Bloody Postal Strikes!

[Monk]

Government should ban strikes. I'm sick to death of public sector strikes just because some union bigot wants to big himself up. Fck off and get back to work. If I didnt turn up to my job, I'd be sacked, so why dont they!

[Alexikokopops]

Government should ban strikes. I'm sick to death of public sector strikes just because some union bigot wants to big himself up. Fck off and get back to work. If I didnt turn up to my job, I'd be sacked, so why dont they!

Get some Union representation, go on strike yourself!!

I had to do an entire module on Trade Unions, Industrial Action, etc

Bloody Industrial Relations...

[Daggers]

I'm off to the sorting office to stand and 'boo' them. That'll learn them and their shirking ways.

Who's coming?

[Phube]

I'm off to the sorting office to stand and 'boo' them. That'll learn them and their shirking ways.

Who's coming?

If they're small and pacifists... then I'm all for it!!!

[Ultra]

Even if what they believe is is exploiting their position as providers of a key service to bully their employers into paying them more than they deserve?

Could it be they're resisting attempts by bullying employers to slash their pay and their working conditions?

They deserve support, not abuse.

[Jon the Hat]

Could it be they're resisting attempts by bullying employers to slash their pay and their working conditions?

They deserve support, not abuse.

Well, if there are others out there who would do the work for less pay, then why should workers who can cause disruption get protection the rest of us don't ?

[Samilktray]

Had a parcel delivered today but i wasnt in. Looks like im going to have to wait until next week to get it now

[Ultra]

The service would be improved by having a secure, highly-skilled, highly-paid workforce.

Treating employees as badly as privatised corporations do is not the answer.

[Kent Fox]

Could it be they're resisting attempts by bullying employers to slash their pay and their working conditions?

They deserve support, not abuse.

Ah, a pro-unionist. It's that sort of attitude, Ultra that causes more unemployment in the long run. Unions demand more pay, companies can't afford it, Unionists state strike action, company pays up, company slashes labour force to pay for unionists unreasonable demands.

Fcuking a*seholes the lot of them. Bullying employers my a*se! You work in a unionised industry, Ultra?

Well, if there are others out there who would do the work for less pay, then why should workers who can cause disruption get protection the rest of us don't ?

Correct. Sack the tw@ts, hire people prepared to do the job for the money, move on.

[Head Honcho]

great. my pay cheque is due 4/5th of the month My company wont pay directly into our accounts. Its the cash flow thing. Dont get paid until they do from their clients.

Have you thought about mentioning to your bosses that it is now the 21st century?

God forbid they lose a couple of contracts

Not the ideal position for a security firm to be in is it?

[Kent Fox]

The service would be improved by having a secure, highly-skilled, highly-paid workforce.

Treating employees as badly as privatised corporations do is not the answer.

That is such a ridiculous cock-and-bull attitude.

No company can afford "highly paid workforces" anymore. So we all have to get on with the job for what we get. We all want more but common sense must prevail. If you pay more than you can afford, you have to make cutbacks to survive.

And they are not treated badly. Certainly not any worse than many, many people in this country.

[hairy]

The service would be improved by having a secure, highly-skilled, highly-paid workforce.

Treating employees as badly as privatised corporations do is not the answer.

The service would be improved by what you say but how highly-skilled and highly paid do you have to be to work in a sorting office, distribute sacks of mail or put a letter through the box. Relative to many workers not very I would suggest. So how would your suggestion improve the service?

A lot of private corps treat their emplyees very, very well. Extended leave, high pensions, bonuses, profit share etc etc. I think you need to rephase you comment so that it does not imply all private corps.

Apart from that. Do you not find it strange that there is nothing on the BBC website about the strike. Are we back to the Thatcher years of a media blank on strike action?

PS please dont turn this into a bitching session as it is getting very boring now.

[Ultra]

Ah, a pro-unionist. It's that sort of attitude, Ultra that causes more unemployment in the long run. Unions demand more pay, companies can't afford it, Unionists state strike action, company pays up, company slashes labour force to pay for unionists unreasonable demands.

You obviously aren't aware of the size of many companies' profits these days. Too often it's a case of companies slashing their labour force to pay for shareholders' unreasonable demands.

Fcuking a*seholes the lot of them. Bullying employers my a*se! You work in a unionised industry, Ultra?

Too right I do.

But the union often has too little power rather than too much - especially when faced by management seeking to cover the tracks of their own inadequacies.

Sack the tw@ts, hire people prepared to do the job for the money, move on.

This is the 21st century, not the 19th.

Introducing the law of the jungle into more workplaces won't make services any better.

[Jon the Hat]

You obviously aren't aware of the size of many companies' profits these days. Too often it's a case of companies slashing their labour force to pay for shareholders' unreasonable demands.

Too right I do.

But the union often has too little power rather than too much - especially when faced by management seeking to cover the tracks of their own inadequacies.

This is the 21st century, not the 19th.

Introducing the law of the jungle into more workplaces won't make services any better.

If you can give me any examples of where a strong union has helped make a company succesful I will gladly look at them. What we need Ultra is a level playing field, not an environment where those in civil service roles have a better life than those in the private sector.

[Ultra]

The service would be improved by what you say but how highly-skilled and highly paid do you have to be to work in a sorting office, distribute sacks of mail or put a letter through the box. Relative to many workers not very I would suggest. So how would your suggestion improve the service?

Most jobs in the industry involve specialist skills of one type or another. Putting letters through boxes might seem simple enough but you'd be surprised at how many addresses are difficult to locate. The designers of many estates in Leicester and other cities have much to answer for. Delivery workers who know their rounds would help to make service a lot more efficient - certainly far more than if the work was done by agency staff.

