muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
I couldnt agree more trampy
I thought all suttons drivers were striking, not just the one contact.
Thats them screwed then from the start. So much for solidarity and one in all in.
muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
I couldnt agree more trampy
I thought all suttons drivers were striking, not just the one contact.
Thats them screwed then from the start. So much for solidarity and one in all in.
muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
I couldnt agree more trampy
I thought all suttons drivers were striking, not just the one contact.
Thats them screwed then from the start. So much for solidarity and one in all in.
I don’t know, but does the law on secondary action apply here? Is it illegal for all Suttons drivers to take industrial action if only one contract is in dispute?
I’m not saying owt about rights or wrongs, just the law?
Franglais:
I don’t know, but does the law on secondary action apply here? Is it illegal for all Suttons drivers to take industrial action if only one contract is in dispute?
I’m not saying owt about rights or wrongs, just the law?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
If a general or national strike is called and voted by the majority, then I cannot see why it would be illegal. After all this is an industrial strike called and voted by its members. If other members joined the strike that is called solidarity, the reason why a national strike or a general strike could not be called, is more likely that it would not make a majority vote or that unite does not have the membership numbers to make it viable. Of course it all stems from the brothers and sisters with this term of solidarity which no longer exists. (amongst drivers) anyway. It exists in other trades and jobs such as train drivers, pilots, engineers and the likes, but then that iswhy they don’t work for minimum wage and long hours to earn a living wage.
Franglais:
I don’t know, but does the law on secondary action apply here? Is it illegal for all Suttons drivers to take industrial action if only one contract is in dispute?
I’m not saying owt about rights or wrongs, just the law?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
If a general or national strike is called and voted by the majority, then I cannot see why it would be illegal.
It would be illegal because a general strike definitely fits the definition of ‘secondary action’.Just as even striking at a seperate subsidiary division of the same firm, that isn’t subject to the same dispute and collective bargaining structure,would be.
The ridiculous bit being that the working class and the TUC went along with all this when Thatcher introduced it let alone Blair’s ‘Labour’ government keeping it in place.So there you have it effectively the right to strike doesn’t exist in this country.Also no surprise that even Corbyn hasn’t made the lifting of secondary action rules part of his core strategy.Probably because he’s more interested in adding to the labour supply by opening the door to more immigration.
Franglais:
I don’t know, but does the law on secondary action apply here? Is it illegal for all Suttons drivers to take industrial action if only one contract is in dispute?
I’m not saying owt about rights or wrongs, just the law?
Sent from my GT-S7275R using Tapatalk
If a general or national strike is called and voted by the majority, then I cannot see why it would be illegal.
It would be illegal because a general strike definitely fits the definition of ‘secondary action’.Just as even striking at a seperate subsidiary division of the same firm, that isn’t subject to the same dispute and collective bargaining structure,would be.
The ridiculous bit being that the working class and the TUC went along with all this when Thatcher introduced it let alone Blair’s ‘Labour’ government keeping it in place.So there you have it effectively the right to strike doesn’t exist in this country.Also no surprise that even Corbyn hasn’t made the lifting of secondary action rules part of his core strategy.Probably because he’s more interested in adding to the labour supply by opening the door to more immigration.
If a general strike was called in the beginning then it would have been perfectly legal. That was what I was driving at. TBH with regards to Secondary action I didn’t realise was illegal.
muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
UKt mate, your tone on this subject seems to have changed a tad, maybe a bit ambiguous, and not fully committng yourself…for a change.
In other posts you have mentioned that you have been on the other side, (management) whereby you have faced up to Union action yourself and not backed down, …or words to that effect.
Now your post appears to be almost gloating in an ‘I told you so’ tone, then strangely it changes tone in your last sentence, and shows almost pity and sympathy for a perceived faliure on the Union’s part.
Don’t sit on the fence mate, …Which camp.are you in exactly?
Another thing …Why has the o/p removed the thread title ■■
Remember when the unions war cry was ‘One out, all out’, now it’s more ‘one out, no clout’.
Bit shocked Sutton’s men never supported their own from the get go especially if they are in the same union. Oh well sure they are sending good luck messages on Facebook.
