http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-16248469
Threatening to strike if they don’t get triple pay AND a day of in lieu to work on Boxing Day.
Sorry, but that is extracting the urine.
Let’s face it, this argument will come down to the usual.
Some people whining that they don’t get the same so why should these guys, while neglecting that the reason they don’t get the same is that they don’t want to belong to a union and have the strength of collective bargaining, for whatever reason.
Good for them, why shouldn’t they use their collective power and position to better their own financial situation.
No one seems to mind when nepotism works to better the position of those that went to the same private school, who earn £100,000+ a year because their Daddy was bestie mates with the Governor of the Bank of England.
Yet the moment some oiks want to improve their position we all have a cry about how it isn’t fair cause we don’t get it and it might disrupt our lives.
I got no sympathy for you waxy, if you want it, then join a Union…or stop whining.
Aye, piss taking as usual, bloody w@nkers
F*** me you really are biggest pr1ck on here…
Where the f*** did I ask for sympathy or draw any parallel with my own situation.
I think it is obsence that a union is threatening 3 days of strike action, which by the way costs lots of other people money from their pocket when they have to find alternative transport to get to work, for what is a completely unreasonable request. If you bothered to read the article you’d see it was put in their contract they would have to work bank holidays including Boxing Day.
I guarantee the majority of people would agree that they are being unreasonable too.
You have got issues pal…but for now wind your neck and stick your head back up your arse. Douche bag.
I think pretty much everyone I know has a problem with that sort of stuff.
Demanding triple time plus a day in liueu for a day you’re contracted to work anyway is taking the piss which ever way you look at it. I’m all for the power of the union but when you’re using that collective power to hold travellers to ransom every time the opportunity arises, it leaves a bad taste.
Unreasonable on what basis? If not a comparison to your own situation?
Therefore…no sympathy for you, or anyone else, that doesn’t get what they get, that YOU deem to be unreasonable.
That they demand a high payment for their time on a day that most everyone else has off is something we should all be applauding them for, and demanding for ourselves, instead of crying that a group of people have the audacity to demand something decent for their time.
The fact that others do not gain as much because of a lack of union strength is THEIR issue, not the issue of a Union that is getting the best for THEIR members.
Go join a union and stop whining about it.
This comes up every time a Union tries to work for their members, other people who are basically jealous, start whining about how they are arseholes to demand something for their members.
Many stories on the BBC highlighting this are there?
I don’t seem to remember any headlines in the Papers or on the BBC nightly news about such things. In fact I would argue that it is the very nepotism that has put the heads of those companies that might report such things in the position they are in, that makes it clear that such nepotism is rarely if ever reported.
The funniest thing is how you undermine your own argument Waxy
It is unreasonable that they should demand such high payments.
Yet if they do take action, it will cost everyone else a huge amount of money.
So they are giving up their time to help make everyone else, including business, a huge amount of money, but should not be allowed to ask for triple time and a day off in lieu in exchange?
Bizarre.
Kaos i don’t get involved in these things very often, i have already stepped forward once and stopped you getting a smack in the mouth from a well respected member of this community.
Not eveyone on here has to get on, not everyone has to agree, but we all have one thing in common which is bikes, you seem to be able to stir **** from an empty can, just fuckking stop it as it really really is annoying.
I’m getting to the point where i hope someone does sort you out as you seem to have a nack of offending people without really thinking things through.
You need to learn just to step back and keep you fingers in your pants so you dont type **** that makes you look like a twat, when in fact, face to face you come across like a decent bloke.
My peace said.
Appreciated, we not all man mountains.
Saying that, I don’t agree with the lambasting that Unions receive every single time they step up and ask for something for their members.
And I will stand up and say so.
You may have noticed that I have not changed in my stance after that incident and nor will I after any future incidents.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and they are entitled to voice it, if some people want to resort to violence or threats of violence to silence those that don’t agree, then I will only speak louder and more profoundly on the issue.
Leave the Unions to fight their battles without fighting companies, Government and the public.
In what way ‘sorting him out’?
If it is how I understand it as in “bitchslap him”, well, gotta get past me first.
Not entirely sure how I undermine my own argument by saying that the strike actually cost individuals lots of money either in lost earnings or additional cost of travel.
What part of “it is in their contract” do you not understand?
And we should all be impressed by the fact that this union is essentially trying to hold London Underground to ransom to get an excessive amount of money.
Kaos, of all people on here I thought you might have understood the meaning and value of contracts. They signed up to an (IMHO incredibly generous) working contract on the basis that they also signed up to working some ‘unsociable days’. I also have this in my contract - it’s part and parcel of the whole deal, y’know getting paid and all.
What I don’t then do is enjoy all the parts of the contract that sit nicely, cashing my pay cheques, whilst waiting until the very moment I feel I have my employer over the barrel, before telling him that actually I won’t be doing the part of my contract that I don’t like. Unless he pays me more, oh and gives me some time off to recover from the trauma of doing what I signed up to do. Where is the fairness in that?
Your argument of safety in numbers doesn’t wash I’m afraid. I’m not against the theory of unions, but I’m 100% against bullies thinking they can push people around to get a better deal for #1. Let’s be honest that’s all they care about.
all im saying is it keeps creating divides in LB and its a shame, Heer schmidt he will tell you himself i have never had a problem with him but i’m just sick of seeing people fall out over what is essentially a load of boll$$s at the end of the day.
Don’t have a problem with someone having an alternative stanch on this…but to try and turn this on to me, saying I don’t deserve your sympathy just makes you look like a pr1ck.
By all means offer a different point-of-view, but don’t say I am whining or looking for sympathy.
I think that is a reasonable counter argument Slates.
The problem is we are hearing one side of the story from the BBC and London Underground on what has happened, yes perhaps the Union is asking for a lot, as a bargaining chip to receive something adequate, we don’t know what is going on during the negotiations. All that article is about is what London Underground has said.
As to the contracts, I can bet you that those contracts have changed drastically for many of those workers from the day that they signed up.
After just finishing employment law I can also tell you that variations of contracts are ENTIRELY at the discretion of the employer, they can vary the contract at any time to any degree and the only option the employee has is to leave their employment, people I know are going through this right now, and it is rarely to the benefit of the employee.
So the contract is not sacrosanct and set in stone which neither side can change to their own benefit.
This isn’t new though Rixxy, we have some right-wingers on here and some left-wingers on here, if someone is going to voice an opinion about something that is happening in the news they have to accept that not everyone will agree. If that is creating a divide that divide always existed, we simply never voice it when talking about bikes.
Waxy, I did not specifically try to turn this on you, other than to point out that their extracting the piss and being unreasonable is a SUBJECTIVE argument. It can only be YOUR OPINION that says that.
Hence my attacking YOUR OPINION in relation to the story.
true true, i think i will just read these, laugh at the stupidness and move on, thank got this isn’t a bike forum eh!
Erm…actually you did. By stating that I was seeking sympathy and I was whining. But as far as I can tell you seem to like arguing about every little point…so whatever.
If I were more cynical I’d suggest this may be because if the unions made public their demands they would finally lose all credibility and semblance of public support.
Well that’s pure speculation, but I’d doubt that would have happened to anyone with union membership i.e. the people we’re talking about here. And as a general rule of thumb I’m not going to sign anything I’m not happy with.
Perhaps you are too close to the coal face, but amicable amendments to contracts can be initiated by either party. And last time I checked my employer could not force me to sign a new or variation contract.
However relating this to employment law is nonsensical, this isn’t a contract renegotiation we’re talking about, it’s blackmail, which falls under a whole different legal category.