Trade Unions - Standing up for their members or irrelevant in modern society?

[AndrewP]

My view is that there is a very complex picture of what a union should be and how it is best placed to represent its members in the current economic climate.

In the private sector there seems to have been a change over the last few years where unions and management have been working together to provide growing businesses where workers share in success and this is perhaps best shown in the Automotive industry which was once riddled with strikes but now has been broadly strike free for many years. Unions are also fulfilling their role of keeping management honest by acting as a 'critical friend' and raising concerns whilst understanding the need to be competitive.

In the public sector the unions seem to have moved on less and there is more willingness to go into strikes and aim for wider political change beyond the organisation that the union has the dispute in - at times I have seen this almost back into the days of the demarcation dispute which, along with bad management and a general malaise that swept the country during my childhood caused so much damage to our manufacturing base. I do worry that some union leaders would like to see a return to the days when idiots like Scargill had power and let political dogma take precedence over their members.

The rail sector seems to have a mix of these with ASLEF seeming to be willing to work with the TOCs whilst maintaining a principled stance on public ownership whilst the RMT is willing to strike more often in a way that may be connected with an aim of bigger socialist ideals - something I believe is doomed to failure and may cause more damage for its members than the benefits it accrues.

In summary I believe that unions have a place going forward but must always do this in a way that considers both the economic and political context in which they operate and must be willing to work with the organisations their members work for

 

[AnonymousUser1]

My view is that there is a very complex picture of what a union should be and how it is best placed to represent its members in the current economic climate.

In the private sector there seems to have been a change over the last few years where unions and management have been working together to provide growing businesses where workers share in success and this is perhaps best shown in the Automotive industry which was once riddled with strikes but now has been broadly strike free for many years. Unions are also fulfilling their role of keeping management honest by acting as a 'critical friend' and raising concerns whilst understanding the need to be competitive.

In the public sector the unions seem to have moved on less and there is more willingness to go into strikes and aim for wider political change beyond the organisation that the union has the dispute in - at times I have seen this almost back into the days of the demarcation dispute which, along with bad management and a general malaise that swept the country during my childhood caused so much damage to our manufacturing base. I do worry that some union leaders would like to see a return to the days when idiots like Scargill had power and let political dogma take precedence over their members.

The rail sector seems to have a mix of these with ASLEF seeming to be willing to work with the TOCs whilst maintaining a principled stance on public ownership whilst the RMT is willing to strike more often in a way that may be connected with an aim of bigger socialist ideals - something I believe is doomed to failure and may cause more damage for its members than the benefits it accrues.

In summary I believe that unions have a place going forward but must always do this in a way that considers both the economic and political context in which they operate and must be willing to work with the organisations their members work for

exactly , and the attitude displayed by the RMT with respect ot therailways, Unison with respect tothe NHS in general ,and especially service reform and job demarcation stuff ( as well as gross misreading of the AFC JE handbook) and the FBU's general attitude since the 30 k guff ( when you can;t even cross the road without a grown up to hold your hand ) ...

 

[zoneking]

I don't mind what the unions do but it is outrageous that us passengers/customers are suffering so much through no fault of our own. From 6th December until the foreseeable future, Southern Services will be almost non existent. There must be a way of protesting that does not make ordinary people suffer, but only the GTR management.

 

[Sadsmileyface]

My view is that there is a very complex picture of what a union should be and how it is best placed to represent its members in the current economic climate.



In the private sector there seems to have been a change over the last few years where unions and management have been working together to provide growing businesses where workers share in success and this is perhaps best shown in the Automotive industry which was once riddled with strikes but now has been broadly strike free for many years. Unions are also fulfilling their role of keeping management honest by acting as a 'critical friend' and raising concerns whilst understanding the need to be competitive.



