jump to last post 1-3 of 3 discussions (69 posts)

More public sector strikes (UK) but do they work?

  1. Silverspeeder profile image60
    Silverspeederposted 2 years ago

    There has been another round of public sector strikes here in the UK with Firefighters, local government workers and teachers (depending on which Union they belong to) amongst the 500,000 - 1,000,000 workers ( depending on who you ask) who decided not to attend work today.  Their grievances run from not having a wage increase to having to little of an increase, having to pay a little more towards their pensions and having to work a little longer to receive them, with one or two stating it was their aim to bring about the downfall of the government, this though was not the official stated aim.
    I can see why some of these workers have been forced to complain but I can not see what this series of one day strikes has achieve.
    There seems to be a general consensus with the public that although they have a right to strike they can not see what effect or objective these strikes are having except losing public sympathy.

    Should the public sector workers then plan a longer strike action? Say for a week or two, this would definitely have a major impact but would it curry any favour with the public?
    I doubt if anything would actually change the general idea that public sector workers have it good, although not strictly true they may be messing it up for themselves.

    So do public sector worker strikes have any affect? And what are the effects of short one day strikes by public sector workers?

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      If nothing else they bring the actions of this sh!tbag government to peoples attention.

      1. Silverspeeder profile image60
        Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I think people already knew the actions John, they showed that when they voted UKIP in the European elections.

        I watched a few interviews last night John and come to the conclusion that although many were sincere they really didn't know what they were talking about. And I will say that government representative also seemed to have no idea what they were talking about either.

        Newsnight was interesting though ( did you see it ) the person they chose to represent the teachers only response to any question was to shout at the government interviewee saying he knew nothing. An old union tactic that went out with the miners. Mind you the government knob didn't seem to know what Groce was trying to do to the education system.
        Maybe they were the only two people they could get that late on a night.

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          But by voting UKIP they were voting for more of the same but heavier.
          The strikers have a lot of public sympathy and more support than the government has.

          1. Silverspeeder profile image60
            Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Not what the polls say!

            UKIP offers a breath of fresh air, maybe they are much of the same but they are definitely not all of the same. It is still the only party who would take us out of Europe if they gained power, I know they won't win but they will do better than the politically elite supporters think they will do.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Got me there! I've never seen a poll that says they aren't just as bad as the rest and worse than some.

              1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I was on about support for the strikes and the strikers.
                Not as much public support as they and their union masters claim.

                Maybe if they went on strike for lower taxes or lower council tax and reduction in government waste then they may have a bit more sympathy from the public.
                Maybe if their own vote was a little mor convincing the public would take more notice!
                   

                My question was related to fact that the public sector strikes don't seen to be working, it hasn't really influenced government policy at all it's just upset the public who they really need on their side.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Six million trade union members
                  177,000 Conservative party members.
                  37,000 UKIP party members.

                  Trade union members are the public but as you say, this government is so deaf that they are not influenced by anything or anyone that objects to their goal of total annihilation of anybody who does not conform.

                  There is no evidence that more of the public were upset by the strike than supported it.

                  1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                    Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Is that how many union members were on strike then John?
                    Only 6 million? That's down a huge amount since 1990 isn't it.

                    Of course the government is not listening because they know that can't give in to the unions or they would lose to many votes.

                    So it shows how ignorant the union leaders are, they will continue with this round of strikes even though they know that they are not working.

            2. jandee profile image46
              jandeeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Wrong ! They are not the only party who pledge 'Out of Europe.'

              1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Who else offers out and not just a referendum then?

    2. psycheskinner profile image79
      psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Short strikes get a lot of media attention, mostly favorable to the workers, and signal a willingness to strike more.  Even one day causes chaos with parents needing to make arrangements, people missing work and millions of dollars being spend one way or another.  This causes people to pressure the government to give the workers what they want.

      I've been in short strikes and they often work to shift the management off their asses and make them make some concessions.

  2. psycheskinner profile image79
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    It certainly showed that Labor no longer lives up to their name.

    1. John Holden profile image61
      John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      It's strange but the Labour party having been set up by the unions to represent their inters in parliament are now told that they should not accept money from the unions!

