The 2015 Popularity Contest (aka UK General Election )

[davek]

The Tories have decided to jump on the football bandwagon.

UK government urges Sepp Blatter to publish full Michael Garcia report
• Culture secretary Sajid Javid writes to Fifa president
• Concerned over Fifa’s independence and transparency

I wonder when the same urgency will be given to publishing all the information about the Westminster paedo sex ring.

Plus the minor awkward detail, of course, that Cameron was one of the Three Lions led delegation heading up a bid that tried to bribe the FIFA Vice President and a whole football federation.

 

[mrs the esk]

I just think it's an antiquated approach and it's sad that we even need trade unions these days. We need everyone working together on these things rather than causing divides.

No Trade Unions, are you joking?

Don't take my word for it, go and watch Episode 4 of Boys from the Blackstuff



From 17:37 George's wife explaining to her two grown up son's why things had got better and why it was important to carry on fighting for improved conditions.

From 28:30, George's soliloquy before he dies, @the esk showed me a video of this whole episode when we first went out together, he said it explained his background better than anything he could do himself.

 

[Coach]

ON the day the National Audit Office slaps down Ian Duncan Smith and says that the Universal Credit Scheme is not providing value for money. Here is great article about the Tories conning us by redefining the meaning of welfare,

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices...ded-to-redefine-the-word-welfare-9873127.html

 

[roydo]

No wind up. They appear a byproduct of the industrial age that I'm not sure is really relevant any more. I'm not sure they've really adapted to how things generally are these days. I mean is it really a coincidence that nearly all union members are public sector workers?

You could argue that the public sector needs decent unions more than the private sector though. Insofar that their bosses are driven by political agendas rather than a commercial interest, and generally change at least every 5 years, and more often than not, every 2 or 3 when new ministers are appointed.

And said new bosses often show an inclination to not really understand the "businesses" they oversea in the same way the owners of a private company would do. That being said, I am not a fan of the overtly political stance some union leaders take, seemingly more interested in fighting a long forgotten class war than anything else!

 

[davek]

No wind up. They appear a byproduct of the industrial age that I'm not sure is really relevant any more. I'm not sure they've really adapted to how things generally are these days. I mean is it really a coincidence that nearly all union members are public sector workers?

I wouldn't defend TU bureaucrats, They're very dubious characters and all about empire building. It's undeniable though that (unless they're made illegal, as in some areas of the globe) trade unions will always have a role to play as the only workplace organisation capable of providing some form of shield against exploitation. People huddle together for protection and strength. It's just a natural, given response. Call it something else if you want, but the impulse to come together and fight off attack is part of the human condition.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

No Trade Unions, are you joking?

From 28:30, George's soliloquy before he dies, @the esk showed me a video of this whole episode when we first went out together, he said it explained his background better than anything he could do himself.

The old smoothie Seriously though, that was over 30 years ago. Times have moved on. Would @the esk exploit his employees if they weren't a member of a trade union? I wouldn't imagine he would for one minute as he no doubt appreciates that a happy workforce is a productive workforce. What makes you think that kind of thinking isn't the norm?

You could argue that the public sector needs decent unions more than the private sector though. Insofar that their bosses are driven by political agendas rather than a commercial interest, and generally change at least every 5 years, and more often than not, every 2 or 3 when new ministers are appointed.

And said new bosses often show an inclination to not really understand the "businesses" they oversea in the same way the owners of a private company would do. That being said, I am not a fan of the overtly political stance some union leaders take, seemingly more interested in fighting a long forgotten class war than anything else!

Call me a cynic if you like, but I do wonder if it isn't more that public services are by and large monopolies, therefore unions can exert a lot of power over the employer because they know full well that the 'customer' cannot go anywhere else.

I wouldn't defend TU bureaucrats, They're very dubious characters and all about empire building. It's undeniable though that (unless they're made illegal, as in some areas of the globe) trade unions will always have a role to play as the only workplace organisation capable of providing some form of shield against exploitation. People huddle together for protection and strength. It's just a natural, given response. Call it something else if you want, but the impulse to come together and fight off attack is part of the human condition.