In the public sector the unions seem to have moved on less and there is more willingness to go into strikes and aim for wider political change beyond the organisation that the union has the dispute in - at times I have seen this almost back into the days of the demarcation dispute which, along with bad management and a general malaise that swept the country during my childhood caused so much damage to our manufacturing base. I do worry that some union leaders would like to see a return to the days when idiots like Scargill had power and let political dogma take precedence over their members.



The rail sector seems to have a mix of these with ASLEF seeming to be willing to work with the TOCs whilst maintaining a principled stance on public ownership whilst the RMT is willing to strike more often in a way that may be connected with an aim of bigger socialist ideals - something I believe is doomed to failure and may cause more damage for its members than the benefits it accrues.



In summary I believe that unions have a place going forward but must always do this in a way that considers both the economic and political context in which they operate and must be willing to work with the organisations their members work for

Will you marry me? This is exactly bang on.

 

[ungreat]

I don't mind what the unions do but it is outrageous that us passengers/customers are suffering so much through no fault of our own. From 6th December until the foreseeable future, Southern Services will be almost non existent. There must be a way of protesting that does not make ordinary people suffer, but only the GTR management.

There's no goodwill left mate...GTR have destroyed it,thanks to our esteemed DfT
The staff have decided that they dont want to work overtime or rest days...the railways are always understaffed and rely on overtime.Now that's gone too

Result is more suffering of passengers..the DfT DO NOT care..they are using GTR as a test case to roll this out all over the UK and will not compromise
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

exactly , and the attitude displayed by the RMT with respect ot therailways, Unison with respect tothe NHS in general ,and especially service reform and job demarcation stuff ( as well as gross misreading of the AFC JE handbook) and the FBU's general attitude since the 30 k guff ( when you can;t even cross the road without a grown up to hold your hand ) ...

Shhh Mr Horton...you'll give away who you are if you carry on!!

 

[highdyke]

..the DfT DO NOT care..

Or perhaps they have been told there is no more cash and savings need to me made? We've already seen the effective cancellation of severe major products..We're nearly 2 trillion in debt.

I happen to think trade unions are part of the democratic process, but they shouldn't be managing or controlling industries (we saw the results of that in the 1970s) rather it should be a partnership, ideally. Yes, we don't live in an ideal world, but all too often we witness a punch and Judy show, especially on the railways.

Nevertheless, if you are low skilled or employed by a monopoly or near monopoly employer, or work in an industry (like the railways) where you need employment protection if things go wrong, Unions are a good idea.

Highly skilled people that can name their price or people who in industries where jobs are plentiful with good conditions probably don't need them.

 

[Dave1987]

Or perhaps they have been told there is no more cash and savings need to me made? We've already seen the effective cancellation of severe major products..We're nearly 2 trillion in debt.

I happen to think trade unions are part of the democratic process, but they shouldn't be managing or controlling industries (we saw the results of that in the 1970s) rather it should be a partnership, ideally. Yes, we don't live in an ideal world, but all too often we witness a punch and Judy show, especially on the railways.

Nevertheless, if you are low skilled or employed by a monopoly or near monopoly employer, or work in an industry (like the railways) where you need employment protection if things go wrong, Unions are a good idea.

Highly skilled people that can name their price or people who in industries where jobs are plentiful with good conditions probably don't need them.

There are very very few people I this country that can "name their price". People who can do are usually very very experienced in a particular field and a company is in great need of that experience. Companies will pay their employees and contractors the going rate for the job they are going to perform. Whether that going rate is considered sufficient in some industries is definitely debatable. If we didn't have strong unions the rush to the bottom with wages and T&C's would be far worse than it is right now. There are many many graduates coming out of university with degrees who are technically classed as "highly skilled" yet they have little or not experience of working in the field they start their career in so therefore have poor wages. Whereas someone who have started an apprenticeship may not have the piece of paper from a uni but have a wealth of experience from their industry already get decent wages once they finished their apprenticeship.

There are many many people who are highly skilled in their own industries but if they left that industry they would be considered low skill.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Highly skilled people that can name their price or people who in industries where jobs are plentiful with good conditions probably don't need them.