  3. HollieT profile image87
    HollieTposted 2 years ago

    Sadly, I think the general public are blinkered enough to believe that public sector workers have it easy and strike action is unnecessary.

    Perhaps when the general public are transported to the future and realise that all this privatisation boll*cks means that they can't get a Dr's appointment, have to watch their house burn down because there aren't enough fire fighters  in the area to actually fight fires, wait for ten hours in an er room and then discover that their children are being taught by cheap, unqualified staff they'll get a flavour of the discontent that the public sector are experiencing.

    As for UKIP supporters, I actually can't believe that such stupidity exists. These nut job libertarians actually believe that the free market, profit and no restrictions are the answer to all our woes. They're even worse than this coalition.

    Here's a taster of what public sector workers are experiencing and just how introducing the 'free market' into specialist areas will affect YOU, and the people you care about.

    http://probationmatters.blogspot.co.uk/ … mment-form

    1. Silverspeeder profile image60
      Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Firstly Hollie T Manchester council make its own decisions about manning levels and has overspent time after time.
      It's a bit like Birmingham city council who have released 67 members of staff to do full time union business then it replaces them with high cost agency staff costing around £1.7 million a year.
      The council is also in £2.6 billion pounds worth of debt which they can't blame anyone else for.
      Poor council management can't be blamed on the government,

      The unions have decided to take on the government and we all know why, they want Labour back in because they control them and every demand is given into.

      Now I am not saying that all public sector workers get huge amounts of money but mast of them do fairly well some to extremely well and some need a top up, but there are many more private sector workers a lot worse of than the public sector workers and many won't get the sort of pensions offered to the public sector.

      My main concern is the third tier of government we all have to pay for and how this government has been taking away our governance and identity. I have seen what Labour the liberals and the Tories have to offer over the EU question and I can quite honestly say the only one who represents British interests is UKIP, the quicker we get out the quicker some of the problems can be sorted.

      On another point, for the last 15 years our children have been taught by so called professionals on very decent pay and conditions however literacy and numeracy has fallen and attitude to work ethics from school leavers has become an entitlement attitude. Maybe these professionals are not as good as they thought they were. Oh and my daughter in law is a teacher so I have had all the lectures anyone could giver about it. She's done very well though, 4th year in the job and on £37k a year and a good pension to boot.

      What some public sector workers don't understand is that they are replaceable and the Tory government will not hesitate in privatising some of the services they offer.  How long I wonder will it be before they replace Birmingham city refuse collection with one of the many large private companies waiting to step in.

      1. John Holden profile image61
        John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Why this intent on dragging everybody down to the lowest level rather than raising everybody up to the highest?

        1. Silverspeeder profile image60
          Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Because John in reality giving in to the public sector workers has done nothing to raise the living standards of anyone except the public sector workers.

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            So how will pulling them down benefit anybody?

            BTW are you aware of how many public sector workers are actually on the minimum wage?

            1. Silverspeeder profile image60
              Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              How can it be pulling them down? How many have had their wages dropped then in the last 4 years?
              And don't forget who pays their wages and pensions John. The more they get paid the more taxpayer has to pay.

              I doubt it's a large percentage although I will concede that some are.
              As you know some of my family work for BCC and they don't do badly at all even though they work in the traditionally lower paid jobs.

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                The pay of the average public sector worker has dropped £3,698.

                Why focus on the few exceptions to the rule and focus on the care workers,the hospital ancillary workers, the town hall clerks, all getting by on reducing minimum wages.

                1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                  Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So the government has taken £3,698 out of their basic pay then John!

                  Sister is a social services care worker for BCC her basic pay is £9.98 an hour which is £3.67 above the NMW she also gets a full pension. (She also has just received a large sum of money in their equal pay claim but says she is still not on what the binmen are getting).
                  A nephew who works as a housing officer for BCC has just gone up a pay
                  grade to £24,000 also with a full pension and an extra days holiday (and he went on strike for some reason?)

                  Now as you know I work at a college but most of the guys on security are agency staff, they get £6.50 an hour and have received one rise for about 5 years whilst the college staff have recorded various amounts with one gaining a rise of £16 k a year without promotion.
                  I think the catering staff and cleaners are in the se position as the security.
                  I have not seen the wage rises for public sector staff make any difference towards bringing up the non public sector pay, it's a myth perpetrated by public sector staff.

