Striking during olympics

[SS4]

Privatisation of Telecoms, Gas and Electric has no doubt benefitted the shareholders, but because of increased competition has massively benefitted consumers via lower prices that we could only have dreamt of if (for example) BT still had a monopoly. I'm old enough to remember when you did that thing to save money where you rang the phone twice to say you got home OK. Now you get free calls!

Technology has changed communication/telecoms more than privatisation. If BT still had a monopoly it would have to compete with mobile phones.

Privatisation is essentially the cherry picking of profitable business aspects and leaving the public sector with the unprofitable ones which can no longer be subsided by the profitable ones as they once were which leaves the public purse lighter.
Of course privatisation is an excellent thing if you've enough capital to invest.

Like 313103 I'm glad we're in a country where we can strike, where the ordinary worker can make his voice heard.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I agree.

Yet you could choose not to do it before the Olympics, and then maybe not be accused of self-interest and gain more public support for your grievances?

And get completely ignored for your troubles? Public support is always fickle as jealousy is rife amongst many who cannot take industrial action, if we relied on public support it'd be race to the bottom which suits nobody except management.

 

[table38]

If BT still had a monopoly it would have to compete with mobile phones.

You fiorget that all the early mobile phones were a monopoly under BT (which became BT Mobile Comms which became O2 after privatisation)

I actually had one! My boss declared they were too expensive so we must use them less or lose them... so we used them less... so he decided we weren't using them enough and so we lost them anyway

Incidentally, what do you think would happen today if O2 went on strike?

- update -

It was very much like this, although I don't remember the battery being really that big!

 

[SS4]

You fiorget that all the early mobile phones were a monopoly under BT (which became BT Mobile Comms which became O2 after privatisation)

I actually had one! My boss declared they were too expensive so we must use them less or lose them... so we used them less... so he decided we weren't using them enough and so we lost them anyway

In that case it probably is fair to say deregulation worked in telecoms. And talk about a self-fulfilling prophecy

edit: privatisation -> deregulation (see below)

 

[HSTEd]

You fiorget that all the early mobile phones were a monopoly under BT (which became BT Mobile Comms which became O2 after privatisation)

You conflate deregulation with privatisation.

BT could have lost its monopoly on mobile phones without being privatised.

It is notable that Telecoms has produced a far less dysfunctional "market" than the other privatisations, possibly because the company was simply floated, and the industry was not blasted to pieces with a shotgun beforehand.

And there was already a semi functioning marketplace with other players, even if they were tiny compared to BT.

 

[table38]

You conflate deregulation with privatisation.

Well they really did go hand-in hand, unless you are suggesting we could have had deregulation, then lots of separate publicly owned companies providing a competing service?

 

[ng1980]

In my opinion, it just makes the country look a complete shambles in the eyes of the world. We have one chance to prove ourselves, and there's always someone who wants to ruin it, and in this case those who strike. It's our country and we should be proud to be hosting something of this scale, but no - they'd rather show us all up.

Absolutely!

The UK is our country, we should be supporting our image with pride, whatever we might think about the Olympic Games, sports sponsorship, or trade unionism.

With a good reputation, other countries will invest in the UK, increasing receipts, improving our economy, which in turn will improve public services and the job market.

With a poor reputation, companies will bypass us, investing in other economies which will then compete with us.

If anything could have came out of the Olympics, I wished it was to regain a bit of national pride. Unfortunately, that has not even started to happen.

I certainly hope that the people tarnishing our reputation are not going to turn around the next week and complain about public services or the job market. ... Yeah, I know, they will!

I am a British expat living out of the UK, and I travel around quite a lot. Many people think that "England" (meaning the UK) is a "has-been", a 19th and early 20th century country. We need to show the world that the UK is here and now, and still a major hub of the world.

Come on, let's pull together, work as a team and show the world that the UK is here, is happening, is a great place to be and is a great place to invest!

 

[table38]

You are Boris Johnson, and I claim my £5

 

[wigwamman]

I agree.

Yet you could choose not to do it before the Olympics, and then maybe not be accused of self-interest and gain more public support for your grievances?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Sure if you want, although I'm still unsure what that has to do with the topic under discussion.

You asked for evidence of cartels.

 

[table38]

You asked for evidence of cartels.

No I didn't, as I wasn't particulaly interested as it has nothing to do with the topic under discussion. What I actually said was:

if you have evidence of that, I'd report it

 

[ainsworth74]

with a (at the moment) democratic Government.

