SCABS
To put the Australia statements into context, the readers of the Forum need to understand where the “roots” of the Aussie Industrial Movement started and the Blood and Tears behind the early union movement.
Without creating a history lesson, it started in the Gold Fields in the state of Victoria in the 1850’s where the workers finally joined together [unionised] [spelt with an “s’] and rebelled against the corrupt and inept [British] ‘authorities” of the time. This action is well known as the Eureka Rebellion.
Since then the Unions have provided the Industrial Framework in which the normal workforce has been protected, to the extent that we Aussies can enjoy the same if not best Western Industrial Standards across the world. [Just ask all the immigrants and boat people].
One of the strong and certainly not acceptable actions of any worker, is to take the job of a worker who is engaged in legal industry action with his or her employer.
That person should they wish to cross to the dark side, is indeed a SCAB and very very short sighted.
Short sighted on a number of fronts: Firstly the actions of the workforce to enhance their conditions in the first place is immediately scuttled, if the SCAB decides to work in another persons job.
The SCAB is not a respectable person and will be the loser in the end. If you doubt this aspect, just ask the SCABS that crossed the Picket Line at the Patrick’s Stevedores dispute on the Victorian Water Front a few years ago. When the Strikers and Company resolved their differences, guess who is now unemployed – permanently!!
They are also cases that cars, vehicles and other equipment that was operated by SCABS was never ever operated again by the normal workforce. I am glad that the Sikorsky rumor is just that.
Helibloke says it a little closer to the point than I, but a SCAB is a SCAB and that is not the way forward.
Hope the dispute is settled quickly, and with both parties having a win.