Quote:
Originally Posted by Ignitionnet
Do you want more people forced into poverty as their costs of living rise to fund crazy wage settlements for others?
The usual logic here, no way of paying for anything other than vague comments about rinsing the rich.
|
We are already paying for the crazy wage settlements of bankers, CEO's Rich Shareholders and Footballers and the wages of people in other sports Look what happed when we got rid of unions from other areas of transport, RESULT: Less employment, worse jobs, less pay and other benifits!
---------- Post added at 12:06 ---------- Previous post was at 12:05 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by martyh
I do support the union movement ,but only when their demands are reasonable .
Then the job will filled by non union staff either temporarily of permanently
much easier to get temps in to cover strikes when trains are driverless
|
Then those
[Mod Edit] are Scabs (the Governmnent should ban strike breaking)!
---------- Post added at 12:08 ---------- Previous post was at 12:06 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pog66
As, by the same logic, can HMV, Blacks, Thorntons, Clinton's Cards.......but at what price? More job losses?
|
They do not have Unionised workers, I would comprmise on the fact that in exchange for benifit and wage cuts in bad times, they should recive a decent share of the profits, and when times are good take back the wage and benifit cuts!