Know something we don't about the future?

And get completely ignored for your troubles?

I think that comes down to tactics. London Underground went on strike not so long ago but they did it for one day every couple of weeks. The impact? Limited (hence ignorable) as for one day people were willing/able to make alternative arrangements. If they'd gone on strike from Monday to Friday however? That might have gained some notice. I don't accept that the only way that strike action can not be ignored is by striking during the Olympics.

 

[wigwamman]

No I didn't, as I wasn't particulaly interested as it has nothing to do with the topic under discussion. What I actually said was:

The information I posted was to illustrate evidence that these firms are upto no good,as you say off topic but relevant to the point I was making.

 

[Metroland]

Railway privatisation doesn't work where there is no competition, but that has been discussed ad nausem before)

Plus of course the railway is funded to the tune of £5bn by the taxpayer. Essentially what the unions are saying, is we don't get paid enough, let's screw some more money out of public funds instead of paying it to single mums, pensioners etc

Organising strikes is not capitalist. It's organised labour (a cartel) seeking to threaten employers into submission for it's own ends. In a purely capitalist world, there would be many companies in open competition with a mobile workforce competing freely for jobs. That might even have the effect of holding wages down if there is an oversupply. None of that happens on the railways, because the companies are not in true competition and there are barriers to entry for other companies/workers.

There are times for strikes when there is really no other option, but the rail unions are quite open about extracting as much for their members as possible. In my book, that's just as bad as companies exploiting their workers. The unions talk about greedy shareholders, yet, the EMT strike is about money invested into a pension pot to buy...erm, usually shares! Who do union members actually think shareholders are? To strike at the time when all eyes on on this country, where hard working families have saved hard and look forward to a national event, only to have it disrupted by a bunch of people on upwards of £50k a year for their own ends is nothing short of a disgrace.

 

[David]

In 2009 energy giants EON and GDF were fined €1.1 billion for carving up the european gas markets between them.

No the were not fined for carving up the european gas markets. They were fined for keeping to a contract signed in 1975 between Ruhrgas (now part of E.On) and Gaz de France not to sell in each others home markets following hte completetion of the MEGAL pipeline. In any case, they cancelled the contract in 2005.

 

[Legzr1]

Once again i see the usuaul diatribe coming from certain quarters!

I also note that Bob Crow's name was mentioned in the very first post, the fact that RMT members are not striking is not lost on me!

I am not going down and picking other comments apart, although what i will say is i think i am right to think that ilive in a democratic country, with a (at the moment) democratic Government. So i think it is also my right to strike if it requires it and refuse to work overtime again if it requires it. No matter when and no matter what kind of event is being done.

In Bold: Getting a little tiresome isn't it?

Agree with the rest of your post.

Here we go again - I don’t get as good a deal so why should you. The race to the bottom is on. Perhaps it could be made an Olympic Sport

In an ideal world there should not be strikes during the Olympics. However, in an ideal world there would be no need for unions because everything would be fair and equitable and there would be no disputes.

Now, when do you think the best time to get someone to listen to your grievance might be? When do you think you might get a positive outcome? Is it right? No. Not at this time. But I bet you it won’t get sorted out if you defer action until after the games.

Well said that man!



What a few of the more self-righteous members on here seem to be missing is that it takes two to tango.

Imagine the uproar if a certain employer thought "what a great time to totally ignore nationally agreed and bargained terms & conditions and/or take liberties with pension funds - they wouldn't dare call a ballot for strike action! We'd have full support from a Tory-led coalition,the anti-union media and some right-wing internet experts posting on a rail forum - win-win!!"...

Oh...

 

[Metroland]

In Bold: Getting a little tiresome isn't it?

So is going on strike every five minutes! What do you want, sympathy? The fares go up every year, most of these "ordinary workers" on are salaries comparable to middle managers and professionals, tools are downed at every opportunity, and when you do want to get a train it's cancelled because people can't sort things out like adults.

You must be very out of touch to not understand why people do not support these sorts of activities - it's virtually everyone I talk to, every paper I read, most (non-railway) comments. It's got nothing to do with jealousy, and everything to do with people who are paid (well) to do a job, and instead of carrying it out, down tools and hold the begging bowl out yet again, despite being in the top 20% of salaries!

This is apart from the railways are not really a commercial entity and we pay a lot of taxes for a service we expect.

