Union bashing

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 May 15 6.01pm
Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 14 May 15 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike.
So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion.

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

derben 14 May 15 6.11pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.
Alert a moderator to this post

derben

14 May 15 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset Shizzlehurst 14 May 15 6.25pm
Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there. What in every instance? I suppose you support this.
Alert a moderator to this post

nickgusset

Shizzlehurst 14 May 15 6.25pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

What in every instance?

I suppose you support this.

Alert a moderator to this post

derben 14 May 15 6.37pm
Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.25pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there. What in every instance? I suppose you support this. How many instances do you think acceptable then? I think one is unacceptable. Of course I do not support the shooting of striking workers - even when the shooting are by governments apparently beyond criticism.
Alert a moderator to this post

derben

14 May 15 6.37pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.25pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

What in every instance?

I suppose you support this.

How many instances do you think acceptable then? I think one is unacceptable. Of course I do not support the shooting of striking workers - even when the shooting are by governments apparently beyond criticism.

Alert a moderator to this post

imbored UK 14 May 15 7.06pm
Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there. This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death? Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

imbored

UK 14 May 15 7.06pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death?

Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

ChuFukka 14 May 15 7.22pm
Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Exactly. Some of the opposition is laughable. Also, the reason the Tories are entitled to govern with so little of the public voting for them (just like Labour - not that anyone was complaining then) is because we NEED a government, so we have to accept that whoever gets the most votes should fulfil that role. We don't need strikes, so abstention from voting should be taken as a lack of support for the contention - if people cared enough, they would vote.
Alert a moderator to this post

ChuFukka

14 May 15 7.22pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Exactly. Some of the opposition is laughable.

Also, the reason the Tories are entitled to govern with so little of the public voting for them (just like Labour - not that anyone was complaining then) is because we NEED a government, so we have to accept that whoever gets the most votes should fulfil that role. We don't need strikes, so abstention from voting should be taken as a lack of support for the contention - if people cared enough, they would vote.

Alert a moderator to this post

TUX redhill 14 May 15 8.51pm
Quote ChuFukka at 14 May 2015 7.22pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Exactly. Some of the opposition is laughable. Also, the reason the Tories are entitled to govern with so little of the public voting for them (just like Labour - not that anyone was complaining then) is because we NEED a government, so we have to accept that whoever gets the most votes should fulfil that role. We don't need strikes, so abstention from voting should be taken as a lack of support for the contention - if people cared enough, they would vote. A lesson in contradicting yourself.
Alert a moderator to this post

TUX

redhill 14 May 15 8.51pm

Quote ChuFukka at 14 May 2015 7.22pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Exactly. Some of the opposition is laughable.

Also, the reason the Tories are entitled to govern with so little of the public voting for them (just like Labour - not that anyone was complaining then) is because we NEED a government, so we have to accept that whoever gets the most votes should fulfil that role. We don't need strikes, so abstention from voting should be taken as a lack of support for the contention - if people cared enough, they would vote.

A lesson in contradicting yourself.

Alert a moderator to this post

derben 15 May 15 12.10pm
Quote imbored at 14 May 2015 7.06pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there. This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death? Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm) No it is not. It is merely pointing out that Britain supposedly having 'the harshest anti union laws' is nonsense when regimes like South Africa (that gussett no doubt generally supports) shoots striking workers dead. Where were the protest marches and denunciations of it from the left by the way?
Alert a moderator to this post

derben

15 May 15 12.10pm

Quote imbored at 14 May 2015 7.06pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death?

Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm)

No it is not. It is merely pointing out that Britain supposedly having 'the harshest anti union laws' is nonsense when regimes like South Africa (that gussett no doubt generally supports) shoots striking workers dead. Where were the protest marches and denunciations of it from the left by the way?

Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh wherever I lay my hat....... 15 May 15 12.16pm
I thought the Thread Title was a job offer ....Disapointed. "It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"
Alert a moderator to this post

dannyh

wherever I lay my hat....... 15 May 15 12.16pm

I thought the Thread Title was a job offer ....Disapointed.

"It's not the bullet that's got my name on it that concerns me; it's all them other ones flyin' around marked 'To Whom It May Concern.'"

Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle 15 May 15 12.35pm
Quote derben at 15 May 2015 12.10pm Quote imbored at 14 May 2015 7.06pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights. Cunds Impossible? Why impossible? 50% of those eligible to vote must vote, and 40% of those eligible to vote must vote for the strike. So if the workforce numbered a 100, 50 of them must vote and 40 of those must vote to strike. So you could still have your strike although 60% do not want it or have no opinion. Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it. Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is. Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm) Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there. This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death? Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm) No it is not. It is merely pointing out that Britain supposedly having 'the harshest anti union laws' is nonsense when regimes like South Africa (that gussett no doubt generally supports) shoots striking workers dead. Where were the protest marches and denunciations of it from the left by the way? Do at least try not to let your knee jerk prejudices and tunnel vision analysis evidence themselves so manifestly?. From the "Unite" union website,as an example. "As the world becomes smaller Unite members are becoming increasingly engaged in action to support workers and communities across borders and continents. Unite is affiliated to the following campaigning organisations. ACTSAAction for Southern Africa ...ACTSA has longstanding and close ties with many organisations, including unions, across southern Africa and in the UK. Unite is affiliated to ACTSA and has supported many of its campaigns, including work on Zimbabwe, Swaziland and justice for South African miners." Edited by legaleagle (15 May 2015 12.35pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

legaleagle

15 May 15 12.35pm

Quote derben at 15 May 2015 12.10pm

Quote imbored at 14 May 2015 7.06pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 6.11pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 6.01pm

