Unions hail major strike action a success

'Put up or shut up', say unions

'Put up or shut up', say unions

'Put up or shut up', say unions

'Put up or shut up', say unions

'Put up or shut up', say unions

First published in News by

Union officials have told national negotiators it is now their turn to move, as they hail major strike action over public sector worker pay and pensions a “success”.

Trade union officials have said it is time “to put up or shut up” in their dispute over public sector pay and have called on Local Government Association negotiators to accept an offer of arbitration to resolve the issue.

And they have warned an “escalation” of today’s is likely later in the year if the strikes do not force changes.

More than 3,000 people took part in the protest through Brighton and Hove yesterday, walking from Hollingdean depot and Hove Town Hall to The Level while thousands of striking teachers, firefighters, council employees and government workers refused to work across the county.

Brighton and Hove saw the most disruption to services, compared to very minimal disturbances elsewhere in Sussex.

City residents had no bin collections, the Royal Pavilion and Brighton Museum and Art Gallery closed and a number of libraries kept their doors locked.

The Argus understands that half of all non-school staff at the council were on strike.

Pupils at almost 200 schools across the county had the day off because of full or partial closures, claimants visiting Brighton Jobcentre in Edward Street were told to come back today and almost all Public and Commercial Services union members went on strike.

The march itself caused some disruption as the parade walked along one carriage of city centre roads and Brighton and Hove buses reported disruption on most services.

The action in Brighton and Hove was among the biggest gatherings in the country which saw more than a million workers nationwide down tools in the largest one-day strike over pay by public sector employees since 2010.

GMB branch secretary Mark Turner said the day was “very positive” despite turnout falling short of anticipated figures.

He said: “We will consider our next move in the next couple of weeks but there is no doubt they would have heard us in Bournemouth where the Local Government Association is having its conference.

“This is the first step in the shape of things to come so we would urge them to take up our offer of going into arbitration with Acas.

“The public sector is very, very angry, just look at how many schools were closed in Brighton and Hove.

“These people are having to take second jobs, they are living hand-to-mouth and they have seen their pay go down over the past five years.

“This is not a dispute with the local authority but we would call on the chief executive and the council leader to put more pressure on their negotiators to get round the table.”

Phil Clarke, secretary of the Brighton and Hove Trades Union Council, said: “Without a doubt the action has been effective and sends a very clear message to the Government that it is not acceptable that the public sector has seen a decade of pay cuts.

“This has to stop and we have to be valued for the work we do.

“The support from the public was brilliant, a lot of people were coming out on to the pavements and applauding the march, parents who had to take the day off to look after children were cheering and applauding. In my opinion if the Government does not back down, you will see not just a repeat of this but an escalation.”

Simon Herbert, East Sussex chairman of the Fire Brigade Union, said spirits remained high among members, despite taking part in more than a dozen strikes over the year with no end in sight in the pensions’ dispute.

He said: “It is a danger that fatigue could set in on such a long dispute but the determination and strength of feeling among the members is just as strong if not stronger than when we first went out.

“We are losing money every day we go on strike and our members are amazed that fire services minister Brandon Lewis has not moved on his position.

“We are prepared that this could drag on and we are not going anywhere.

“It may be a political game for Mr Lewis but we are fighting for our futures.”

Conservative councillors in Brighton were critical of the strike action, questioning its mandate and concerned about the impact on residents.

Group leader Geoffrey Theobald said: “The low turnout for the march reflects the lack of mandate for this action - just 8.3% of Unison members voted to support a strike.

“This makes it very hard for the unions to justify the disruption and inconvenience they have caused residents.

“Today’s rubbish collections for example will not now take place until next Thursday which will no doubt have knock-on effects and many communal bins will be overflowing.

“I commend the schools in the city that managed to stay open today, including the two academies, BACA and PACA, but for those that didn’t, it is disappointing that their pupils have lost a valuable day’s schooling and that many parents will have to have taken a day off work.”

Brighton Pavilion MP Caroline Lucas was one of a number of speakers at the gathering at The Level alongside Labour candidate for Brighton Kemptown Nancy Platts, Hove Park School NUT rep Liz Ritson and GMB officials.

Ms Lucas said: “It is very clear that austerity isn't working.

“Strike action is the option of last resort and the decision to take part will not have been taken lightly.

