I was a tgwu member for 20yrs at my last driving job in scotland ,well things went soso till i mentioned to another driver in the yrd that i was really hard up and the 2day strike that was coming up was going to kill me…so was going on agency for couple o days !!
following morning had the shop steward and the company shop steward waiting for me to get out of my car.
well they started about me being long service and should know better than say things like i did and I HAD TO STAND ON THE PICKET LINE,like it or not.etc…well having me mortgage jump up,no OT to speak off for months and generally pd of being spoken to like this by guys id worked /with for 20yrs.
I told them to stick the union up their esra and walked to payroll and told them to stop my union fee.
I lasted another yr ,but being made to leave drivers canteen when union meeting ,stuff like that.
and you know how petty it got…when i handed my notice in to come to canada the union actually told the drivers not to give me anything as a going away collection as i was a bad influence skab ,their words not mine!!.
I was not so bothered as i was glad to get away but was chuffed when the office ,mechanics ,and a lot of the drivers stopped me outside the gates to give me a going away present 
and yup the union was very unhappy at what the did…
and by the way i never once ran a picket line,even when i left the union…i just found a job for the day…
thanks for reading needed it out o my system./
jimmy.
I don’t know wether the strike resulted in a pay rise or not, or even if that was what the strike was about.
I can’t agree with the shop stewards actions either but,
I lasted another yr ,but being made to leave drivers canteen when union meeting ,stuff like that.
during that year did you take what the union had won, or did you tell them to stick that up their ares also ?
if i remembered correctly the union action got the drivers 1% more than the offer over 2yrs .but if i remember we walked out for 4 days overall.
so 4 days pay lost for a couple o pounds a wk extra
and yup i took the extra pound plus pennies after deductions just like the younger drivers/loaders that woudnt join.
leave aside the fact that you left after a year.
A couple of pounds a week over a year is £104 and that is every year from then on.
So after 10 years it would have been £1040, perhaps that is worth losing 4 days pay for.
Factor in also that any future pay rise based on a % basis would also increase the value of the "couple of pounds"each time you had such a pay rise.
If you had stayed until the end of your working career you would have been quids in
I am sorry that after that your colleagues asked you to leave union meetings but am not really surprised, I would not expect to sit in on a meeting of a group of which I was not a member.
Sadly sometimes when the situation calls for it we have to fight and sometimes fighting means making sacrifices for the future.
If every driver had done as you wanted to do and gone to work on the agency for the period of the strike who would have manned the picket lines?
Wouldn’t the ones who did have faced the same economic consequences that you feared you would, and would they have been happy that you were earning whilst they were doing the dirty work for which you would also benefit?
it appears that you suffered ill feeling after the dispute, in which you did take part if I read your response correctly, and that is wrong.
Industrial action is never a bed of roses for anyone concerned in it, and sadly some are in a worse position than others to be able to stand the loss of a few days wages, but that is what solidarity is about.
Only hearing your side of the argument I am reluctant to criticise the shop steward as I can well believe that he would have been under considerable pressure from others to ensure that everyone “toed the line”
As far as the union saying not to give you a leaving present, I am not sure just who you mean by the union . Certainly the union organisation would not have been interested in the slightest about that, maybe the shop steward still held a grevience aginst you and organised it, but not the union itself.
anyway, hope you are enjoying life in Canada 
one of the things that pd me off was it was drivers canteen ,not the union canteen…
and i was informed by ex steward at work (different department) that it was talked about by area rep that i was to be put in my place and to be made an example for not toeing the line.
yeah i was a solid union man for 20yrs but the minute i spoke back well …
but my loyalty was to my family to keep a roof over our heads and when times were tough near a wks wages lost was not an option and having to work yrs to get back what was lost.
sorry but we are no going to agree over this.
anyway yes life is good in canada ,better than i ever hoped… 
jimmy
del949:
leave aside the fact that you left after a year.
A couple of pounds a week over a year is £104 and that is every year from then on.
So after 10 years it would have been £1040, perhaps that is worth losing 4 days pay for.
Factor in also that any future pay rise based on a % basis would also increase the value of the "couple of pounds"each time you had such a pay rise.
If you had stayed until the end of your working career you would have been quids in Sadly sometimes when the situation calls for it we have to fight and sometimes fighting means making sacrifices for the future.
