Do you support the RMT?

[Scaley]

Private sector workers can join a union though. There is nothing stopping them. Except their own prejudices I have found in my experience

Totally agree, I was Private Sector for six years with very good union representation before going over to the Public Sector. The Union Rep came to speak to me during the week I started. To be honest I don’t use Union Reps now (wife’s a solicitor) but I’ll always be a Union member for the legal costs protection.
In relation to Public Sector pay rises I’ve personally always felt that every department should get the same rise and same pay bands as I think it would aid retention and save money in the long term. The Emergency Services get the headlines when it comes to pay however, for example, you have court services and DWP who keep the cogs turning especially throughout the Pandemic but get next to no recognition. Most importantly what I see at the moment is a clear divide and conquer tactic between both Public and Private Sector workers which we all need to resist. Workers want a decent not astronomic pay rise, I’ve stated this before, a decent pay rise to most people may may mean a few more nights out, spending a bit more a shopping, more chippy teas, the odd sporting event most of which would go back into the local economy, no one’s looking to buy a Lamborghini or diamond encrusted Rolex. Most people don’t want Government handouts to pay bills they just want stuff to reasonably priced. A decent pay rise and reasonably priced goods/energy should not be a lot to ask in the World’s six largest economy, it’s heartbreaking to think what kind of Xmas some kids are going to have this year.
Apologies if I went off topic.

 

[Stephen230]

Big picture is that you and countless others are essentially being asked to accept a 1% pay rise (or none at all), work longer hours and pay more tax, so that striking public sector workers and those in heavily unionised areas can receive 10%-plus pay rises.

That’s pretty much the long and short of it. Oh, and if you can bib your horn when you’re driving past the picket lines on the way to work, they’d really appreciate it.

Do you think if every single unionised public sector union came out tomorrow and said we accept a 0% pay rise, any changes in the terms and conditions and as many redundancies you fancy implementing, that a single private sector worker would see a single penny of that saving?

 

[joe123]

So in your world view, you seem to believe that there are only two sectors in the economy, and two types of workers, namely public and private.

And regardless of where you work in the private sector, what job you do, how much you get paid, whether you can have your heating on or eat properly, you have to pay ever higher levels of tax and work longer so that public sector workers can receive what you judge to be a fair rate of pay, and be completely insulated from rising inflation.

This logic presumably extends to the postal and rail workers that are on strike as well, because workers in non unionised sectors are fair game, and have to pay for other peoples’ pay rises, even when the rail workers are well paid to begin with. And you’re the one calling out companies for dividing and conquering?

If Union membership and industrial action is the best way to secure a payrise, why shouldn't they use them to secure better conditions?

I'm private sector and if I want a raise I ask for one, or I move company. Public sector workers often don't have that option. They also tend to work in well respected services. I don't recognise any resentment towards public sector workers at all in my professional or social circles.

 

[mexico1970]

If a sufficient number of workers in a workplace join a union that union can then seek to be recognised by the employer. That applies in the public and private sector. There is no prejudice for either sector.

Those not giving a fuck are allowed to not give a fuck but they have to accept when they bleat about strikes and the better terms and conditions of organised workforces that they are worse off because they didn't give a fuck. Reap what you sow.

That's it in a nutshell, you can go figure out why the public will turn on you as you as you lump them in with bankers and the government. Bleating about strikes and reap what you sow indeed.

 

[bluethrunthru]

Totally agree, I was Private Sector for six years with very good union representation before going over to the Public Sector. The Union Rep came to speak to me during the week I started. To be honest I don’t use Union Reps now (wife’s a solicitor) but I’ll always be a Union member for the legal costs protection.
In relation to Public Sector pay rises I’ve personally always felt that every department should get the same rise and same pay bands as I think it would aid retention and save money in the long term. The Emergency Services get the headlines when it comes to pay however, for example, you have court services and DWP who keep the cogs turning especially throughout the Pandemic but get next to no recognition. Most importantly what I see at the moment is a clear divide and conquer tactic between both Public and Private Sector workers which we all need to resist. Workers want a decent not astronomic pay rise, I’ve stated this before, a decent pay rise to most people may may mean a few more nights out, spending a bit more a shopping, more chippy teas, the odd sporting event most of which would go back into the local economy, no one’s looking to buy a Lamborghini or diamond encrusted Rolex. Most people don’t want Government handouts to pay bills they just want stuff to reasonably priced. A decent pay rise and reasonably priced goods/energy should not be a lot to ask in the World’s six largest economy, it’s heartbreaking to think what kind of Xmas some kids are going to have this year.
Apologies if I went off topic.

I never worked in the public sector but was always in a union in the private sector and for a great deal of the time I was actively involved as a union rep. Always earned decent money always got an annual pay rise and am now retired on decent but not lavish pensions - I think that the fact they were organised workplaces influenced all that.

