[CarterUSM]

Honestly captain, how many people do you think will lose their job? I really cannot see it. Hyperbole of the highest order.

[Captain Speaking]

Originally Posted by CarterUSM

Honestly captain, how many people do you think will lose their job? I really cannot see it. Hyperbole of the highest order.

Millions - yes millions (no hyperbole) will be hit by this inward-looking selfish action. Not everyone has such reasonable attitudes to empoyees as NR (if you think that's unreal, try working for minimum wage for some office cleaning company in any big city - that's the Real World - no show, next day; no job. No big powerful Crow to look after them, is there?).

You lot live in a protected world that robs you of a view of what life is like for many in UK today. Makes me sick! You need a wake-up call, a very very long swim in Lake Reality, not an easy chance to impose chaos on the lives of others in persuit of your selfish aims.

At least one of your number has said he is not that well educated and probably couln't get an equivalent job outside NR. How would minimum wage cleaning appeal? THAT is the real world. So get real!

Just think, seriously and a bit wider than your own interests (if you can), about what you are doing.

[CarterUSM]

Sounds like someone took the jam out of your doughnut mate. Jealousy is a little childish too.

[Captain Speaking]

Originally Posted by CarterUSM

Jealousy is a little childish too.

Jealous of what, exactly? The chance to put others out of work? the chance to seriously screw up the lives of millions of folk who've done you no harm perhaps costing them a fortune in lost hotel bookings etc.? The chance to be manipulated by a dinosaur union leader? What?

Thing is - striking is for losers. I never considered it as an option. There were times I had to suffer the most appalling injustices at work. Hey, that's life (real life)! Roll with the punches, bide your time, and take the opportunies when they arise. Work hard, work well, to be in a position to do that. And then have the last laugh.

I've always considered the threat of strike to be an un-natural mechanism for some workers to lever themslves over the shoulders of others in persuit of job security and more money, at the expense of those they levered themselves over. In other words, it's not how good you are at your job that gets you the rewards, but how many fellow workers (who may be more deserving than you) can you leapfrog over becuase you happen to have the balls of the travelling public in your hands, and you just have to squeeze to get what you want.

That is dispicable, and only worthy of contempt.

Take it to it's natural conclusion - just suppose everyone in the UK was in a strong union and had the public's balls in their grasp, and they all demanded more money or whatever. They'd ALL go on strike - nothing in the country working while everyone in UK is demanding everyone else pays them more! Of course, in today's globalised economy, the far east would walk in, do it all, and leave GB Ltd redundant!

What we actually have is a few unions who have a stranglehold on vital services, and they can, if they are so minded, abuse that position and demand their 'better deal' at everyone else's expense. Which is where we came in, I think.

[cuccir]

Originally Posted by Captain Speaking

Jealous of what, exactly? The chance to put others out of work? the chance to seriously screw up the lives of millions of folk who've done you no harm perhaps costing them a fortune in lost hotel bookings etc.? The chance to be manipulated by a dinosaur union leader? What?

I'm off to fly some aeobatics in our aeroplane tomorrow. And the rest of the week looks pretty good, too. I can do this because I worked bleedin hard for over 40 years, retired a few years ago on a company pension, and I'll feel really jealous of you while I'm doing all this and more (not!).

Thing is - striking is for losers. I never considered it as an option. There were times I had to suffer the most appalling injustices at work. Hey, that's life (real life)! Roll with the punches, bide your time, and take the opportunies when they arise. Work hard, work well, to be in a position to do that. And then have the last laugh.

Relying on dinosaurs like Crow to look after you is ok if you are a sheep. I'm not.

"I'm all right Jack"

[the sniper]

Originally Posted by Captain Speaking

Ah, the whole world's out of step except Sniper. I think see your problem, old boy.

Originally Posted by Captain Speaking

At least one of your number has said he is not that well educated and probably couln't get an equivalent job outside NR. How would minimum wage cleaning appeal? THAT is the real world. So get real!

Hmm... I might as well take this opportunity to declare that I'm actually 20 years old, fresh out of the education system with nine GCSE's at grade C to A* and the equivalent of four A levels, I'm currently unemployed looking for work like thousands of other young people in my position in Birmingham.

I don't have any allegiance in this 'debate', I just don't agree with virtually anything you've said here.

[Tom C]

That is dispicable, and only worthy of contempt.

I think you are going a little too far by saying that people who are striking because the job they are doing will get less safe to the point of dangerous are only worthy of contempt.

I don't know what line of work you are in but obviously you are quite happy to be used and abused and thats fine because thats your look out. But seeing as you have used the word dispicable against the Network Rail workers then perhaps your own look out could be looked at as spineless. Sure you are quite happy to come on here shouting the odds about how striking is dispicable yet you say that you "suffer the most appalling injustices at work" and are quite happy to accept that which in my estimation is cowardly and spineless.

[CarterUSM]

Sorry to hear that sniper, hope you are not out of work for too much longer. Captain, i've the feeling your jealous of the railway industrys staffs terms and conditions. I'd be the first to say they are pretty good, but they were not gained overnight, a lot of sacrifices have been made by previous generations of workers/employees to give me what I and my colleagues from all parts of the industry now have. You don't seem to like that, does it stick in your craw for some reason? Because that is the impression I get from your laughably angry posts. Take a chill pill mate. If your not happy with your own particular employment terms and conditions you can either fight to better them, or bolt off to a new career. Your choice mate.

