convenient stick to beat public sector workers?

 

Locally yes, by providing employment to unskilled workers on proper contracts at rates above the min wage.

 

When the min wage was first muted, I wasn't in favour. Shortly after though, I quickly realised that it was a good thing for both the worker and the employer. More could still be done, like continuing to raise the tax threshold and taking more of the lower paid out of taxation.

 

Your line of argument is just whatabouttery: no one who has a "decent" job should ever complain or strive for better conditions because another group of workers has it worse off. It's a recipe for a race to the bottom and in that scenario the "common working man" gets an even poorer deal.

 

Of course people should strive, but with the public sector this me me me attitude is relentless. If they could open their eyes, there is no money in the pot and there are far many people far worse off. If anything, the time to demand more money and better conditions is in the good times, when they are more likely to succeed. That's not about left or right, it's bleeding common sense.

Edited 12 September, 2013 by Johnny Bognor

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

Fair play, good reply although I don't quite subscribe to your view that you don't promote your interests when times are tough. If the likes of the teachers didn't stick up for themselves the Government would have tried to curb their pay and conditions even more.

[Lord Duckhunter]

 

When the min wage was first muted, I wasn't in favour. Shortly after though, I quickly realised that it was a good thing for both the worker and the employer. More could still be done, like continuing to raise the tax threshold and taking more of the lower paid out of taxation.

 

.

 

The minimum wage is a con job. How can you have a minimum wage that is set so low that you have to top it up with tax payers money? The minimum wage is good for employers, but a terrible deal for the taxpayer. It isn't a minimum wage, it's a welfare for work scheme where multi million pound companies get their pitiful wages subsidised by the tax payer.

 

Now Labour bang on about a "living wage". Surely a minimum wage needs to be a living wage, why set a minimum wage that people cant live on? They wont campaign for an increase in the minimum wage because they know it may cost jobs, exactly the same argument that opponents made against it's introduction. By setting it so low Labour felt good about themselves and boxed the Torys in, business get subsidised Labour and the bloke on the wage doesn't care as it gets topped up. Everybody's a winner except the mug taxpayer.

[Johnny Bognor]

The minimum wage is a con job. How can you have a minimum wage that is set so low that you have to top it up with tax payers money? The minimum wage is good for employers, but a terrible deal for the taxpayer. It isn't a minimum wage, it's a welfare for work scheme where multi million pound companies get their pitiful wages subsidised by the tax payer.

 

Now Labour bang on about a "living wage". Surely a minimum wage needs to be a living wage, why set a minimum wage that people cant live on? They wont campaign for an increase in the minimum wage because they know it may cost jobs, exactly the same argument that opponents made against it's introduction. By setting it so low Labour felt good about themselves and boxed the Torys in, business get subsidised Labour and the bloke on the wage doesn't care as it gets topped up. Everybody's a winner except the mug taxpayer.

 

It is a good deal for the lower paid as it does stop exploitation. There is a stigma attached to the min wage, so if you pay more, you attract better staff. Those staff earn more and the employer reaps the benefits. As close to a win win as you are likely to see.

[Whitey Grandad]

It is a good deal for the lower paid as it does stop exploitation. There is a stigma attached to the min wage, so if you pay more, you attract better staff. Those staff earn more and the employer reaps the benefits. As close to a win win as you are likely to see.

 

Not necessarily. You might just put your costs up so much that you are no longer commercially viable.

[Viking Warrior]

The potential problem with the living wage is that it is starting to seriously erode the differentials between staff immediately above them and those in other grades . This is going to be a nightmare for public sector workers and the unions are starting to make noises and threats about maintaining differentials based on the living wage at all levels of the pay structure . Some delded local unions stewards just want a single hourly rate for every grade .

 

Some public sectors have just added the difference of the living wage and the current wage as a supplement .

 

The concern I have is that that the living wage will now lead to further job cuts in the public sector . They are already facing year on year cut backs and savings this scenario now means further job cuts are around the corner

[saintfully]

I never said namby-pamby public sector wastrel. I said wrapped in cotton wool (relative to those in the private sector without union representation).

So when was the last time an A&E consultant was made redundant? Or let go with no notice? Or forced to look at a stakeholder pension, which he/she couldn't afford because their company didn't provide one? Or took a pay cut? With a guaranteed job and a starting salary range of £75k-£100k, A&E consultant looks pretty wrapped to me.

 

OK, my turn. Teachers.

 

Your go.

 

 

PS It never seems to amaze me how the lefties ignore the common working man on zero hour contracts or minimum wage (or both) being exploited with no job security or benefits. It's all me me me (or us us us if you're in the public sector gang) and there was me thinking that the socialists actually cared.

 

What is your argument Johnny? Are you saying that you want the public sector to have less employment protection? Or do you want the private sector to have more? Are you just neutrally observing that members of one sector often have more employment rights than the other? In which case, yes thats true - in other news, the Earth is a sphere.

