Public sector in biggest walkout

Members of the NUT and their supporters march through the centre of Brighton in March.   Picture: Simon Dack

Members of the NUT and their supporters march through the centre of Brighton in March. Picture: Simon Dack

First published in News
Last updated
by

Thousands of public sector workers are set to strike next month in what is expected to be one of the biggest walkouts in recent years.

In Brighton and Hove alone, up to 6,500 council employees including bin men, admin staff and cleaners could strike. GMB, Unison and Unite are leading the action with NHS staff also set to be balloted.

It is not known at this stage if teachers will join the walkout.

The action, which is being held across the country, is over pay – with unions claiming members have suffered a 15% pay cut in real terms across the last five years.

Local government workers have had a three year pay freeze, followed by a below inflation pay deal and have now been offered a 1% rise.

The strike will be held just days before the TUC organised national demonstration on October 1, where there will be a call for improved pay.

Alex Knutsen, chair of Brighton and Hove Unison, said: “Most of our members are low paid despite what people may believe. They have seen just a 1% pay rise in just five years while living costs continue to rocket. Not only are they getting less money in real terms but they are also being expected to work more. The action will be the biggest we have seen in a few years – perhaps back to 2011.”

Brighton and Hove will be the focal point for the day of action in the South East with around 10,000 workers expected to march through the city.

While details have not yet been decided, it is expected there will be several separate marches meeting at a central location for speeches.

As well as local government workers, Unite, GMB and Unison will also be balloting their members working in the NHS. For the first time ever, the Royal College of Midwives will also ballot for action. Workers employed by contractors working for local authorities are also set to strike.

The GMB has announced binmen employed by SERCO at Mid-Sussex District Council will be balloted on proposed action.

Gary Palmer, GMB organiser, said “The offer of a 1% rise in the light of recent cost of living increase and low pay awards over the past few years have resulted in our members seeing their standard of living drop at an alarming rate. Disappointingly this has left them with no other option.”

Sue Moorman, Brighton and Hove City Council’s head of human resources and organisational development, said: “It’s too early to say exactly how services might be affected, we are planning ahead to try identify the extent of potential disruption to services and agree contingency arrangements wherever possible.”

Comments (73)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:15am Fri 5 Sep 14

Sussex jim says...

These people should consider themselves lucky that they have secure jobs and gold-plated pensions to look forward to. Some of us in the private sector, or self-employed, have no job security or even a regular income; and the pension pot has to come from selling a family home and downsizing.
These people should consider themselves lucky that they have secure jobs and gold-plated pensions to look forward to. Some of us in the private sector, or self-employed, have no job security or even a regular income; and the pension pot has to come from selling a family home and downsizing. Sussex jim
  • Score: -58

8:05am Fri 5 Sep 14

rogerthefish says...

Sussex jim wrote:
These people should consider themselves lucky that they have secure jobs and gold-plated pensions to look forward to. Some of us in the private sector, or self-employed, have no job security or even a regular income; and the pension pot has to come from selling a family home and downsizing.
Totally agree, and how many stikes in private sector ?

And the sickness rate is a lot higher.
[quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: These people should consider themselves lucky that they have secure jobs and gold-plated pensions to look forward to. Some of us in the private sector, or self-employed, have no job security or even a regular income; and the pension pot has to come from selling a family home and downsizing.[/p][/quote]Totally agree, and how many stikes in private sector ? And the sickness rate is a lot higher. rogerthefish
  • Score: -43

8:22am Fri 5 Sep 14

ourcoalition says...

"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all. ourcoalition
  • Score: 92

8:26am Fri 5 Sep 14

Valentinian says...

If you don't like the job...and your 'skills.....' Can be better rewarded elsewhere ha ha leave... and seek your fortune in the private sector ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha of course...you can't ....ah well another boom for Brighton shops as everyone goes shopping...
If you don't like the job...and your 'skills.....' Can be better rewarded elsewhere ha ha leave... and seek your fortune in the private sector ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha of course...you can't ....ah well another boom for Brighton shops as everyone goes shopping... Valentinian
  • Score: -65

9:01am Fri 5 Sep 14

Just trying to earn a crust says...

Valentinian wrote:
If you don't like the job...and your 'skills.....' Can be better rewarded elsewhere ha ha leave... and seek your fortune in the private sector ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha of course...you can't ....ah well another boom for Brighton shops as everyone goes shopping...
Do people shop in Brighton any more? Most of my friends now go the Worthing or Crawley
[quote][p][bold]Valentinian[/bold] wrote: If you don't like the job...and your 'skills.....' Can be better rewarded elsewhere ha ha leave... and seek your fortune in the private sector ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha of course...you can't ....ah well another boom for Brighton shops as everyone goes shopping...[/p][/quote]Do people shop in Brighton any more? Most of my friends now go the Worthing or Crawley Just trying to earn a crust
  • Score: 12

9:10am Fri 5 Sep 14

Alison Smith says...