[Captain Speaking]

Originally Posted by Tom C

I don't know what line of work you are in but obviously you are quite happy to be used and abused and thats fine because thats your look out. But seeing as you have used the word dispicable against the Network Rail workers then perhaps your own look out could be looked at as spineless. Sure you are quite happy to come on here shouting the odds about how striking is dispicable yet you say that you "suffer the most appalling injustices at work" and are quite happy to accept that which in my estimation is cowardly and spineless.

Then you've entirely missed my point. the first thing you have to haul on board is the life is not fair. Never was, never will be. I'm amazed I have to say that!

I did NOT meekly accept injustices - I used my nouse to work around them - turned them to my advantage. Have you never observed how predators work in the wild? THAT is life, and THAT is how it works. Bleating and striking.... in the real world, without those testes in your grasp giving you unfair advantage at everyone elses disadvantage, you'd be eaten!

[CarterUSM]

You'll need to do better than that to wind me up mate! That's good though, enjoy your retirement old fella. You do deserve it after 40 odd years of graft. And at least you won't have to worry about getting around or being laid off either, so that's 1 off the 'millions' who apparantly will. I'll believe it when I see it.

[Captain Speaking]

Old? Moi? Come and fly a session of aerobatics with me and see who feels old!

[CarterUSM]

I've no doubt I could match you, but I only meant old in the chronological sense! Perhaps mature is a better expression, it's certainly sounds more dignified.

[Metroland]

Sometimes this forum really hits low levels of mud slinging, where the debate isn’t moved forward and we get into the realms of ideology, stereotype and passing opinions the writer clearly hasn’t researched, or much knowledge on. Some comments are downright insulting others are just plain wrong.

This debate is being fought from an ideological point of view. The vast majority of people are not signallers or rail maintenance workers, some are clearly pro-union for the sake of it, or anti-union for the sake of it. Many politicians often state ‘I support the right to strike’, yet seem to denounce every strike there is. Which kind of makes me believe, actually they don’t – which is fine. But I do wish people would state what they really believe.

So perhaps the first point is whether there should be a right to strike among certain groups of workers – say in essential services (utilities, transport, emergency services and so on).

Really this a political point of view and has nothing to do with the underlying reasons for this dispute. If people are within the law, and striking, that does not make them selfish, irresponsible as the law stands. Whether anyone likes it or not, the choice to buy or sell goods, seek money for one’s labour, or withdraw it, is currently part of the democratic rights of this country. Some people may argue, because of the pain it creates, this [striking] shouldn’t be allowed, and the law should be changed. This point of view is fine once again, and certainly there is a case for pay demands, but once we apply it to this situation it enters a grey area.

As we all know, the public and media make a great deal of fuss about railway accidents. The public demand a safe system, and should anything go wrong, questions are rightly asked.

This problem in this instance, is groups of workers believe, for whatever reason, what they are being asked to do is not as safe as the system before or even unsafe and may result in an accident – which they will be held ultimately responsible.

Now some people have suggested this is an internal problem, and indeed it is, but let's just imagine; you are someone that is being asked to do something you are not 100% happy with. What would you do?

It really doesn’t matter, if NR management put in a system of work that is potentially less safe – long as they can show at the time they took reasonable care. When accidents happen, usually top management are never found culpable (please name me one case?). Middle management possibly might get moved around to another job, it’s the front line that find themselves in court with a manslaughter charge, entire loss of their income and all that goes with it, and a mental anguish that few can imagine unless you have been in the same situation. This is why unions are popular in the railway – not a political agenda. Most signallers tend to be very independent thinking and conservative in their outlook, nor are they people to be pushed around.

The Gerald Corbetts of the world, find themselves with a big pay offs and a new directorships, the front line staff in the most recent serious cases either lost their jobs, were threatened with jail, or had nervous breakdowns – certainly the driver involved in Southall, and the signalman involved in Ladbroke Grove.

So I ask again, what would you do if you thought something was unsafe?

You really have four lines of defence:

1. You can report your concerns to your line manager, who may or may not back you. Clearly in this case, NR have not backed front line staff, so this option at the moment is closed.

2. You can refuse to do something. Indeed, I have many times, and its part of law that you not only have the right to do this, you should excise that right. In this case you could refuse to allow T3 possessions (I’ve done that on safety concerns) and if this was a universal action, you will find that the railway would have to close anyway, as parts of it would become unsafe.

3. Or you can contact your union (if you have one) and report your concerns to them. They may take up your case. Clearly, here, they have, but cannot find agreement with Network rail. Hence they have balloted for strike action - essentially a joint refusal to take part in ‘unsafe’ activities.

4. The final option is you can resign from your job - indeed I did this myself. But I was lucky, because that was a choice I could make. What people need to understand, is its not a choice for everyone, not because they are uneducated, because like doctors, lawyers, police officers, firelighters, pilots and air traffic controllers, you will find your re-employment opportunities in your chosen field limited to non-existent. You will have to spend years retraining, and with mortgages, families and other commitments sometimes that is near impossible.

I’m afraid when push comes to shove, unless we start running a dictatorship and radically change the legal system, even if you banned striking, you could potentially have a situation where someone refuses to do something on the grounds of safety. I’ve been there, and I can tell you, when its my freedom and conscience is on the line, I’ll be making a the final decision, not a politician, manager, lawyer or anyone else.

Here is a system of work, which NR wish to put in, that in my opinion opens signallers up to error, and I don't blame them in the least, knowing the consequences of making that error.

[Greenback]

Metroland, that is an excellent post! A very good analysis that puts this dispute in its proper context, avoiding the subjective views and insulting language that have marred this thread.

[GB]

I dont usually agree with Metroland but well said that man!

CS, you talk about the "real world"...do you think any or most of us were born into the rail industry? All/most of us have worked damn hard to get where we are.