Effect of strike on Tuesday 26 May?

[VauxhallandI]

Except you can't. In that week there will be millions of people hoping for and demanding a resolution.

No because the public are aware of the new deadline too. They will be asking why it wasn't reached by the deadline.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You seem to have not answered any of my questions. I don't thing the causes and effects are the same as you have to take human psychology into account. In any case I really don't see what you gain and why you think there is any more chance of calling off a strike using your method.

It is a massive change. Which results in much negative publicity once your 7 day deadline kicks in and the pubic are incredulous that no-one is continuing to try to avert a strike.



You're still not selling this.

It is as clear as a Summer's day to me.

You avoid the uncertainty of the current process.

 

[Deerfold]

No because the public are aware of the new deadline too. They will be asking why it wasn't reached by the deadline.

Being aware of it doesn't mean they'll agree it's a great idea. You'll direct a good chunk of the dissatisfaction at whoever brought in this system.

It is as clear as a Summer's day to me.

Yes. I think it's quite clear to me how it works. I just think it'll go down very badly.

You avoid the uncertainty of the current process.

By guaranteeing a strike a whole week earlier. I'd prefer uncertainly (and as I say I am travelling during this "strike" and have incurred extra expense).

 

[VauxhallandI]

Being aware of it doesn't mean they'll agree it's a great idea. You'll direct a good chunk of the dissatisfaction at whoever brought in this system.



Yes. I think it's quite clear to me how it works. I just think it'll go down very badly.



By guaranteeing a strike a whole week earlier. I'd prefer uncertainly (and as I say I am travelling during this "strike" and have incurred extra expense).

The uncertainty moves forward a week, so you've still got it if you want it!

 

[Deerfold]

The uncertainty moves forward a week, so you've still got it if you want it!

No, I'd prefer uncertainly right up to the day of the strike than a guarantee of a strike.

 

[Tomnick]

Can you imagine the public response, a week before guaranteed Bank Holiday chaos, if the unions and employers involved in a dispute announced that they were actually very close to an agreement, but would now need to stop talking to each other for a week so that the strike could go ahead anyway? Maybe not much different to the current scenario, where they might just fail to reach agreement before the staff walk out, but I bet that the public wouldn't see it that way. All to avoid unexpectedly "conveniencing" someone...?!

 

[whoosh]

"We are striking on Thursday 28th May, Wednesday 4th June, and Tuesday 10th June"

How would that work in the strange world of JohnGill100?

Or,
"We are striking for a week from Friday 29th May to Thursday 5th June inclusive."

How would that work? What's the latest before it all gets 'locked in'?

 

[TheKnightWho]

No, I'd prefer uncertainly right up to the day of the strike than a guarantee of a strike.

This. No strike is *always* better than a strike.

Just because you've shifted the whole thing forward doesn't change the fact that there's still a load of time left to get things sorted out before the actual walk-out. I don't really see why this is so difficult to comprehend.

 

[Chrism20]

Can you imagine the public response, a week before guaranteed Bank Holiday chaos, if the unions and employers involved in a dispute announced that they were actually very close to an agreement, but would now need to stop talking to each other for a week so that the strike could go ahead anyway? Maybe not much different to the current scenario, where they might just fail to reach agreement before the staff walk out, but I bet that the public wouldn't see it that way. All to avoid unexpectedly "conveniencing" someone...?!

It would create the type of chaos and public outcry that would probably see someone dragged in front of a select committee to explain.

 

[Deerfold]

This reminds me of when I was working as a Travel Ambassador for the London Olympics. London Underground had put on their website that Hyde Park Corner station would be made exit only due to expected dangerous overcrowding. However crowds were smaller than expected so Hyde Park station reopened for people entering and the website was updated. One person complained that the station was open for entry as he exited - as it had said it would be shut on the website in the morning it should have stayed shut. Fortunately I wasn't the one dealing with that complaint.

 

[A-driver]

Is this still going on?! I got bored going round in circles so went off to drive some trains and come back to find it still going round in circles with the same posters refusing to understand the huge flaws in their arguments!

I'd love to see these proposals brought in just to see the huge public outcry when you announce a strike then stop all negotiations for an entire week! Would be fantastic to watch the outrage just so that one or two people can feel good about not having wasted their extra travel plans!

Beggars belief that people still havnt realised what a bad idea this is despite the amount of posters spelling it out for them!

 

[carriageline]

Some people are barmy. i can see what they are saying (if they was going to offer something at the 11th hour, then they still will, just the 11th hour is a week before the strike), but it literally makes no sense. Yes the public will know a week in advance whether or not it will happen, but the point of strike action isn't to actually go on strike.

What if, say on the 11th hour they are close to conclusion, but yet they can't cross that final step. They now have 7 days where both sides must sit on their hands, the company with an offer they know will be accepted, but because the public now "know" the strike is happening then you can't cancel it? Bonkers.

Ask the people who are travelling on Monday, whether or not they are happy the strike was averted.