Railway workers are the ones going on strike. Perhaps the passengers should go on strike and see what that gets you!

Once again i see the usuaul diatribe coming from certain quarters!

As opposed form the sort of diatribe from railway union members on this forum? Or to stereotype like you do the people who disagree with you: The left wing brothers, who bully people that don't go on strike, think there are quite justified in going on strike because they voted for it, and are more interested in them v us than providing a useful service.

 

[HSTEd]

Well they really did go hand-in hand, unless you are suggesting we could have had deregulation, then lots of separate publicly owned companies providing a competing service?

No... but BT could have competed with regulated private sector companies?

There is no need to eviscerate the public sector provider to ensure the private sector is triumphant, if the public sector provider really is that inefficient this should occur naturally, if a cap is put on subsidies for mobile phone operations to respect they are expected to provide a near universal service.

 

[table38]

Railway workers are the ones going on strike. Perhaps the passengers should go on strike and see what that gets you!

Lets see...

(a) could passengers manage without the railway? Well, it would be inconvenient, but there are other forms of transport.

(b) could the railway manage without any passengers? Answers on a postcard please
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No... but BT could have competed with regulated private sector companies?

But then it wouldn't be a level playing field; if kept in public ownership, BT would be relying on millions in government subsidies rather than getting its finance from the private sector. Oh, a bit like the railways then

 

[wigwamman]

So is going on strike every five minutes! What do you want, sympathy? The fares go up every year, most of these "ordinary workers" on are salaries comparable to middle managers and professionals, tools are downed at every opportunity, and when you do want to get a train it's cancelled because people can't sort things out like adults.

You must be very out of touch to not understand why people do not support these sorts of activities - it's virtually everyone I talk to, every paper I read, most (non-railway) comments. It's got nothing to do with jealousy, and everything to do with people who are paid (well) to do a job, and instead of carrying it out, down tools and hold the begging bowl out yet again, despite being in the top 20% of salaries!

This is apart from the railways are not really a commercial entity and we pay a lot of taxes for a service we expect.

Railway workers are the ones going on strike. Perhaps the passengers should go on strike and see what that gets you!

I agree sort of that we don't live in a true free market society,its a mix of corpratism and rigged markets.
All workers are doing here is trying to extract the best deal they can,they know full well that a lot of money is being made out of the olympics and want a slice,nothing more nothing less.
This is the system we asked for when we embraced the greed is good mantra of the 80s.
Rail workers are paid well(drivers) and ok in the case of most other grades,like it or not drivers do have a lot of power as they can bring large parts of the country to a halt.
Politicians exploit power,rich people exploit power and corporations exploit power.
What is the difference,is it that these working class oiks have the temerity to realise their own value.

 

[HSTEd]

But then it wouldn't be a level playing field; if kept in public ownership, BT would be relying on millions in government subsidies rather than getting its finance from the private sector. Oh, a bit like the railways then

It could have the same operating environment as DRS does, as an arms length commercial body.

Even if it was to gain access to government gilt rate financing, it would make little difference since it would be at no net cost to the taxpayer so long as it was expected to repay the loans it took out.

 

[chuckles1066]

my bold

What no strike net? My brother in law is in the Met and the Police Federation are absolutely adamant that after the latest batch of police changes they will pursue the right to strike all the way......

He's been spending too much time reading Inspector Gadget's blog :roll:

 

[Metroland]

I agree sort of that we don't live in a true free market society,its a mix of corpratism and rigged markets.
All workers are doing here is trying to extract the best deal they can,they know full well that a lot of money is being made out of the olympics and want a slice,nothing more nothing less.
This is the system we asked for when we embraced the greed is good mantra of the 80s.
Rail workers are paid well(drivers) and ok in the case of most other grades,like it or not drivers do have a lot of power as they can bring large parts of the country to a halt.
Politicians exploit power,rich people exploit power and corporations exploit power.
What is the difference,is it that these working class oiks have the temerity to realise their own value.

It'll all end in tears. If the PR battle is lost the government, in the end, will just invoke anti strike legislation. The same way as corporations have to be regulated against monopolistic and exploitative behaviour, politicians have to answer to voters etc.

Greed is a bad thing whatever way you look at it, it upsets the status quo, it corrupts and destroys other people's hopes and dreams.

I can only hope you are priced out of the market.

Being a railwayman was once a proud profession, I'm sorry it's now all about 'getting rich quick'.

