ConDems vs The Unions

Well, it looks we could be stepping back to the 1970s/1980s.

First, the Unions tell us, the British people, what we think!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11276452

Yes, they know exactly how we feel, that's right, all of us. And, more interestingly, is some sort of planned campaign of strike action on the horizon?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11232394

All I can say is get stuffed. We all know why the unions fear these cuts, because without the bloated public sector, they have very little reason to exist. Sure, their members can be employees of private companies( if the company chooses not to ban employees from union membership), but let's be honest, there's no real political clout that way.

No, the unions know the big public sector is a tool for them. Think of it like a business, but the bigger the public sector, the more money the company makes. Of course, who cares if any proposed planned campaign of strikes hurts the economy, does public sector employees no favours and ultimately does more harm than good?

If something does materialise, I actually say good. Perhaps this government can finish what Maggie started, Round 2 anyone?

They are half-right, but they are also half-wrong.

Either way, I am not caring too much, there needs to be some efficiency cuts.

But they do speak for a large section of the British public who do think their way, as well, so it isn't just them talking about nonsense.

Either way, I am not caring too much, there needs to be some efficiency cuts.
Yeah. Just not me. Cut (bleed) somebody else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Sure, their members can be employees of private companies( if the company chooses not to ban employees from union membership), but let's be honest, there's no real political clout that way.

---

Is that not illegal I suspect what your really talking about is where the company does not have an officially endorsed union.

They usually try to bribe the employees with perks and the like but the employees may still be members of a union.

I just love how a private medical business "adds to the economy", while if the same business is government owned, then it becomes "government spending".

bwahahahahaha! break them again, make them bleed.

You can ban employees from Union membership?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tibilicus

Perhaps this government can finish what Maggie started, Round 2 anyone?

---

Sad how it's come to this. Clearly few people actually remember, or want to remember, how hard and for how long the average worker had to fight for decent pay and working conditions. Unions now might be a far cry from their roots, but the alternative is far worse. The right wing press have always smeared the unions, portraying them and their supporters as greedy parasites that just want to be paid more than they're worth, but the likes of the Times, Express, Daily Mail and Sun have a clear agenda: to slander, discredit and ridicule the union movement at every opportunity - what's worse though is seeing the average person on the street, who's non too distant ancestors probably benefited from the unions, repeating this bile without a second thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CountArach

You can ban employees from Union membership?

---

Why not? If they want the job then they have to accept the terms and conditions that go with the post. If they want to join a union they can stay unemployed. Much better than when I left school. In those days you had to join the union if you wanted to take the job. Institutional racketeering.

What I want explaining by the government is why am I financing these thugs with my taxes through the union modernising fund. Which BTW goes back to the Labour party in union subs. Subs that you have to pay. I remember when Hilda fetched in legislation that compelled the unions to secretly ballot members on the political levy. Our shop steward came around with a list of all his members and asked us, in full view of all there, whether we wanted to continue with the Labour partys tithe.

I told him I didn't and was harassed and threatened for years afterwards. A side of the unions that not many see. Vicious fascists thugs, all of them.

*and breathe*

That's what happens when unions become like corporations. ~;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asai Nagamasa

Sad how it's come to this. Clearly few people actually remember, or want to remember, how hard and for how long the average worker had to fight for decent pay and working conditions. Unions now might be a far cry from their roots, but the alternative is far worse. The right wing press have always smeared the unions, portraying them and their supporters as greedy parasites that just want to be paid more than they're worth, but the likes of the Times, Express, Daily Mail and Sun have a clear agenda: to slander, discredit and ridicule the union movement at every opportunity - what's worse though is seeing the average person on the street, who's non too distant ancestors probably benefited from the unions, repeating this bile without a second thought.

---

But now most of the things that were fought for a now legislated into European Law. We don't need to have every vestige just in case of a threat from several hundred years ago. We used to have chains preventing Dutch warships going up the thames and other major rivers. This is no longer required, nor are the castles to prevent a Welsh invasion.

Things do change over time and what once were essential are not not required and merely a drain on resouces. My personal experience of Unions has been that they take the approach of least work - sod worker's rights, just don't require the local union bod to y'know, do anything.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asai Nagamasa

Sad how it's come to this. Clearly few people actually remember, or want to remember, how hard and for how long the average worker had to fight for decent pay and working conditions. Unions now might be a far cry from their roots, but the alternative is far worse. The right wing press have always smeared the unions, portraying them and their supporters as greedy parasites that just want to be paid more than they're worth, but the likes of the Times, Express, Daily Mail and Sun have a clear agenda: to slander, discredit and ridicule the union movement at every opportunity - what's worse though is seeing the average person on the street, who's non too distant ancestors probably benefited from the unions, repeating this bile without a second thought.

---

Perhaps my reaction may be a strong one, but let's look at a short history of where the unions went wrong.

Pre 1960s- The Unions had a role in the post-war consensus, this much is undeniable.

1963-1970s- Strike action begins to be seen by Unions as a tool of ransom. Days lost to strike action increases.

1973-1980- The NUM strikes lead to the three day week which, essentially, brings down a democratically elected government. The NUM had this political aim in mind, simply because Heath and the Conservatives weren't "one of us". This was unforgivable in my opinion and marked the point where the unions had to be castrated. Wage rise concessions in the 1970s were a joke, rising way above real wage increases and the unions helped essentially bankrupt the country along with Labour. Callaghan has the humiliatingly ask for an IMF loan. Winter of discontent, you get the rest.

