Originally Posted by
MPN11
Trying to be fair and moderate, I think the general readership are not trying "to justify general gripes about the TU movement borne of their political incline."
I think many people are actually really very tired of having their lives severely disrupted by Trades Unions. The ability to take IA may well be a part of the 'power of the Union', but the reality is that millions of people are adversely affected by it [wherein, of course, lies the power].
Whether it's Post, Refuse, Rail, Underground, Cabin Crew, Miners, Firemen or any other sector of the major 'service industries' ... the rest of the population gets a bit pi55ed off having their lives massively disrupted. There is anger out there. Not necessarily because the strikers or disrupters may not have a good cause [or not] ... just simply that the rest of society is getting a bit tired of small groups messing their lives about.
Despite being a Right-winger, I can accept there are good causes where the Union should rightly [ooops, did i say that?] take some form of action. However, any expectation of Public sympathy should be carefully considered. Sadly, that hasn't been the case. The Public [i.e. some poor innocent victim like me] is expected to accept a battle between Management and Union ... with the Public as the victim, and management as the Villain, and the Union as the Hero in the White Hat. Guess what? I don't want to be a pawn in the power-struggle about who runs the Company, or whether a 15 minute tea-break is acceptable.
@ call100 ... That's why people are pi55ed off, and it has nothing whatever to do with political inclinations.
I was referring to those who use McCarthy type language when discussing the subject of TU's and IA..
TU members are often not considered members of the Public when it comes to discussions about the way IA affects.
I don't disagree that people get racked off with it all. Society has grown a very me, me, me outlook and people rarely, if ever, consider what the IA is about.
I have been in the position where strike action was voted for. The meeting to discuss the timing of the action took two days. Whatever we did was going to affect someone. We didn't want to strike in the school holidays (even though this had most impact) as many hard working families would be affected on their main holidays.
Business flyers would be affected if we had any prolonged strikes.
Struggling airlines may be tipped over the edge. Etc. Etc.
Whatever the decision, someone somewhere was going to feel as you do. We eventually came up with a strategy that impacted on the employer more than the travelling public. However, it would have still upset some people. Luckily we negotiated a settlement before we had to test it (Much the preferred option).
Using IA irresponsibly is a big problem, but, irresponsibility is subjective and the people involved in the decision are often as blinkered to the effects on others as others are to the reasons for the IA.
Most disputes are resolved amicably, the nature of the beast means that no one reports any of these. It's not enough to get Daily Mail readers wound up any more than they already are.
I don't agree with the methods used in the BASSA dispute and I don't agree with fighting your dispute in the press or on forums like this. Unfortunately 'Society' has moved in that direction and people are emboldened by the anonymity of media like this.
As for IA in general. I believe that it must always remain a possibility otherwise there would be not negotiation of anything. The notion that all employers are reasonable, altruistic entities is far far from reality.
But it has been proven that the successful companies are those that work hand in hand with their workforce to reach amicable and beneficial (to both sides) agreements.
Sorry this went on longer than I intended......