Never was a truer word said.

 

[LowLevel]

Never was a truer word said.

But what for the rest of us who don't have higher aims and desires in life? (I just want to live a half decent life by my own moral standards without racking up excessive wealth and with good luck and a fair wind I'll die in a not too unpleasant way at a reasonable age, unlike too many folk I know. I don't want power, I don't want higher office, I don't want a Rolls. A steady income and my friends and family are all that really matter).

Are we to just accept that the way the world has been shaped for us means we are to worry from one year to the next without stable employment and the fairly real likelihood of no retirement to speak of?

I am a firm believer that you get one life and then you die. I have no religious beliefs assuring me of an afterlife. I spend most of money on travelling, eating and drinking vaguely nice things with the people I love. I can't even own a home without getting indebted for life. I work shifts up to 50-60 hours a week over 24 hours a day, 7 days a week to have a decent income.

As a result I take people whose actions and decisions threaten my quiet existence out of the way very seriously indeed. I was probably born a few decades too late.

 

[Johnny_w]

whilst I'm not railway we have a long and excellent union. Keeps everyone in check both sides of the table.

Not had a strike in the industry in decades, but our T&C's and remunerations are excellent across the board.

Unions are still highly relevant.

 

[Dave1987]

Never was a truer word said.

And that is precisely why this country voted for Brexit Paul. Because the majority of those pitiful low skilled workers who have to live on the scraps from the almighty table of those who are considered the elite are completely fed up with how the system works. That's why Donald Trump has ended up in the White House because the American people are fed up with how the system works. The economy and system is broken and people want it to change. The trouble is is those pitiful low skilled workers well out number those of you that can "name your price" so change is a coming whether you like it or not!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

whilst I'm not railway we have a long and excellent union. Keeps everyone in check both sides of the table.

Not had a strike in the industry in decades, but our T&C's and remunerations are excellent across the board.

Unions are still highly relevant.

Well said.

 

[Robertj21a]

whilst I'm not railway we have a long and excellent union. Keeps everyone in check both sides of the table.

Not had a strike in the industry in decades, but our T&C's and remunerations are excellent across the board.

Unions are still highly relevant.

.........in the very large organisations. Usually because 'normal' communication between managers and staff is far more difficult/impractical.

 

[DarloRich]

.........in the very large organisations. Usually because 'normal' communication between managers and staff is far more difficult/impractical.

but as I said to you previously that simply isnt true in the industry I work in. It isnt true in the NHS or in teaching. It isnt true in the council. Perhaps by drawing on your own experiences you provide further information to illustrate your point?

Are my daily communications not "normal"?

 

[highdyke]

There are very very few people I this country that can "name their price". People who can do are usually very very experienced in a particular field and a company is in great need of that experience. Companies will pay their employees and contractors the going rate for the job they are going to perform. Whether that going rate is considered sufficient in some industries is definitely debatable. If we didn't have strong unions the rush to the bottom with wages and T&C's would be far worse than it is right now. There are many many graduates coming out of university with degrees who are technically classed as "highly skilled" yet they have little or not experience of working in the field they start their career in so therefore have poor wages. Whereas someone who have started an apprenticeship may not have the piece of paper from a uni but have a wealth of experience from their industry already get decent wages once they finished their apprenticeship.

There are many many people who are highly skilled in their own industries but if they left that industry they would be considered low skill.

Depends on the industry anything creative or technical, senior management with a large market for those skills isn't going to be unionised: Some engineering, artists, musicians, information technology, some traditional professions, writers, designers, consultants, anyone that's self-employed etc

There are many moderately skilled jobs like truck driving, bus driving, call centre workers, supervisors, operatives or various kinds where thy many benefit from a union, but the power to hold their employer to book is going to be limited by the number of people with those skills and the number of employers.

