Wouldn't you think people would learn from history. A strike has never been a gain to anyone..seems to be always jumped up Unions leaders in their 20's that push for them...of course they know no better and the sheep follow!
Can you imagine self employed people and small business /shops going on strike coz you dont have enough money coming in lol.
What do you suggest they all get trampled on by government.
Strikes and the threat of them have achieved , many things over the years.Would you prefer that we were all still in workhouses.No company would ever give its workers a rise, holidays, sick pay etc without the threat of action.
Why would anyone self employed strike,or a small business owner strike, every penny they earn they keep, they can take a day off whenever they want, when they make money they can pay themselves as much as they want. Workers dont have that luxury, if the company they work for, makes massive profits through thier hard graft , they get nothing, unless a union fights for a better deal.
If the rich and the multi national companies paid the taxes they should be paying , instead of fiddling it into offshore accounts, then we wouldnt have these problems we are getting now.
why should the private sector pay for public sectors pensions, manage like most of the hard grafters of this country do on low pay with no rewards. fall sick and all you get is statutory sick pay, and if you have 2 absents in 6months get threatened by means of a disciplinary, we are all suffering public sector workers want to realise how lucky they are
If you strike you are not willing to work and therefore should be sacked.
If you don't like the job then leave.
Simple!
007 I agree.
Would help if you sign a form when you take a job saying... 'I understand if I strike / refuse to work I may have my employment terrminated' ...simple ..plenty want a job!
I overheard three women talking about the strike this morning. All have jobs that meant they could have striked yesterday. Fine, I have no issue with them personally over whatever action they felt necessary.
But I still don't know how I stopped myself from speaking when I heard one say 'It annoys me when I hear shopkeepers say they don't have a pension - that's their fault for not paying into one'
That shows the typical mentality of those who have only worked in the public sector and are lucky enough to get paid regardless of whether they make a profit or not.
That poor shopkeeper she was so quick to deride has contributed to her pension, her sickness benefit, her holiday pay and at the same time has paid his business rates, utility bills, stock, insurance, paid his staff and their National Insurance, covered for staff holidays and sickness, possibly contributed towards their pensions, has ensured that his shop is open at convenient times so she can pop in for milk or nappies at wheneever she wants and then, and only then does he pay himself - pay money into a pension? Get real.
Anyone know what the pension and redundancy(ie not re-elected) etc situation is for MPs?
I find J Warrener's comments quite offensive and if that's the sort of drivel he spouts no wonder there is little support for striking.
"Why would anyone self employed strike,or a small business owner strike, every penny they earn they keep, they can take a day off whenever they want, when they make money they can pay themselves as much as they want. Workers dont have that luxury, if the company they work for, makes massive profits through thier hard graft , they get nothing, unless a union fights for a better deal."
Luxury? I think you ought to think before putting such stupid statements on here. Being self employed isn't a luxury - there is no sick pay, holiday pay or pension and trying to work your way around ever increasing paperwork is a nightmare.
I have no problem with the teachers trying to save their terms and conditions of work, just don't make out they have it harder than anyone else.
here,here flo
Nothing stupid said by me. If its so tough for the shopkeeper/business owner , then its simple.Just as you have stated that if public sector workers dont like the job leave, then the same applies to shop/business owners, LEAVE YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS, shut up shop and go and work for the publc sector.
If my comments offend you FLO , then perhaps you need to get out in the real world and toughen up.Being self employed as you state means funding your own pension.What do you think the public sector do, they pay into a pension.I pay £18 a week into mine , thats £936 a year. When i retire i will get £1482 per year . So ipay in £33696. Unless i live to 102, i make a loss. So i have been funding YOUR state pension.
The self employed also pay whatever tax they want,please dont try and tell me you dont do jobs cash in hand. Then thiers the endless list of receits for items, that you can cash in, so you avoid tax.The car(need it for business), petrol(yes business trip), nights out and meals(clients).
Sorry flo but the only drivel as you so call it and stupid comments seem to have come from you.Perhaps you need to stop reading The Sun newspaper. Oh and before you spout on about im obviously the usual public sector worker. I've worked both sides of the coin.Next time you need a Nurse,Carer, Policeman or moan about the state of the streets or standard of teaching, lets hope they havent taken your advice and quit, to find a much easier job.
What a nasty piece of work you are J Warrener.
1. How you do know what job I do? How do you know if its public / private sector or self employed? My husband is self employed, not me - you have no idea what I do. I do apologise though for having an opinion, god whatever next, votes for women?
2. Car, business trips, cash in hand jobs - you really have no idea, too much Sun reading yourself methinks. Don't judge everyone by your own very low standards. I don't know what jobs you perceive as coming under self employed - try to find out first before you assume.
3. If you read my last para you will see I don't disagree with the striking teachers - its your nasty minded slurs on those not in the public sector I disagree with and most certainly despise. Its people like you that do the public sector workers a disservice.
Please can someone explain why those of us at the lower end of the socio-economic food chain ( and I'll assume that's where we all are) are having this squabble? Surely we have more in common with each other than we have with those on mega buck salaries and pensions.
Perhaps they are the people we should be targetting - not the public sector workers who are your next door neighbours, who work in the local school, doctor's surgery, hospital and the like.
Low(er) paid public sector workers and low(er) paid private sector workers having a go at each other? Madness!
Why does the phrase 'divide and rule' come to my mind?
Lynne
I don't usually write back even when I really disagree with what someone says but I just felt those comments were just not acceptable and in fact perpetuate a myth about the self employed - its just the same as saying teachers knock off at 3.15 and have long holidays doing nothing.