If every driver had done as you wanted to do and gone to work on the agency for the period of the strike who would have manned the picket lines?
Wouldn’t the ones who did have faced the same economic consequences that you feared you would, and would they have been happy that you were earning whilst they were doing the dirty work for which you would also benefit?
it appears that you suffered ill feeling after the dispute, in which you did take part if I read your response correctly, and that is wrong.
Industrial action is never a bed of roses for anyone concerned in it, and sadly some are in a worse position than others to be able to stand the loss of a few days wages, but that is what solidarity is about.
Only hearing your side of the argument I am reluctant to criticise the shop steward as I can well believe that he would have been under considerable pressure from others to ensure that everyone “toed the line”.
+^1
I think that the situation of an employee taking part in an official strike,then working for another employer while on strike,could subject that employee to disciplinary action (termination of employment) by the employers and possibly also risk the possibility of such a member causing the whole action to be regarded as unofficial action thereby possibly subjecting everyone involved to the same disciplinary action ?.However being on the picket line should be voluntary and the less involved the better from the point of view of keeping attitudes on all sides,and those being asked to turn around,civil rather than entrenched assuming that there’s a decent level of support for the action by those directly involved.
It’s also obvious that the maths of gaining a pay rise need to be looked at on a rolling basis of each rise gained each year then rolls forward as the base level for the next rise at the following pay demand.It’s the lack of those annual pay increases at inflation or above that’s causing a lot of the problems in the economy as people’s spending power decreases on a year on year basis.
del949:
leave aside the fact that you left after a year.
A couple of pounds a week over a year is £104 and that is every year from then on.
So after 10 years it would have been £1040, perhaps that is worth losing 4 days pay for.
Four days wages from the agency then no longer paying union dues each week and that is surely going to cover, and more, the £1040?
JIMBO47:
one of the things that pd me off was it was drivers canteen ,not the union canteen…
and i was informed by ex steward at work (different department) that it was talked about by area rep that i was to be put in my place and to be made an example for not toeing the line.
yeah i was a solid union man for 20yrs but the minute i spoke back well …
but my loyalty was to my family to keep a roof over our heads and when times were tough near a wks wages lost was not an option and having to work yrs to get back what was lost.
No one really knows all of the private situations of each member involved.It’s possible that there’s others who might be in an even worse situation.But the issue of decent strike pay is one of the things that can make or break an action.
Before taking out their problems on the members the stewards and reps maybe need to start thinking about much better financial cooperation between unions so strike funds are pooled into the TUC as a whole and then drawn on by whichever union is taking action except in the event of a general strike in which case the nature of the action is likely to get it over with sooner rather than later anyway as (would have been) the case in actions like the miners strike of 1984 amongst others.
But the economy would probably have collapsed long before now if every union member in the past had worried about the loss of a week’s pay to settle a wage dispute.
Coffeeholic:
del949:
leave aside the fact that you left after a year.
A couple of pounds a week over a year is £104 and that is every year from then on.
So after 10 years it would have been £1040, perhaps that is worth losing 4 days pay for.Four days wages from the agency then no longer paying union dues each week and that is surely going to cover, and more, the £1040?
Now do the figures on a pay demand of inflation + 2% on a rolling basis every year since 1973 when the oil prices and when we joined the EU sent price rise and tax increases in the economy bonkers.That’s where the average/minimum wage (should) be now to keep spending power in real terms at a reasonable level of growth.
Truckulent:
waynedl:
1 tab:
and thats why the rates are [zb] in this industry drivers are there own worst enamy .and have to work 60 plus hours a week to make a decent living . some of you deserve what you getThe rates are [zb] because there’s more drivers than jobs.
If I didn’t go and cross the picket line, the next guy would, maybe not even a brit, there’s plenty of foreigners itching for our jobs.
The days of a strike working are long gone, I say “if you don’t like it, leave”.
I haven’t read the whole thread so apologies if this has been mentioned…but this statement above is ■■■■■■■■.
The rates are [zb] 'cos drivers are willing to work for [zb] wages!!! And to top them up they put more hours in during the week than our lass works in two weeks…
As I’ve said before, you have a choice whether to do it or not.