In short we live in a much more competitive world than years ago, you are in effect in competition with not just the local population, but in some cases the world population. We have better transport and communications to 'thank' for that. Whoever is voted in it won't particularly change. There are not many jobs for life because it is a fast changing world. You have to be prepared to be flexible where you live and be prepared to take on more education and training, sometimes off your own back.

In many ways this is a source of great unhappiness to quite a bit of the population who do not have much capital or are well-connected, have special talents or are educated to post graduate level and beyond.

With the railways it pretty secure compared to a lot of industries, but even that's got to the point where things are going to change quite a bit. It's a shame, someone starting in 1900 would recognise much of the railway when they retired. Someone starting in 1950 would have seen quite big changes, but could have expected a job for life. Someone from the 1990s, in certain grades, would have expected to have to change location. Someone starting now would probably need to change jobs completely within the industry. In other industries, you may need several complete career changes.

 

[AlterEgo]

And that is precisely why this country voted for Brexit Paul. Because the majority of those pitiful low skilled workers who have to live on the scraps from the almighty table of those who are considered the elite are completely fed up with how the system works. That's why Donald Trump has ended up in the White House because the American people are fed up with how the system works. The economy and system is broken and people want it to change. The trouble is is those pitiful low skilled workers well out number those of you that can "name your price" so change is a coming whether you like it or not!

There won't be any meaningful change - thankfully - while those who run the country continue to be those same well-skilled people who can "name their price".

Trump factor is simply a cry from the disenfranchised. So was Brexit. Neither will improve the lot of the unskilled man with minimum-mandatory level education.

Brexit in particular will hurt those who voted for it most.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Depends on the industry anything creative or technical, senior management with a large market for those skills isn't going to be unionised: Some engineering, artists, musicians, information technology, some traditional professions, writers, designers, consultants, anyone that's self-employed etc

other than the professional representative organisations that offer a none party political Union -like function in terms of boh services to members and lobbying / influencing

On the creative side of things, I think you are forgetting about the likes of Equity, the musicians Union and BECTU ... professional theatre and the broadcast media is fairly heavily unionised .

There are many moderately skilled jobs like truck driving, bus driving, call centre workers, supervisors, operatives or various kinds where thy many benefit from a union, but the power to hold their employer to book is going to be limited by the number of people with those skills and the number of employers.

and the question is why are the unions not trying to expand in these areas ?

then you get the situations such as CWU and its attitude towards protecting 'proper postmen' and trying to ignore those who are unworthy even if they are employed by RMG ? ( interestingly the CWU's attitude is one of the reasons why certain parts of RMG tend to have a upto 4 year path to substantive posts - taking advantage of the full 2 years on agency and then 2 years as RMG casual , vs the 12 weeks (minimum if sourced through agency without paying the agency a penalty fee)- 6mths - year at most of many other employers

 

[Robertj21a]

but as I said to you previously that simply isnt true in the industry I work in. It isnt true in the NHS or in teaching. It isnt true in the council. Perhaps by drawing on your own experiences you provide further information to illustrate your point?

Are my daily communications not "normal"?

I said 'usually' - it's good to hear that your experiences are more positive. In my experience there are big gaps in communication in some councils and the NHS, also occupations like truck drivers, coach drivers etc. Weren't there some rail staff on here a while back saying that they spent so long working alone that they rarely saw/spoke to their manager ?

 

[AnonymousUser1]

I said 'usually' - it's good to hear that your experiences are more positive. In my experience there are big gaps in communication in some councils and the NHS, also occupations like truck drivers, coach drivers etc. Weren't there some rail staff on here a while back saying that they spent so long working alone that they rarely saw/spoke to their manager ?

the problem with communication in the NHS , for health professional staff in particualr, is that they are often better educated, more qualified and have relevant and recent operational experience than the failed baked bean stackers making up the tractor production commissar class or the so-called professional leadership ...

 

[LateThanNever]

With the extotionate pay of most chief executives we should support unions in their reasonable pay requirements. The railway unions are probably the last bastion for opposition to neoliberalism. A push back such as they offer is now desperately needed for a decent country!