A lot of private corps treat their employees very, very well. Extended leave, high pensions, bonuses, profit share etc etc. I think you need to rephrase you comment so that it does not imply all private corps.

Private sector managers are very well looked after. Whether the same can be said of employees lower down the scale is open to question. If they have a union to assist them then they are more likely to obtain the benefits you describe.

Apart from that. Do you not find it strange that there is nothing on the BBC website about the strike. Are we back to the Thatcher years of a media blank on strike action?

I have no idea what the BBC has said about the strike. A complete ban on coverage would be extraordinary. It never happened during the Thatcher years, and I see no reason why it should start now.

PS please dont turn this into a bitching session as it is getting very boring now.

I don't want another bitching session (there are more than enough already on here), but you can't get away with asking questions and then not expecting thm to be answered.

[Kent Fox]

blah, blah, blah

and more blah

I was a delivery driver and the only reason I amn not doing that now is because of Unions and tossers like you.

This year, the Union (I won't say which one) demanded that my company pay 3.5% at a time when inflation was around 2%.

The Union KNEW the company were £10M in the red but stuck to their demands and offered to strike if they didn't get it.

Because the people in the union were unintelligent (business-wise) and greedy, they all agreed to strike so the company paid them.

They then went on to subsidise the increased wages by making over 100 people redundant. Skilled people, I might add.

So you, your union and your fcuking simple-minded, greedy and selfish attitude can fcuk right off.

Ultra - I now understand why people on here think you are a cock. You are!

Should we ever have the misfortune to meet, please bring your union card so i can shove it and your idealist world right up your arse!

[Guest]

Up the Proletariat!

[Ultra]

If you can give me any examples of where a strong union has helped make a company succesful I will gladly look at them. What we need Ultra is a level playing field, not an environment where those in civil service roles have a better life than those in the private sector.

There are plenty of examples to be found in the FTSE top 100, including many former public utilities still dependent on the co-operation of largely unionised workforces.

The private sector should not be used as the benchmark for workers' rights. I believe in levelling up not levelling down.

[Ultra]

I was a delivery driver and the only reason I amn not doing that now is because of Unions and tossers like you.

This year, the Union (I won't say which one) demanded that my company pay 3.5% at a time when inflation was around 2%.

The Union KNEW the company were £10M in the red but stuck to their demands and offered to strike if they didn't get it.

Because the people in the union were unintelligent (business-wise) and greedy, they all agreed to strike so the company paid them.

They then went on to subsidise the increased wages by making over 100 people redundant. Skilled people, I might add.

So you, your union and your fcuking simple-minded, greedy and selfish attitude can fcuk right off.

Ultra - I now understand why people on here think you are a cock. You are!

Should we ever have the misfortune to meet, please bring your union card so i can shove it and your idealist world right up your arse!

Presumably a fair number of those made redundant would have been union members. So the union will now be losing revenue.

That leads me to suggest the situation might perhaps be a little more complex than you make it out to be.

It's a shame you lower the tone of debate by resorting to TPH-style threats and personal abuse.

You're not him in disguise, are you?

[hairy]

Most jobs in the industry involve specialist skills of one type or another. Putting letters through boxes might seem simple enough but you'd be surprised at how many addresses are difficult to locate. The designers of many estates in Leicester and other cities have much to answer for. Delivery workers who know their rounds would help to make service a lot more efficient - certainly far more than if the work was done by agency staff.

But its the post office which dictates what the postal address is not the designer (by which I assume you mean the planners)

[Kent Fox]

Presumably a fair number of those made redundant would have been union members. So the union will now be losing revenue.

That leads me to suggest the situation might perhaps be a little more complex than you make it out to be.

It's a shame you lower the tone of debate by resorting to TPH-style threats and personal abuse.

You're not him in disguise, are you?

Very few of those who went were in the union. And really, a loss of revenue for the union is hardly any recompense for those who lost their jobs, is it?

And no, the issue was not too complex for me. I understood it perfectly thanks.

Threats? Abuse? All in good taste, Ultra, all in good taste . I find it gets a point across to those who have difficulty understanding common sense.

[Ultra]

Very few of those who went were in the union. And really, a loss of revenue for the union is hardly any recompense for those who lost their jobs, is it?

I never said it was. I just observed that the union was perhaps not as complicit as you implied.

Threats? Abuse? All in good taste, Ultra, all in good taste . I find it gets a point across to those who have difficulty understanding common sense.

You can spin it how you like. I read it as an outbreak of bitterness from someone losing the argument.

[lookwhaticando]

You can spin it how you like. I read it as an outbreak of bitterness from someone losing the argument.

Is that what happens to make you become more aggressive/abusive?

[Kent Fox]

Presumably a fair number of those made redundant would have been union members. So the union will now be losing revenue.

I never said it was. I just observed that the union was perhaps not as complicit as you implied.

You can spin it how you like. I read it as an outbreak of bitterness from someone losing the argument.

Oh i am sorry.

I must have interpreted your first statement about presuming incorrectly...

Losing the argument? What argument! I am not losing anything.

You, however, are losing your mind if you cannot remember what you have written.

[Phube]

Unions = Con merchants!!!

If I was in a Union at my work (NHS) I would have had to pay ~£100 a year for them to negotiate with the government, for SIX months, on my payrise... to come up with...

NO CHANGE!!! Tw@ts!!!

Now I could have had my pay rise last April... but now I will have to wait for another month or so!!! Just sod off the lot of them!!!