The fact of the matter is, if you don’t work for the wages on offer, someone else will, the job WILL be filled. Whether it’s a foreigner or someone who’s better off working for a crap wage and topping it up with tax credits and other benefits which then also allows them to get other benefits for their family such as free dinners, free prescriptions, free dental etc…
Either way, if there was more jobs than drivers, the wages would HAVE to go higher to attract drivers to that particular firm, with more drivers than jobs, then drivers are fighting each other for every job, including the poor paid ones.
A simple case of supply and demand my friend, and if you don’t understand that, it’s time to go back to playing pairs or snap or some other childs game.
Four days wages from the agency then no longer paying union dues each week and that is surely going to cover, and more, the £1040?
That would be true but I understood that he actually did honour the strike and not go the agency route.
Also, to make that claim stand up you would need a lot more info. e.g. was his next job better or worse paid, did the company go on to have decent pay rises or not etc . and also to take into account that he gave up 20 years service and the ramifications of that on possible redundancy.
the members the stewards and reps maybe need to start thinking about much better financial cooperation between unions so strike funds are pooled into the TUC as a whole
I don’t think that this is ever going to happen, for many reasons.
However Unite is to have a strike fund of £20 million in order to provide some level of reasonable strike pay in order to address exactly the issue that affected the OP.
In addition, there is nothing to stop each individual branch having its own “branch fund” .
In my own branch members are asked to voluntarily pay an extra 38p per week into a special fund that then offers some level of sick pay, strike pay and help for retired members (who , by and large were in the industry when pensions were a rarity).
In general, over the entire discussion of unions, I usually find that unlike the OP, most opponents actually know little of how a union works and have drawn their “knowledge” from the likes of the daily mail etc., and usually also hide behind the “nobody is going to tell me what to do” argument.
If you accept the argument that it is simply a case of “supply and demand” then the future does indeed look bleak, because in todays world there is always going to be an excess of “unskilled” workers.
Being a member of a strong, well supported union can help to create an artificial control over the problems this causes.
If you are happy with the status quo (I like their music !) then doing nothing will simply result in a race to the bottom.
I wonder how many reading this were surprised that a member had his fine paid by the union
or how many know that youcan insure your HGV licence against losing it through sickness etc.
There is a lot more to unions today than wether to strike or not to strike.
OK advertisement over
del949:
Four days wages from the agency then no longer paying union dues each week and that is surely going to cover, and more, the £1040?
That would be true but I understood that he actually did honour the strike and not go the agency route.
Also, to make that claim stand up you would need a lot more info. e.g. was his next job better or worse paid, did the company go on to have decent pay rises or not etc . and also to take into account that he gave up 20 years service and the ramifications of that on possible redundancy.the members the stewards and reps maybe need to start thinking about much better financial cooperation between unions so strike funds are pooled into the TUC as a whole
I don’t think that this is ever going to happen, for many reasons.
However Unite is to have a strike fund of £20 million in order to provide some level of reasonable strike pay in order to address exactly the issue that affected the OP.
In addition, there is nothing to stop each individual branch having its own “branch fund” .
In my own branch members are asked to voluntarily pay an extra 38p per week into a special fund that then offers some level of sick pay, strike pay and help for retired members (who , by and large were in the industry when pensions were a rarity).
In general, over the entire discussion of unions, I usually find that unlike the OP, most opponents actually know little of how a union works and have drawn their “knowledge” from the likes of the daily mail etc., and usually also hide behind the “nobody is going to tell me what to do” argument.
If you accept the argument that it is simply a case of “supply and demand” then the future does indeed look bleak, because in todays world there is always going to be an excess of “unskilled” workers.
Being a member of a strong, well supported union can help to create an artificial control over the problems this causes.
If you are happy with the status quo (I like their music !) then doing nothing will simply result in a race to the bottom.
I wonder how many reading this were surprised that a member had his fine paid by the union
or how many know that youcan insure your HGV licence against losing it through sickness etc.
There is a lot more to unions today than wether to strike or not to strike.OK advertisement over
I think without any effective way of making policy in government (‘Labour’ Party),the loss of power since Thatcher’s ‘reforms’ of union practices like secondary action,the fact that there seem to be ‘a lot of reasons’ why strike funds can’t be pooled across the Union movement 
,there’s no way what’s left after all that can really effectively insulate the members from the rigging of the labour ‘free market’ in the employers’ favour ranging from everything from direct government wage increase controls to mass reduncancies through outsourcing jobs to foreign countries and/or use of cheap imported labour and/or in this industry replacement of employed drivers by self employed ones.
