Thatcher Dies

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Zingy said:
Can't beat a bit of Elvis Costello. <ok>

[video=youtube;9t4-zDem1Sk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9t4-zDem1Sk[/video]
Click to expand...

We had an anti-Twatcher session on the jukie in the Cheese last night. My contribution was Shipbuilding followed by Tramp the Dirt Down. It surprising how many there are <ok>
 
donga darko said:
"Britain wasn't some great lush utopia before Thatcher, and unions were totally out of hand and something did need to be done, it still does, I would never join a union, as they do far more to damage the economy than help it. Generally Unions help their members and damn the consequences. "

Ffs, this is why we're heading towards a McJobs, McPay and McConditions workplace. I liken this attitude to the outbreak of measles in South Wales - someone else can get innoculated and suffer the potential pain and risk. Do you REALLY think workers would have any rights or conditions were it not for unions? As it is, they're weakened to **** all now, but after the Thatcher years and her heir apparent Blair, in order to make us 'competitive' - i.e. cheap, uncomplaining serfs for donors to the Tory/Labour party - there's a ****ing race to the bottom to take us back to Victorian mills; or else we'll end up being outdone by Chinese coolies and other Third World peasants. And it'll serve us right when all these millionaire directors take our jobs to India, according to the Mail.

Thing that infuriates me about this attitude is that in my experience any rights, terms, conditions and pay that is 'won' by the unions is never turned down by the non-union members. Do they really think they'd stand a ****ing earthly negotiating against these hatchet- faced, HR cows, with their 'values and behaviours' ducking stools, IPD's wedged up their arses and complete inability/knowledge about any of the jobs they lord over and appraise, if it wasn't for the fact that a union exists in the first place?

I had a boss from the education industry about six years ago, brought in because she said she knew everything about training (though she's never stood in front of a classroom or training room in her life) who was vehemently against unions, espousing that if you're good enough at your job you should be that invaluable you don't need them. We used to call her the pigeon because every time the hatchet-faced HR director (see above) said anything she billed and cooed how wonderful and right she was. Didn't do her any good - the HR director had a mate on Linkedin (is this the new Masons or what?), so she ordered a spurrilous reorganisation based on values and behaviours (so ethemeral that you can get what ever answer you want from them) and the stupid mare lost her job to the director's pal.

And guess what? She approached me about joining the union because the HR director had only managed this (strictly illegal) move past the rest of the board on the basis that she'd find a way of withholding her severance pay on some trumped-up cause or other. We represented her - and got her the severance- if for no other reason to mix a bottle for the wildly out-of-control HR director. Nonetheless, the now redundant manager left with her money and barely a thank you, but we heard she'd moved to Ohio with her severance and was again involved in training, telling all who'll listen how unions are dinosaurs and bad for businesses and individuals...

As I say, scratch an anti-union employee and you'll find someone living under the delusion that if they burrow themselves far up the relevant boss's arsehole enough they'll be safe, so **** the rest of you. But they never. ever, ever, turn down any goodies that the union earn for employees.
Click to expand...

Let me give you an example, My missus is the company secretary for a huge company that was once publicly owned, and the union refused to accept an inflation busting pay rise because a handful of those original public employees would have lost a pittance of a mid-day meal allowance, that none of the newer employees even get, and so because the unions didn't want to accept that a few of the old timers would lose about £75 a year, compared with the few hundred quid pay rise they would be getting, they tried to stop the whole process. It defies logic, they were just like a dog with a stick, harming 95% of their members over this stupid little quirk that only benefited 5% of their members!

The public sector as a whole is a money pit, with automatic pay scales rises no matter how **** and useless you are at your job, piss taking sickness benefits, and people doing so little work that it takes 3 public employees to do the work of one person in the private sector, who don't get anywhere near the benefits.

These days Unions are about how much they can gouge out for their members, and less about protecting their basic rights. It is what you get when it is people's jobs to do nothing else but union business, they have to think up **** to make themselves relevant. I am all for protecting the workers from abuse, but their remit has to end there, common sense need to be brought back to stop these people going off on their ego boosting power trips.

