Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35355199)

On the flip side: Tube workers get what they want. Due to the disruption, companies lose a lot of money. TFL have to increase fares to pay for what the Tube drivers demand. Thus people have to pay more. Those people will have to either have increased wages, or try and cut their own costs. Either way, other companies end up (indirectly) paying. If they pay too much, they risk financial trouble, or have to cut costs themselves (even the major companies have finite resources - ask the staff of Woolworths and Focus), which may result in store or office closures, and job losses.

In the mean time, the strike action persuades international companies to look at cities in other countries to put their headquarters. After all, their staff need a reliable transport infrastructure to get to work, and higher fares will mean higher wage demands. If even one of these companies closes their UK office, this can result in thousands of job losses.

You think that doesn't happen? I ready a couple of years ago that HSBC had already threatened to move their world headquarters from it's current home in Canary Wharf. A building that houses thousands of workers.


On the contrary, the Government should not only not ban strike breaking, but they should increase the number of jobs where striking is banned.


Personally, I am not opposed to more companies doing profit shares in the same way as John Lewis does. It's worked well for them, their staff and their customers.

---------- Post added at 13:15 ---------- Previous post was at 13:11 ----------



Personally, I do think we should investigate ways to persuade more people to start voting.

Regarding your comment about members being too busy working, I'd argue that if ANY union member cared enough about a subject to want to strike about it, he or she would make the time to vote.

Although judging by what a couple of tube drivers I know have said about the job, I doubt that most of the membership would be too busy working to find time to vote..

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355195)

Sorry, Also the products were rubbish, butn it was not the falut of the Trade Unions alone

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35355208)

Oh right and you're critical that the banks didn't want to lend more money to a company effectively being run by a militant union with a workforce who were unable or unwilling to build a competitive product and wound up having to be propped up by the state. :confused:

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355195)

Previous post was at 13:06 ----------

What about general Elections, If there is less than 50% voted, does that nullfy the reslut, may I go on about Shareholder Meetings, House of Commons and Lords etc...

And what about the fact that some members are too busy working to be voting!

Originally Posted by martyh (Post 35355219)

Totally different scenarios ,a strike vote is usually a yes/no ballot .If a majority of members don't feel strong enough about an issue to vote then there is no issue .In a general election many people don't vote as a legitimate choice because they don't approve of any of the choices ,there is no "none of the above" option

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355195)

You just don't get it you do! I care about perosnal Freedom, like freedom from povery and bad jobs, low wages etc

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35355226)

Evidently you don't given that you want to take away people's right to go to work. You're just waffling on about a socialist nirvana as I said before, with the usual total lack of regard for what you force people to forsake on the way.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355216)

I am not blaming the bank for all this, but the management ans the government as well

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355229)

What is the right to go work worth if your job is a dead end job!

Originally Posted by Stuart (Post 35355233)

How about the Unions? Continual strikes (whether legit or not) would not have helped BL's balance..

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35355240)

What if your job winds up in China or India because you're totally uncompetitive?

---------- Post added at 13:51 ---------- Previous post was at 13:50 ----------

It seems the only group Alan can't bring himself to blame for anything is the unions.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355229)

What is the right to go work worth if your job is a dead end job!

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355244)

Hence why we need to crack down on currency manipulations by those nations and force work and labour standard onto them with poltical pressure!

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet (Post 35355256)

Some jobs are, sadly, dead end. Hate to break it to you but being a cleaner, serving behind the counter at a fast food outlet and several other jobs are not known for their prospects, doesn't mean they don't have to be done.

When you join the rest of us here:

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...012/01/104.jpg

We'll talk some more on this.

---------- Post added at 14:05 ---------- Previous post was at 14:02 ----------



I don't rate our chances of forcing work and labour standards onto 2 countries with a combined population of 2.5bln.

Not that it's anything against the UK, I don't rate anyone's chances of forcing said standards onto them, be it the USA, the EU, or whomever else.

Not that it matters of course, while we continue to buy their cheaper goods nothing will change, and we're not going to stop doing that any time soon as those goods being so relatively cheap is the only reason many can afford them.

Originally Posted by heero_yuy (Post 35355260)

Those continual strikes frittered away customer support and the cash needed to invest in new models and technology: At one time they had a class leading front wheel drive system and liquid suspension when Ford were still using donkey cart springs and live axles.

Without funds they had to scrimp and make do: Even when the Metro came out as one of the models to try and save the company it had to make do with many parts from the original Mini as Austin/Morris, as it was called at that time, couldn't afford the £500 million needed to develop new engines and gearboxes.

No single strike killed that industry but the continual drip drip of disputes did, as it also did for many other of the heavy industies that we were once pre-eminent in.

Those that are too ready to strike on the slightest pretext should take a look at the history books and think again. There are very few jobs where sooner or later a machine/computer can't do the work more reliably, repeatably and for less money than a man/woman.

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355244)

I would agree with that but they were a symptom not a cause!

---------- Post added at 13:54 ---------- Previous post was at 13:53 ----------



Hence why we need to crack down on currency manipulations by those nations and force work and labour standard onto them with poltical pressure!

Originally Posted by Osem (Post 35355397)

You really think the UK has the political and economic clout to crack down on the likes of China? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Alan Fry (Post 35355029)

What I am saying is that Speacsavers can offord better pay and conditions!