........& the previous strikes were so successful?
........& the previous strikes were so successful? Alison Smith
  • Score: -30

9:21am Fri 5 Sep 14

Bugzy84 says...

Bit of a double edged sword, whilst I agree that everyone in the public sector should at least be receiving a living wage and decent pension it annoyed the hell out of me when I heard someone who works for the council complaining that he'd have to get rid of his Sky TV because he couldn't afford it any longer, sorry but all sympathy went at that point.
Bit of a double edged sword, whilst I agree that everyone in the public sector should at least be receiving a living wage and decent pension it annoyed the hell out of me when I heard someone who works for the council complaining that he'd have to get rid of his Sky TV because he couldn't afford it any longer, sorry but all sympathy went at that point. Bugzy84
  • Score: -42

9:38am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fight_Back says...

ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ).

As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.
[quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ). As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No. Fight_Back
  • Score: -39

9:53am Fri 5 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Fight_Back wrote:
ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ).

As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.
So a plague on both houses then! This inverted snobbery is what made Britain great (not).
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ). As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.[/p][/quote]So a plague on both houses then! This inverted snobbery is what made Britain great (not). HJarrs
  • Score: 30

10:03am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fercri Sakes says...

We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom. Fercri Sakes
  • Score: 65

10:16am Fri 5 Sep 14

Serf says...

Fight_Back wrote:
ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ).

As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.
It seems that the government's divide and rule is working well. The public and private sectors both need to stop sniping at each other. What is needed is a united front against the common enemy.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ). As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.[/p][/quote]It seems that the government's divide and rule is working well. The public and private sectors both need to stop sniping at each other. What is needed is a united front against the common enemy. Serf
  • Score: 68

10:21am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fight_Back says...

Serf wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ).

As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.
It seems that the government's divide and rule is working well. The public and private sectors both need to stop sniping at each other. What is needed is a united front against the common enemy.
It's nothing to do with divide and rule. It has everything to do with striking not working. How many strikes so far ? Nothing achieved except to alienate non-public sector workers and in many cases cost them time and money. If public sector workers were actually good at their jobs then there might be a case for a pay rise but many aren't. Go to the council offices in ST Barts Square and experience the slowness, rudeness and incompetency and then explain why those people deserve a pay rise. In the private sector many would be managed out of the business.
[quote][p][bold]Serf[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]I was made redundant at the beginning of the year and my experience of public sector staff at the DWP, HMRC and the council was poor to say the least. They were slow, inefficient, often rude and regularly gave out incorrect or conflicting advice. They don't deserve a pay rise ( I exclude the binmen as I have had nothing but good experiences from them ). As for the 15% pay cut in real terms - I've had to take a 35% pay cut to get back into work. Do you see me striking ? No.[/p][/quote]It seems that the government's divide and rule is working well. The public and private sectors both need to stop sniping at each other. What is needed is a united front against the common enemy.[/p][/quote]It's nothing to do with divide and rule. It has everything to do with striking not working. How many strikes so far ? Nothing achieved except to alienate non-public sector workers and in many cases cost them time and money. If public sector workers were actually good at their jobs then there might be a case for a pay rise but many aren't. Go to the council offices in ST Barts Square and experience the slowness, rudeness and incompetency and then explain why those people deserve a pay rise. In the private sector many would be managed out of the business. Fight_Back
  • Score: -36

10:23am Fri 5 Sep 14

jyan says...

So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below.
So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below. jyan
  • Score: -33

10:37am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fight_Back says...

jyan wrote:
So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below.
They can't - that's why all they do is thumb down you if you point out the futility and pointlessness of striking. No objectives, no targets set, no defined outcomes - typical public sector project really.
[quote][p][bold]jyan[/bold] wrote: So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below.[/p][/quote]They can't - that's why all they do is thumb down you if you point out the futility and pointlessness of striking. No objectives, no targets set, no defined outcomes - typical public sector project really. Fight_Back
  • Score: -27

10:48am Fri 5 Sep 14

L bailey says...