OP has deleted the opening thread out of sheer embarrassment by the look of it.
Crossing a picket line isn’t the only definition of a scab, not joining brothers and sisters in action is another.
Hang your heads in shame Unite members.
muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
UKt mate, your tone on this subject seems to have changed a tad, maybe a bit ambiguous, and not fully committng yourself…for a change.
In other posts you have mentioned that you have been on the other side, (management) whereby you have faced up to Union action yourself and not backed down, …or words to that effect.
Now your post appears to be almost gloating in an ‘I told you so’ tone, then strangely it changes tone in your last sentence, and shows almost pity and sympathy for a perceived faliure on the Union’s part.
Don’t sit on the fence mate, …Which camp.are you in exactly?
Another thing …Why has the o/p removed the thread title ■■
rob my views have not changed in the least on unions, I have always said that they are weak and powerless nowadays and that solidarity is the only way forward. I have indeed fought and won unions in my management days (Unite) of all irony. My sympathy is with the men who are striking and that is a fact. I am only reinforcing what I have said certainly not gloating, I ain’t trying to dam any one for being in a union. My statement of Unite being weak and pointless without full membership numbers and drivers sticking together, a union membership is pointless and not needed on this basis. The men that are striking have no alternative or anything to lose, others however who have something to lose will simply close an eye towards them.
Dipper_Dave:
Remember when the unions war cry was ‘One out, all out’, now it’s more ‘one out, no clout’.
Bit shocked Sutton’s men never supported their own from the get go especially if they are in the same union. Oh well sure they are sending good luck messages on Facebook.
OP has deleted the opening thread out of sheer embarrassment by the look of it.
Crossing a picket line isn’t the only definition of a scab, not joining brothers and sisters in action is another.
Hang your heads in shame Unite members.
HuffPost referenced the Suttons strike in a piece a couple of days ago.
Full piece here: huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/p … 8013de4da0
Extract:
"The last decade or so has seen most people’s real terms income flat-line or fall. Whilst there are many possible reasons for this, the trend for outsourcing and the subsequent impact that has on wages must play a part. A typical example is happening right now locally to me where Unite members who are tanker drivers for Sutton Tankers have gone on strike over a proposed pay cut of up to 40%. The Employer says they have to do something to stay competitive with the customer. However, it just happens to be the case that the customer is in fact the company that the drivers used to work for until three years ago when their jobs were outsourced.
What we end up with is a toxic cocktail of beguiling management consultants, weak employment rights and greedy bosses that leads to a race to the bottom. It’s time Government put a stop to this instead of being a willing participant."
muckles:
They’re only striking on one contract, not the entire company and if Sutton Tankers are sending management in to do the job, I assume it means drivers aren’t going onto that company’s site.
I fully understand that, but to quote the OP
“I will post more information soon. SOLIDARITY TO OUR BROTHERS AND SISTERS AT SUTTONS”
Doesn’t appear to be too much solidarity amongst their own. The striking drivers are already out of pocket with loss of wages and it hasn’t even been confirmed that it is the management that is driving. Pure speculation, it does go to show that in the threat and face of strike action by unite, the management have not really been affected or backed down to it. A full on national strike by the brothers and sisters would have brought this to a head immediately. My prediction is that along with the unions this strike action will have little affect or any real benefit. A shame but it appears that way.
UKt mate, your tone on this subject seems to have changed a tad, maybe a bit ambiguous, and not fully committng yourself…for a change.
In other posts you have mentioned that you have been on the other side, (management) whereby you have faced up to Union action yourself and not backed down, …or words to that effect.
Now your post appears to be almost gloating in an ‘I told you so’ tone, then strangely it changes tone in your last sentence, and shows almost pity and sympathy for a perceived faliure on the Union’s part.
Don’t sit on the fence mate, …Which camp.are you in exactly?
Another thing …Why has the o/p removed the thread title ■■
Because he’s bottled it, like most drivers do. Fanny.
Franglais:
HuffPost referenced the Suttons strike in a piece a couple of days ago.
