I1L2T3 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I've been in my current job for quite a long time, but before that I was in the private sector. I'm well aware of the value of public sector pensions, and I do take that into account when I say that the private sector pays more. I had tenure in my private sector position, but I don't in my public sector job. I know that's unusual. I suppose its a matter of opinion as to what we would have and not have if not for the unions. We may just have to agree to disagree. Without re-running history in the absence of unions (or perhaps just in the absence of the special legal status of unions) we can't really know. It's not really a matter of opinion at all. There are loads of features of modern work that unions have been instrumental in bringing about. And most workers today benefit from those gradual improvements, whether they are in unions or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 so you left a private sector job to take a public sector job with better conditions (probably brought about by union involvement) and then knock that same movement . I went through a post-graduate degree in between. ---------- Post added 30-09-2015 at 20:46 ---------- It's not really a matter of opinion at all. There are loads of features of modern work that unions have been instrumental in bringing about. And most workers today benefit from those gradual improvements, whether they are in unions or not. This has not been established. I'm am wholly unconvinced that the unions were the cause of these changes. Correlation is not causation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 I went through a post-graduate degree in between. and still ended up working for the public sector with conditions brought about by union invovlement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 and still ended up working for the public sector with conditions brought about by union invovlement That doesn't invalidate my points. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 This has not been established. I'm am wholly unconvinced that the unions were the cause of these changes. Correlation is not causation. You won't find many serious historians who would ignore the role of the unions. Even the most rabidly right wing historians would accept that the post-WW2 working landscape was altered significantly through the role of the unions. I guess what you are really trying to suggest is that the changes would have happened anyway. We'll never know. You are imagining an alternative that is impossible to test and using it as if it is fact when the reality is that the role of the unions cannot be denied. Kind of weird bro Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 This whole issue stems from the tube drivers in london holding the nation to ransom pure and simple. So Cameron (with public support) is now wanting more democratic strike action. In fact they even had a strike because London Underground suspended a driver with high alcohol in his blood. What is wrong with that? Or do you want our capital city to be constantly shut down due to unions with unreasonable demands? don't you mean it all stems from Cameron taking on bob crowe and losing out to the shrewder man he thought that bob crowe would talk about negotiations after the Olympics (leaving crowe with no bargaining power) but he saw through that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted October 1, 2015 Author Share Posted October 1, 2015 The Conservative Party has began to eliminate all political opposition and consolidate its power, it is launching its own union for the workers. The unbeliever, have your dreams come true? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34407971?SThisFB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodmally Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 The Conservative Party has began to eliminate all political opposition and consolidate its power, it is launching its own union for the workers. The unbeliever, have your dreams come true? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34407971?SThisFB Havent they had this before with the National Farmers Union or the UDM? Nothing new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) As I've made clear on this forum before: The public sector employs vast numbers of people who do nothing of use. Many of them actively hinder productivity. They do not exist in anything like such numbers in the private sector. I'm witness on a daily basis to vast waste of tax-payers money that could be given back or better spent (depending on your political leanings). It's not in the interests of the state for these useless and counter-productive people to remain in post. Nor is it in the interests of the tax-payers and the people who depend on public services. It's also not in the interests of the productive workers in the public services. It is however in the interests of the public sector unions. In fact these useless people are often very active union members. The great weakening or elimination of public sector unions would save a fortune to the tax-payers or lead to greatly superior public services. Not to mention allowing for better pay and conditions for the useful public sector workers within the same or smaller budgets. Who's against that? Edited October 2, 2015 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 As I've made clear on this forum before: The public sector employs vast numbers of people who do nothing of use. Many of them actively hinder productivity. They do not exist in anything like such numbers in the private sector. I'm witness on a daily basis to vast waste of tax-payers money that could be given back or better spent (depending on your political leanings). It's not in the interests of the state for these useless and counter-productive people to remain in post. Nor is it in the interests of the tax-payers and the people who depend on public services. It's also not in the interests of the productive workers in the public services. It is however in the interests of the public sector unions. In fact these useless people are often very active union members. The great weakening or elimination of public sector unions would save a fortune to the tax-payers or lead to greatly superior public services. Not to mention allowing for better pay and conditions for the useful public sector workers within the same or smaller budgets. Who's against that? You haven't made anything clear You claim to have a science background but just post streams of unsubstantiated statements peppered with political soundbites. You often don't post links to back up anything you say. We could simply automate you and replace you with a kind of right wing soundboard and randomly trigger buttons on it to produce your posts. Seriously we could Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now