If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Wildcat Strikers
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Apparently the Royal Mail are advising LOndoners to not send any mail for the next day or two, because staff at the London sorting offices keep walking out of their jobs on wildcat strikes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3223353.stm
I am of the belief that these people should be summarily dismissed, if they cannot do their job and obey by both the rules of their job and by trade union legislation then they do not deserve a job. I personally would then consider it to be that they voluntarily left their job, meaning that they cant get benefits.
People should nto be allowed to hold the country to ransom anymore.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3223353.stm
I am of the belief that these people should be summarily dismissed, if they cannot do their job and obey by both the rules of their job and by trade union legislation then they do not deserve a job. I personally would then consider it to be that they voluntarily left their job, meaning that they cant get benefits.
People should nto be allowed to hold the country to ransom anymore.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
If myself and my team walked out of work we would be fired, why is it any different here?
I know a postie and he is one lazy bastard, maybe he's leading it all!
Its not exactly a death-defying job, or a job where you hold responsibility for others lives. Its delivering a few letters.
Yes.
some might question that
after all many establishments rely on the post to inform - ie the NHS
but I know what you mean and it is out of order - leave without authorisation - and should be treated as a disciplinary.
And where did it say that they just walked out of work one day because they couldnt be arsed?
They actually walked out because after the initial official strikes, when the workers who were on strike returned, the managers said they couldnt have any contact with the union reprasentatives for 28 days, and put a 14 day overtime ban on them.
So they walked out again.
Are you suggesting that there is low unemployment in London then?
Yes?
I have no idea about the current employment situation in London to be honest. And its not just within London anymore.
But if the Post Office sack 20,000 people, then there's going to be a lot of problems with the workers who remain.
If 20,000 people were sacked (which in my opinion is a excessive measure) you can bet your bottom dollar there would be the biggest mass walk-out in the history of Britain. Every transport, public service and unionised worker in the country would walk out and tell the government "re-instate the postal workers... or sack us all if you have the balls".
The government would certainly lose, and then be promptly be kicked out at the next election.
Sadly for as long as the postal workers do this en masse and can count on the support of other workers elsewhere, they can do what they want.
And in the meantime we haven't had any post for 4 days.
Where is my Private Eye? :mad:
So you would have it that there were no strikes ever?
because any strike could be interprweted as 'holding the country to ransom' couldn't it?
Or is it that you disagree with this particular one rather thna strikes in general?
And you also think only people with dangerous jobs should 'be allowed' to strike?
Face it if they got the sack and you supported the situation would be far worse wouldn't it?
We had a theory that they were still delivering these because you get a refund as it is guaranteed next day delivery......
Damn the rest of the mail, just get out the stuff that costs us money!! I am so looking forward to the 3ft pile of mail I will have to open when they finally start delivering again..... :rolleyes:
Well in an ideal world yes.
I disagree with nearly all strikes, as a matter of fact. the only one that I have supported is the firemens' strike, and thats because they deserved a payrise because of the nature of the work.
If these postal workers dont like the rate of pay, theres plenty of other people whod gladly work for that.
Its not as easy as just sacking them, Im not naive, but the unions need to be put in their place. So do the wildcat strikers- I said the same thing about the whining spoilt brats at BA during August.
Its a real shame Thatcher never managed to finish what she started, it really is.
Britain already has, by a million miles, the weakest unions in Europe. It is shocking how easy is for bosses to kick people out, and how little compensation if any can the worker expect. I think Thatcher did enough damage as it is, thank you.
Unless you want to base the British workforce market on the American model, where the average worker is a piece of shit with fewer rights than a Guantanamo Bay inmate, and who can be given the boot at will with little or no compensation.
I know it does not work like that though, but they have unoficcially walked out, let them be replaced.
before the minimum wage was introduced, unskilled jobs around n.wales were advertised as low as 2.50 an hour! how the hell were family men supposed to survive on that? break your balls all week for some fat cat bastard who would sack the entire workforce just after paying himself a million pound bonus!
you think that kind of behaviour is acceptable while the workers are ground into the dust? if thatcher had finnished the job ...men would be cutting asbestos sheeting on circular saws and finding that for the disease ridden graft they had done ...there wasn't even a hospital they'd be able to go to to treat them!
people who bash unions in my experience, have usualy had mummy and daddy to rely on for to long.
.
there seems to be some confusion over that
anyway i think it is a bit unfair that this is causing what seems to be utter chaos for the mail system in some parts of the country.
Err, maybe not eh?
Unless a £20k wage makes my family a "fat cat"...
Oh, mocha, the RM workers are striking because the RM refused them a 6% pay rise...on an already comfortable wage. The poor diddumses...
My problem is not with workers rights, its with the scum that are trade unions. Nothing that the trade unions have EVER done has benefitted anyone other than the leaders of the trade unions, I wish I could get £120,000 a year (as the leader of the RMT does) for presiding over a union struggling for members. And as for the problems in the former mining communities, the blame can go no further than Arthur Scargill- demand too much money, and people will just go and buy AUSTRALIAN coal because it is cheaper, even after a decent wage.
i know what your saying kermit about the bad side of unions ...in the late 60's through the 70's they had way to much power and behaved very iresponsibly. god i'm drunkish.
The bosses will do all they can to protect their interests, as will politicians, as will consumers, as will parents, as will everyone, as will YOU.
How can people be 'scum' for looking out for themselves when that is exactly what everyone else does. That is how the world works..........
I agree with Kermit, for every fat cat boss there is a fat cat union leader.
P.S
My family are as working class as they come & I starting working for a living at 16.
Thats not the only reason that the unofficial strikes took place. Part of it was about discrimination towards workers. After the official strike had taken place, upon returning to work those who had been on strike were told that they were to have no contact with the unions reprasentatives or the unions at all for 28 days, and there was a 14 day overtime ban for anyone who had been on strike. So it was partially because of discrimination, those who hadn't gone out on strike officially weren't affected by the two conditions they imposed.
I agree wit htheir complaint about no access to their Union rep, but they really cannot complain about the loss of overtime.
The reason that overtime became necessary was becuase of the strike. Therefore they we likely to profit from their strike action and only those whi showed some sense of loyalty towards their employer should be rewarded with the extra work/pay that followed...
That isnt necessarily true. I agree that the amount of overtime available would have increased becasue of the strike, but RM nearly always have plentiful overtime for those who want to do it. My dad works for RM and does between 40 and 50 hours a week overtime at normal times of the year, not even after strikes or at christmas. I know not everyone does that much, but if people wnt to, its nearly always there. The overtime wasn't just for the clean up operation after the official strike.
It isnt. But what I was trying to say, is that the strikes were partially about workers feeling discriminated against, because overtime was only offered to those who hadn't been on the official strikes. They felt discriminated against for striking.
employers generally take a dim view of people taking time off work unofficially.
I understand that probably the management are at fault too, but these strikes and any other like them will only force more business away from RM and make sackings more likely.
They NEED to be working on their level of service so they can actualy dig themselves out of the hole they have created.
I'm not sure we need another Thatcher, but if the strikes get worse, well, it will be playing into the hands of those who say we do. If it gets a lot worse I can see Howard making ground on this issue.