Full piece here: huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/p … 8013de4da0
Extract:
"The last decade or so has seen most people’s real terms income flat-line or fall. Whilst there are many possible reasons for this, the trend for outsourcing and the subsequent impact that has on wages must play a part. A typical example is happening right now locally to me where Unite members who are tanker drivers for Sutton Tankers have gone on strike over a proposed pay cut of up to 40%. The Employer says they have to do something to stay competitive with the customer. However, it just happens to be the case that the customer is in fact the company that the drivers used to work for until three years ago when their jobs were outsourced.
What we end up with is a toxic cocktail of beguiling management consultants, weak employment rights and greedy bosses that leads to a race to the bottom. It’s time Government put a stop to this instead of being a willing participant."
No, what we end up with is a company desperate to get rid of these over-paid employees before they get completely bled dry. If some of the ‘brothers’ on here knew what some of these Suttons drivers are on, I wonder whether they would still support their brethren? They should also ask themselves, when was the last time they seen one of these jobs advertised. It was a closed shop, all dads and lads. No sympathy for any of them. As usual they kill the golden goose. Vauxhalls will go the same way shortly.
Franglais:
HuffPost referenced the Suttons strike in a piece a couple of days ago.
Full piece here: huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/p … 8013de4da0
Extract:
"The last decade or so has seen most people’s real terms income flat-line or fall. Whilst there are many possible reasons for this, the trend for outsourcing and the subsequent impact that has on wages must play a part. A typical example is happening right now locally to me where Unite members who are tanker drivers for Sutton Tankers have gone on strike over a proposed pay cut of up to 40%. The Employer says they have to do something to stay competitive with the customer. However, it just happens to be the case that the customer is in fact the company that the drivers used to work for until three years ago when their jobs were outsourced.
What we end up with is a toxic cocktail of beguiling management consultants, weak employment rights and greedy bosses that leads to a race to the bottom. It’s time Government put a stop to this instead of being a willing participant."
No, what we end up with is a company desperate to get rid of these over-paid employees before they get completely bled dry. If some of the ‘brothers’ on here knew what some of these Suttons drivers are on, I wonder whether they would still support their brethren? They should also ask themselves, when was the last time they seen one of these jobs advertised. It was a closed shop, all dads and lads. No sympathy for any of them. As usual they kill the golden goose. Vauxhalls will go the same way shortly.
Check it out yourselves.
Financial year 2016 gross profit a bit over 8 million quid. Up about £3 million from previous year.
Suttons are really being bled dry by these drivers it seems.
Yeah, OK, crude figures etc, but WTF is going on?
Janos hasnt got a job on there, or a Dad on there. Well neither have I. But dragging their pay down isnt going to make any of us richer.
The only beneficiaries of a pay cut for Suttons drivers is Suttons management and shareholders. Now, dont get me wrong,we need competent managers and satisfied investors, but if the managers cant pay a dividend from a gross profit of £8m who should get the pay cut?
Franglais:
HuffPost referenced the Suttons strike in a piece a couple of days ago.
Full piece here: huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/p … 8013de4da0
Extract:
"The last decade or so has seen most people’s real terms income flat-line or fall. Whilst there are many possible reasons for this, the trend for outsourcing and the subsequent impact that has on wages must play a part. A typical example is happening right now locally to me where Unite members who are tanker drivers for Sutton Tankers have gone on strike over a proposed pay cut of up to 40%. The Employer says they have to do something to stay competitive with the customer. However, it just happens to be the case that the customer is in fact the company that the drivers used to work for until three years ago when their jobs were outsourced.
What we end up with is a toxic cocktail of beguiling management consultants, weak employment rights and greedy bosses that leads to a race to the bottom. It’s time Government put a stop to this instead of being a willing participant."
No, what we end up with is a company desperate to get rid of these over-paid employees before they get completely bled dry. If some of the ‘brothers’ on here knew what some of these Suttons drivers are on, I wonder whether they would still support their brethren? They should also ask themselves, when was the last time they seen one of these jobs advertised. It was a closed shop, all dads and lads. No sympathy for any of them. As usual they kill the golden goose. Vauxhalls will go the same way shortly.