                  1. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    You've not seen the wages rise for public sector staff at all.

      2. HollieT profile image87
        HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Firstly Silverspeeder I made reference to the Probation Service and what govt. cuts and privatisation are doing to (an award winning service which is a highly esteemed model throughout the world) and how its staff are affected.

        Secondly, I find it almost impossible to reason with an individual who believes that a cheaper model and cheap, untrained staff  will keep communities safe. I mean, really, have you any idea how many murderers, rapists and child sex offenders are being managed in the community? And you want to pay these people peanuts- the starting salary of a PO is £28,000 rising to £35 K or there abouts. And you think the few years of training (always ongoing) long hours, high stress and mammoth responsibility is worth less? Are you kidding me?

        Furthermore, these nutty right wing prats that you appear to admire so much, who also thought the job was without worth decided to make so many redundancies that the service was left in crisis. Now, they're having to rehire X POs as contractors and pay way, way more than they were originally earning. Some saving.

        As it happens the govt. couldn't find these cheap untrained staff to effectively supervise anyone, so, they started advertising for POs who qualified in Australia and New Zealand- problem is they receive six weeks training in those countries as opposed to two years training here and are in no way able to manage high risk cases to the standard which we expect. Oh, and they offered them a starting salary of 50K- Where are the savings?

        As for Manchester city council- do you have any idea of the social problems we have in this city? The Govt. cut funding to this city and the council have had to make cuts accordingly. Your idea of the public vs private sector and their respective merits is so convoluted that it's laughable. Do you honestly, honestly not realise that you're now paying more for services and lining some multi national's pockets? Wake up!

        1. John Holden profile image61
          John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Reason doesn't come into it. Some people are so indoctrinated with hatred of the left (and by extension of themselves) that they would put themselves through any amount of purgatory to avoid anything that even smacked of the left wing.

          1. HollieT profile image87
            HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Just sounds like stupidity to me- doesn't even have to be about the right and left but about what works (evidence based) but we know what this govt. thinks about evidenced backed policy ( p*sses on the profits for their mates)

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Whatever Hollie, it just seems to me that some people are their own worst enemies.
              It's all turkeys voting for Christmas.

          2. Silverspeeder profile image60
            Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            No John I hate the fact that I have to work hard to give someone else a good life and then because they think they are not getting enough  they want more and put me down for it.
            Socialism is a simple ideology really, take money form my pocket to make someone else comfortable.

            1. John Holden profile image61
              John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Oh how deluded you are! Who are you actually giving a good life to? That'll be your masters, not the unemployed who are unemployed to keep your wages down and stop you having a good life.

              Your idea of socialism couldn't be further from the mark. That isn't socialism, it's capitalism.

              1. Silverspeeder profile image60
                Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                You know exactly what I was on about and it wasn't the unemployed.
                Socialism brings everybody down to the same level it doesn't try to bring anyone up.
                I still think Orwell's work was quite implicit about what happens when we are all equal, maybe he understood human nature it's quite obvious that socialists don't.

                1. John Holden profile image61
                  John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  Unlike capitalism which only raises a few up and pulls the rest down?

                  Socialism raises everybody up, some, those at the top, less than others but it does not condemn anybody to a life of poverty and then blame the poverty stricken for their plight.

                  Orwell wasn't writing about socialism, he was writing about Stalinist Russia.

        2. Silverspeeder profile image60
          Silverspeederposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks nice Hollie T, what you have just said is exactly what I would expect from someone like you, this attitude of you are better than anyone else and can't be replace under any citcumstamces and should be getting much much more than you actually do because you work for the government and we should all be thank for that.
          Secondly are you really telling me that there has been no mismanagement at Manchester council? And are you telly telling me that all council workers should be seen as untouchable an should get all the best salaries and pensions while those who pay for them to do so should have no say on it at all.

          This is what happens when their is no restraint within the public sector, it becomes far to expensive and people lose their jobs.

          Oh an £28 k sounds quite good to me but I understand it's not quite enough for you.

          Never mind it's the usual we are better than anyone else argument from the privaliged few who work for the government.