If they can afford to keep losing a days pay each time they strike they cannot be that badly off. Has anyone added up their lost wages and compared that with any pay rise they may have achieved. By the way do the union leaders lose their pay!
If they can afford to keep losing a days pay each time they strike they cannot be that badly off. Has anyone added up their lost wages and compared that with any pay rise they may have achieved. By the way do the union leaders lose their pay! L bailey
  • Score: -25

10:54am Fri 5 Sep 14

Bertie1966 says...

Many of the front line council staff do a good job, but the people who work behind the front line are just inefficient and lazy. They don't deserve all the 'fat cat' perks they get. The council just put taxes up to match their pay rises and predicted spending. I wish we could all do that. Many private sector employees, especially self employed don't have pensions as after paying their business rates their is no money left over. I'd love to see the council people go out and earn £10. They wouldn't have a clue where to start ... they'd be too busy getting wrapped up in red tape. So they've had a pay cut ... awwww how unfair to now have a salary that matches the equivalent private sector worker. At least they still take more sick pay than private sector workers.
So to go on strike is just unethical.
Many of the front line council staff do a good job, but the people who work behind the front line are just inefficient and lazy. They don't deserve all the 'fat cat' perks they get. The council just put taxes up to match their pay rises and predicted spending. I wish we could all do that. Many private sector employees, especially self employed don't have pensions as after paying their business rates their is no money left over. I'd love to see the council people go out and earn £10. They wouldn't have a clue where to start ... they'd be too busy getting wrapped up in red tape. So they've had a pay cut ... awwww how unfair to now have a salary that matches the equivalent private sector worker. At least they still take more sick pay than private sector workers. So to go on strike is just unethical. Bertie1966
  • Score: -29

10:56am Fri 5 Sep 14

ThinkBrighton says...

It says a lot about the private sector, that nobody will notice the public sector walk out, other than what the media prints, as previously stated they have jobs and shouldn't follow what the dumb trade unions instruct them to do to justify their own existance.
It says a lot about the private sector, that nobody will notice the public sector walk out, other than what the media prints, as previously stated they have jobs and shouldn't follow what the dumb trade unions instruct them to do to justify their own existance. ThinkBrighton
  • Score: -26

10:59am Fri 5 Sep 14

ThinkBrighton says...

ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
Fact or fiction? I think the latter
[quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]Fact or fiction? I think the latter ThinkBrighton
  • Score: -34

11:12am Fri 5 Sep 14

jyan says...

Fight_Back wrote:
jyan wrote:
So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below.
They can't - that's why all they do is thumb down you if you point out the futility and pointlessness of striking. No objectives, no targets set, no defined outcomes - typical public sector project really.
Yes, so far only thumbs down and no clear agenda has been posted. I'm not interested in point scoring or thumbs up or down, I'm interested in what clear objectives of the strike and where the money or jobs will be coming from. Go on tell us or carry on losing public sympathy!
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jyan[/bold] wrote: So what will these strikes gain? If it's money, how much do they want and where will that come from? What are the other expectations? I would be happy to support a cause if I can see a clear point to it, so go ahead start outlining clear plans below.[/p][/quote]They can't - that's why all they do is thumb down you if you point out the futility and pointlessness of striking. No objectives, no targets set, no defined outcomes - typical public sector project really.[/p][/quote]Yes, so far only thumbs down and no clear agenda has been posted. I'm not interested in point scoring or thumbs up or down, I'm interested in what clear objectives of the strike and where the money or jobs will be coming from. Go on tell us or carry on losing public sympathy! jyan
  • Score: -40

11:28am Fri 5 Sep 14

inmegarden says...

Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers."
PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014
Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers." PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014 inmegarden
  • Score: -11

11:36am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fight_Back says...

inmegarden wrote:
Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers."
PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014
Thank you for the invitation but no thanks. Have you seen how they've done locally in B&H ? As for growth - UKIP have grown even faster.
[quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers." PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014[/p][/quote]Thank you for the invitation but no thanks. Have you seen how they've done locally in B&H ? As for growth - UKIP have grown even faster. Fight_Back
  • Score: -25

11:54am Fri 5 Sep 14

Fairfax Aches says...