You selfish ■■■■ .So because they had a good deal you dislike them …wtf
Millions of workers are wage slaves in this country, they struggle to make ends meet and every major financial outlay needs careful planning, and then you get a group of workers who through their own struggles receive excellent wages and conditions then along comes someone petty like Janos who’s immediate thought isn’t “wow, how do I get myself such a great job?”. Oh no, his first thought is “how do I stop others getting that?”
There in one fell swoop is the main reason most people work for relatively rubbish wages.
the maoster:
Millions of workers are wage slaves in this country, they struggle to make ends meet and every major financial outlay needs careful planning, and then you get a group of workers who through their own struggles receive excellent wages and conditions then along comes someone petty like Janos who’s immediate thought isn’t “wow, how do I get myself such a great job?”. Oh no, his first thought is “how do I stop others getting that?”
There in one fell swoop is the main reason most people work for relatively rubbish wages.
Same principle as those ■■■■ s who go and key a nice car that some poor sod has worked his balls off to own.
Rather than strive to do similar they would rather mark it.
I wonder if he went for an interview somewhere and when told about the excellent wage rate he would turn it down on principle?..yeh right.
the maoster:
Millions of workers are wage slaves in this country, they struggle to make ends meet and every major financial outlay needs careful planning, and then you get a group of workers who through their own struggles receive excellent wages and conditions then along comes someone petty like Janos who’s immediate thought isn’t “wow, how do I get myself such a great job?”. Oh no, his first thought is “how do I stop others getting that?”
There in one fell swoop is the main reason most people work for relatively rubbish wages.
You are assuming a lot there. There is not a jealous bone in my body. Am only interested in fairness and equity.
I have nearly always been self-employed, and I think a stint of self-employment would be an eye-opener for a lot on here.
Also, it is obvious a lot on here do not come from large port cities with a history of industrial strikes. When you have seen the damage caused by those marxist pricks in the union, and had to suffer because of their selfish actions, then you soon get wise to this ‘brother’ nonsense.
Do any of you not think it is odd that no Suttons driver is on here defending their job? That may be because of the ridiculously high pay rate some are on. Would get a bit embarrassing.
As for wanting to work there, or any of the other union mafioso bastions, like the docks, Fords etc, I would turn it down flat.
Using Sutton as an example, who would like their work allocated by the ‘lead driver’? A practice that is just jobs for the boys, and the crap for who is not family. Most on here would be happy with that, but some are not cap-doffing halfwits and have a bit of pride.
Janos:
You are assuming a lot there. There is not a jealous bone in my body. Am only interested in fairness and equity.
I have nearly always been self-employed, and I think a stint of self-employment would be an eye-opener for a lot on here.
Also, it is obvious a lot on here do not come from large port cities with a history of industrial strikes. When you have seen the damage caused by those marxist pricks in the union, and had to suffer because of their selfish actions, then you soon get wise to this ‘brother’ nonsense.
Do any of you not think it is odd that no Suttons driver is on here defending their job? That may be because of the ridiculously high pay rate some are on. Would get a bit embarrassing.
As for wanting to work there, or any of the other union mafioso bastions, like the docks, Fords etc, I would turn it down flat.
Using Sutton as an example, who would like their work allocated by the ‘lead driver’? A practice that is just jobs for the boys, and the crap for who is not family. Most on here would be happy with that, but some are not cap-doffing halfwits and have a bit of pride.
Isn’t it amazing how easy it is to read and interpret some posters replies in different ways depending on how someone reads it. I completely agree with your above post. It is a fact that some jobs as you describe “jobs for the boys” do actually exist. It is also a fact that Unions like Unite will simply look at a companies balance sheet and assume that they can afford to keep these lucrative jobs going. Regardless to the fact of capital investment, share holders profit etc. Share holders will only invest into a business that gives them a return, they don’t invest into a business that is struggling. Unions along with their members assume it a right to share these profits towards the employees. This is not the case and is the thought pattern in difference between someone who is self employed and someone who is employed. A union often drags down capital investment from investors because of this reason. A union is rather like the politician who is collecting votes, tell the voters what they want to hear but seldom deliver the promise.