          1. John Holden profile image61
            John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Employees of Manchester City Council (those still with jobs) are to get a pay rise of 1% this year! Oh those greedy pampered so and so's!

            The people of Manchester do have a say in salaries and pensions, they elect the councillors who decide those pay rises and pensions. If people disagree they can vote them out of office.

            1. wilderness profile image96
              wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              "The people of Manchester do have a say in salaries and pensions, they elect the councillors who decide those pay rises and pensions. If people disagree they can vote them out of office."

              True.  Or vote them into office - sure wish I could have bri...uh...voted for - voted for! - the people that would set my salary when I was working.  Can you say "conflict of interest" any louder?  Perhaps anyone drawing an income from the public purse should lose their voting privileges?

              1. John Holden profile image61
                John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Although MCC has a policy of employing people who live in the city I doubt there are enough to influence any influence on the outcome of any election.  I really don't think disenfranchising folk would serve any purpose beyond causing dissent.

                1. wilderness profile image96
                  wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  It probably would cause dissension.  If I were able to vote my friends into setting MY salary, I'd be pretty ticked at losing it too.

                  But seriously, I'm not so sure they can't affect a vote.  I know in the US, voter turnout is very low, and the smaller the election (local, county, state, national) the lower the turnout in percentages of those that could vote.  I'd think it quite likely a county vote could be affected even in the US by people working for a county and would expect you guys to have a higher percentage drawing wages from government than the US.

                  1. John Holden profile image61
                    John Holdenposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    OK, so we stop those relying on local government for their income from voting, better stop all those living in social housing as well. And what about those who depend on MCC for refuse collection, better stop them from voting. Anybody who depends on the council for services better no vote either.

                    That leaves, let's see, nobody entitled to vote for councillors!

                    If council employees were evenly distributed across wards that would mean 204 council employees per councillor,  It takes between 1400 and 2500 votes to elect a councillor to MCC. Therefore even if those council employees were evenly distributed and all voted the same way they would have no real affect on the vote.

          2. HollieT profile image87
            HollieTposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks nice Hollie T, what you have just said is exactly what I would expect from someone like you, this attitude of you are better than anyone else and can't be replace under any citcumstamces and should be getting much much more than you actually do because you work for the government and we should all be thank for that.

            Someone like me, that's an interesting comment! What I'm telling you is that you're paying a damn sight more for your public services and this govt. is happily trying to recruit unskilled cheap staff to keep you safe (joke) whilst lining their mate's pockets. I'm also telling you that I bothered to get off my ars& get an education and work hard to get on. If I'd have been in it for the money I'd have floated to to the private sector. The alternative, of course, would have been to moan about a sector I clearly know nothing about and believe that I would deserve the salary and prospects of my public sector peers when I'd done sod all to actually get myself there.

            That's by the by anyway. I couldn't give a damn whether you want to thank me or otherwise- and not once have any of the public sector asked for much much more than they actually receive (do you actually do any research at all?) They're asking to retain their pensions, which they have paid into for years (and they're not gold plated either before you start with that nonsense) not have to do the work of three people and receive annual increments in-line with inflation. Oh, the cheek! The other nonsense you've spouted exists in your imagination only.

            Secondly are you really telling me that there has been no mismanagement at Manchester council? And are you telly telling me that all council workers should be seen as untouchable an should get all the best salaries and pensions while those who pay for them to do so should have no say on it at all.

            There's always mismanagement somewhere- think the private companies that are under investigation by the serious fraud office for charging the tax payer to tag offenders who were dead or still in custody. Just an example which I suspect you'll not want to discuss any further.

            Oh an £28 k sounds quite good to me but I understand it's not quite enough for you.

            Actually that's more than enough for me, but Chris Grayling has decided that I'm worth far, far more because there's a national shortage of people with my skills and experience (the coalition stopped recruiting and training new POs) Blame them.

            And by the way, if I'd have opted to join the private sector after graduation I'd have been earning far more than 28K. If this sum sounds massive to you then might I suggest that you take a 50k student loan, work  and study full time and then let employers decide your worth.

            And I notice how you've very conveniently dodged the issue when it comes to the public sector, the govts. mismanagement of such and how your public services have become more expensive under this govt. (and the staff aren't the ones who are raking it in) Think!

 
working