Bin men-they ever not on strike these days? Get some bulgarian-romanians in im sure they would do the job better at lower cost.
As for the council staff...well who would notice anyway (other than the benefits delinquants looking a handout)
Bin men-they ever not on strike these days? Get some bulgarian-romanians in im sure they would do the job better at lower cost. As for the council staff...well who would notice anyway (other than the benefits delinquants looking a handout) Fairfax Aches
  • Score: -46

12:01pm Fri 5 Sep 14

theargusissoinformative says...

inmegarden wrote:
Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers."
PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014
Our economy badly needs rebalancing, with the public sector becoming a less significant part of GDP; some aspects of it are just communism by another name. The public sector only complements the UK's wealth, it does not create it. Those of you going on strike, please ask where you really want your country to be in twenty five years' time. You'll probably do what you always do - turn to your work colleagues to convince yourselves that you are right, so that you can all go on strike together. The rest of us have to find the stamina to tolerate your flawed logic.
[quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers." PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014[/p][/quote]Our economy badly needs rebalancing, with the public sector becoming a less significant part of GDP; some aspects of it are just communism by another name. The public sector only complements the UK's wealth, it does not create it. Those of you going on strike, please ask where you really want your country to be in twenty five years' time. You'll probably do what you always do - turn to your work colleagues to convince yourselves that you are right, so that you can all go on strike together. The rest of us have to find the stamina to tolerate your flawed logic. theargusissoinformative
  • Score: -41

12:13pm Fri 5 Sep 14

AburridoEnTrabajo says...

I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it. AburridoEnTrabajo
  • Score: -40

12:20pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Zamora25 says...

Sack the lot of them! People wonder why the council use agency staff. It is hardly a surprise when the average public sector worker takes off over two weeks a year in sick leave and is constantly on strike. Privatise everything and then these people would have to get a job in the real world of the private sector where there are no gold plated pension or job security rather than living in the dream world of the public sector.
Sack the lot of them! People wonder why the council use agency staff. It is hardly a surprise when the average public sector worker takes off over two weeks a year in sick leave and is constantly on strike. Privatise everything and then these people would have to get a job in the real world of the private sector where there are no gold plated pension or job security rather than living in the dream world of the public sector. Zamora25
  • Score: -49

12:23pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Hove Actually says...

You can vote all these comments down BUT....
like your last strikes nothing will change, the council will save a days wages, the majority will lose out due to school closures etc and you will still be in the same sorry position but sadly we cannot afford to pay you more as we are still paying for Labour's "no return to boom and bust"
You can vote all these comments down BUT.... like your last strikes nothing will change, the council will save a days wages, the majority will lose out due to school closures etc and you will still be in the same sorry position but sadly we cannot afford to pay you more as we are still paying for Labour's "no return to boom and bust" Hove Actually
  • Score: -29

12:31pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Plantpot says...

theargusissoinformat
ive
wrote:
inmegarden wrote:
Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers."
PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014
Our economy badly needs rebalancing, with the public sector becoming a less significant part of GDP; some aspects of it are just communism by another name. The public sector only complements the UK's wealth, it does not create it. Those of you going on strike, please ask where you really want your country to be in twenty five years' time. You'll probably do what you always do - turn to your work colleagues to convince yourselves that you are right, so that you can all go on strike together. The rest of us have to find the stamina to tolerate your flawed logic.
The one thing that we can be sure of is that strike action will do nothing for the cause of the strikers. This isn't the 1970's. If anything, the public sector will shrink further. The public sector generate no wealth by themselves, and all public sector money is generated by the private sector. If you want a strong public sector, the only way to fund it is for the private sector to be ever more successful.

With regards to Green votes, if they were to double their performance at the next election they would be up with the BNP. UKIP on the other hand look set to do quite well. We may see the unfortunate situation of the country being largely right wing but losing out to socialists because of the vagaries of the election system, such as Labour needing far fewer votes than the Tories to form a govt. due to the way constituency boundaries are cut.

If the Greens were to do well, as with Labour, I would be genuinely scared for the future of the country. They would create a society where you would be better off sitting on your backside doing nothing. They would buy one piece of equipment for the military only - a white flag, and plant it on the white cliffs of Dover.
[quote][p][bold]theargusissoinformat ive[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]inmegarden[/bold] wrote: Vote Green...Natalie Bennett(Green Party Chair) says"The fact that the Green party are consistently polling at some of our best numbers since 1989 goes to show that our message of the need to reshape our politics and economy to work for the common good is really hitting home. It is our policies such as making the minimum wage a living wage, a wealth tax on the top 1%, re-nationalising our railways and having a publicly owned and run NHS that are both encouraging people to join as members and vote Green in growing numbers." PS while the Blue Tories and Red Tories have experienced stagnation in terms of the people that are prepared to vote for them the Green Party vote has more than doubled since the General Election. Source: YouGov 05/09/2014[/p][/quote]Our economy badly needs rebalancing, with the public sector becoming a less significant part of GDP; some aspects of it are just communism by another name. The public sector only complements the UK's wealth, it does not create it. Those of you going on strike, please ask where you really want your country to be in twenty five years' time. You'll probably do what you always do - turn to your work colleagues to convince yourselves that you are right, so that you can all go on strike together. The rest of us have to find the stamina to tolerate your flawed logic.[/p][/quote]The one thing that we can be sure of is that strike action will do nothing for the cause of the strikers. This isn't the 1970's. If anything, the public sector will shrink further. The public sector generate no wealth by themselves, and all public sector money is generated by the private sector. If you want a strong public sector, the only way to fund it is for the private sector to be ever more successful. With regards to Green votes, if they were to double their performance at the next election they would be up with the BNP. UKIP on the other hand look set to do quite well. We may see the unfortunate situation of the country being largely right wing but losing out to socialists because of the vagaries of the election system, such as Labour needing far fewer votes than the Tories to form a govt. due to the way constituency boundaries are cut. If the Greens were to do well, as with Labour, I would be genuinely scared for the future of the country. They would create a society where you would be better off sitting on your backside doing nothing. They would buy one piece of equipment for the military only - a white flag, and plant it on the white cliffs of Dover. Plantpot
  • Score: -31

