Labour Leadership

I'm disappointed Boris hasn't taken their subsidised travel off them.

Was class when Walsh did that to the BA cabin crew.
 
Is it not part of their contract with LU though?

For BA Cabin crew it was a discretionary perk so Walsh was free to do as he pleased, which was great! Willie's the man.
 
Well if ken gets back in, the tube workers will be safe as houses and no doubt find more reasons to strike

There will be a mass hiring of "race advisors" on £150k a year who will invite holocaust denying, nazi worshipping Imans as their "guests". Millions will disappear into "black community projects" whilst the white middle class will be sneered at, ableit not with the same hatred as that dished out to the Jews
 
Bit strong Clive, some of that is just Daily Mail nonsense.

However, it does amuse me that it's Ken's policies on modernising the Underground ticketing systems that have bought about job losses in the underground and now he has the cheek to speak out against them!
 
Not too strong at all. Pretty much what happened last time around (although there were some achievements too)
 
Was impressed with Ed's speech today, especially the section on opposing needless strikes.

Looks like David M will be gone tomorrow, a great shame IMO.
 
With so many rules and regs enshrined in EU labour law now, are unions relevant any more? I'm not sure that they've been relevant to British workers since the rise of tribunalism, where the disaffected can go to ombudsmen and various panels, without the need to belong to a union or for their representation. Any thoughts on this, anyone? Life without unions is possible if you have legally-enforceable good rules about working conditions, surely?
 
krizon said:
With so many rules and regs enshrined in EU labour law now, are unions relevant any more? I'm not sure that they've been relevant to British workers since the rise of tribunalism, where the disaffected can go to ombudsmen and various panels, without the need to belong to a union or for their representation. Any thoughts on this, anyone? Life without unions is possible if you have legally-enforceable good rules about working conditions, surely?
Click to expand...

I agree, sadly, that trade unions have become largely irrelevant in the UK, Krizon, but I think that a proper trade union movement would have a big contribution to make. After all, where would labour laws come from if there is no labour movement to campaign for them?

I think British trade unions are probably the weakest in western Europe. This is partly due to economic factors such as the loss of coal and most of the steel and motor industries and the growth of service sectors which are difficult to organise, and partly due to hostile legal measures introduced by the Thatcher governments which "New Labour" did nothing to reverse.

But another part of the reason is limited vision and poor strategy by the British unions. Most European countries have institutionalised dialogue between the so-called social partners (trade unions, employers, the voluntary sector and government) about working conditions, labour law, social welfare, access to health services, migration policy and the like. This sort of process got under way in Ireland in the 1990s and has been a great success. For example, when the Irish economy hit the rocks in recent years and a huge budget deficit opened up, public sector wages were slashed. In France and Greece there would have been riots but in Ireland there was broad acceptance - sullen, perhaps, but acceptance nevertheless - because the trade unions were fully informed of the seriousness of the situation and of the need for their co-operation to get us out of the mess.

For their part unions have had much greater influence than they had in their traditional role of confronting individual employers, despite experiencing some of the same adverse economic factors as the UK unions and a major drop in membership. They have been able to insist on proper enforcement of labour legislation and industry ageements, including a decent enough minimum wage. This has been very helpful in reducing resentment against migrant labour. They have been able to trade off increases for middle and upper incomes in order to protect the living standards of the lowest paid and, with the help of the voluntary sector, they obtained a more generous social welfare package for pensioners and the unemployed.

This process of social dialogue has not been accepted by everyone on the union side. There are those, Trots and others, who simply want to see the present economic system collapse and oppose attempts to shore it up, but more numerous are those who simply think this sort of give and take is collaboration with the enemy, and a sign of weakness.

Ireland has both British-based and home grown trade unions operating (both north and south), and it is noticeable that the main opposition to social dialogue has come from the British unions. They are unsympathetic to the European christian/social democrat model of social dialogue, and seem to be as wedded to the Anglo-Saxon version of capitalism as their governments and employers. In the process, as their economic power declines, and given their aversion to social dialogue, they have been reduced to little more than purveyors of cut price insurance and holiday packages to their members.
 
I thought Trade Unions were just a way of tricking naive, non-politically aware members of the general population to fund the Labour party? I appreciate that they do this through purporting to represent their members interests but I wasn't aware that they were able or even inclined to actually do so.
 
