Todays worker against yesteryears worker

[Anna Glypta]

30 years ago the working man could walk out of one job and into another, most of these jobs gave job security and for the chance to better oneself. fast forward 30 years and what chance has the working man/woman got today?

 

 

 

 

Perhaps if 30 years ago our factories didn't have folk like Derek Robinson calling strikes every 5 minutes our industries might not have up sticks and gone to countries with a reliable work force.

 

http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/archive/archive-all-out-strike-fury-closes-biggest-leyland-plant/

[mikebatty]

Perhaps if 30 years ago our factories didn't have folk like Derek Robinson calling strikes every 5 minutes our industries might not have up sticks and gone to countries with a reliable work force.

 

http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/archive/archive-all-out-strike-fury-closes-biggest-leyland-plant/

 

What arrant nonsense ! All some people need is a little bit of feed from the press /media and they believe that all the real facts have landed on their lap .Don,t be like the the man on " Mars " or was it the "Moon " early'er in the thread . I am sure that you have sufficient intelligence to work things out for yourself . Please , read the entire thread . 30 - 40 -50 years ago people were making the same comparisons as you are now .It was not reliability these companies looked for - it was cheap labour . They simply moved to abuse workers in the third world because they could no longer abuse people here . That is what multi-nationalism is about .

[erebus]

30 years ago the unions were destroyed, and good riddance, so the workers could then be treated as individuals, have their wages slashed, no job security, thus great for bullies to have fun making their lives miserable. Work harder, work for less, and do the overtime for free if you do not want to be replaced. What a mantra, what a creative process, and now it just gets better. Slaxhing jobs from government and councils piles up the unemployed like beans in a can. Then one just tinkers with the laws, and those sacked workers become known as shirkers, sounds nearly the same, but its bullying as only the British know how.

 

THen these shirkers, can for their overpaid £70 a week, well less these days as hey have to pay for housing, and that extra room so maybe 10-20 less, but still ovepaid at £50, would you not all agree? The next bit is to get them to work for large corporations for nothing, well their £50 and going down.

 

We all know shirkers are trash, just read the papers, and listen to the politicians, and radio. THe trouble is some of these shirkers are getting away with ahveing to work, as over 6000 and rising choose suicide. Whats all that about??

[Anna Glypta]

What arrant nonsense ! All some people need is a little bit of feed from the press /media and they believe that all the real facts have landed on their lap .Don,t be like the the man on " Mars " or was it the "Moon " early'er in the thread . I am sure that you have sufficient intelligence to work things out for yourself . Please , read the entire thread . 30 - 40 -50 years ago people were making the same comparisons as you are now .It was not reliability these companies looked for - it was cheap labour . They simply moved to abuse workers in the third world because they could no longer abuse people here . That is what multi-nationalism is about .

 

Don't try talking down to me as if I'm not entitled to an opinion. The reason folk moved factories was because the workers in the UK were constantly on strike for higher wages and priced themselves out of the market.

Ford recently closed its last vehicle manufacturing plant in the UK because the unions turned down every attempt to reach a compromise over the pension plan. The folk in Rumania seem perfectly happy with Fords terms.

You should perhaps read about how many strikes there were at British Leyland, Ford, and Routes Group in the 1960s and 70s. You will note that not one of the above companies still produce vehicles in the UK.

[mikebatty]

30 years ago the unions were destroyed, and good riddance, so the workers could then be treated as individuals, have their wages slashed, no job security, thus great for bullies to have fun making their lives miserable. Work harder, work for less, and do the overtime for free if you do not want to be replaced. What a mantra, what a creative process, and now it just gets better. Slaxhing jobs from government and councils piles up the unemployed like beans in a can. Then one just tinkers with the laws, and those sacked workers become known as shirkers, sounds nearly the same, but its bullying as only the British know how.

 

THen these shirkers, can for their overpaid £70 a week, well less these days as hey have to pay for housing, and that extra room so maybe 10-20 less, but still ovepaid at £50, would you not all agree? The next bit is to get them to work for large corporations for nothing, well their £50 and going down.

 

We all know shirkers are trash, just read the papers, and listen to the politicians, and radio. THe trouble is some of these shirkers are getting away with ahveing to work, as over 6000 and rising choose suicide. Whats all that about??

 

NURSE ! He's out of bed again . In just three paragraphs you have upped yourself time and again .