12:40pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Plantpot says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
Striking won't achieve anything. It will just remind everyone how pointless a strike is, a discredited tactic from the 1970's. like most public sector thinking.

BTW, the ordinary taxpayer puts huge amounts of money in the pockets of those who don't generate any wealth, i.e. anyone on benefits or tax credits or who works for the public sector. Every day. Only 48% of households in the UK are net contributors financially to UK plc.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.[/p][/quote]Striking won't achieve anything. It will just remind everyone how pointless a strike is, a discredited tactic from the 1970's. like most public sector thinking. BTW, the ordinary taxpayer puts huge amounts of money in the pockets of those who don't generate any wealth, i.e. anyone on benefits or tax credits or who works for the public sector. Every day. Only 48% of households in the UK are net contributors financially to UK plc. Plantpot
  • Score: -35

1:04pm Fri 5 Sep 14

fredaj says...

AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
[quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it! fredaj
  • Score: -31

1:43pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
Typical trade union lies and obfuscation.
A pension paying £4,600 inflation proofed and transferable to a spouse is worth @£150K.
A public sector worker would ALWAYS get more than this if they worked full time all their life in the public sector. They would only get a pension of this size if they had worked part time or had large gaps in public sector employment.
If you need to resort to lies why should we believe anything you say?
[quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]Typical trade union lies and obfuscation. A pension paying £4,600 inflation proofed and transferable to a spouse is worth @£150K. A public sector worker would ALWAYS get more than this if they worked full time all their life in the public sector. They would only get a pension of this size if they had worked part time or had large gaps in public sector employment. If you need to resort to lies why should we believe anything you say? Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -44

1:55pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Fight_Back says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
ourcoalition wrote:
"Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work.

Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth.

Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference.

Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions.

Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.
Typical trade union lies and obfuscation.
A pension paying £4,600 inflation proofed and transferable to a spouse is worth @£150K.
A public sector worker would ALWAYS get more than this if they worked full time all their life in the public sector. They would only get a pension of this size if they had worked part time or had large gaps in public sector employment.
If you need to resort to lies why should we believe anything you say?
Indeed - the Hutton report into pensions reckoned the average public sector pension is just shy of £8k a year.
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: "Gold Plated Pensions" - tell that to a Teaching Assistant - pension average at £4,600 after a lifetime in work. Secure job - 150 employers in all sectors - job losses in all - please do not swallow this Government's "divide and rule" myth. Sickness - as above - the public sector has to record all absence (for example, jury duty) in its statistics - the private sector records what it likes, hence the difference. Strikes - someone has to fight back when our gold plated pensions are attacked, pay cuts are imposed...... And locally, golf course staff last year, Brighton Housing Trust the year before - private and voluntary sectors respectively, but all one common factor - attacks by their employer on pay, allowances and pensions. Do you really support the "race to the bottom"? Do you really want a tin-pot, low wage, economy? The effect on the private retail sector will be less buying, reduced profits and a dying City. All in all disastrous for us all.[/p][/quote]Typical trade union lies and obfuscation. A pension paying £4,600 inflation proofed and transferable to a spouse is worth @£150K. A public sector worker would ALWAYS get more than this if they worked full time all their life in the public sector. They would only get a pension of this size if they had worked part time or had large gaps in public sector employment. If you need to resort to lies why should we believe anything you say?[/p][/quote]Indeed - the Hutton report into pensions reckoned the average public sector pension is just shy of £8k a year. Fight_Back
  • Score: -44

3:19pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
[quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes. Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -74

4:16pm Fri 5 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work. HJarrs
  • Score: 21

4:17pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
What exactly are you thanking them for?
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.[/p][/quote]What exactly are you thanking them for? Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -32

4:18pm Fri 5 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.
Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations. HJarrs
  • Score: 31

4:23pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts.