No one has turned around thatchers legislation because there is no public support to do so. Despite being the home of unionism the uk isn't (hat enthused about collectiviism. That's somethiung she understood and one of the reasons why (as opposed to the continent) extreme parties have never had any support. This countries srtrength is in individualism and creativity and the industries we thrive in demonstrate that (as well as the long history of innovation)
 
clivex said:
No one has turned around thatchers legislation because there is no public support to do so. Despite being the home of unionism the uk isn't (hat enthused about collectiviism. That's somethiung she understood and one of the reasons why (as opposed to the continent) extreme parties have never had any support. This countries srtrength is in individualism and creativity and the industries we thrive in demonstrate that (as well as the long history of innovation)
Click to expand...

There is a healthy streak of individualism in British society, but I don't see that social dialogue is in conflict with, and I don't see the link between social dialogue and political extremes. In fact I'd say the lack of it is more likely to lead to extremes. The individualist society par excellence is supposedly the US, but the Bush administration's political philosophy and foreign policy came straight out of Marvel Comics ("we're gonna give the bad guys what's coming to 'em") and was certainly extremist.
 
Bush was not extremist at all in the democratic liberal sense. I am really talking about the anti democratic collectivist extremes on left and right. I think you know that grey
 
I know nothing at all about what goes on inside your head, Clive. I don't see any link between social dialogue and political extremism. Do you?
 
Great to see David Milliband put it to Harman yesterday.

I forgot about it, but it's hard to take a party seriously when there is a minimum number of women to be voted into it's shadow cabinet.
 
I'm not sure what you're on about grey. All I pointed out was that unions are collectivist and (as withe the collectivist extremes in both politics and religion) that is not something that is historicallyu or naturally appealing to the british

That's why the unions are "the weakest in europe"
 
Im not refering to "social dialogue" at all. If (supposedly) unions are necessary for this and lack of the same leads to extremes, why is the UK the least fertile ground in europe for the Nick Grffins and Seamus milnes of this world?
 
Last edited:
clivex said:
I'm not sure what you're on about grey. All I pointed out was that unions are collectivist and (as withe the collectivist extremes in both politics and religion) that is not something that is historicallyu or naturally appealing to the british

That's why the unions are "the weakest in europe"
Click to expand...

It is easy to overstate these things, I feel. I think you are referring to an important strand in British tradition, but only a strand. The idea of acting for the common good is not unknown in the UK.

In a sporting context British people like to emphasise the importance of the team effort. In football they usually prefer the honest clogger working hard for the team to the talented prima donna. Likewise, British people draw great pride from their capacity to rally round in a crisis (e.g. the community spirit displayed during the blitz), from their donations to charities, etc. And above all, Britain's economic and political might was built on the collective discipline of its navy and army.
 
Thats fair enough. There are some contradictions and personally i think too much can be made of national characteristics

In economic terms though our strength is as a trading nation (nation of shopkeepers). The nation we are most similar to in that respect is the Netherlands.

And I still say that politically and religously (if thats right phrase) the british are deeply suspicious of fundmentalism and authoritinarism.
 
clivex said:
So he should. Crow is a moron and a bigot.

Reagan sacked all the air traffic controlers when they went on strike in the 80s. Thats a skilled job and yet somehow they managed to keep the service going. Tube driving is not a skilled job but is paid as if it was.

An abolsutely wonderful solution would be the immediate firing of all tube drivers. Sure they can reapply for their jobs but at a market rate (ie half what they get now). And they would. They are useless outside of their current employment.

The public would be right behind this, even if it meant that tubes were affected for weeks. They are absolutely despised
Click to expand...

I wasnt aware they were this high..

A station supervisor earns £35,000-£39,000, while a tube driver's starting salary is just over £40,000, according to TfL. Pay grades for station assistants start at either £24,000 or £29,000 depending on the role and responsibilities.
Click to expand...

I would have loved to bump into Bob Crow at 7.00 this morning when walking a long way to work. I can't imagine the public have any sympathy for this crowd. Lets hope Boris remains resilient.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Hardly market rates are they? Really believe a good battle could be won here.

Bob Crow under a train would be a perfect start to the day.
 
Back
Top