“It is simply unacceptable that workers continue to suffer pay cuts and freezes and I’ll continue to lobby the Government to do the right thing by increasing public sector pay.”

Labour group leader Warren Morgan was among several Labour and Green city councillors who joined in the march.

He said: “I think we’re in a huge crisis, with a large number of people in jobs we all rely on not being able to keep up with the cost of living, so I’m here to support those people.”

Tom Scanlon, director of public health at Brighton and Hove City Council said: “We made sure we had done as much preparation as possible and had contingency plans in place.

“Essential services which look after vulnerable adults and children in our city were protected and exempted from the strike.”

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:58am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

Low vote for strike action, low turnout on the day. Hardly affected anyone in Sussex apart from the People's Republic of Brighton. I'm sure the inconvenience caused to the general public has likely put back the cause of the strikers rather than advanced it. I'm sure the govt. are quaking in their boots.
Low vote for strike action, low turnout on the day. Hardly affected anyone in Sussex apart from the People's Republic of Brighton. I'm sure the inconvenience caused to the general public has likely put back the cause of the strikers rather than advanced it. I'm sure the govt. are quaking in their boots. Plantpot
  • Score: 0

7:00am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

Interesting how the union leaders constantly dodged the question of turnout for the strike ballot and the percentage of members in favour etc. Teachers claiming a mandate from two years ago. 2 out of 3 teachers union not calling for strikes. Cracking.
Interesting how the union leaders constantly dodged the question of turnout for the strike ballot and the percentage of members in favour etc. Teachers claiming a mandate from two years ago. 2 out of 3 teachers union not calling for strikes. Cracking. Plantpot
  • Score: 5

7:01am Fri 11 Jul 14

rogerthefish says...

I do find it odd that "being in this together" the MP's get a 11% rise whilst the workers get 1%, surely this is not right!
I do find it odd that "being in this together" the MP's get a 11% rise whilst the workers get 1%, surely this is not right! rogerthefish
  • Score: 45

7:05am Fri 11 Jul 14

Quiterie says...

If Trade Unions are asking the Government to "put up or shut up", I rather suspect they'll take the "shut up" option.
If Trade Unions are asking the Government to "put up or shut up", I rather suspect they'll take the "shut up" option. Quiterie
  • Score: 4

7:07am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament. Plantpot
  • Score: -17

7:41am Fri 11 Jul 14

monkeymoo says...

Plantpot wrote:
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
.....And they have now increased it by 11%!!
Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards),
Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension!

Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us).

All in it together!
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.[/p][/quote].....And they have now increased it by 11%!! Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards), Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension! Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us). All in it together! monkeymoo
  • Score: 35

7:41am Fri 11 Jul 14

monkeymoo says...

.....And they have now increased it by 11%!!
Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards),
Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension!

Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us).

All in it together!
.....And they have now increased it by 11%!! Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards), Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension! Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us). All in it together! monkeymoo
  • Score: 17

7:49am Fri 11 Jul 14

We love Red Billy says...

monkeymoo wrote:
.....And they have now increased it by 11%!!
Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards),
Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension!

Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us).

All in it together!
I do believe the Cameron chamber pot @gzunder says
" We are all right in it together"

How true
[quote][p][bold]monkeymoo[/bold] wrote: .....And they have now increased it by 11%!! Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards), Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension! Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us). All in it together![/p][/quote]I do believe the Cameron chamber pot @gzunder says " We are all right in it together" How true We love Red Billy
  • Score: 5

8:11am Fri 11 Jul 14

Brightonian71 says...

Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies. Brightonian71
  • Score: 17

8:14am Fri 11 Jul 14

Make a difference says...