Even the last point concerning the idea of insuring your HGV licence against loss through sickness is flawed and luckily for me I didn’t rely on that facility and took out my own income protection insurance policy.There are more scenarios, in which it’s possible to have your employment terminated on medical grounds,while still being fit enough to actually hold the licence,than there are ones whereby loss of licence is the reason and unlike the Union licence insurance idea income prtection insurance covers all those scenarios including the loss of licence ones.
If I’d only have covered my licence I’d have been reliant on the Job Centre and lumbered with having to find another type of (low paid) job because in addition to being unfit enough to lose my job,but not unfit enough to lose my licence, I was also considered fit enough to not meet the incapacity benefit test requirements.
Realistically,without some drastic changes in the way of government and people’s attitudes,the Unions now are an irrelevance just like most,if not all,of the socialist ideas like the social security system and the NHS.They are actually just another of those ideas which,as things stand,give a false sense of security by making people think that there is much more provision out there than there actually is.Maybe things would get better if the union leadership and the so called ‘Labour’ Party woke up and smelled the coffee by realising that we are already in a race to the bottom.
i simply do not agree with your outlook at all.
The hgv insurance is what it says. It is not, nor ever was, intended to be an income protection policy, nor does it cost the same.
it was only ever envisaged as being a cushion, to tide a driver over for a few months, I think the current figure is £7000, if he was to permmanently lose his vocational licence through ill health.
As I undestand it most IPP’s will not pay out for several reasons, (similarily to the union plan),eg taking voluntary redundancy, so I am not convinced that they are a panacea to all a workers problems.
Surely even you IPP would have only paid out for a limited time?
So you would still have the problem of finding another job at some stage and would still have no LGV licence and would still probably have to accept a lower paid job.
Would the fact that you had IPP affect the benefits avaiable from the state?
As far as the NHS and Social security being an irrelevance in todays world.
There will be few truck drivers who can realistically afford private health cover for themselves and their families that would provide the cover that the NHS does.
Yes, it does have faults and there are glaring examples of where it fails to deliver, but in general if you need treatment …you get it.
Social security is also prone to examples of bad managemnet and policy making. we are all well aware of the payments made to unentitled (in our opinion) foreigners and “dole jockeys”.
We all agree , I would imagine, that if payments to non entitled or undeserving cases were policed correctley there would be more available for genuine claimants.
In general however I think that the system in the UK is amongst the best in the world for providing for the citizens when times get tough and I for one am happy to pay into these service via tax.
Aqs for unions being irrelevant unless laws and peoples outlooks are changed.
In some part I agree. certainly laws need changing, to give the british worker the same protection his companion workers in the rest of the EC have.
peoples outlooks do need to change but as long as the media (owned by the select few) have the means and the opportunity to influence the masses, then thats what we are stuck with.
Wether you believe it or not unions are making attempts to move into this century and i freely admit that it has been a long time coming, but it is happening.
del949:
i simply do not agree with your outlook at all.
The hgv insurance is what it says. It is not, nor ever was, intended to be an income protection policy, nor does it cost the same.
it was only ever envisaged as being a cushion, to tide a driver over for a few months, I think the current figure is £7000, if he was to permmanently lose his vocational licence through ill health.
As I undestand it most IPP’s will not pay out for several reasons, (similarily to the union plan),eg taking voluntary redundancy, so I am not convinced that they are a panacea to all a workers problems.
Surely even you IPP would have only paid out for a limited time?
So you would still have the problem of finding another job at some stage and would still have no LGV licence and would still probably have to accept a lower paid job.
Would the fact that you had IPP affect the benefits avaiable from the state?As far as the NHS and Social security being an irrelevance in todays world.
There will be few truck drivers who can realistically afford private health cover for themselves and their families that would provide the cover that the NHS does.
Yes, it does have faults and there are glaring examples of where it fails to deliver, but in general if you need treatment …you get it.
Social security is also prone to examples of bad managemnet and policy making. we are all well aware of the payments made to unentitled (in our opinion) foreigners and “dole jockeys”.
We all agree , I would imagine, that if payments to non entitled or undeserving cases were policed correctley there would be more available for genuine claimants.
In general however I think that the system in the UK is amongst the best in the world for providing for the citizens when times get tough and I for one am happy to pay into these service via tax.