In a bygone era it may well have been the case that people were exploited at work, I'm just not sure it's the case any more, and certainly not in the public sector.

 

[The Cowboy]

The old smoothie Seriously though, that was over 30 years ago. Times have moved on. Would @the esk exploit his employees if they weren't a member of a trade union? I wouldn't imagine he would for one minute as he no doubt appreciates that a happy workforce is a productive workforce. What makes you think that kind of thinking isn't the norm?



Call me a cynic if you like, but I do wonder if it isn't more that public services are by and large monopolies, therefore unions can exert a lot of power over the employer because they know full well that the 'customer' cannot go anywhere else.



In a bygone era it may well have been the case that people were exploited at work, I'm just not sure it's the case any more, and certainly not in the public sector.

Given that working condition / dismissal disputes are covered by Industrial Tribunals/ACAS etc, I guess all TU's have left is to defend their workers pay and push for better pay.

I suppose this becomes more pertinent for public workers who's finances depend on budgets rather than company profits.

<cannot believe I'm almost defending the existence of TU's here>

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Given that working condition / dismissal disputes are covered by Industrial Tribunals/ACAS etc, I guess all TU's have left is to defend their workers pay and push for better pay.

I suppose this becomes more pertinent for public workers who's finances depend on budgets rather than company profits.

<cannot believe I'm almost defending the existence of TU's here>

Aye possibly. I didn't like Bob Crow in the slightest, but it's hard to dispute that he was fantastic in terms of raising the wages of his members. I'm just not sure he benefited the industry as a whole, nor the customers of that industry.

 

[The Cowboy]

Aye possibly. I didn't like Bob Crow in the slightest, but it's hard to dispute that he was fantastic in terms of raising the wages of his members. I'm just not sure he benefited the industry as a whole, nor the customers of that industry.

The only person who benefitted was Bob Crow. A hideous specimen who only wanted to promote himself.

Holding TFL (and the LU users) to ransom in order to get a payrise for his members surely is not what a TU is all about?

 

[mrs the esk]

How do you propose that Companies negotiate with their workers then @Bruce Wayne ? Individually?

Employment is a commercial contract between two parties with little alignment of interests in the majority of cases, and it is essential therefore that both parties are each represented by a body (Directors in the case of the Company, on behalf of shareholders and a Union as a representative of the workforce) to efficiently negotiate for both parties.

Negotiations are not just about pay and conditions, they also cover areas such as productivity and quality control standards, working practices, health and safety, dispute handling processes and resolution, and general corporate compliance.

So today Unions are just as relevant to good employer/employee relationships as they have been in ensuring the gradual improvement of working conditions and practices over the ages.

You talk often about improving the education and skill sets of the general working population yet you seem to want to commoditise employees into low cost, zero hour contracted minimal value assets to businesses. The two do not fit, and never will.

Go and listen to the first clip in particular and recognise that improving the working conditions and terms of employment improve the economy, not destroy it!

 

[mrs the esk]

Would @the esk exploit his employees if they weren't a member of a trade union? I wouldn't imagine he would for one minute as he no doubt appreciates that a happy workforce is a productive workforce. What makes you think that kind of thinking isn't the norm?

Because he has a waiting list of hundreds of people who want to work for him. He encourages trade union membership as he knows it can offer him as an employer almost as much as it offers his employees.

 

[donalmclean]

slightly off topic but with regard to Trade Unions and their 'power'. Can Trade Unions negotiate with an employer, on behalf of employees , changes in say terms and conditions even if the majority of employees are not members of that union and have not given that union permission to negotiate on their behalf. ?

 

[donalmclean]

How do you propose that Companies negotiate with their workers then @Bruce Wayne ? Individually?