 

[chuckles1066]

Being a railwayman was once a proud profession, I'm sorry it's now all about 'getting rich quick'.

As was being a miner.

But anyone who is old enough to remember the (almost weekly) strikes by them in the 1970s will tell you they ended up being perceived as money-grabbing parasites who brought the country to its knees.

 

[bluenoxid]

This is going to be controversial... I think they are a disgrace.
Striking normally is fine by me they have the right to, but by taking action during the olympics they are basically trying to blackmail the TOCs and in some cases the government. Bob crow etc may aswell walk into stagecoach head office with a shotgun and go give us money.
One of the most vital and challenging months in the railways recent history and the unions decide striking is a good idea.

I know most of you will disagree and my opinion is swayed by the fact that my girlfriend is on the last train from waterloo to hampton during the olympics. Which if it is cancelled for this reason my opinion could get even worse...

I am on placement and some nights i stay back 2 hours and work through lunch hour, because a client wants drainage details a day early, i dont complain, i dont get any more money. This happens regularly, sometimes for a short period things like this happen. its 2 and a bit weeks im sure they can cope...

I don't care about them striking during the Olympics or whatever industrial action they want to take but when it inconveniences me, they are all despicable and deserve a slap.

 

[313103]

Actually Metroland the railway workers are not always going on strike. The last time i was on a picket line was in May 2003, in the dark old days of Silverlink. I have yet to know of industrial action being taken on London Overground let alone a strike!

Actually i might as well put here, me and my left wing brothers (so you so eloquently put it) have on quite a few occasions stopped industrial action taking place. Perhaps it is not the mentality of the unions or there left wing brotherhood, but the mentality people of who join the railway industry.

I dont know but to me there is no militancy left in the industryt apart from a few isolated companies. Under British Rail militancy was rife both extreme left wiing and extreme right wing.

Perhaps when the McNulty reports comes to fruition everyone on here will stop moaning, but i doubt it.

 

[wigwamman]

Thing is I don't percieve workers today as being half as militant as in the 70's.
Personally I have been a railwayman 20 years and a gaurd for 14 of those,I have been out on strike once for one day in that time and I have never and never would cross a picket line.
As for anti union legislation we already have some of the toughest in the world,I would like to see them try and bring in a no strike law,I'm no law expert but I'm sure it would go against human rights legislation within the european union.
As for politicians holding monopoly's to account,let's not kid ourselves that all political mainstream partys are in the pockets of big buisness,it is they hold the real power not our governments.

 

[Greenback]

Actually Metroland the railway workers are not always going on strike. The last time i was on a picket line was in May 2003, in the dark old days of Silverlink. I have yet to know of industrial action being taken on London Overground let alone a strike!

I agree. I was a railway worker for almost three eyars and during that time I wa snever on strike, never even balloted for industrial action>It's all a far cry from the almost weekly strikes in the 1970's that Chuckles refers above, presumably in relation to the miners.

I'd be interested to know how many days of strikes there have been in the rail industry in the past year, five years, etc. Perhaps then we can put the discussion into some sort of context.

As the newspapers seem to go into a frenzy every time a strike ballot (not a strike) is mentioned, I wouldn't mind betting that the reality is a lot less than is perceived by many.

 

[ANorthernGuard]

in a decade being a railwayman I have been on strike for a whole 2 days. Wow I must really be striking all the time :roll:

 

[ainsworth74]

As the newspapers seem to go into a frenzy every time a strike ballot (not a strike) is mentioned, I wouldn't mind betting that the reality is a lot less than is perceived by many.

I think this is the crucial point. We hear of strikes being balloted for or there being the threat of a ballot for a strike fairly regularly (it feels weekly but it's probably more like once or month or so). However, how often does that actually lead to a strike? Not as often I'd gamble (and going on the response so far I'd be winning that bet). Unfortunately, for the Unions, that is not the public perception.

 

[KA4C]

Being a railwayman was once a proud profession, I'm sorry it's now all about 'getting rich quick'.

Absolute rubbish

 

[wigwamman]

I think this is the crucial point. We hear of strikes being balloted for or there being the threat of a ballot for a strike fairly regularly (it feels weekly but it's probably more like once or month or so). However, how often does that actually lead to a strike? Not as often I'd gamble (and going on the response so far I'd be winning that bet). Unfortunately, for the Unions, that is not the public perception.

That's a good point you make,but why is this so,could it be in the words of a old union song that "money speaks for money but never for its own".