For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector.

Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came.

These strikes achieve nothing.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.[/p][/quote]No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts. For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector. Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came. These strikes achieve nothing. Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -31

4:25pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

HJarrs wrote:
Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.
I don't recall their being a fight.

Would you care to explain how it was fought?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.[/p][/quote]I don't recall their being a fight. Would you care to explain how it was fought? Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -31

4:26pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

HJarrs wrote:
Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.
I don't recall there being a fight.

Would you care to explain how it was fought?
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.[/p][/quote]I don't recall there being a fight. Would you care to explain how it was fought? Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -26

4:46pm Fri 5 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.
I don't recall there being a fight.

Would you care to explain how it was fought?
Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now).
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Oh yes, and let's not forget that some of those posting and complaining are already drawing their pension, a benefit fought for over generations.[/p][/quote]I don't recall there being a fight. Would you care to explain how it was fought?[/p][/quote]Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now). HJarrs
  • Score: 32

5:12pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Bertie1966 says...

Hove Actually wrote:
You can vote all these comments down BUT....
like your last strikes nothing will change, the council will save a days wages, the majority will lose out due to school closures etc and you will still be in the same sorry position but sadly we cannot afford to pay you more as we are still paying for Labour's "no return to boom and bust"
Absolutely spot on ... I agree with everything you've said.
[quote][p][bold]Hove Actually[/bold] wrote: You can vote all these comments down BUT.... like your last strikes nothing will change, the council will save a days wages, the majority will lose out due to school closures etc and you will still be in the same sorry position but sadly we cannot afford to pay you more as we are still paying for Labour's "no return to boom and bust"[/p][/quote]Absolutely spot on ... I agree with everything you've said. Bertie1966
  • Score: -20

5:18pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right. Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -41

5:19pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Bertie1966 says...

Fercri Sakes wrote:
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living.
[quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living. Bertie1966
  • Score: -19

5:23pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Bertie1966 says...

HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
You are spot on ... there are so many negative thumbs because all the public sector workers have nothing else better to do, while the private sector haven't read the comments as they are at work, earning their salary.
HOWEVER some front line public sector workers do a good job and a very difficult job in some cases, but there are too many lazy spongers behind them.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.[/p][/quote]You are spot on ... there are so many negative thumbs because all the public sector workers have nothing else better to do, while the private sector haven't read the comments as they are at work, earning their salary. HOWEVER some front line public sector workers do a good job and a very difficult job in some cases, but there are too many lazy spongers behind them. Bertie1966
  • Score: -31

5:31pm Fri 5 Sep 14

G Wiley says...

I've never seen so much support for HJarrs in ages - could this possibly be the usual moanerati commenting and responding or is it a different group?

Methinks that either all the public service workers must spend all their day reading and responding to these comments; and/or, perhaps it is linked to all the watermelons now sitting in Aston University with the iPads and IPhones giving support.

I was most encouraged by UK Green Party 'leader' Natalie Bennett on the BBC Breakfast show this morning given the chance to present her 'package' - not a single mention about the environment! The eye-opener was the idea that everyone (I assume including children) will get paid £10 per hour from birth (again I assume for a 35 hour week) paid for by 'big business' - I think this was what she said - but it does go to show how irresponsible the green party is.

I did like the way she said support for the greens is growing - I assume she forgot the Clifton Blackpool council election recently where the 'Green Party Against Fracking' scraped through on 2% of the vote.

And looking at the Green Party Conference timetable - again minimal discussions on the environment - but instead an awful lot of left-wing socialist stuff on minimum wage, living wage, sexism, feminism, the war in Palestine and the middle East, animal testing, etc.

I'd be interested to sit in at the session 'Flooded Out: why did Greens fail to gain from public anxiety?'

