It’s not unions holding people to ransom it’s companies unwilling to.offer fair pay and fair terms and conditions of employment.
But sure it’s all our fault.
So what’s the governments plan to hit recruitment targets? All I see is attempts to turn people away from public service careers.
Can schools afford to offer anything above minimum service levels at the moment?
In other countries when the train drivers strike they still provide the service however they just don’t charge passengers. It should be the employers who suffer the consequences of strikes not the general public.
(Edit: Morally) You can’t just let houses with people inside burn down because of a firefighter strike, there is a genuine need for a minimum service to be met there.
Edit – if this is currently illegal then that’s the laws which should be changing, instead of just introducing a law which would ban strikes.
“What’s the minimum crew requirement”
“Errr, 1 I suppose”
So effectively making strikes illegal, because I assume it isn’t the public sector workers deciding what those minimums are
If the government want to mandate “minimum service levels” then they also need to be locking in inflation linked pay adjustments and ensuring conditions are not adversely affected.
As a fairly new NHS worker that has settled my mind about whether or not to join the union.
This is just the start of reductions in workers rights, just wait till they really get going with their deregulated ‘Enterprise Zones’ / Freeports.😔
There’s already a minimum service from those sectors you donuts
Fortunately, teachers and doctors are in huge over-supply; there is a reservoir of qualified, healthy doctors and teachers just waiting to be phoned up to take over these jobs. Even better, both have short, easy training periods and we can make a load of new doctors by just popping down to the pub and asking a few people if they fancy re-training as consultant surgeons.
Back in the real world, both professions are underpaid (don’t start on “but doctors get £X” — work on the assumption that people who can get two STEM degrees in five years and then do a substantial post-graduate load leading to an MRCP and membership of the appropriate specialist college are fairly smart and able to do something else, something other than minimum wage), have a long pipeline of training and, most seriously, have a huge demographic bulge — each year for the next ten years, more people will retire than did the year before.
So starting a fight with professions with pre-existing shortages of qualified staff is an absolutely absurd thing to do.
I’m genuinely curious how this will work.
Who will be under the obligation to keep the services running?
Will the trade union be barred from encouraging more than 80% of staff to walk out at one time?
Would it still be possible for the designated staff who have agreed not to walk out to frustrate the minimum service level by other absence?
I have genuine doubts this can be made to work.
Well she can fuck right off. I’ll leave teaching if this happens.
To any who clapped for key workers but supports this can, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart, get absolutely and utterly fucked.
Forced labour rather than lifting a finger to improve conditions. They really can’t hide their contempt for British workers any more can they?
There was a German guy in the 30’s who did stuff like this. He couldn’t stand unions. Those were some of the first things he went for.
Offer fair pay, terms and conditions and then there will be no strikes
16 comments
It’s not unions holding people to ransom it’s companies unwilling to.offer fair pay and fair terms and conditions of employment.
But sure it’s all our fault.
So what’s the governments plan to hit recruitment targets? All I see is attempts to turn people away from public service careers.
Can schools afford to offer anything above minimum service levels at the moment?
In other countries when the train drivers strike they still provide the service however they just don’t charge passengers. It should be the employers who suffer the consequences of strikes not the general public.
(Edit: Morally) You can’t just let houses with people inside burn down because of a firefighter strike, there is a genuine need for a minimum service to be met there.
Edit – if this is currently illegal then that’s the laws which should be changing, instead of just introducing a law which would ban strikes.
“What’s the minimum crew requirement”
“Errr, 1 I suppose”
So effectively making strikes illegal, because I assume it isn’t the public sector workers deciding what those minimums are
If the government want to mandate “minimum service levels” then they also need to be locking in inflation linked pay adjustments and ensuring conditions are not adversely affected.
As a fairly new NHS worker that has settled my mind about whether or not to join the union.
This is just the start of reductions in workers rights, just wait till they really get going with their deregulated ‘Enterprise Zones’ / Freeports.😔
There’s already a minimum service from those sectors you donuts
Fortunately, teachers and doctors are in huge over-supply; there is a reservoir of qualified, healthy doctors and teachers just waiting to be phoned up to take over these jobs. Even better, both have short, easy training periods and we can make a load of new doctors by just popping down to the pub and asking a few people if they fancy re-training as consultant surgeons.
Back in the real world, both professions are underpaid (don’t start on “but doctors get £X” — work on the assumption that people who can get two STEM degrees in five years and then do a substantial post-graduate load leading to an MRCP and membership of the appropriate specialist college are fairly smart and able to do something else, something other than minimum wage), have a long pipeline of training and, most seriously, have a huge demographic bulge — each year for the next ten years, more people will retire than did the year before.
So starting a fight with professions with pre-existing shortages of qualified staff is an absolutely absurd thing to do.
I’m genuinely curious how this will work.
Who will be under the obligation to keep the services running?
Will the trade union be barred from encouraging more than 80% of staff to walk out at one time?
Would it still be possible for the designated staff who have agreed not to walk out to frustrate the minimum service level by other absence?
I have genuine doubts this can be made to work.
Well she can fuck right off. I’ll leave teaching if this happens.
To any who clapped for key workers but supports this can, and I mean this from the bottom of my heart, get absolutely and utterly fucked.
Forced labour rather than lifting a finger to improve conditions. They really can’t hide their contempt for British workers any more can they?
There was a German guy in the 30’s who did stuff like this. He couldn’t stand unions. Those were some of the first things he went for.
Offer fair pay, terms and conditions and then there will be no strikes