I appreciate that the Fire Rescue teams work hard and risk their lives to help others however there are many people on less than minimum wage that juggle more than 2 jobs at a time putting their health and family lifestyle under years of pressure and stress.
I have worked my way through the fitness industry for over 20 years now and my salary has decreased. I therefore have to work an average of 70 hours per week to pay the bills as do many others.
I think that it should be acceptable for all employees over 21 earning less than the minimum wage and those on a low income salary therefore forced to juggle many jobs should ALL strike as that would show the true value of how the real world is affected.
Currently the NHS are saying that in 10 years time we will have to pay for our healthcare but surely if salaries across the board were increased to reflect the true cost of living then people's health would be extremely improved and the nhs costs would be reduced. However I guess that would have a negative financial effect on big pharma and the unethical political boundaries for the economy and government!?
I appreciate that the Fire Rescue teams work hard and risk their lives to help others however there are many people on less than minimum wage that juggle more than 2 jobs at a time putting their health and family lifestyle under years of pressure and stress. I have worked my way through the fitness industry for over 20 years now and my salary has decreased. I therefore have to work an average of 70 hours per week to pay the bills as do many others. I think that it should be acceptable for all employees over 21 earning less than the minimum wage and those on a low income salary therefore forced to juggle many jobs should ALL strike as that would show the true value of how the real world is affected. Currently the NHS are saying that in 10 years time we will have to pay for our healthcare but surely if salaries across the board were increased to reflect the true cost of living then people's health would be extremely improved and the nhs costs would be reduced. However I guess that would have a negative financial effect on big pharma and the unethical political boundaries for the economy and government!? Make a difference
  • Score: 10

8:40am Fri 11 Jul 14

Fight_Back says...

Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one.
[quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one. Fight_Back
  • Score: 0

8:49am Fri 11 Jul 14

Brightonian71 says...

Let's be clear about this: this is a serious matter of national importance. Yesterday's strike action was to represent the interests of key, low paid workers who play a vital role in our society. "Austerity Measures" have a disproportionately adverse effect on those earning below the national average wage. A real terms 18% pay cut over 5 years for a worker who earns less than £20k gross per year is an unacceptable financial burden to expect them to carry. As a nation we should be ashamed of this situation; I am deeply saddened by the attitudes of those who deride the Strikers for their actions. Remember the Government has refused to even negotiate and that is what prompted the action. I am a self employed constructuon worker who marched yesterday in support of the Strike, prompted by social conscience. It certainly felt like a huge turnout on the ground and there was noticeable support from passers by. To those involved in what will surely be a long and difficult struggle I wish you courage, resolve and ultimately , justice. Because you're worth it and you deserve it.
Let's be clear about this: this is a serious matter of national importance. Yesterday's strike action was to represent the interests of key, low paid workers who play a vital role in our society. "Austerity Measures" have a disproportionately adverse effect on those earning below the national average wage. A real terms 18% pay cut over 5 years for a worker who earns less than £20k gross per year is an unacceptable financial burden to expect them to carry. As a nation we should be ashamed of this situation; I am deeply saddened by the attitudes of those who deride the Strikers for their actions. Remember the Government has refused to even negotiate and that is what prompted the action. I am a self employed constructuon worker who marched yesterday in support of the Strike, prompted by social conscience. It certainly felt like a huge turnout on the ground and there was noticeable support from passers by. To those involved in what will surely be a long and difficult struggle I wish you courage, resolve and ultimately , justice. Because you're worth it and you deserve it. Brightonian71
  • Score: 8

8:50am Fri 11 Jul 14

Max Ripple says...

Plantpot wrote:
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators.
It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour.
Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line.
[quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.[/p][/quote]Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators. It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour. Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line. Max Ripple
  • Score: 12

8:59am Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

I do wish that people involved in the disputes wouldn't make stupid statements:

" “Without a doubt the action has been effective and sends a very clear message to the Government that it is not acceptable that the public sector has seen a decade of pay cuts. "

Pay hasn't been cut. A below-inflation increase merely means that it is worth less.

"GMB branch secretary Mark Turner said the day was “very positive” despite turnout falling short of anticipated figures. "

So fewer people supported the strike action - how can it be deemed a 'success', then?

"Simon Herbert, East Sussex chairman of the Fire Brigade Union, said spirits remained high among members, despite taking part in more than a dozen strikes over the year with no end in sight in the pensions’ dispute. "

A dozen strikes with no result. Why not admit that strike action isn't having any effect on the government's position?

This is a political dispute, pure and simple. If it weren't, the Unions would wait for the Election and vote for Labour. It's a disgrace that they are using working men and women as a tool.
I do wish that people involved in the disputes wouldn't make stupid statements: " “Without a doubt the action has been effective and sends a very clear message to the Government that it is not acceptable that the public sector has seen a decade of pay cuts. " Pay hasn't been cut. A below-inflation increase merely means that it is worth less. "GMB branch secretary Mark Turner said the day was “very positive” despite turnout falling short of anticipated figures. " So fewer people supported the strike action - how can it be deemed a 'success', then? "Simon Herbert, East Sussex chairman of the Fire Brigade Union, said spirits remained high among members, despite taking part in more than a dozen strikes over the year with no end in sight in the pensions’ dispute. " A dozen strikes with no result. Why not admit that strike action isn't having any effect on the government's position? This is a political dispute, pure and simple. If it weren't, the Unions would wait for the Election and vote for Labour. It's a disgrace that they are using working men and women as a tool. stevo!!
  • Score: -6

9:14am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

monkeymoo wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
.....And they have now increased it by 11%!!
Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards),
Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension!

Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us).

All in it together!
So are you saying ministers have broken their promise and taken a pay rise? Any link to that?
[quote][p][bold]monkeymoo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.[/p][/quote].....And they have now increased it by 11%!! Ring fenced their pensions (which they do not contribute towards), Not to mention, they only have to work for 13 years to be able to claim a FULL pension! Add this to all the 'expenses' claimed, and second homes (bought by us). All in it together![/p][/quote]So are you saying ministers have broken their promise and taken a pay rise? Any link to that? Plantpot
  • Score: -3

9:17am Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

"I am deeply saddened by the attitudes of those who deride the Strikers for their actions. Remember the Government has refused to even negotiate and that is what prompted the action. "

Negotiate over what?

If the funds aren't available and manning levels cannot be increased, then there is no room to negotiate.

Sadly for the workers who keep losing money through no fault of their own, these strikes are all about bringing a government down.
"I am deeply saddened by the attitudes of those who deride the Strikers for their actions. Remember the Government has refused to even negotiate and that is what prompted the action. " Negotiate over what? If the funds aren't available and manning levels cannot be increased, then there is no room to negotiate. Sadly for the workers who keep losing money through no fault of their own, these strikes are all about bringing a government down. stevo!!
  • Score: -4

9:17am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
The difference is that the entire population of eligible voters had the opportunity to vote. The union ballot is completely different. Also, by using your logic, the Amex would never have been built (which would have been a good thing). Also by using your logic, the Green party gets about 0.3% of the eligible vote nationally, so why do we hear from them or about them at all?
[quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]The difference is that the entire population of eligible voters had the opportunity to vote. The union ballot is completely different. Also, by using your logic, the Amex would never have been built (which would have been a good thing). Also by using your logic, the Green party gets about 0.3% of the eligible vote nationally, so why do we hear from them or about them at all? Plantpot
  • Score: -2

9:18am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

Make a difference wrote:
I appreciate that the Fire Rescue teams work hard and risk their lives to help others however there are many people on less than minimum wage that juggle more than 2 jobs at a time putting their health and family lifestyle under years of pressure and stress.
I have worked my way through the fitness industry for over 20 years now and my salary has decreased. I therefore have to work an average of 70 hours per week to pay the bills as do many others.
I think that it should be acceptable for all employees over 21 earning less than the minimum wage and those on a low income salary therefore forced to juggle many jobs should ALL strike as that would show the true value of how the real world is affected.
Currently the NHS are saying that in 10 years time we will have to pay for our healthcare but surely if salaries across the board were increased to reflect the true cost of living then people's health would be extremely improved and the nhs costs would be reduced. However I guess that would have a negative financial effect on big pharma and the unethical political boundaries for the economy and government!?
52% of households in the UK already do not make a net contribution financially to society. Where do you think the money is going to come from?
[quote][p][bold]Make a difference[/bold] wrote: I appreciate that the Fire Rescue teams work hard and risk their lives to help others however there are many people on less than minimum wage that juggle more than 2 jobs at a time putting their health and family lifestyle under years of pressure and stress. I have worked my way through the fitness industry for over 20 years now and my salary has decreased. I therefore have to work an average of 70 hours per week to pay the bills as do many others. I think that it should be acceptable for all employees over 21 earning less than the minimum wage and those on a low income salary therefore forced to juggle many jobs should ALL strike as that would show the true value of how the real world is affected. Currently the NHS are saying that in 10 years time we will have to pay for our healthcare but surely if salaries across the board were increased to reflect the true cost of living then people's health would be extremely improved and the nhs costs would be reduced. However I guess that would have a negative financial effect on big pharma and the unethical political boundaries for the economy and government!?[/p][/quote]52% of households in the UK already do not make a net contribution financially to society. Where do you think the money is going to come from? Plantpot
  • Score: -2

9:20am Fri 11 Jul 14

Morpheus says...

Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
[quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget. Morpheus
  • Score: -2

9:23am Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
[quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected. stevo!!
  • Score: -7

9:27am Fri 11 Jul 14

Plantpot says...

Max Ripple wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators.
It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour.
Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line.
It sounds like you feel success should be penalised or is unfair? or that someone's personal success should be shared in some way? Do you think that equality is achieved by dragging people down or up? For me it's up every time.

More people are claiming benefits than ever because these benefits are available, and employers are using them to subsidise their workforce pay. You can blame Gordon Brown looking to buy votes for that one, and the law of unintended consequences. Foodbanks - how many users still smoke, drink, use smartphones, have Sky TV, turn up in designer gear, and are even properly checked for eligibility?
[quote][p][bold]Max Ripple[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.[/p][/quote]Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators. It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour. Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line.[/p][/quote]It sounds like you feel success should be penalised or is unfair? or that someone's personal success should be shared in some way? Do you think that equality is achieved by dragging people down or up? For me it's up every time. More people are claiming benefits than ever because these benefits are available, and employers are using them to subsidise their workforce pay. You can blame Gordon Brown looking to buy votes for that one, and the law of unintended consequences. Foodbanks - how many users still smoke, drink, use smartphones, have Sky TV, turn up in designer gear, and are even properly checked for eligibility? Plantpot
  • Score: 3

9:28am Fri 11 Jul 14

Fight_Back says...

stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-) Fight_Back
  • Score: 1

9:35am Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in. stevo!!
  • Score: -10

10:01am Fri 11 Jul 14

ThinkBrighton says...

stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
Those who choose to..................
.........
What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]Those who choose to.................. ......... What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement. ThinkBrighton
  • Score: 2

10:04am Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

ThinkBrighton wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
Those who choose to..................

.........
What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.
They might have done.....do you have inside information?

Otherwise, stick to the topic.
[quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]Those who choose to.................. ......... What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.[/p][/quote]They might have done.....do you have inside information? Otherwise, stick to the topic. stevo!!
  • Score: -9

10:17am Fri 11 Jul 14

theargusissoinformative says...

Let's face facts. We're getting boxed in both ears and in the face all at once by Europe, the Trade Unions and Scotland. Roll on 2015. The timing of this strike is just appalling on the part of the unions, and can only lead to an outright Conservative majority at Westminster next year. Tory voters don't need to take to sites like this; they just quietly keep their own counsel and vote quietly accordingly. I'm a lukewarm Tory myself, but I reckon that the unions' emotional blackmail is economically unreal and causes trouble for the challenges ahead.

Thinking globally, we should consider ourselves lucky that we are still one of the world's richest nations; this has been more by luck than judgement. India and China should both have bigger GNPs than the UK, except that corruption in public life is a massive curse for both of these countries, as is India's inability to make tangible changes to its own working culture and improve its infrastructure. The sooner our unions can grow up and f**k off, the future can begin to look bright for those of us that understand the meaning of hard work.
Let's face facts. We're getting boxed in both ears and in the face all at once by Europe, the Trade Unions and Scotland. Roll on 2015. The timing of this strike is just appalling on the part of the unions, and can only lead to an outright Conservative majority at Westminster next year. Tory voters don't need to take to sites like this; they just quietly keep their own counsel and vote quietly accordingly. I'm a lukewarm Tory myself, but I reckon that the unions' emotional blackmail is economically unreal and causes trouble for the challenges ahead. Thinking globally, we should consider ourselves lucky that we are still one of the world's richest nations; this has been more by luck than judgement. India and China should both have bigger GNPs than the UK, except that corruption in public life is a massive curse for both of these countries, as is India's inability to make tangible changes to its own working culture and improve its infrastructure. The sooner our unions can grow up and f**k off, the future can begin to look bright for those of us that understand the meaning of hard work. theargusissoinformative
  • Score: 2

10:21am Fri 11 Jul 14

theargusissoinformative says...