 

Re. teachers - like other public sector workers they have good employment rights protected by the strength of their unions. But, at least 40% of teachers leave the profession within 5 years - why?This is most often because they are poor teachers and their headmasters make it quite clear that they are not wanted at their school any longer. This relates to the question of whether A&E consultants are wrapped in cotton wool or not - IMHO, where you score poorly is your inability to measure value beyond economics. A great many in the public sector could earn more money elsewhere in the private sector, but choose not to. This empathic approach means they care about their jobs in a way beyond how much they are earning. So, for someone working in a hospital or a school, the price of failure isn't just getting the sack or losing money, its someone dying or a child not reaching his/her potential. If you have a soul/conscience, that carries a cost way beyond what you take home in your paypacket. This is why I think describing them as being wrapped in cotton wool is so misguided and, frankly, weird. Your avatar is a man being grateful that at least his god likes him - perhaps if you were able to think with a little more social intelligence these sort of doubts wouldn't plague you.

 

PS. I don't know a single 'leftie' that ignores the common working man - what you're mistaking is the ability to talk about one issue with an inability to talk about more than one. Sticking up for your own interests doesn't mean you don't care about others - 2/10 I'm afraid.

 

Anyway - lets talk about the forces shall we. How about submariners - wrapped in cotton wool?

[Jonnyboy]

My god hates me.

[Johnny Bognor]

What is your argument Johnny? Are you saying that you want the public sector to have less employment protection? Or do you want the private sector to have more? Are you just neutrally observing that members of one sector often have more employment rights than the other? In which case, yes thats true - in other news, the Earth is a sphere.

 

Probably the last one

 

Re. teachers - like other public sector workers they have good employment rights protected by the strength of their unions. But, at least 40% of teachers leave the profession within 5 years - why?This is most often because they are poor teachers and their headmasters make it quite clear that they are not wanted at their school any longer. This relates to the question of whether A&E consultants are wrapped in cotton wool or not - IMHO, where you score poorly is your inability to measure value beyond economics. A great many in the public sector could earn more money elsewhere in the private sector, but choose not to. This empathic approach means they care about their jobs in a way beyond how much they are earning. So, for someone working in a hospital or a school, the price of failure isn't just getting the sack or losing money, its someone dying or a child not reaching his/her potential. If you have a soul/conscience, that carries a cost way beyond what you take home in your paypacket. This is why I think describing them as being wrapped in cotton wool is so misguided and, frankly, weird. Your avatar is a man being grateful that at least his god likes him - perhaps if you were able to think with a little more social intelligence these sort of doubts wouldn't plague you.

 

I've highlighted the key words. They choose, so they should stop the whinging

 

Anyway - lets talk about the forces shall we. How about submariners - wrapped in cotton wool?

 

Maximum respect for the forces, because they don't complain or strike. They just get on with the job they chose to do. They are true public servants because they are not in it for themselves and are not concerned about what they can get out of it. They don't blackmail the nation by withholding their labour. They are the most undervalued in our society and how they are treated after sustaining life changing injuries is nothing short of a national disgrace.

 

The cotton wool jibe is used against those who have it pretty cushy (compared to most), but then complain about things when they are doing something they chose to do.

[Whitey Grandad]

Cotton wool doesn't stop bullets. HTH

[saintfully]

Probably the last one

 

 

 

I've highlighted the key words. They choose, so they should stop the whinging

 

Maximum respect for the forces, because they don't complain or strike. They just get on with the job they chose to do. They are true public servants because they are not in it for themselves and are not concerned about what they can get out of it. They don't blackmail the nation by withholding their labour. They are the most undervalued in our society and how they are treated after sustaining life changing injuries is nothing short of a national disgrace.

 

The cotton wool jibe is used against those who have it pretty cushy (compared to most), but then complain about things when they are doing something they chose to do.

 

And if the conditions under which they chose to work in the public sector change? Do they have a right to protest against the changes? I think the point that you're missing is that (rightly or wrongly) some public sector workers feel like they are having the pi.ss taken out of them and are being misrepresented purely for political reasons - not because of a genuine attempt to improve the service or cut costs. Many teachers feel that they have made a contribution by having a wage freeze for the past 3 years just like many working in the private sector and cannot accept the antagonsitic way Mr Gove approaches his reforms - they also feel that if you denigrate pay and conditions in education you get sh.it teachers and everyone suffers. Maybe its not surprising then that some hot-heads want to strike.

 

Obviously there are some people who have cushier jobs than others, but to divide between public and private sector is simplifying stuff to a silly degree.

[saintfully]

Cotton wool doesn't stop bullets. HTH

 

Don't know what point your trying to make, but you're wrong anyway. If you have enough cotton wool, bullets can be stopped quite easily - thought someone with Einstein as his avatar would've thought that through.

 

Analogous to what??? Give peace a chance :):)

[Viking Warrior]

Saints fully you make some good points about the public sector . I wish I could say more . I will one day . As for the armed forces definately not the cotton wool brigade . Yes there are cushy periods . I ave experienced them but equally I experienced some of the negative **** . We just got on with it as that was the life we chose .