I am anti-union, to a point, but I don't brown-nose, I do my job, and if I don't like how I am treated, I leave and get another job, as I have a skillset that people need, so I can look after myself without arse licking or hiding behind a union, so that blows your ****ing stupid theory out the water.

It's not the 1820's anymore, many workplaces don't accept unions, and they are good places to work, as the owners know that you have to treat your workforce well to get the most out of them, and to attract the best staff. I do accept that 10 a penny unskilled workers do need protection, but they should not be protected to the point where my taxes and rates are used to let them do **** all and moan about how hard their life is.
 
Noblelox said:
Let me give you an example, My missus is the company secretary for a huge company that was once publicly owned, and the union refused to accept an inflation busting pay rise because a handful of those original public employees would have lost a pittance of a mid-day meal allowance, that none of the newer employees even get, and so because the unions didn't want to accept that a few of the old timers would lose about £75 a year, compared with the few hundred quid pay rise they would be getting, they tried to stop the whole process. It defies logic, they were just like a dog with a stick, harming 95% of their members over this stupid little quirk that only benefited 5% of their members!

The public sector as a whole is a money pit, with automatic pay scales rises no matter how **** and useless you are at your job, piss taking sickness benefits, and people doing so little work that it takes 3 public employees to do the work of one person in the private sector, who don't get anywhere near the benefits.

These days Unions are about how much they can gouge out for their members, and less about protecting their basic rights. It is what you get when it is people's jobs to do nothing else but union business, they have to think up **** to make themselves relevant. I am all for protecting the workers from abuse, but their remit has to end there, common sense need to be brought back to stop these people going off on their ego boosting power trips.

I am anti-union, to a point, but I don't brown-nose, I do my job, and if I don't like how I am treated, I leave and get another job, as I have a skillset that people need, so I can look after myself without arse licking or hiding behind a union, so that blows your ****ing stupid theory out the water.

It's not the 1820's anymore, many workplaces don't accept unions, and they are good places to work, as the owners know that you have to treat your workforce well to get the most out of them, and to attract the best staff. I do accept that 10 a penny unskilled workers do need protection, but they should not be protected to the point where my taxes and rates are used to let them do **** all and moan about how hard their life is.
Click to expand...

Well that's a nice story but so what? Does your missus complain that she doesn't have to put up with being paid half as much as a man doing the same job? That was 1970 not the 1820s.
 
PGFWhite said:
And your source for this outstanding comment?
Click to expand...

I've worked in both sectors, I've worked in the council, schools, the NHS and the civil service. The amount of people off with "stress" for 6 months, who then come back for 1 day, just before it goes down to half pay, and go off again. If you can't do the job, leave, stop getting full pay for doing **** all! And people talk about benefit scroungers!
 
Noblelox said:
I've worked in both sectors, I've worked in the council, schools, the NHS and the civil service. The amount of people off with "stress" for 6 months, who then come back for 1 day, just before it goes down to half pay, and go off again. If you can't do the job, leave, stop getting full pay for doing **** all! And people talk about benefit scroungers!
Click to expand...

Your comment was "it takes 3 public employees to do the work of one person in the private sector". I asked for the source of your information not another pathetic rant. Or is it just a figure you made up?

NB I too have worked in the private and public sector.
 
astroturfnaut said:
Well that's a nice story but so what? Does your missus complain that she doesn't have to put up with being paid half as much as a man doing the same job? That was 1970 not the 1820s.
Click to expand...

No, because she doesn't get paid less, any company only has one company secretary. She's not a typist, you know, she's a board member, it is 2013 not the 70's you know? I accept that there may still be a few bastard places to work, and many people who don't have much choice but to work there, so I'm not totally anti-union, but they do go too far, most of the time. Keeping useless people in a job, who hide behind the union rather than trying to improve their attitude, so they keep skiving/yelling "nice tits sweetheart"/nicking stuff/Slagging management off in front of the public.... I've seen them all.
 