Aqs for unions being irrelevant unless laws and peoples outlooks are changed.
In some part I agree. certainly laws need changing, to give the british worker the same protection his companion workers in the rest of the EC have.
peoples outlooks do need to change but as long as the media (owned by the select few) have the means and the opportunity to influence the masses, then thats what we are stuck with.
Wether you believe it or not unions are making attempts to move into this century and i freely admit that it has been a long time coming, but it is happening.
On the subject of income protection v the idea of the union licence insurance firstly there’s no comparison and it’s surprisingly affordable.My own policy wasn’t limited to any time scale and in the case of no realistic return to the job in the foreseeable future being possible there was the provision to just settled it all with a lump sum instead which admittedly in my case they didn’t agree to without a fight and a reduction in the amount which I should have got.BUT.Even allowing for that all in all it was far better to anything that the so called national insurance/social security system or the union could provide.
The figure of £7,000 and being subjected to the demands of Jobseekers Allowance,bearing in mind the virtual impossibility of claiming Incapacity Benefit since the numerous ‘reforms’ of the social security system, as an out of work truck driver,having been sacked on health grounds,isn’t really going to be much help in comparison in that situation.In which case I’d have preferred the option of doing without the Incapacity Benefit provision in the social security system and keeping the money paid in taxes for it instead.
The NHS is actually just a third rate hospital plan which effectively just subsides employers by taking taxes out of low wage provisions to pay for a cheap effectively rationed medical care system when it would be better to have the tax back and have a decent medical insurance scheme with wage claims to match.Although that would of course need some changes in the way people think about their present attitudes to union wage bargaining and the global free market economy.The same probably applies in regard to all of the social service puplic sector provision.
In other words the good old fashioned American way before they sold the country out to the Chinese.Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters v TGWU/Unite.No contest. 
Scarab:
The world doesn’t owe me a job, my employer doesn’t owe me a job. When I signed up for any work I agreed to their terms and conditions, if I suddenly decide I don’t like them, or they change them, I will go elsewhere.All these union twerps think as soon as they get a job it’s the employers duty to keep them in bread for life.
It isn’t, if you don’t like the T’s & C’s go elsewhere. Don’t stand about round burning oil drums whinging that you don’t like it anymore.
As much as I agree with this statement in many ways, the problem is that if we didn’t have unions and nobody ever striked employers would have free reign to treat all their employees like crap. They do serve a purpose.
We’d end up with a situation where all the fat cats at the top of the hierarchy are wodded and everybody underneath them is on minimum wage struggling to feed their families. We could just walk out and try and find a better paying job, but the problem is it would be the same situation every where. The only reason we aren’t ALL on minimum wage now all accross the industry from tanker drivers to parcel slingers is because our employers know they couldn’t get away with it.
rob22888:
The only reason we aren’t ALL on minimum wage now all accross the industry from tanker drivers to parcel slingers is because our employers know they couldn’t get away with it.
I wouldn’t like to bet on it in the medium to long term.
Iam pretty lucky that I get to decide who, when and where I decide to work, and because I have that choice I would never choose to cross a picket line.
waynedl:
Truckulent:
waynedl:
1 tab:
and thats why the rates are [zb] in this industry drivers are there own worst enamy .and have to work 60 plus hours a week to make a decent living . some of you deserve what you getThe rates are [zb] because there’s more drivers than jobs.
If I didn’t go and cross the picket line, the next guy would, maybe not even a brit, there’s plenty of foreigners itching for our jobs.
The days of a strike working are long gone, I say “if you don’t like it, leave”.
I haven’t read the whole thread so apologies if this has been mentioned…but this statement above is ■■■■■■■■.
The rates are [zb] 'cos drivers are willing to work for [zb] wages!!! And to top them up they put more hours in during the week than our lass works in two weeks…
As I’ve said before, you have a choice whether to do it or not.
The fact of the matter is, if you don’t work for the wages on offer, someone else will, the job WILL be filled. Whether it’s a foreigner or someone who’s better off working for a crap wage and topping it up with tax credits and other benefits which then also allows them to get other benefits for their family such as free dinners, free prescriptions, free dental etc…
Either way, if there was more jobs than drivers, the wages would HAVE to go higher to attract drivers to that particular firm, with more drivers than jobs, then drivers are fighting each other for every job, including the poor paid ones.
at, it’s A simple case of supply and demand my friend, and if you don’t understand thtime to go back to playing pairs or snap or some other childs game.