Quote derben at 14 May 2015 5.47pm

Quote nickgusset at 14 May 2015 5.31pm

Make it impossible to strike, then hit people with cuts to work rights.

Cunds

Impossible? Why impossible?

Hardly communist-block suppression of union rights is it.

Not Communist block suppression. No. But still suppression. We already have among the harshest anti union laws in the western world as it is.

Edited by nickgusset (14 May 2015 6.03pm)

Lucky you are not in South Africa, they shoot striking workers there.

This is basically the equivalent of slapping your wife then telling her to be thankful she's not in the middle east being stoned to death?

Edited by imbored (14 May 2015 7.08pm)

Do at least try not to let your knee jerk prejudices and tunnel vision analysis evidence themselves so manifestly?.

From the "Unite" union website,as an example.

"As the world becomes smaller Unite members are becoming increasingly engaged in action to support workers and communities across borders and continents. Unite is affiliated to the following campaigning organisations.

ACTSAAction for Southern Africa

...ACTSA has longstanding and close ties with many organisations, including unions, across southern Africa and in the UK. Unite is affiliated to ACTSA and has supported many of its campaigns, including work on Zimbabwe, Swaziland and justice for South African miners."

Edited by legaleagle (15 May 2015 12.35pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

npn Crowborough 15 May 15 12.48pm
I've always found it amazing that retired workers who are still members of the union get to vote on strike action. They won't have to walk out and lose a day's pay (must be some sort of power trip to be able to insist on people who actually stand to lose out by strike action when you won't personally be affected). The comparisons with elections are, of course, fallacious (as I'm sure those making them are well aware). Expecting a decent majority in a yes/no decision seems far more reasonable than expecting it in a Con/Lab/LD/Green/UKIP/SNP/PC/Other choice. If you get a quarter of the votes in an upwards of 6 horse race, you're doing pretty well. Anyone who is still working and fails to vote is a bit spineless in my opinion (I can understand the whole "none of the above, they are all weasels" attitude in an election, but "I don't know whether to strike or not so I'll just leave it to others to decide" seems an indication of indifference to the issue)
Alert a moderator to this post

npn

Crowborough 15 May 15 12.48pm

I've always found it amazing that retired workers who are still members of the union get to vote on strike action. They won't have to walk out and lose a day's pay (must be some sort of power trip to be able to insist on people who actually stand to lose out by strike action when you won't personally be affected).

The comparisons with elections are, of course, fallacious (as I'm sure those making them are well aware). Expecting a decent majority in a yes/no decision seems far more reasonable than expecting it in a Con/Lab/LD/Green/UKIP/SNP/PC/Other choice.

If you get a quarter of the votes in an upwards of 6 horse race, you're doing pretty well.

Anyone who is still working and fails to vote is a bit spineless in my opinion (I can understand the whole "none of the above, they are all weasels" attitude in an election, but "I don't know whether to strike or not so I'll just leave it to others to decide" seems an indication of indifference to the issue)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk Top half 15 May 15 12.52pm
Quote npn at 15 May 2015 12.48pm I've always found it amazing that retired workers who are still members of the union get to vote on strike action. They won't have to walk out and lose a day's pay (must be some sort of power trip to be able to insist on people who actually stand to lose out by strike action when you won't personally be affected). The comparisons with elections are, of course, fallacious (as I'm sure those making them are well aware). Expecting a decent majority in a yes/no decision seems far more reasonable than expecting it in a Con/Lab/LD/Green/UKIP/SNP/PC/Other choice. If you get a quarter of the votes in an upwards of 6 horse race, you're doing pretty well. Anyone who is still working and fails to vote is a bit spineless in my opinion (I can understand the whole "none of the above, they are all weasels" attitude in an election, but "I don't know whether to strike or not so I'll just leave it to others to decide" seems an indication of indifference to the issue) Can't disagree with any of that. Optimistic as ever
Alert a moderator to this post

Stuk

Top half 15 May 15 12.52pm

Quote npn at 15 May 2015 12.48pm

If you get a quarter of the votes in an upwards of 6 horse race, you're doing pretty well.

Can't disagree with any of that.

Optimistic as ever

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Union bashing

Site Map

Sponsors