Max Ripple wrote:
Plantpot wrote:
At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.
Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators.
It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour.
Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line.
If bosses are doing so well, have you thought about becoming your own boss?
[quote][p][bold]Max Ripple[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Plantpot[/bold] wrote: At the start of the coalition, all Ministers took a pay cut of 5% and had their pay frozen for the life of the Parliament.[/p][/quote]Yes but don't forget that those ministers are all people who have a lot of their own money stashed away from previous jobs and positions when they have made shed loads. A 5% cut in their pay means very little to them. And of course they are due to get an 11% rise for just being an MP. Often overlooked by commentators. It's all very well to say that more people are in jobs and maybe they are. Ask yourself why that is? It is because guidelines for being eligible for any form of benefit have been re-drawn in such a way that people cannot claim anymore. They HAVE to take any job that comes along - on any pay at all. Average pay in the UK has been going down whilst the cost of living is going up. They may be in jobs but they are being paid peanuts whilst bosses are doing very well thank you. The economy is recovering on the back of low paid labour. Oh and by the way, there are more people than ever who are working but have to claim benefits to top up those low wages. There are more people getting help from foodbanks than ever before and many of those are working people with full time low paid jobs. We have to stand up for ourselves somewhere along the line.[/p][/quote]If bosses are doing so well, have you thought about becoming your own boss? theargusissoinformative
  • Score: 0

10:32am Fri 11 Jul 14

Bluebeef says...

Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
Still in a different league than the scandalous 8.3% of Unison members who voted to strike ( assuming Argus article above is correct)
[quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]Still in a different league than the scandalous 8.3% of Unison members who voted to strike ( assuming Argus article above is correct) Bluebeef
  • Score: -1

10:34am Fri 11 Jul 14

Bluebeef says...

stevo!! wrote:
I do wish that people involved in the disputes wouldn't make stupid statements:

" “Without a doubt the action has been effective and sends a very clear message to the Government that it is not acceptable that the public sector has seen a decade of pay cuts. "

Pay hasn't been cut. A below-inflation increase merely means that it is worth less.

"GMB branch secretary Mark Turner said the day was “very positive” despite turnout falling short of anticipated figures. "

So fewer people supported the strike action - how can it be deemed a 'success', then?

"Simon Herbert, East Sussex chairman of the Fire Brigade Union, said spirits remained high among members, despite taking part in more than a dozen strikes over the year with no end in sight in the pensions’ dispute. "

A dozen strikes with no result. Why not admit that strike action isn't having any effect on the government's position?

This is a political dispute, pure and simple. If it weren't, the Unions would wait for the Election and vote for Labour. It's a disgrace that they are using working men and women as a tool.
Last paragraph nails it.
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: I do wish that people involved in the disputes wouldn't make stupid statements: " “Without a doubt the action has been effective and sends a very clear message to the Government that it is not acceptable that the public sector has seen a decade of pay cuts. " Pay hasn't been cut. A below-inflation increase merely means that it is worth less. "GMB branch secretary Mark Turner said the day was “very positive” despite turnout falling short of anticipated figures. " So fewer people supported the strike action - how can it be deemed a 'success', then? "Simon Herbert, East Sussex chairman of the Fire Brigade Union, said spirits remained high among members, despite taking part in more than a dozen strikes over the year with no end in sight in the pensions’ dispute. " A dozen strikes with no result. Why not admit that strike action isn't having any effect on the government's position? This is a political dispute, pure and simple. If it weren't, the Unions would wait for the Election and vote for Labour. It's a disgrace that they are using working men and women as a tool.[/p][/quote]Last paragraph nails it. Bluebeef
  • Score: 0

10:57am Fri 11 Jul 14

Andy R says...

Fight_Back wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one.
Utterly absurd comparison. You look at the numbers of people entitled to vote in each scenario. Theobald sits on the Council with a princely 19% of the vote in his ward. So presumably he will now do the principled thing and stand down? Truly ironic that a government elected by no-one is handing down lectures on "democracy".
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one.[/p][/quote]Utterly absurd comparison. You look at the numbers of people entitled to vote in each scenario. Theobald sits on the Council with a princely 19% of the vote in his ward. So presumably he will now do the principled thing and stand down? Truly ironic that a government elected by no-one is handing down lectures on "democracy". Andy R
  • Score: 3

11:01am Fri 11 Jul 14

Andy R says...

Sorry...I meant 19% of the electorate
Sorry...I meant 19% of the electorate Andy R
  • Score: 3

11:10am Fri 11 Jul 14

theargusissoinformative says...