 

Try spending six months in a submarine or however long a tour is . It's not pleasant . You just don't go down the pub in the evening to go out on the **** in one of those things likewise if your at sea on frigate etc

[Viking Warrior]

Saintfully . You would have to have massive amounts of cotton wool to stop a high velocity bullet from hurting you

[badgerx16]

I've highlighted the key words. They choose, so they should stop the whinging

Teachers didn't choose Gove !

[Johnny Bognor]

And if the conditions under which they chose to work in the public sector change? Do they have a right to protest against the changes? I think the point that you're missing is that (rightly or wrongly) some public sector workers feel like they are having the pi.ss taken out of them and are being misrepresented purely for political reasons - not because of a genuine attempt to improve the service or cut costs.

 

This does always makes me laugh. Strikes are called out of misrepresentation or being taken the **** out of, but pay rises always come to the agenda. I wish the unions would be more honest and come out and say "we want more money", rather than try to dress it up as some principled stand against a change in ideology, like they always do.

 

Many teachers feel that they have made a contribution by having a wage freeze for the past 3 years just like many working in the private sector and cannot accept the antagonsitic way Mr Gove approaches his reforms - they also feel that if you denigrate pay and conditions in education you get sh.it teachers and everyone suffers. Maybe its not surprising then that some hot-heads want to strike.

 

Obviously there are some people who have cushier jobs than others, but to divide between public and private sector is simplifying stuff to a silly degree.

 

Really? The poor old teachers have had to endure and suffer a 3 year pay freeze? I didn't realise. Let me tell this to the 1,000,000+ private sector workers who lost their jobs during the financial crisis due to redundancy and company closures, because the parallels between the two are striking (excuse the pun). Silly old me.

Edited 16 September, 2013 by Johnny Bognor

[CB Saint]

The posties are expected to vote for strike this week. However what struck me is that it doesn't cause as much aggro these days as because most communication and payments are transmitted electronically. Ten years ago I would have been thinking about contingency plans at work. Now we will just breeze through it.

 

That suggests that the long term future for the Royal Mail in its current form is not so good.

[badgerx16]

Let me tell this to the 1,000,000+ private sector workers who lost their jobs during the financial crisis due to redundancy and company closures, .......

 

Whilst you are at it, tell it to the hundreds of thousands of public sector staff who lost their jobs in the last 4 years, as well.

[Johnny Bognor]

Whilst you are at it, tell it to the hundreds of thousands of public sector staff who lost their jobs in the last 4 years, as well.

 

... and the teachers striking/asking for more money is going to help how exactly? Are they not going to put even more lower paid low skilled public sector workers on the scrap heap?

 

You could say raise taxes, but this will inevitably lead to private sector job losses.

 

Either way, with no money in the pot, the teachers would be responsible for low paid job losses in either the public or private sector. Perhaps if they had to live under the threat of redundancy themselves, they wouldn't be so selfish and be grateful for the position they find themselves in during times like these.

Edited 17 September, 2013 by Johnny Bognor

[Johnny Bognor]

OK, here goes.....

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24129141

 

Let's hope no-one gets trapped in a fire next week.

Edited 17 September, 2013 by Johnny Bognor

[Dimond Geezer]

OK, here goes.....

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24129141

 

Let's hope no-one gets trapped in a fire next week.

 

It's for 4 hours & should you be unlucky enough to be trapped in a fire, you'll still get rescued as fires & major incidents will still be covered, however if you're trapped in a lift I suggest you take a flask & a sandwich, you could be waiting for the full 4 hours.

[Tokyo-Saint]

It's for 4 hours & should you be unlucky enough to be trapped in a fire, you'll still get rescued as fires & major incidents will still be covered, however if you're trapped in a lift I suggest you take a flask & a sandwich, you could be waiting for the full 4 hours.

 

That'll give you something to moan about on twitter. I can see it now, you are stuck in a lift just as a woman opens her egg sandwich. You are mid tweet about it when the guy behind you starts looking over your shoulder. Que #meltdown

[hypochondriac]

OK, here goes.....

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24129141

 

Let's hope no-one gets trapped in a fire next week.

 

Utterly pathetic. Shame they can't all be sacked.

[Johnny Bognor]

It's for 4 hours & should you be unlucky enough to be trapped in a fire, you'll still get rescued as fires & major incidents will still be covered, however if you're trapped in a lift I suggest you take a flask & a sandwich, you could be waiting for the full 4 hours.

 

Can't even bring the army in, as someone sold off all the green godesses.

[Batman]

fire strikes are a joke

100's of people apply for every job they advertise

[CB Saint]

It's for 4 hours & should you be unlucky enough to be trapped in a fire, you'll still get rescued as fires & major incidents will still be covered, however if you're trapped in a lift I suggest you take a flask & a sandwich, you could be waiting for the full 4 hours.

 

I think any assistance is at the discretion of the fire fighters - not entirely satisfactory

 

"Should a "major incident" occur, the FBU has agreed it will exempt firefighters and operation managers from strike action if they volunteer to help"