You and anyone else have every right to ask the questions and I will always give a reply.
As above, it is you again who is offering misinformation and actually it is you who is telling people that this is the view of Skyshare, perhaps you should stop publishing unsubstantiated facts? Please provide facts that this is the case and not your own personal speculation.
The views expressed here, which would appear to be in support of ss and the silence from ss on this matter. Plus of course the company going on record in stating that such a move would lead to cut backs and the scaling down of expansion plans. Such a situation would bring the issue to centre stage. Whether the situation is engineered or not, those who are vulnerable have to address this. As I said, a clarification from SS would be welcome and I am perfectly willing to change my own views in the light of such evidence. In fact I would be very happy to do so. However whilst there is doubt over an issue that is such importance, I must assume the worst case until I have evidence to the contrary.
In one respect this is no different than the widely held and publicized view on the SS side that those who are standing have been directly approached by management to do so or are trying to "cut themselves a deal".
Yes, you are are correct, but what you fail to address from the previous poster is that the number of people who actually take part in the vote is also important and the company have said they will not publish that number.
Do you not agree that if only 100 people vote in something then it is hardly representative of 950 people and the question of why there has been such a poor turnout needs to be addressed, in this case because people dont believe in the programme or how it will be run.
Certainly, but no one has been barred from standing and no one has been barred from voting. If only 100 people bother to vote then only 100 people will have their views represented. That is not the fault of Outreach.
Its that kind of bulldozing attitude which we have had for the last 6+ years and which Outreach was suppose to stop, well it seemsa live and healthy and now you are continuing it.
How does encouraging people to engage in a democratic vote represent a bulldozing attitude?
Being told what to do by a body that saw no need to put itself up for election falls more into that category IMHO.
What annoys me even more is that it would appear you are fighting your campaign almost on a scare-tactic effort
I'm not trying to scare anyone. I just want people to know what, in the lack of evidence to the contrary, would appear to be being suggested in their name. Also
JS aside, there are other valid reasons why many people think that a union would be bad for NJE and their prospects. My own view is that those who most want a show of industrial muscle are those who are, by virtue of their position in the career list, the least likely to suffer the consequences.
The
JS time frame of 4 years is completed with no further redundancies and everyone is called back to full time, followed by an announcement that due to the company needing to re-structure itself more accurately to its level of flying, redundancies will be necessary and they will be done by the seniority method.
If that is the case, and those are the rules then I shall have to abide by them. I would not be happy but that's life. As I have stated over and over again, my primary concern is that the promises made and the contract variations issued be honoured for the period that they are valid. After that time , well it's anybodies guess. I sincerely hope that no cuts will be required either now or in 3 years time. My other concern is that the application or potential threat of industrial action will make such cuts inevitable. I believe that there are others who share this view, and not only from the lower reaches of the career list.
This is obviously an area where we will disagree.
I genuinely respect your right to stand and to have whatever opinion you so choose, and none of this is aimed at you in an aggressive or insulting way, however, I hope you also respect that since you are theoretically asking for my vote I think I have the right to question your views.
Thank you, and I respect your position. To misquote someone famous and long dead, "I may disagree with your views but I will fight to the death for your right to express them." I would hope that this is reciprocated.
I dont want it to be a slagging match, more respectful debate.
Me too. I would hope that SS and Outreach have the same strategic aims despite a different tactical approach A successful company and a contented and secure workforce. If the differences can be debated in a respectful and civilized manner then so much the better. I am not looking or a fight, there are more important things to do. I will however, vigorously defend my position. Personal attacks on an individual's integrity and motives are not worthy of reply. Attack the message by all means, not the messenger.