 

[najaB]

What if, say on the 11th hour they are close to conclusion, but yet they can't cross that final step. They now have 7 days where both sides must sit on their hands, the company with an offer they know will be accepted, and the union knowing that their demands will be met, but because the public now "know" the strike is happening then you can't cancel it? Bonkers.

This is the problem with the proposal.

 

[island]

Actually, just realised I have via an annual policy normally used for abroad. Never even thought of UK usage, so thanks for pointing it out.

Most mass market annual travel insurance policies do not cover travel within the UK unless two or three nights' accommodation has been booked.

There is no argument to lose, it is two different ways of doing something.

The fact that you cannot understand that a deadline has been moved and the causes and affects on that deadline are exactly the same in the new idea as the present way is the problem.

If everyone knows that the deadline is the deadline then they know when to table their last ditch bid. Do you really think there is a sudden flash of brilliance at the last second? They know their last ditch options and they can apply then at the new time.

It's not a massive change or a leap of faith.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


You can create the same environment.

The ballot is done and the result is strike.

You then set a negotiation deadline, creating the pressure. There is no need to keep it a secret, in fact you want everyone to know the deadline.

If it is passed then the strike is 100% on.

The law then stipulates a period of seven days notice bfore thenwalkout therefore giving time for arrangements and arrangements that are not a waste of time.

Some people are barmy. i can see what they are saying (if they was going to offer something at the 11th hour, then they still will, just the 11th hour is a week before the strike), but it literally makes no sense. Yes the public will know a week in advance whether or not it will happen, but the point of strike action isn't to actually go on strike.

What if, say on the 11th hour they are close to conclusion, but yet they can't cross that final step. They now have 7 days where both sides must sit on their hands, the company with an offer they know will be accepted, but because the public now "know" the strike is happening then you can't cancel it? Bonkers.

Ask the people who are travelling on Monday, whether or not they are happy the strike was averted.

Thank you carriageline for saving me typing what I wanted to say.

Johngill100, nothing personal, but your idea is madness on stilts. To force workers to go on strike whether they want to or not, because negotiations were unsuccessful by some arbitrary deadline a week before the strike, is bound to be illegal/against human rights/etc. No government would bring in such a law. And if one did, who would enforce it? Neither employer nor union would take court action to force the strike to go ahead, and it is a civil matter so the police aren't going to touch it. Plus, to ban negotiations during that period will not be perceived as logical by 99% of the population – who want the parties around the table, not shouting down megaphones and not on the picket line.

It's clear you've never been involved in any meaningful industrial relations activity (and yes, before you ask, I have – on the union side when HBOS pulled out of Ireland).

All of this because you chose to make backup plans and are now out of pocket. Put the shovel away before you get to Australia.

 

[LAX54]

Yes I can see your sarcasm but I can also see it is still a barb comment to the unconvinced many.

They shouldn't use the threat of action as a tool to talk. They should negotiate with a non public threat and if ignored call the strike and see it through.

No problem with striking per se but this posturing is pathetic.

Now bearing in mind this was the first strike since 1994, that should start alarm bells ringing in everyone's head that something has seriously gone wrong with negotiations, and don't forget there have been negotiations going on since November 2014, but NR were not interested on iota, so they started the 'last resort' programme to focus the minds of the NR HQ staff !

 

[carriageline]

And seeing the offer they have offered us, it's a possibility it might not be the end just yet either!

 

[Starmill]

Nobody likes being out of pocket. Especially not when disposable income is limited, as at present is the case for many people. If it's bad luck that's one thing, but being stuck between a rock and a hard place as this strike thread doubtless left many is bound to leave acid relations.

 

[Deerfold]

Nobody likes being out of pocket. Especially not when disposable income is limited, as at present is the case for many people. If it's bad luck that's one thing, but being stuck between a rock and a hard place as this strike thread doubtless left many is bound to leave acid relations.

Your last sentence makes less sense than usual, but I understand people being irritated by the strike threat. However I don't see why that blinds them to flaws in their suggested alternatives.

 

[GodAtum]

Just a quick question, I dont think the stirke involved guards or drivers? So would they have had to take a day off?

 

[A-driver]

Just a quick question, I dont think the stirke involved guards or drivers? So would they have had to take a day off?

No. We would have had to book on as usual and probably sit spare if our diagrammed trains couldn't run.

A note went up at my TOC telling us that any driver not booking on would be marked as AWOL and normal procedures would follow.

Obviously many may have struggled to get to work (like anyone) so the TOCs would have had to allow us to sign on at our nearest station instead or book is taxis but that is the same as in any disruption regardless of the cause.

 

[jopsuk]

I'd guess that had the strike happened the chances of a legal picket line being in place at the entrance to a driver or guard's place of work would have been low

 

[Deerfold]

I'd guess that had the strike happened the chances of a legal picket line being in place at the entrance to a driver or guard's place of work would have been low

A legal one would have been impossible as those grades/jobs were not on strike.