Employment is a commercial contract between two parties with little alignment of interests in the majority of cases, and it is essential therefore that both parties are each represented by a body (Directors in the case of the Company, on behalf of shareholders and a Union as a representative of the workforce) to efficiently negotiate for both parties.

Negotiations are not just about pay and conditions, they also cover areas such as productivity and quality control standards, working practices, health and safety, dispute handling processes and resolution, and general corporate compliance.

So today Unions are just as relevant to good employer/employee relationships as they have been in ensuring the gradual improvement of working conditions and practices over the ages.

You talk often about improving the education and skill sets of the general working population yet you seem to want to commoditise employees into low cost, zero hour contracted minimal value assets to businesses. The two do not fit, and never will.

Go and listen to the first clip in particular and recognise that improving the working conditions and terms of employment improve the economy, not destroy it!

even if the employees are not members of a union should the employer negotiate with that union even if that union have not got permission to do so by the employee?

 

[Bruce Wayne]

How do you propose that Companies negotiate with their workers then @Bruce Wayne ? Individually?

Employment is a commercial contract between two parties with little alignment of interests in the majority of cases, and it is essential therefore that both parties are each represented by a body (Directors in the case of the Company, on behalf of shareholders and a Union as a representative of the workforce) to efficiently negotiate for both parties.

Negotiations are not just about pay and conditions, they also cover areas such as productivity and quality control standards, working practices, health and safety, dispute handling processes and resolution, and general corporate compliance.

So today Unions are just as relevant to good employer/employee relationships as they have been in ensuring the gradual improvement of working conditions and practices over the ages.

You talk often about improving the education and skill sets of the general working population yet you seem to want to commoditise employees into low cost, zero hour contracted minimal value assets to businesses. The two do not fit, and never will.

Go and listen to the first clip in particular and recognise that improving the working conditions and terms of employment improve the economy, not destroy it!

Well yeah, that's pretty much how I think things should be negotiated. Employees are individual human beings, they can't be lumped together in one mass as though they're identical. Pretty much the entire private sector operate without the presence of unions, and both employer and employee alike seem broadly happy with the arrangement.

I'd love to say that I've worked for great organisations down the years, but despite being on the payroll of some stinkers, I've never once felt the need to have someone represent me for fear of being exploited in the negotiations.

"You talk often about improving the education and skill sets of the general working population yet you seem to want to commoditise employees into low cost, zero hour contracted minimal value assets to businesses. The two do not fit, and never will."

I wouldn't say it's low value for either party, but there is a huge shift towards flexibility in the labour market. You only have to see the huge growth in places like oDesk and eLance to see that. There is a major trend towards flexibility, with the value that offers employers being able to scale up/down according to demand very easily, and for workers to choose the projects they want to work on.

Indeed, that's by and large how I work. I'm not being exploited, and very much appreciate the flexibility it affords me and my life. In that kind of environment education is more important than ever before as there is ultimate transparency about what you can offer.

Maybe, because I largely come from a service sector point of view that my views are swayed by how things are there, and in manufacturing it's very different. I'm happy to concede that could be the case, but in the service sector people are gladly flocking to this way of working. As Dan Pink wrote over a decade ago now:

"Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, it has been the organizing principle of society: people are what they do. But at the dawning of the new millennium, Americans are waking up to the fact that commitment to a traditional corporate structure does not guarantee personal validation or financial security. In what is one of the fastest growing movements today, people are rejecting the idea of corporate loyalty to explore more creative ways of making a living. This book addresses this movement and is a must-have for the millions investigating free agency."

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Because he has a waiting list of hundreds of people who want to work for him. He encourages trade union membership as he knows it can offer him as an employer almost as much as it offers his employees.

That doesn't surprise me at all, but lots of companies have similar waiting lists, and few have heavy trade union representation (if any) amongst employees. Managers are largely waking up to the fact that to get the best out of people you have to treat them well. I'm not sure the Dickensian/Taylorist approach to business is anywhere near as prevalent as is being suggested here.