Andy R wrote:
Sorry...I meant 19% of the electorate
So who's problem is it meant to be if a lot of people can't be bothered to vote in local elections? Your nuanced argument is what?
[quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: Sorry...I meant 19% of the electorate[/p][/quote]So who's problem is it meant to be if a lot of people can't be bothered to vote in local elections? Your nuanced argument is what? theargusissoinformative
  • Score: 0

11:17am Fri 11 Jul 14

r2dean2 says...

While agree with the fire brigade and teachers taking action, I'm confussed as to why Cityclean dustmen went on strike. There some of the best paid in the country, I know, I used to be one. But I left due bullying and harrisment, not from managers but from so called fellow workers, even the so called GMB union failed me, protected the bullies rather than the victims, I guess it's who shouts the loudest really. I back the teachers and fire personal, Cityclean are just jumping on the bandwagon. Thank goodness I left there, 7 years in a new happy workplace.
While agree with the fire brigade and teachers taking action, I'm confussed as to why Cityclean dustmen went on strike. There some of the best paid in the country, I know, I used to be one. But I left due bullying and harrisment, not from managers but from so called fellow workers, even the so called GMB union failed me, protected the bullies rather than the victims, I guess it's who shouts the loudest really. I back the teachers and fire personal, Cityclean are just jumping on the bandwagon. Thank goodness I left there, 7 years in a new happy workplace. r2dean2
  • Score: 5

12:12pm Fri 11 Jul 14

mimseycal says...

These strikes and the reasons for them are just one aspect of many similar ones brought on by this 'manufactured' Austerity. Cutting wages, capping benefits and introducing costly assessments for the really vulnerable - where implementing the new procedure costs over twice what the old system cost - whilst at the same time Osborne is offering huge tax reliefs to multinationals ... Were you to run your personal accounts the way this government runs public funds, you'd be done for fraud!
These strikes and the reasons for them are just one aspect of many similar ones brought on by this 'manufactured' Austerity. Cutting wages, capping benefits and introducing costly assessments for the really vulnerable - where implementing the new procedure costs over twice what the old system cost - whilst at the same time Osborne is offering huge tax reliefs to multinationals ... Were you to run your personal accounts the way this government runs public funds, you'd be done for fraud! mimseycal
  • Score: 2

12:19pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Fairfax Aches says...

Typical right wing propaganda form the Argus, I suspect they will crow bar in some blame to the green party on this also. How about doing some actual journalism for a change.
Typical right wing propaganda form the Argus, I suspect they will crow bar in some blame to the green party on this also. How about doing some actual journalism for a change. Fairfax Aches
  • Score: 2

12:42pm Fri 11 Jul 14

jarmonesque says...

People work hard, pay them properly. They can then afford to buy stuff, the wheels turn. Everyone wins.
People work hard, pay them properly. They can then afford to buy stuff, the wheels turn. Everyone wins. jarmonesque
  • Score: 5

1:45pm Fri 11 Jul 14

ThinkBrighton says...

stevo!! wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
Those who choose to..................


.........
What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.
They might have done.....do you have inside information?

Otherwise, stick to the topic.
What was the topic, as you have removed yourself so far from it,
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]Those who choose to.................. ......... What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.[/p][/quote]They might have done.....do you have inside information? Otherwise, stick to the topic.[/p][/quote]What was the topic, as you have removed yourself so far from it, ThinkBrighton
  • Score: 1

7:10pm Fri 11 Jul 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Andy R wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one.
Utterly absurd comparison. You look at the numbers of people entitled to vote in each scenario. Theobald sits on the Council with a princely 19% of the vote in his ward. So presumably he will now do the principled thing and stand down? Truly ironic that a government elected by no-one is handing down lectures on "democracy".
On your rather questionable logic you could argue that every government we have ever had was elected by no one !

In reality of course they have been elected by someone, indeed, lots of someones have voted for them whether you like it or not.

If your beef is that the government usually doesn't get voted in by more than 50% of the country then that applies to Labour and Tories alike. In fact, due to the scandalously irregular size of constituencies, it is a well known fact that Labour can get into government without even polling the most votes in a general election and that really is an issue.

