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.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
To expand - some people fall just outside the criteria. True, there is a hardship fund but its very limited. Plus not everyone knows about it or has the confidence to apply. Thing is Kentish, unless you've been there or worked in this field, you don't know what its like. You have a feeling of confidence and entitlement from your upbringing that a lot of people just don't have.
e.g.
Guess which scenario happens more often, by a factor of a million to one.
Very often is not I'm afraid.
Do we actually know what the French air traffic controllers are striking about?
Does the boss of Jet2? I somehow doubt it... Judging by his comments he sounds like the kind of person who thinks employees are some sort of scum who should have no rights.
The Jet2 statement is unwise but the point is to highlight the inconvenience to ordinary working people who would like to fly over France who have been unable to do so because the French are striking. That's all. It is in Jet2's interest, afterall, to keep its planes flying. The right to strike is all very well but if it was an essential right then maybe all workers should be allowed to do it, military and medical personnel included.
yea, i just found out......apparently they did run out of bog roll
The BA workers got sacked. I wonder what will happen to the French air traffic controllers... :chin:
The right to strike is as essential as any working right could be.
As for Jet2, the profoundly moronic, borderline xenophobic ranting can only mean, in my opinion at least, that the boss is your typical greedy tyrant who would like to have anyone who strikes haning from lampposts. Most companies from most industries are affected by strike action sooner or later. And most of them can put up with the inconvenience without making sterotypical bigoted remarks or throwing their toys out of the pram. The man in charge of Jet2 is either a bit of a cunt, or a complete idiot.
Part of an attempt by the unelected unions to break a democratically elected Government...
And by the looks of it they suceeded...
I was actually very good at my job. I'm not going to get offered a job at one of the most well respected and longest running substance misuse services in London (post I'm starting next week) by being crap at my job.
What I'm doing is illustrating that everyone's choices are not the same, that in fact some people's choices are extremely limited by economic and life circumstances. If you want to work with the "socially excluded" then its something you're gonna have to get your head around - you've been quite priviledged.
It can, yes. It took me over 12 months to get a referral. Once you've had 12 sessions, thats yer lot, you don't get any more. And yes, there are charities, but as I've already said, you have to pay if you're working. That's not even getting into the disparity of services across boroughs.
You're not taking into account the reality of people's lives. Someone working 12 hour night shifts who left school years ago is not going to feel that they can do an OU course. Get real.
My point is that you don't have a clue. You're naive and don't know how easy you've had it.
Starting to take drugs was a choice, picking an unsuitable partner was a choice, allowing yourself to get comfy on union subsidised wages without improving your skillset was a choice.
Once you've made shit choices, it can be hard but of course not impossible to come back from it. Surely shoring up some people who make shit choices softens the blow and makes it easier for other people to make those stupid decisions.
It's not the attempt to stop a new employement law that would give bosses the powers to dispose of employees as easily as discarding a used kleenex in the trash, is it?
Because if it is, the strikers should be supported by everyone who has to work for a living and is not a boss.
Which I guess means 99% of people here as well.
But as ever, it's both amusing and surreal to see so many turkeys willingly voting for Christmas.
You don't see any other company bosses, even those who are affected by more regular strike action, make xenophobic, insulting and idiotic remarks about it.
I guess they're being too soft eh, putting up with such outrageous behaviour as strike action by workers.
Tell me Disillusioined... are you rich? Or are you, or will you expect to be your own boss in the forseeable future? Because if not, you appear to be just another turkey voting for Christmas.
Or striking for Christmas as seems to be the case here.
Why should I support something which is going to decrease employment, keep people on the dole and is an attempt to overturn a law enacted by a democratic Government by violence and intimidation?
99% of people will still be employed after 2 years. Why? Because its actually in the bosses interests not to sack decent staff after you've spent time and money training them up for 2 years. What it means however is that they can get rid of the workshy and the incompetent easier (which obviously worries unions as if you get rid of workshy and incompetent staff half their shop stewards will find themselves unemployed).
Of course one of the other problems with the French economy is that small firms don't dare expand - if they make a mistake when hiring someone or the market downturns they're stuck with employees or face exhorbitant costs when making them redundant. The net result is that many firms stay smaller than they could and more people remain unemployed.
Democracy of the mob.... Whoever can cause the most violence wins...
I refer you to my intitial question on this thread
For all those people who are anti-union and anti-strike - how do you think improvements in workers rights, wages and conditions come about? A gift from the pixies? A gift from benevolent bosses? or something else?
I don't know why you think being called naive and priviledged is such an insult. Its not, its an observation, born out by your posts on this thread.
BTW, try surviving in London delivering leaflets door to door. :rolleyes:
Years ago they introduced a similar law in Spain. Don't know the particulars in France but in Spain they made it extremely easy for employees to be sacked when on 6-month contracts, but on the "plus" side the employer could only keep you on 6-month contracts for 3 years maximum, after which he was obliged to offer you are more secure indefinite contract.
Guess what happened when the 3 years came up.
Face it: so long as the employee meets a minimum standard countless employers don't care much for better or more loyal employees if they can hire cheaper ones instead. Hundreds of thousands of youths in Spain spent years floating from dead end job to dead end job with shite conditions, pay and benefits as time after time their bosses 'let them go' after 3 years.
Can't blame the French or anyone else for trying to avoid being sucked into a similar situation.
:yes:
The best job security is doing a good job and being pleasant etc. The only people I can see bothering about such a situation are those who are crap workers.
Or just go blackmarket entirely.
All worker improvements come from the capitalists side, then unions used violence to make them widespread rather than wait for the market to sort it all out naturally.
Knowing a few air stewards and stewardesses at Jet2 through my step cousin that works there from what I’ve heard about the guy that runs Jet2 he’s very hands-on, gives generous benefits to loyal staff and is generally an all round good bloke but a pretty down to earth plain speaking northerner that’s done well for himself. The sort of person probably like Alan Sugar that has done well through hard work and rightly or wrongly expects the same from everybody else. To some extent, it’s through concern for customers no doubt as he will want to run a successful business and to some extent through being ruthless – but I don’t really think it’s xenophobia.
I am not rich and nor is my family. I just believe that strikes in the long run don't help anybody, rich or poor – look at British Leyland, in the long run who benefited from years of constant strikes?
That's coming from you, not me. The fact is that going by your comments on this thread, you think that everyone has the same choices as you had. That is patently bullshit.
How did you reach that conclusion? Bizarre.