So it's all out in the open now - the green party is the new-old labour of the 1960s following left-wing policies and 'environmental issues' were just a way for them to get into power.
I've never seen so much support for HJarrs in ages - could this possibly be the usual moanerati commenting and responding or is it a different group? Methinks that either all the public service workers must spend all their day reading and responding to these comments; and/or, perhaps it is linked to all the watermelons now sitting in Aston University with the iPads and IPhones giving support. I was most encouraged by UK Green Party 'leader' Natalie Bennett on the BBC Breakfast show this morning given the chance to present her 'package' - not a single mention about the environment! The eye-opener was the idea that everyone (I assume including children) will get paid £10 per hour from birth (again I assume for a 35 hour week) paid for by 'big business' - I think this was what she said - but it does go to show how irresponsible the green party is. I did like the way she said support for the greens is growing - I assume she forgot the Clifton Blackpool council election recently where the 'Green Party Against Fracking' scraped through on 2% of the vote. And looking at the Green Party Conference timetable - again minimal discussions on the environment - but instead an awful lot of left-wing socialist stuff on minimum wage, living wage, sexism, feminism, the war in Palestine and the middle East, animal testing, etc. I'd be interested to sit in at the session 'Flooded Out: why did Greens fail to gain from public anxiety?' So it's all out in the open now - the green party is the new-old labour of the 1960s following left-wing policies and 'environmental issues' were just a way for them to get into power. G Wiley
  • Score: -19

5:39pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s.
The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises.
At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s. The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises. Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -17

5:56pm Fri 5 Sep 14

JeevesMcMontague says...

Ah yes its that time of the month wheren the riff-raff take an extra day off and disturb us all as they march down Western Road for no reason whatsoever.
Ah yes its that time of the month wheren the riff-raff take an extra day off and disturb us all as they march down Western Road for no reason whatsoever. JeevesMcMontague
  • Score: -18

6:03pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Zeta Function says...

Bertie1966 wrote:
Many of the front line council staff do a good job, but the people who work behind the front line are just inefficient and lazy. They don't deserve all the 'fat cat' perks they get. The council just put taxes up to match their pay rises and predicted spending. I wish we could all do that. Many private sector employees, especially self employed don't have pensions as after paying their business rates their is no money left over. I'd love to see the council people go out and earn £10. They wouldn't have a clue where to start ... they'd be too busy getting wrapped up in red tape. So they've had a pay cut ... awwww how unfair to now have a salary that matches the equivalent private sector worker. At least they still take more sick pay than private sector workers.
So to go on strike is just unethical.
There's nothing stopping private sector workers from organising, that is if they're not already members of unions. Look at how hospitality workers are exploited.

Temporary low paid, part time hospitality workers really do need to STRIKE!
[quote][p][bold]Bertie1966[/bold] wrote: Many of the front line council staff do a good job, but the people who work behind the front line are just inefficient and lazy. They don't deserve all the 'fat cat' perks they get. The council just put taxes up to match their pay rises and predicted spending. I wish we could all do that. Many private sector employees, especially self employed don't have pensions as after paying their business rates their is no money left over. I'd love to see the council people go out and earn £10. They wouldn't have a clue where to start ... they'd be too busy getting wrapped up in red tape. So they've had a pay cut ... awwww how unfair to now have a salary that matches the equivalent private sector worker. At least they still take more sick pay than private sector workers. So to go on strike is just unethical.[/p][/quote]There's nothing stopping private sector workers from organising, that is if they're not already members of unions. Look at how hospitality workers are exploited. Temporary low paid, part time hospitality workers really do need to STRIKE! Zeta Function
  • Score: 23

6:42pm Fri 5 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s.
The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises.
Sometimes strike action is the right course of action, sometimes counterproductive, however a strike is the end of a process of negotiation.

I don't know your circumstances, but if your workplace is not unionised then generally wages and redundancy packages will be lower. British management mostly gives a miserable minimum unless pushed and employees are too cheap to sack, which leads to great uncertainty.
[quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s. The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises.[/p][/quote]Sometimes strike action is the right course of action, sometimes counterproductive, however a strike is the end of a process of negotiation. I don't know your circumstances, but if your workplace is not unionised then generally wages and redundancy packages will be lower. British management mostly gives a miserable minimum unless pushed and employees are too cheap to sack, which leads to great uncertainty. HJarrs
  • Score: 8

7:01pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Nikski says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts.

For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector.

Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came.

These strikes achieve nothing.
Oh I don't know....they certainly get you keyboard warriors riled and tapping away furiously!
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.[/p][/quote]No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts. For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector. Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came. These strikes achieve nothing.[/p][/quote]Oh I don't know....they certainly get you keyboard warriors riled and tapping away furiously! Nikski
  • Score: 3

7:27pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Cyril Bolleaux says...

HJarrs wrote:
Cyril Bolleaux wrote:
At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s.
The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises.
Sometimes strike action is the right course of action, sometimes counterproductive, however a strike is the end of a process of negotiation.