Its not a matter of having a go at each other, its a matter of having an opinion and trying to right misconceptions.
Everyone is feeling the pinch in whatever sector of work they are in and these divisions are encouraged both by the government and more noticeably by the media. Bickering amongst ourselves will only take the heat off the real problems and the important decisions that need to be made.
I shall refrain from commenting on here in future.
flo
flo dont be put off from voicing your opinions, this is what some people want this forum to thereselves so they can all agree with thereselves. I dont always agree with Lynne but I respect her right to voice her opinions, there are some who no matter what seem to come on here with a very pompous arrogant attitude as if they are the only ones that matter and god forbid you disagree with them. Please reconsider.
I totally agree about misconceptions - but right now it seems to me that it's the public sector workers that are getting all the stick. Gold plated pensions? Ha! go tell that to a teaching assistant, or a nurse, or most local government employees.
Yes, I agree, that there are lots of myths about different types of workers, whether public sector, private sector, voluntary sector or self employed. And all those myths need to be shown for exactly what they are. And the only way for that to happen is for statements to be challenged. Whether it's me challenging others or others challenging me or others challenging others.
I totally agree that the divisions are being encouraged by the government aided and abetted, as per usual, by the press - or certain sections of it. (To try and get a balanced view on things I do try to take a look online at the Telegraph, Independent and Guardian. However,in order for my blood pressure not to go through the roof I avoid like the plague reading The Mail and The Express).
And I agree that bickering amongst ourselves will only take the heat off the real problems.
So, you see, we agree about a lot of things. And like Brazilnut I hope that you reconsider your stance about not posting anymore.
Flo - well said. (would look for an applause smilie but last time I tried to use one it c*cked up and lost my post!!)
In your post when you started this thread you said two things that jarred on me when I first read them and are still jarring on me now some few days later - so I'm going to address them.
You said: " A strike has never been a gain to anyone". Well, I guess that depends on what you define as being a gain. And whilst I agree that strikes have been lost I wouldn't say that applies to all strikes. Take a look for instance at the Matchgirl strike of 1888 and the outcome of the 1968 strike by the women workers at the Ford factory in Dagenham.
You said: "Seems to be always jumped up union leaders in their 20s who push for them". With the exception of the leader of the National Union of Students I can't think of any union leaders who are in their 20s. Most are in their 40s if not 50s. Some may even be 60+.
I was a civil servant and was very happy that the taxpayer contributed more to my pension than I did. It was an excellent job compared with working in the private sector, we were very inefficient, incredibly wasteful but didn't care because as long as we met targets nothing else mattered.
If the Civil Service was as efficient as private companies have to be in order to survive, then the staff levels could be halved so saving the taxpayer a fortune in wages and pensions.
I have also run my own company so aware of 'all sides of the coin', but without doubt being a civil servant was the cushiest job going.
If it was so cushy, why did you leave?
Simple, I retired.
Flo, if you dont like insults then dont dish them out.
You were the one to call me offensive , talking drivel,and stupid.
Yet you seem to expect me to except that. When someone replies to you in the same manor,you call them a nasty piece of work.
That makes TWO of us then.We have so much in common.
Wriggler , i agree with you that some Civil Servants are paid far to much for doing nothing, and get pensions they dont deserve.Look at any company and you will find the same.
The average public sector pension is just over £3,500 a year.For this they have paid extra money in every week.
I was one of the 1st to have my pension raided by the government.This was due to a poor union , not spotting what the government were doing.
Overnight my pension went from £4268 per year to £1482. For this i have to work 6 years longer and increased my contribution £3 per week.
If you say i live to 80, It means that just under £60,000 has been taken from my pension fund.
How would you feel if you had put £60,000 into a bank account for when you retire, only to find it had been stolen over night and you were told , its needed to pay off the mistakes the government and rich bankers made.
Other unions have seen what happened to us, that is why they are so angry.
As they expect us to work to 66, what you will find is more retire on sick grounds, as for many of us the job is not physically possible.
Spot on Lynn. Not a paper that i like but on this occasion it hits the nail on the head.
Here's some more from that paper you don't like - but which I think you might nontheless agree with.
".............the government and certain elements of the media seem to have been quite succesful at stirring up resentment towards the recipients of public sector pensions, grossly exaggerating both the average size of such pensions and the cost to the taxpayer (members of the public sector pay taxes, too) and giving the impression that it is the fault of the public sector pensioner that his or her stipend may be grater than their counterparts in the private sector, as if the financial sector's gross mismanagement of private-sector pensions had nothing to do with it.
Yes, it was the financial sector which, before precipitating the worst recession of most of our lifetimes, also brought about the great pensions disaster. But it is the poor what gets the blame, and the righwing press is more concerned about the occasional welfare cheat than it is about the fact that bankers whose businesses have been temporarily nationalised are paying themselves bonuses."
William Keegan. page 42, The Observer, 3.7.11.
Not quite true, some 12 years ago a certain Tony Blair was swept to power with a majority of over 150. He asked Frank Fields to look into the enormous problem of the ageing population and the impending pension crisis. Mr Fields response was right on the buttons but Blair thought it would be political suicide so sacked Frank Fields unceremoniously and he is now advising the coalition
Yes, Tavener, I know that.
Not sure though how that negates the fact that the government, aided and abetted by the right wing press, have been stirring it up about public sector pensions so much so that there are now 'urban myths' about how great they are. I think the low(er) paid public sector employees may well have a completely different experience from that!
And the bankers are paying themselves mega bonuses courtesy of a mega taxpayer bail out.
Please 