As for your other points I whole heartedly agree - nurses get the headlines but as well as them you have to gave someone to clean the hospital floors. The systematic driving down of wages has pushed them all to the limit when coupled with rising prices etc - they next question we all need to ask is if they have effectively cut the pay of those cleaners for example by 25% in 12 years and extrapolate that across the whole public sector piece where has all the money gone? Underlying it all I think that is the question the Tories are now desperate to avoid

 

[Brewster's millions]

If a sufficient number of workers in a workplace join a union that union can then seek to be recognised by the employer. That applies in the public and private sector. There is no prejudice for either sector.

Those not giving a fuck are allowed to not give a fuck but they have to accept when they bleat about strikes and the better terms and conditions of organised workforces that they are worse off because they didn't give a fuck. Reap what you sow.

I wouldn’t call being concerned about the impact of strikes, such as being unable to get to work and losing money as a result, or deal with childcare issues or being unable to visit loved ones at Christmas as bleating. Or do you not bother about the impact of the strikes as long as you’re not particularly impacted?

On a broader view though, who do you think will ultimately end up paying for these very large pay rises in the unionised sectors?

 

[Scaley]

I never worked in the public sector but was always in a union in the private sector and for a great deal of the time I was actively involved as a union rep. Always earned decent money always got an annual pay rise and am now retired on decent but not lavish pensions - I think that the fact they were organised workplaces influenced all that.

As for your other points I whole heartedly agree - nurses get the headlines but as well as them you have to gave someone to clean the hospital floors. The systematic driving down of wages has pushed them all to the limit when coupled with rising prices etc - they next question we all need to ask is if they have effectively cut the pay of those cleaners for example by 25% in 12 years and extrapolate that across the whole public sector piece where has all the money gone? Underlying it all I think that is the question the Tories are now desperate to avoid

I can’t disagree with any of it. In relation to the question the Tories have answered it with “put a jumper on” or “go get a better job!” Our cups are truly running over!

 

[Mike Brock]

As someone who lost a fire fighting family member in a fire in Birmingham a few years ago and watched his mother, my aunt, bravely accept this plus the way his friends rallied round her and her family I am with you @bluethrunthru I will always back the Fire Fighters.

Thank you x

 

[Brewster's millions]

Do you think if every single unionised public sector union came out tomorrow and said we accept a 0% pay rise, any changes in the terms and conditions and as many redundancies you fancy implementing, that a single private sector worker would see a single penny of that saving?

I think in a general sense, and if we’re just talking about the nuts and bolts of it, there would of course be some savings, whether through eventual tax cuts, inflation being slightly lower or the Bank of England not pushing rates up any further if pay growth held at a lower level. But that’s not my argument.

My argument is that there seems to be a very outdated view - held by what appears to be many across the left of the political spectrum - in relation to the ability for private sector workers to pay for very large pay rises across areas of the public sector and/or within heavily unionised sectors. Most jobs in the private sector are low paid - often very lowly paid - and the people in those jobs are facing the same pressures in relation to the cost of living as public sector workers, but this doesn’t seem to be a consideration for many. It seems that these concerns are secondary to what the RMT demands, or postal workers want, and I struggle to see the justification for this sort of attitude.

 

[bluethrunthru]

I wouldn’t call being concerned about the impact of strikes, such as being unable to get to work and losing money as a result, or deal with childcare issues or being unable to visit loved ones at Christmas as bleating. Or do you not bother about the impact of the strikes as long as you’re not particularly impacted?

On a broader view though, who do you think will ultimately end up paying for these very large pay rises in the unionised sectors?

Strikes are supposed to have an impact otherwise they would be pointless. I think you have to understand how an industrial dispute works. A strike is the final option not the first. Both sides should be in discussions over a period of time and at some stage come to an agreement. Things only escalate if no agreement can be found. What is clear in all these cases we have an employer ( the Govt ) who has been refusing to engage in discussions or who have chosen to stand on the sidelines and seek to scupper on going talks. Thats a decision taken by the Govt in their own interests and not the interests of the country.

Nobody will miss out on seeing loved ones over Christmas. The train strikes from Xmas Eve to after Xmas impact maintenance works - no trains were ever scheduled to run in that period. Not sure about how the Highways Agency staff strikes will impact those of us driving over the festive period as I hardly ever see them - indeed the highest impact they have seems to be on slowing traffic because drivers mistake them for a Police car on the motorway.

As for who pays if they are public servants all pay including increases come out of the public purse. Again thats a Govt decision as to how you raise that money. You can tax income via shares and bonds the same way you do other income you can introduce a wealth tax you can increase the higher rate of income tax you can tax windfall profits you can tax bankers bonuses more heavily OR you can suppress public sector pay and not raise any further revenue but as I say thats a political decision.