 

[AlterEgo]

With the extotionate pay of most chief executives we should support unions in their reasonable pay requirements. The railway unions are probably the last bastion for opposition to neoliberalism. A push back such as they offer is now desperately needed for a decent country!

Would you ever want to be a chief executive?

 

[fowler9]

Would you ever want to be a chief executive?

Not on your nelly. I am a big lefty though. It is all well and good saying a CEO has a lot of responsibility but they know that there are people doing a hell of a lot of hours for a hell of a lot less pay and if they don't meet their targets they can also loose their job and they don't get a big pay off. Look up Bob Mendelsohn who was CEO at a company I worked at. Wiping 75% of the companies share value was probably the best thing he ever did. His pay off was more than you would see in 1000 lifetimes when he got kicked out. On top of costing the company a fortune in losses and being paid a fortune in compensation for having his contract terminated he got to keep the company house in Berkeley Square in London. Do you reckon you would get that for messing up your employer to such a monumental degree. The Neo Liberal system is a mess.

 

[AlterEgo]

Not on your nelly. I am a big lefty though. It is all well and good saying a CEO has a lot of responsibility but they know that there are people doing a hell of a lot of hours for a hell of a lot less pay and if they don't meet their targets they can also loose their job and they don't get a big pay off. Look up Bob Mendelsohn who was CEO at a company I worked at. Wiping 75% of the companies share value was probably the best thing he ever did He pay of was more than you would see in 1000 lifetimes when he got kicked out.

You make out like the Chief Executive position is devoid of responsibility. It's never been the case anywhere I've worked. Where I work now, the CEO seems to be made of glass.

The positions are often well remunerated because these people carry the can when it goes wrong. Of course, we all know CEOs who got away scot free, but then I know LOTS of people who got away scot free from a lot of messes who range from entry level upwards.

Frankly if I were to become a CEO one day I'd be wanting a lot more than the £170k ours gets. The bloke's gone grey and bald before his time.

 

[fowler9]

You make out like the Chief Executive position is devoid of responsibility. It's never been the case anywhere I've worked. Where I work now, the CEO seems to be made of glass.

The positions are often well remunerated because these people carry the can when it goes wrong. Of course, we all know CEOs who got away scot free, but then I know LOTS of people who got away scot free from a lot of messes who range from entry level upwards.

Frankly if I were to become a CEO one day I'd be wanting a lot more than the £170k ours gets. The bloke's gone grey and bald before his time.

Maybe a bad example but far from the only one. Just actually read what Bob Mendlesohn got when he wrecked the company. He didn't get away scot free, he got paid a fortune. If I mess up my job I get sacked and then can't claim dole because it is deemed it was my fault.

The jobs are so well remunerated because unless these people are completely useless with money it would be hard for them to end up homeless.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I can't even comment on what the upper level management of the company I work for now has done in case I lose my job for saying it. Needless to say I will be left with nothing.

 

[AlterEgo]

Maybe a bad example but far from the only one. Just actually read what Bob Mendlesohn got when he wrecked the company. He didn't get away scot free, he got paid a fortune. If I mess up my job I get sacked and then can't claim dole because it is deemed it was my fault.

The jobs are so well remunerated because unless these people are completely useless with money it would be hard for them to end up homeless.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I can't even comment on what the upper level management of the company I work for now has done in case I lose my job for saying it. Needless to say I will be left with nothing.

You're almost making it sound like it's immoral to be senior management because you view them as fireproof. But, you've never been senior management, so how can you appreciate their pressures?

 

[fowler9]

You're almost making it sound like it's immoral to be senior management because you view them as fireproof. But, you've never been senior management, so how can you appreciate their pressures?

1) You don't know I've never been senior management.

2) Getting paid off millions for ruining a company will probably be in the back of the mind when thinking about the pressure.