For all its faults at least our election process rarely results in coalition governments which would be the inevitable case with proportional representation and this coalition has adequately shown how a rump party of two faced twits like the Lib Dems can mess things up for everyone so I hope we can all agree we don't really want that.
[quote][p][bold]Andy R[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]But you're not comparing like with like. All people able to vote in a strike ballot are paid up members of that union. Most of the voters at a general election are not paid up members of any of the political parties. If you want to make a fair comparison then the it should be between the percentage of union members that voted for a strike versus the percentage of Conservative party members who voted Tory in the last general election. I'd suggest the Tory percentage will be considerably higher than the union one.[/p][/quote]Utterly absurd comparison. You look at the numbers of people entitled to vote in each scenario. Theobald sits on the Council with a princely 19% of the vote in his ward. So presumably he will now do the principled thing and stand down? Truly ironic that a government elected by no-one is handing down lectures on "democracy".[/p][/quote]On your rather questionable logic you could argue that every government we have ever had was elected by no one ! In reality of course they have been elected by someone, indeed, lots of someones have voted for them whether you like it or not. If your beef is that the government usually doesn't get voted in by more than 50% of the country then that applies to Labour and Tories alike. In fact, due to the scandalously irregular size of constituencies, it is a well known fact that Labour can get into government without even polling the most votes in a general election and that really is an issue. For all its faults at least our election process rarely results in coalition governments which would be the inevitable case with proportional representation and this coalition has adequately shown how a rump party of two faced twits like the Lib Dems can mess things up for everyone so I hope we can all agree we don't really want that. Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 0

7:16pm Fri 11 Jul 14

spurious warnings says...

stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
As AlanPare brilliantly responded to Stevo!!

Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms:

•Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

•Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

•Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

•Requires excessive admiration

•Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

•Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

•Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

•Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

•Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
[quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]As AlanPare brilliantly responded to Stevo!! Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms: •Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) •Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love •Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) •Requires excessive admiration •Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations •Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends •Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others •Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her •Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes spurious warnings
  • Score: 3

8:09pm Fri 11 Jul 14

stevo!! says...

ThinkBrighton wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
ThinkBrighton wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
Those who choose to..................



.........
What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.
They might have done.....do you have inside information?

Otherwise, stick to the topic.
What was the topic, as you have removed yourself so far from it,
It's in the report which you just clicked upon.
[quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ThinkBrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]Those who choose to.................. ......... What a statement, didn't an inmate of Broadmore make a similar statement.[/p][/quote]They might have done.....do you have inside information? Otherwise, stick to the topic.[/p][/quote]What was the topic, as you have removed yourself so far from it,[/p][/quote]It's in the report which you just clicked upon. stevo!!
  • Score: -3

8:48pm Sat 26 Jul 14

Dr Martin says...

spurious warnings wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
stevo!! wrote:
Morpheus wrote:
Brightonian71 wrote:
Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.
So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.
And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.
Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)
My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment.

Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.
As AlanPare brilliantly responded to Stevo!!

Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder

In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms:

•Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)

•Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love

•Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)

•Requires excessive admiration

•Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations

•Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends

•Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others

•Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her

•Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes
Good point!
[quote][p][bold]spurious warnings[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]stevo!![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Morpheus[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brightonian71[/bold] wrote: Tired of the " low mandate for strike action" spin which seems to have become the stock Government / Pro Government dismissive response to this issue. Just as a reminder. UK General Election turnout 2010 = approx 65%. Conservative share of vote = approx 36%. 36% of 65% = 23.4%. In other words lets not forget that the vast majority of this country did not vote for the Conservative party. By their own logic, perhaps we should be equally dismissive of their opinions, and equally dubious of the mandate for their policies.[/p][/quote]So why not blame the 35% of people who did not vote rather than the Tories and we do have a coalition government which you seem to forget.[/p][/quote]And those who don't vote are telling us that they don't mind who gets elected.[/p][/quote]Have you taken a sensible pill today or something ? I've had to agree with a couple of your posts and it's getting embarrassing !!! ;-)[/p][/quote]My posts deal with facts, common sense, quizzical enquiries and reality coupled with the occasional 'funny' (to me) comment. Those who choose to disagree with me are generally those whose reality is of their own construct, rather than the one the rest of us live in.[/p][/quote]As AlanPare brilliantly responded to Stevo!! Symptoms of Narcissistic Personality Disorder In order for a person to be diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder (NPD) they must meet five or more of the following symptoms: •Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements) •Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love •Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions) •Requires excessive admiration •Has a very strong sense of entitlement, e.g., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations •Is exploitative of others, e.g., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends •Lacks empathy, e.g., is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others •Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her •Regularly shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes[/p][/quote]Good point! Dr Martin
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree