Re: There is trouble afoot
 

Pete, what are you employed as at the moment, and are you in a union?

Re: There is trouble afoot
 

It's not that simple - as I said you quite obviously know nothing of basic mathematics and cross collateralization when it comes to benefits.

OK, so it's "everybody" and then it's "well not all but a lot". Do you see how foolish that statement appears? When you ask "why should they be immune" are you including yourself in "they"?

On the matter of stupidity and selfishness here's one for you.

Since you appear to have resigned yourself to the fact that there need to be cuts here there and everywhere and that you are as susceptible to them as anyone else why don't you do your bit for the national recovery / austerity drive which you are so passionately and slavishly advocating and turn up at work tomorrow (assuming you do actually work) and give your employer back all of the money you've been paid as a result of any pay rises negotiated either by or without your union during "all them years of labour rule" and promptly resign from your job?

At least that way someone with the backbone to stand and fight for his / her job will have the opportunity to do so and you can sheepishly skulk off to a life on the benefit system safe in the knowledge that you've "done your bit" for the recovery.

Just a thought.

Re: There is trouble afoot
 

The disputes/strikes I don't fully understand are where things like, closure of final salary pension schemes to new employees and redundancy via natural wastage. None of the current employees are adversely affected by being out of pocket.

Re: There is trouble afoot
 

[QUOTE=PeteL;35091559]like i said before laws on strike action needs amending?QUOTE]

That would mean if workers were being treated badly by an employer then they couldn't strike because they would just be sacked

yaaaayy bring back the workhouse :rolleyes:

Re: There is trouble afoot
 

Put simply, value for money cannot be totally maintained.

LA's are currently exploring and implementing shared services between them and neighbouring LA's. They are cutting discretionary services so that they can focus on the statutory, etc.

Not to mention something called Job Evaluation/Single Status, this has the ability to slash thousands of pounds off a job's wage banding, the result of this is that people will seek alternative jobs, the LA will then have to lower the standards they expect of the person filling that role as they just will not attract the same sort of people at the lower wage.

Re: There is trouble afoot
 

The situation you describe would not trigger industrial unrest. I worked for a large company that regularly altered pension schemes and I and everyone else cared not at all that the later entrants were on lesser deals. New entrants knew what they were signing up for and accepted. Redundancy via natural wastage is commonly called retirement:). Nobody cares who does their job or if nobody does it after they leave a company.

Where strife is a near certainty is when new recruits are on a new lower salary structure, have lower cost pension deals and are seen as a replacement work force by higher cost incumbents. If the higher cost incumbents have a degree of certainty that their careers are going to be cut short and one way or another they will be forced out then trouble is afoot.