In theory - yes. But as there is a never ending supply of people (as you say foreigners, people working for a crap wage and topping up with benefits etc.) your model would never come to pass - one glance at this fine forum is enough to see that there are many drivers that are more than happy to work for next to nowt. It’s highly unlikely there ever will be more jobs than drivers,certainly in the near future, and even less likely that employers will increase wages dramatically. If the people that are prepared to work for £7/hour on artics at night ALL said no -we want at least (say £10)…then it wouldn’t matter how many jobs were out there. None would get done at a cheap rate. This may be a bit unlikely (very unlikely!) but it doesn’t stop it being a fact. If drivers stood together (yeh right!) and asked for a decent day’s pay in return for decent work, the issues of appalling rates would be gone. There is plenty of demand to work in our local supermarket, decent shifts etc - and there are many non-English that work there…but the hourly rate is still better than a lot of driving jobs are. If they can pay it there - and that’s filling shelves etc., why not for a job with responsibility like HGV driving?
Yes, I know it won’t happen - mostly because a huge amount of drivers are too daft to see their worth and are more interested in what motor their driving and if it has shiny bits. 
I would cross a picket line without any doubt, for the simple reason I disagree with strikes.
In my opinion the strike weapon is to easy used in the UK, and mostimes only for the purpose of media attention.
The Unions as they are clearly have passed their sell by date, they need to pull their socks up and move into the 21st century.
We need Unions that are partnerships with the employers, who work together to look at both sides of the coin and work together to bring our economy to a higher level.
Not try to ruin companies, like they have done in the past (look at Peugot in Rydon, Rover in Longbridge to name but a few)
We need forces of employers and employees to build up what is been damaged, no to break it down further.
And yes companies need to make profit, and yes as much as possible, otherwise it’s pointless to invest your money in to it.
If you can get 5% more return to invest in another country than Britain, you will, so will big companies.
The Unions need to help to create a Britain with an added value workforce, not one who if the coffee to cold,or the toilet paper to hard drop their tools, that will never get us up to a higher level again.
See it a bit like Skoda, bad name but b y building better cars for a reasonable price they are on the way of turning it around to be eventually one of the core players. They didn’t get there with a asking top dollar, but with working hard and build quality to prove the world wrong.
The Trademark of Britain in the world is one of strikes, which big investor is looking for that?
I think the Union plight is to save Britain and prove that we are a reliable partner with added value to invest in, instead of a moaning bunch of people who rob their own members of a holiday by always thread to strike just before the holiday seasons.
IMO anyone who claims that they would always cross a picket line nowadays really needs to think about it.
Nobody in todays climate goes on strike without a really good reason.
Nobody chooses to risk losing their job and certainly lose some wages for the issue of “bog rolls being too hard” (can anyone actually give evidence that this did in fact happen? …but it made a good headline in the daily mail )
The other points you raise.
unions need to move into this century…they are, belatedly I agree, but they are.
they should form partnerships with employers…in general, in well orgaised places that is exactly what they do
they should work with employers to add value… they are doing.
Most of the companies that have worker improvemment programmes are union workplaces.
Most of these programmes are union inspired
Companies like peuguet, rover etc… this is history. things like this have not happened, broadly speaking, in the last 15 years or so. The days of continual strikes by rival unions in the same workplace are finished and rightly so.
companies exist to make a profit… agreed, but not at any cost.
more union negotiations are spent on safety than on pay structures.
Tesco, one of the most profitable companies in the UK are comitted to union representation and negotiations. It is beneficial for them to have one individual in a work place to resolve issues than to consult with lots of individuals.
the trademark of britain is strikes… not for at least 2 decades. there are less strikes in Britain than almost all the EC countries. The strict laws on strikes we have in this country see to that
and that brings us to Skoda
the turnaround there had little if anything to do with the workforce. it was entirely down to a change of management and investment in technology alongside the introduction of new models. Nothing whatseover the bod on the work floor could have any control over.
I would imagine that the workforce there is unionised (correct me if I am wrong).
Also, wasn’t Skoda manufacturing their product in a communist country in the times when cars were crap, so I doubt that many strikes would have been permitted there.
in short, caledonian dreaming, the scenario of unions you seek to paint is obsolete and way out of date. but you are allowed your opinion