3) I'm not making it sound immoral to be senior management, or to be more precise like CEO or Board level. The pay is immoral. Where is the stress if you know if you completely mess up you will be kept for life? I wouldn't be in my job.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

With the extortionate pay of most chief executives we should support unions in their reasonable pay requirements. The railway unions are probably the last bastion for opposition to neoliberalism. A push back such as they offer is now desperately needed for a decent country!

I was wondering when the old Socialist chestnut of the pay levels of company chief executives would be "wheeled out" on this thread. In any large company organisation, all that one has to do is to divide the CEO salary by the total number of employed staff to see how much that equates to as a figure.

What on earth has "railway unions being the last bastion for opposition to neoliberalism" got to do with that matter, save only to confirm suspicions that any such rail union political positioning is very much in the mind of those at the top of those rail unions, whose total efforts should be solely devoted to the welfare of their union members and any left-wing related political matters best left to the Labour Party. But the RMT especially are a prime example of this double diminution of energies.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Look up Bob Mendelsohn who was CEO at a company I worked at. Wiping 75% of the companies share value was probably the best thing he ever did.

What a very strange observation to make. I am sure those shareholders of that company would hold to a totally different sentiment.

 

[AnonymousUser1]

Frankly if I were to become a CEO one day I'd be wanting a lot more than the £170k ours gets. The bloke's gone grey and bald before his time.

or even less than that

there was a bit of a stink kicked up when St John ambulance restructured in 2012

prior to that nominally the person in charge of the organisation in a county was a volunteer - Known as the Commander ... some of these were very effective 'chairmen' , a few were effective 'executive chairmen', and the rest of the 30 or so were figureheads ...

there was a postion that had grown from no where over the past 15 -20 year known as the county executive officer , unlike the other Officers this post was paid ... although the exact salaries were rarely published ...

however this structure combined with a duality of paid and volunteer structures developing and mutatign and by retaining 'counties' the need for 30 CQC registratations meant the organisation overall was haemorhaging money, despite the best efforts of the commercial training dept ( i.e. the people who run the FAW / AP / AED / Fire marshal / H+S courses for 'industry' ) and agoodly minority of the volunteer run even t side of things in counties making best efforts to live within their means ...

so clean sheet approach was made - 8 regions , senior person i nthe region to be Paid ( but also MUST be the CQC registered Manager - unlike most ofthe CEOs and/or commanders - where a suitable but sacrificial person was taken on as paid staff - much like you get manager CPC holders working for a number of smaller haulage firms)

and all hell breaks loose that the 'Regional Drectors' would be getting about 90 k ( even though the County Exec Officers in the large counties got nearly that much ) ...

 

[Robertj21a]

1) You don't know I've never been senior management.

2) Getting paid off millions for ruining a company will probably be in the back of the mind when thinking about the pressure.

3) I'm not making it sound immoral to be senior management, or to be more precise like CEO or Board level. The pay is immoral. Where is the stress if you know if you completely mess up you will be kept for life? I wouldn't be in my job.

The stress is certainly there, and probably far more than you can ever imagine. It's caused by the earnest desire to do the job to the very best of their ability, knowing that many hundreds/thousands of other staff are largely dependent on them. You don't usually get to such a senior role in a large organisation without having exhibited significant skills over a lengthy period of time.

 

[aylesbury]

I have only been a member of two trades unions both times under duress ie you work here so you must join. Once.unions fought for better conditions and pay mainly in heavy industry but nowadays most people work for small companies mostly in service industries and do not seem to worry about unions.People are being duped by the big boys into paying for their political adventures and surely this is not what a union is for they should help members if they need help but I doubt if the top brass care about the members.

 

[AlterEgo]

1) You don't know I've never been senior management.

2) Getting paid off millions for ruining a company will probably be in the back of the mind when thinking about the pressure.

3) I'm not making it sound immoral to be senior management, or to be more precise like CEO or Board level. The pay is immoral. Where is the stress if you know if you completely mess up you will be kept for life? I wouldn't be in my job.

I can tell the answer to 1) by your answers to 2) and 3).