The Theresa May General Election thread (edited)

capo4th

DarnWeight said:

I'm just going to address my original argument from this point on, namely the assertion that latterday industrial action is causing the country to "grind to a halt", is bollocks.  The following chart was produced by the ONS.



Minor fluctuations in a baseline rate that barely register over the last 25 years.

Just to be clear, I won't be responding to any further personal insults or insinuation on this thread.

Why is this relevant to the 2017 election? Corbyn is unionist and supports the strike action on the railways. You live in Norfolk which is not the southeast and have been unaffected by the strike action. If you lived in the best city in the world you would understand how fundamentally wrong it is for train conductors / drivers to go on strike in the modern era. They are well paid and should be thankful they have a decent job riding the railways.

If if I told my boss I was going on strike I would lose my job very quickly. These clowns pile misery on everyone and it costs people jobs when they cannot get to work on time. Please spare me the history lesson your graph is irrelevant in modern Britain. 

Corbyn is a mugwump and when he loses the election hopefully he will go deep underground never to be seen again and will be remembered for what he is - a complete idiot who could not run a pub let alone a country!

Heartfeltdawn

Fretwired said:

The Tories don't have a policy. The only way to get things working is to get it done at a local level. I was told by a government minister that on average if the government collects £10 of tax by the time it's gone though the system and reached say a patient in a hospital there's only £1 left. 

x100. Local all the way.

DarnWeight

OK, @capo4th ;

It isn't relevant to the 2017 election.  That's the point.  You were asserting the havoc being wrought by Corbyn-supported strike action, and I was pointing out that that's a gross over-exaggeration.  The graph illustrates that very clearly, I think.

People join trade unions to protect their rights, freedoms and conditions in the workplace.  If you want to vilify them for that, then knock yourself out.  Maybe you should join a union yourself, then your boss wouldn't be able to sack you if you took legal strike action.

Here's the thing...I'm fairly sure that like many other members here, we put our location in our public profiles to help out with buying/selling issues, and maybe to touch base with fellow musicians/enthusiasts who may be nearby.  You, however, seem much happier using it to try and ridicule or belittle, based on the fact that you have a puffed-up misplaced pride in living in "the best city in the world".  I've had debates in this very same thread with other people, where nobody felt compelled to get personal/abusive, or generally act dickish.  I don't need this, and just FYI, I'll be putting you on ignore from now on. 

One other thing...are you a paid troll?  Because your constant echoing of Tory Central's word-of-the-day (ooooh...mugwump), and vapid parroting of Conservative election soundbites has me wondering.

ThePrettyDamned

capo4th said:

DarnWeight said:

I'm just going to address my original argument from this point on, namely the assertion that latterday industrial action is causing the country to "grind to a halt", is bollocks.  The following chart was produced by the ONS.



Minor fluctuations in a baseline rate that barely register over the last 25 years.

Just to be clear, I won't be responding to any further personal insults or insinuation on this thread.

Why is this relevant to the 2017 election? Corbyn is unionist and supports the strike action on the railways. You live in Norfolk which is not the southeast and have been unaffected by the strike action. If you lived in the best city in the world you would understand how fundamentally wrong it is for train conductors / drivers to go on strike in the modern era. They are well paid and should be thankful they have a decent job riding the railways.

If if I told my boss I was going on strike I would lose my job very quickly. These clowns pile misery on everyone and it costs people jobs when they cannot get to work on time. Please spare me the history lesson your graph is irrelevant in modern Britain. 

Corbyn is a mugwump and when he loses the election hopefully he will go deep underground never to be seen again and will be remembered for what he is - a complete idiot who could not run a pub let alone a country!

I'm sure public transport will do so much better under Theresa May. 

Right? 

ToneControl

DarnWeight said:

I'm just going to address my original argument from this point on, namely the assertion that latterday industrial action is causing the country to "grind to a halt", is bollocks.  The following chart was produced by the ONS.



Minor fluctuations in a baseline rate that barely register over the last 25 years.

Just to be clear, I won't be responding to any further personal insults or insinuation on this thread.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/01/11/many-days-lost-strike-action-every-year-uk/

the graphs in this article show a rise since 2015

Not like the strikes of the past though

The big question for me is: what gives someone the ethical right to strike for more pay if it damages other people? 
There are professions where maximum distress to other citizens can be caused, and the more distress caused, the less ethical money-driven or dogma-driven striking becomes
e.g. medics, fire service, police, trains, power, grave diggers,.........

capo4th

Strikes really get my blood boiling the recent distress caused to myself and my wife commuting into the city combined with childcare was a nightmare.