1982- Thatcher quite rightly sees the militancy of the unions. The NUM strike was the cumulation of a long brewing confrontation where the Marxist pig, Scargill, essentially leads those who he is meant to represent, down the road to ruin. We then lead up to 2010 where we have gone a good 20 years plus with out real strike action. We're all the better for it too.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to 2010 however, and it looks like it's a certainty.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11278570

A campaign of strike action has now been announced and will either take place this autumn or spring. Of course, how could we have a strike without the Labour Party backing it?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11283048

Labour make me sick. It's pathetic how in opposition they revert to their old knuckle-dragging and thuggish like ways.

The Labour Party is probably foaming at the mouth like the rabid dogs they are. How nice they get to ruin the country and then protests against those who would seek to mend it. Next the Militant Tendency will be back, infiltrating councils all over Britain and bankrupting cities.

Quote:

---

The Labour Party is probably foaming at the mouth like the rabid dogs they are. How nice they get to ruin the country and then protests against those who would seek to mend it. Next the Militant Tendency will be back, infiltrating councils all over Britain and bankrupting cities.

---

Worse than Militant. Worse than the NUM or TUC.

Look up Common Purpose.

You will break out in a cold sweat. :sweatdrop:

in the 20th century the USSR funded union militancy via the Co-op, in the 21st century the EUSSR funds propaganda via Common Purpose.

http://www.cpexposed.com/about_common_purpose/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

in the 20th century the USSR funded union militancy via the Co-op, in the 21st century the EUSSR funds propaganda via Common Purpose.

http://www.cpexposed.com/about_common_purpose/

---

:jumping:

Oh goodie! Someone else knows about this!

I've always wondered how pro-union patriots would feel if they knew their union was receiving funding from communists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

in the 20th century the USSR funded union militancy via the Co-op, in the 21st century the EUSSR funds propaganda via Common Purpose.

http://www.cpexposed.com/about_common_purpose/

---

I have to admit, that site made me laugh, especially that whole brain-washing and mind-control part. The rest of it could be true, but brain-washing/mind-control doesn't really work like that and would require the subject to actively allow themselves to be 'mind-controlled'. There are a couple of ways you could break a person, but they are illegal and it would cause some serious personality problems and side-effects, such as PTSD being an obvious one. Active and willing participants are far more efficient and effective, especially if you play an ignorance card.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vladimir

I've always wondered how pro-union patriots would feel if they knew their union was receiving funding from communists.

---

'communist' isn't a scare word to some one who actually knows what communism is. However, your own statement gets more amusing since the biggest investors are the financial elite who already own America. :beam:

Let's take a quick look for example:
Council of Foreign Relations, who's members include Mc Cain, Clinton and Obama.
Bilderberg Group, another American dominated grouping of tycoons and multi-internationals, along with the Dutch Royal Family, and other 'Old Guard'


Edit:

On another interesting note, I notice they put up "Unelected Regional Assemblies" as one of the big bad guys. Labour tried to make these elected bodies, and succeeded with for example, London Assembly. However, there was a very strong Conservative party resistance to making these elected bodies, which resulted in the failure of the North East assembly. Since this failure, the project of making these bodies elected was side-lined. Only other successes were Scotland and Wales and Northern Ireland, where they have a very small conservative presence.

Also, there is Conservative resistance to making Councils elected as well, there are very few places with 'elected Mayors'.

I just found it interesting enough to mention.


If we continue, all this talk ends up along the lines of the "New World Order" and Illuminati conspiracy theories, then people just jump off the bandwagon as it becomes far removed from the common public spheres. So I am just going to step off here.

no unions please, we're British:

http://economist.com/blogs/blighty/2010/09/unions

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Furunculus

no unions please, we're British:

http://economist.com/blogs/blighty/2010/09/unions

---

I agree that the current actions are against the spirit of Trade Unions. Trade Unions do have a purpose in a system where there is no/limited economic democracy, but I don't approve of actions and words they have spoken in the media, and I am especially displeased Labour are supporting them.

"2010 is a vital year where freedom hangs in the balance. A vicious police state is being installed around us by means of a subversive common purpose political agenda. This must be exposed and thwarted for our children's sake."

In fact, CP is an elitest pro-EU political organisation helping to replace democracy in UK, and worldwide, with CP chosen ‘elite’ leaders. In truth, their hidden networks and political objectives are undermining and destroying our democratic society and are threatening ‘free will’ in adults, teenagers and children. Their work is funded by public money and big business, including international banks.


1 - Wots that all about then?

2 - I thought the 'paranoid style of politics' was a US phenomenon? ('Socialist take-over!')

All of the themes are distinct US paranoia-politics:
- Persons being 'replaced' by identical looking, but very different versions of themselves. (See the classic 'Invasion of the Body Snatchers')
- Freedom hangs in the balance. The severe threat may not even be noticeable except for those in the know, but rest assured that freedom itself is hanging in the balance!
- People are 'zombie-fied'. Their free will taken away. (See 'perennial US zombie fixation')
- Massive funding! Invisible, but massive! In this case, both big government AND big business.
- The foreign Evil Empire is behind it all.

What's with the British imitation of this all of a sudden? Next, they'll be clamouring to replace Darwin with Intelligent Design too. Some things are not meant to cross the pond.

lol the site is funny and i put it up as a joke, but that doesn't make CP any more worthwhile of breathing oxygen. :D