I would agree that everyone has the right to their own opinion . I just wish that I could understand yours.

 

---------- Post added 25-03-2013 at 13:37 ----------

 

Don't try talking down to me as if I'm not entitled to an opinion. The reason folk moved factories was because the workers in the UK were constantly on strike for higher wages and priced themselves out of the market.

Ford recently closed its last vehicle manufacturing plant in the UK because the unions turned down every attempt to reach a compromise over the pension plan. The folk in Rumania seem perfectly happy with Fords terms.

You should perhaps read about how many strikes there were at British Leyland, Ford, and Routes Group in the 1960s and 70s. You will note that not one of the above companies still produce vehicles in the UK.

 

I am neither talking down to you , nor am I denying you the right to an opinion . I am however , disagreeing with your conclusions , based upon whichever facts , from where ever you obtained them . As commented early'er , understand the history ,don't just look at it .

Most of the companies to which you refer have received numerous government grants to either establish or continue production in this country . They took the grants for the minimum agreed period and then left for cheap labour countries .

We buy our gas , coal etc. at vastly inflated prices from abroad . At far greater cost than our own nationanalised companies ever produced them ; and why were they nationalised ? not because they were making a loss but because investors could make a profit . Each one of the public utilities was sold off at less than the valued price . Why ? Because the tory government had to save face .

I express my feelings strongly , not because people don't believe or understand what I am saying , but because they are so blinkered in their perceptions of the real facts laid out before them . If only they would take the time to understand them and not just look at them .

[BIGDINNERS]

nationalised companies wouldn't stand a chance in today's market.

anyway,As I recall,the majority of them were either run down and in proper state,perhaps due to strikers who failed to produce the product equal to demand, or on their last legs by the time they were sold off without a monopoly on the product

[Anna Glypta]

 

I am neither talking down to you , nor am I denying you the right to an opinion . I am however , disagreeing with your conclusions , based upon whichever facts , from where ever you obtained them . As commented early'er , understand the history ,don't just look at it .

Most of the companies to which you refer have received numerous government grants to either establish or continue production in this country . They took the grants for the minimum agreed period and then left for cheap labour countries .

We buy our gas , coal etc. at vastly inflated prices from abroad . At far greater cost than our own nationanalised companies ever produced them ; and why were they nationalised ? not because they were making a loss but because investors could make a profit . Each one of the public utilities was sold off at less than the valued price . Why ? Because the tory government had to save face .

I express my feelings strongly , not because people don't believe or understand what I am saying , but because they are so blinkered in their perceptions of the real facts laid out before them . If only they would take the time to understand them and not just look at them .

 

I think it is you that needs to check on the facts. Ford wasn't receiving government grants and neither was Rootes group. British Leyland was making cars that were subsidised by the UK tax payer when the unions weren't on strike.

Rootes is part of Peugeot and now manufactures outside the UK but not within it. Ford has also moved all vehicle manufacturing overseas.

 

Regarding you joke about coal and how it was cheaper to mine it in the UK than import it, that is utter rubbish. UK coal was massively subsidized by the UK tax payers. Even so they called strikes, shut down power stations and tried to bite the hand that fed them. The great thing about imported coal is that it is not only far cheaper, but those mining it can't hold the country to ransom.

 

Add Arthur Scargill to the list of union leaders who crippled their industry and forced the jobs of their members overseas.

[skinz]

I got lotsa dosh so I don't care...

[ricgem2002]

The great thing about imported coal is that it is not only far cheaper, but those mining it can't hold the country to ransom.

.

no its not the countries who hold us to ransom, its the companies in these countries that do

[Staunton]

The great thing about imported coal is that it is not only far cheaper, but those mining it can't hold the country to ransom.

 

The very bad thing about imported coal is the fact that it is the multinationals who are doing the importing. And this means exploited labour and resources in impoverished states across the global south, unregulated externalised factors such as air, surface and water pollution and associated environmental degradation, and, although the minerals will travel by direct route, the administrative paper-trail will pass through a host of secrecy jurisdictions such as the Cayman Island, Luxembourg, the Channel Islands, the Netherlands, Ireland and Switzerland, in order for profits to be maximised and taxes avoided, both in the country in which the minerals were extracted, and here in the UK where those mineral are marketed.

 

So, labour exploitation, pollution and tax avoidance are the result - all factors that harm ordinary people here and abroad, whilst enhancing profit for the multinationals.