Oh well shame he blocked me I probably won't sleep tonight because of the stress. I was enjoying his banter, graphs and history lessons and I don't recall being abusive unless he was offended by me asking to see a picture of his tractor.

capo4th

If you don't like driving trains go and get another job you fuckin muppets

VimFuego

people have the right to withdraw their labour if the pay conditions offered them are not suitable, when pay conditions are imposed by a monopoly upon a collective that collective have the right to collectively withdraw their labour. I suggest if it is a major inconvienience to you that you find a job where you will not be effected by it.

capo4th

I'm fine pal been with my firm nearly 20 years no risks there 

VimFuego

I'm happy for you.

capo4th

VimFuego said:

people have the right to withdraw their labour if the pay conditions offered them are not suitable, when pay conditions are imposed by a monopoly upon a collective that collective have the right to collectively withdraw their labour. I suggest if it is a major inconvienience to you that you find a job where you will not be effected by it.

Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

VimFuego

capo4th said:

VimFuego said:

people have the right to withdraw their labour if the pay conditions offered them are not suitable, when pay conditions are imposed by a monopoly upon a collective that collective have the right to collectively withdraw their labour. I suggest if it is a major inconvienience to you that you find a job where you will not be effected by it.

Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

so, you can't yourself come up with a rational response, so you make a desperate appeal for someone to help you out. How touching, and so graftifying to me to know how easily you are defeated.

VimFuego

for me, it's about maintaining a balance, if the workforce are too powerful (as we saw in the '70s) then it is troublesome. If the employers are too powerful (as we saw before unions) then it is bad. If they are the only employer, they are essentially a monopoly, and you can't have fair and efficient markets in a monopoly. In a situation like that, it is important that the workforce act collectively to redress that balance. Both sides have to work together to ensure strikes don't happen, but it must be fair to both sides.

ICBM

capo4th said:
Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

I agree with it.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case because I don't know the details, but the principle is correct - the only leverage employees have over an employer imposing unfair conditions on them is to withdraw their labour.

One of the reasons nurses are so poorly paid in this country is precisely because their belief in the duty of care ensures they will never take strike action - this has been ruthlessly exploited by their employers.

holnrew

A selfish conservative, what a shock

ThePrettyDamned

capo4th said:

VimFuego said:

people have the right to withdraw their labour if the pay conditions offered them are not suitable, when pay conditions are imposed by a monopoly upon a collective that collective have the right to collectively withdraw their labour. I suggest if it is a major inconvienience to you that you find a job where you will not be effected by it.

Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

I do. See @ICBM comment above, which very neatly sums up my thoughts. 

Having worked front line NHS I can assure you nurses not striking is not because they're happy at essentially getting a pay cut. 

Heartfeltdawn

capo4th said:

Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

£15 an hour is on the breadline? Fucking hell, I'm in the wrong thread. Maybe the wrong forum. 

*holds cap in hand and looks at the ground*

DarnWeight

Wow.  Political trolling obviously pays far better than I thought.

ToneControl

ICBM said:

capo4th said:
Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

I agree with it.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case because I don't know the details, but the principle is correct - the only leverage employees have over an employer imposing unfair conditions on them is to withdraw their labour.

One of the reasons nurses are so poorly paid in this country is precisely because their belief in the duty of care ensures they will never take strike action - this has been ruthlessly exploited by their employers.

I know that nurses are regarded with admiration - and few have any motivation to criticise, but what professions are you comparing them with when you state that they are poorly paid? 

Myranda

ICBM said:

capo4th said:
Who actually agrees with this? Can you imagine if all nurses did what southern rail employees did and just did not turn up for a couple of days holding the country/employers/general public to ransom. In my opinion a train driver in London makes a sensible well above average wage. Why do they always feel the need to go on strike ? I could understand if they were on £15 an hour and on the breadline.

I agree with it.

I'm not sure I agree with this particular case because I don't know the details, but the principle is correct - the only leverage employees have over an employer imposing unfair conditions on them is to withdraw their labour.

One of the reasons nurses are so poorly paid in this country is precisely because their belief in the duty of care ensures they will never take strike action - this has been ruthlessly exploited by their employers.

Tube drivers asked to work shifts for crazy money (£40k for sitting down and making sure to stop when lights are red, and go when they're green...) STRIKE

Swapping who pushes the button for closing the doors STRIKE... for almost a whole year on and off!

When conditions are poor and/or pay is poor then collective industrial action is the only bargaining tool left to workers, I stand by that right and think it's important that people have the power - I'd support strikes by nurses and teachers over pay a lot faster than say a On Board Supervisor who is jealous of the button privileges... but when the STRIKE option is used at the drop of a hat, the only logical outcome is governments clamping down on strike action, removing rights and trampling over the collective bargaining power of unions. Workers at Sports Direct were treated little better than cattle - they should have been talking strikes... from what I understand Amazon were crappy to the point where Victorians might say "that's jolly unfair" before being seen to do so and reacting by making life 10% less crappy - but their staff were prime strikers ... Rail and Tube staff are paid fantastically for what they do, work cushy jobs and still feel that they're the most hard done-by people on earth - not realising that they're likely only a few pay rises from being more expensive than automating the whole system.

Also... Capo - if you think £15 an hour is the breadline you should know that the minimum wage is what an awful lot of people are on, and it's £7.50