How to end the current round of strikes

[islaydarkblue]

In the mid 1970’s there was soaring inflation in the U.K. thanks to the soaring price of oil imposed by the oil producing countries in the Middle East.
However the U.K. Government introduced a simple solution which kept workers pay in step with the rising inflation rate which from memory reached over 20% at one stage.
Sadly most of our current politicians and union leaders will not be old enough to remember the mid 1970’s and as a result they will not have the savvy to even suggest this solution.
Before the oil price hike in 1973 I can remember purchasing petrol at 50p per gallon.

[Deeranged]

What was the 'simple solution'? I'm not old enough to remember.

Best solution to strikes? Make it clear there will be no overtime to make up for the working time lost when they go back, make sure that striking will hit them longer term in the pocket like they try to hit the employer on the bottom line. Bring in temps while they're on strike, arrest any that try to stop them and make it an automatic large fine - say £5,000. Ultimately if they refuse to attend work for a period without good justification hold them in breach of the contracts they were perfectly happy to sign at the time they were hired and sack them.

[eric_sinclair]

What was the 'simple solution'? I'm not old enough to remember.

Best solution to strikes? Make it clear there will be no overtime to make up for the working time lost when they go back, make sure that striking will hit them longer term in the pocket like they try to hit the employer on the bottom line. Bring in temps while they're on strike, arrest any that try to stop them and make it an automatic large fine - say £5,000. Ultimately if they refuse to attend work for a period without good justification hold them in breach of the contracts they were perfectly happy to sign at the time they were hired and sack them.

Nobody wants to strike or lose a days pay but sometimes it is needed.
Are you suggesting every employee Shud just say yes to every wage increase offered?
The media Shud be impartial also and report all salaries not just high end ones.

[Deeranged]

Nobody wants to strike or lose a days pay but sometimes it is needed.
Are you suggesting every employee Shud just say yes to every wage increase offered?
The media Shud be impartial also and report all salaries not just high end ones.

Unless specified in an employment contract that the employee will receive a minimum percentage increase PA then any increase should be viewed as better than nothing. It's not a requirement of any employer to increase wages beyond the amount agreed at point of hire.

I started my current job four years ago and this year I received a 2% increase on my agreed salary, I'd had no increase before that. I'm grateful to my employer for the 2% increase however had I once again received no increase I'd likely have left and gone to a new employer on a higher agreed salary. We all have the option to leave an emploiyer if we're not happy and the whole strike thing achieves nothing other than reducing an individual's annual earnings IMO. However the militant fat cats at the tops of the unions don't care about the person on the front line who they see as foot soldiers for their cause.

[jdfc]

Unless specified in an employment contract that the employee will receive a minimum percentage increase PA then any increase should be viewed as better than nothing. It's not a requirement of any employer to increase wages beyond the amount agreed at point of hire.

I started my current job four years ago and this year I received a 2% increase on my agreed salary, I'd had no increase before that. I'm grateful to my employer for the 2% increase however had I once again received no increase I'd likely have left and gone to a new employer on a higher agreed salary. We all have the option to leave an emploiyer if we're not happy and the whole strike thing achieves nothing other than reducing an individual's annual earnings IMO. However the militant fat cats at the tops of the unions don't care about the person on the front line who they see as foot soldiers for their cause.

Think you really need a reality check

And just to point out to you, there is no overtime available to folk that strike in Royal Mail to make up lost wages, do you really think we want to strike and lose wages, maybe if you took time to look in to the reason for our strike you’d find out it’s not all about wages, but if you think it’s ok for a company to make £739 million profit, payout £400 million to share holders, pay executives £4.5 million in bonuses on top of their 6 and 7 figure wages and offer the work force 2% your no worth debating with

[num1adi]

Think you really need a reality check

And just to point out to you, there is no overtime available to folk that strike in Royal Mail to make up lost wages, do you really think we want to strike and lose wages, maybe if you took time to look in to the reason for our strike you’d find out it’s not all about wages, but if you think it’s ok for a company to make £739 million profit, payout £400 million to share holders, pay executives £4.5 million in bonuses on top of their 6 and 7 figure wages and offer the work force 2% your no worth debating with

Well said , strikes are the only weapon the ordinary working man has , we are in for a winter of discontent far worse than one in 79 and this out of touch tory government are gonna get their erse seriously kicked

[BCram]

Think you really need a reality check

And just to point out to you, there is no overtime available to folk that strike in Royal Mail to make up lost wages, do you really think we want to strike and lose wages, maybe if you took time to look in to the reason for our strike you’d find out it’s not all about wages, but if you think it’s ok for a company to make £739 million profit, payout £400 million to share holders, pay executives £4.5 million in bonuses on top of their 6 and 7 figure wages and offer the work force 2% your no worth debating with

I think you are quite right to question the figures. I'd like to understand what is happening because it seems to me that the trains and the buses and the postal workers are all facing a major reduction in their target markets. City centres are being completely filleted of commuters and with substantial drops in demand the usual economic response is to reduce the supply and try to reduce costs to bring things back into balance. I don't think postal workers have a hope of changing the way they deliver the mail so how are they going to be able to compete with the "gig economy" style of employment offered by the likes of Amazon? You can use your power to create misery for everyone else, but as those of us who have lived through a cycle of union militant action, eventually the court of public opinion turns and the union members lose the war, having been persuaded by their leaders that they won the best deal they could get.

I think Royal Mail turnover was £12.7bn. If after receiving £12.7bn you only have a profit of £739m, what have you spent the other £12bn on? £4.5m in bonuses, £400m in dividends seems relatively small figures when you look at how much money must have been spent elsewhere.

Rail workers face a similar dilemma. If city centres are no longer driven by the economic activity of commuters then we are all in much much bigger trouble than anyone is prepared to admit, IMO.

[Deeranged]

Think you really need a reality check

And just to point out to you, there is no overtime available to folk that strike in Royal Mail to make up lost wages, do you really think we want to strike and lose wages, maybe if you took time to look in to the reason for our strike you’d find out it’s not all about wages, but if you think it’s ok for a company to make £739 million profit, payout £400 million to share holders, pay executives £4.5 million in bonuses on top of their 6 and 7 figure wages and offer the work force 2% your no worth debating with

Not sure I specified Royal Mail to be fair. I don't think for one minute that anyone that's going to lose money from it wants to strike, but the people at the top of your union who feel no effect do.

Company profits are irrelevant unless you have a contractual agreement that links a rate or salary increase to profits - such as shareholders and executives have.

2% was enough for me, why isn't it enough for you?

I'm not worth debating with because I refuse to be bullied by union fat cats?

[jdfc]

Not sure I specified Royal Mail to be fair. I don't think for one minute that anyone that's going to lose money from it wants to strike, but the people at the top of your union who feel no effect do.

Company profits are irrelevant unless you have a contractual agreement that links a rate or salary increase to profits - such as shareholders and executives have.

2% was enough for me, why isn't it enough for you?

I'm not worth debating with because I refuse to be bullied by union fat cats?

Personally I’m not to fussed with the pay, though inflation is through the roof, it’s all the other conditions they are throwing at us, including Sunday working for no extra payments, now I know some already work Sundays but our contracts don’t have them in it

[jdfc]

Well said , strikes are the only weapon the ordinary working man has , we are in for a winter of discontent far worse than one in 79 and this out of touch tory government are gonna get their erse seriously kicked

Royal Mail has buildings in every town to pay for, a large fleet of vehicles, on top of that they have invested £200’s of millions in new technology, parcel sorting machines and buildings the size of 20 odd football pitches