PGFWhite said:
Your comment was "it takes 3 public employees to do the work of one person in the private sector". I asked for the source of your information not another pathetic rant. Or is it just a figure you made up?

NB I too have worked in the private and public sector.
Click to expand...

<doh> I've worked both, I can compare. Or will you only accept it if I go and do time and motion surveys. If you've worked both and can't see it, you must be one of the waste of space workshy ****s I'm talking about.
 
Just dipping into this thread, got to say I agree with Ox on this one.

Worked for a Welsh local government for best part of a decade (Neath Port Talbot, PGF) and there are a good many people there who do literally **** all for a living.

At least ten days a year sick is taken every year as a matter of 'right', to top up the already huge annual leave entitlement.

Women have children, get six months maternity then take six months off for 'depression'. Then come back and they were so depressed they have another kid and do the whole cycle again. The stress thing Ox touched on, massively prevalant throughout NPT at least. Six months sick for not being able to sleep, six months sick for essentially being fat as ****, I genuinely could go on.

And that's not even mentioning the gilt edged pension the rest of the country's workforce finances. I got out, glad I did. And that's even taking into account I spent four months out of work during the worst part of the recession. I'm still glad I got out.

Local government workers give other public sector workers like teachers and nurses etc. a bad name as they get tarred with the same brush.
 
Noblelox said:
No, because she doesn't get paid less, any company only has one company secretary. She's not a typist, you know, she's a board member, it is 2013 not the 70's you know? I accept that there may still be a few bastard places to work, and many people who don't have much choice but to work there, so I'm not totally anti-union, but they do go too far, most of the time. Keeping useless people in a job, who hide behind the union rather than trying to improve their attitude, so they keep skiving/yelling "nice tits sweetheart"/nicking stuff/Slagging management off in front of the public.... I've seen them all.
Click to expand...

Wow, I think that point went right over your head. You think she gets paid the same because all the companies looked at the calendar and decided the year was big enough to start behaving nicely... or because they are legally required to do so after that right was secured by union action?
 
Noblelox said:
I've worked in both sectors, I've worked in the council, schools, the NHS and the civil service. The amount of people off with "stress" for 6 months, who then come back for 1 day, just before it goes down to half pay, and go off again. If you can't do the job, leave, stop getting full pay for doing **** all! And people talk about benefit scroungers!
Click to expand...

PGFWhite said:
Your comment was "it takes 3 public employees to do the work of one person in the private sector". I asked for the source of your information not another pathetic rant. Or is it just a figure you made up?

NB I too have worked in the private and public sector.
Click to expand...

You both want to try working in the voluntary sector, you can shove your public and private work rates up your arse then <ok>
 
There are faults with unions, but anyone that thinks the working classes would have achieved a decent standard of living without them, and the Labour movement in general, is kidding themselves.
 
You want to try working as a contractor where I work.

No pay rise for 4 years, no pension, no profit share, no bonus no sick pay (all the "permies" get this).

Oh, and of course, contractors aren't allowed to join the same Union that the permies are members of, so we have nobody fighting in our corner.

And yet the myth pervades throughout the organisation, from senior manager level downwards, that because contractors are so highly paid we've all got a ****ing Porsche parked outside <doh>
 
Jonesey said:
You want to try working as a contractor where I work.

No pay rise for 4 years, no pension, no profit share, no bonus no sick pay (all the "permies" get this).

Oh, and of course, contractors aren't allowed to join the same Union that the permies are members of, so we have nobody fighting in our corner.

And yet the myth pervades throughout the organisation, from senior manager level downwards, that because contractors are so highly paid we've all got a ****ing Porsche parked outside <doh>
Click to expand...

I've not had a pay rise for about five years and since I work for a charity, it is fairly obvious that I don''t get profit shares either <laugh>

I do get sick pay although it is near enough statutory bare minimum. However, as a self-employed body, I'm sure you'll get tax benefits (legit or not) that you quite like and nothing stops you paying into your own pension fund either <ok>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back