Quote:
Originally Posted by Druchii
You don't sound like you're trying to start anything to me! 
I think spending money on the court case is something RM have to do versus giving a pay rise during a recession to their workers. They don't have to offer an additional payrise.
They do have to defend themselves, lest they lose by default.
(I also think it's probably cheaper to pay some barristers for one case, rather than an entire workforce more for years to come).
I also think it's rather irresponsible of the union to expect RM to allow the workers that caused the issue of a massive backlog, to be paid overtime while clearing it. This would only cost RM more money.
In fact, i think i do agree in a way with you, if only that the union is trying to cost RM money indirectly. (Or rather, that's what they're doing regardless of intentions). |
Well it's true, despite their intentions of the Union they are indirectly, costing RM alot of cash and RM will defend and being a massive company will throw a specialist barristar for each subject - making a team who will without a doubt rip the Union to shreds. My point is, what the heck is going on?