I don't know your circumstances, but if your workplace is not unionised then generally wages and redundancy packages will be lower. British management mostly gives a miserable minimum unless pushed and employees are too cheap to sack, which leads to great uncertainty.
I prefer not to give out too much info. but you will find that in the Reading to London to Gatwick triangle a vast number of British and multinational companies who treat their skilled employees very well. i don't work in that area but our suppliers do. Not a union in sight.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cyril Bolleaux[/bold] wrote: At my company there have been 50% redundancies in 18 months and a pay freeze. There were no strikes. The alternative was the company shutting down. That is the real world. Our main customer is HMG but they have no money due to Labour and their union chums wrecking the economy just as they did in the 1970s. The unions don't give a monkey's - they are quite happy for taxes to rise so the rest of us can fund their pay rises.[/p][/quote]Sometimes strike action is the right course of action, sometimes counterproductive, however a strike is the end of a process of negotiation. I don't know your circumstances, but if your workplace is not unionised then generally wages and redundancy packages will be lower. British management mostly gives a miserable minimum unless pushed and employees are too cheap to sack, which leads to great uncertainty.[/p][/quote]I prefer not to give out too much info. but you will find that in the Reading to London to Gatwick triangle a vast number of British and multinational companies who treat their skilled employees very well. i don't work in that area but our suppliers do. Not a union in sight. Cyril Bolleaux
  • Score: -22

7:35pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Sussex jim says...

Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands.
Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010.
If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary.
"
Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands. Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010. If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary. " Sussex jim
  • Score: -21

8:00pm Fri 5 Sep 14

ourcoalition says...

To answer a few of the usual anti Union stuff above.

"Striking didn't get anyone anywhere". Last year Golf Course Green Keepers (private sector members of UNISON and the GMB) were faced with a £4,000 pay cut - after 6 days action, the company dropped all their proposals.

Ask RMT members if they are happy with their pay and conditions.

You may not like it, but we work and we win!

Union membership in B and H in all sectors is way above most of the rest of the country - we campaign, we fight back where necessary and to insult individual members by saying they are led by "Union Barons" is ridiculous. Haven't you heard of secret ballots (UNISON has never lost a vote in the City, with most majorities exceeding 80%).

And, a little bit of history - where do you think the frequently attacked, democratic and human rights came from - our forebears, and ourselves fighting for them. Not from the "benevolence" of the bosses or the rich.

I say, stand with us, private or public sector, self-employed or unemployed - we are "all in it together"!!!
To answer a few of the usual anti Union stuff above. "Striking didn't get anyone anywhere". Last year Golf Course Green Keepers (private sector members of UNISON and the GMB) were faced with a £4,000 pay cut - after 6 days action, the company dropped all their proposals. Ask RMT members if they are happy with their pay and conditions. You may not like it, but we work and we win! Union membership in B and H in all sectors is way above most of the rest of the country - we campaign, we fight back where necessary and to insult individual members by saying they are led by "Union Barons" is ridiculous. Haven't you heard of secret ballots (UNISON has never lost a vote in the City, with most majorities exceeding 80%). And, a little bit of history - where do you think the frequently attacked, democratic and human rights came from - our forebears, and ourselves fighting for them. Not from the "benevolence" of the bosses or the rich. I say, stand with us, private or public sector, self-employed or unemployed - we are "all in it together"!!! ourcoalition
  • Score: 21

8:12pm Fri 5 Sep 14

Ambo Guy says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.
I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!!

Another day another username eh Stevo?
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.[/p][/quote]I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!! Another day another username eh Stevo? Ambo Guy
  • Score: 33

9:01pm Fri 5 Sep 14

JeevesMcMontague says...

Don't they have enough time off with fraudulent sick days and the like?

I suppose the rest of us honest hard working people will have to keep the economy going ourselves as usual.
Don't they have enough time off with fraudulent sick days and the like? I suppose the rest of us honest hard working people will have to keep the economy going ourselves as usual. JeevesMcMontague
  • Score: -20

9:38pm Fri 5 Sep 14

SmileyD says...

Bertie1966 wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living.
"Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is." - you've obviously got a very poor memory then.It was actually an INTERNATIONAL Financial Crash caused by the irresponsible actions of Bankers & Politicians (none of whom, incidentally, have been held accountable for their crimes.) But of course you won't read about that in the popular press or hear it on the telly - just another of the ways history is rewritten by the ruling establishment who clearly believe that we're all gullible enough to fall for their lies. Fortunately, as illustrated by many of today's comments here, not everyone is that dumb...
[quote][p][bold]Bertie1966[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living.[/p][/quote]"Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is." - you've obviously got a very poor memory then.It was actually an INTERNATIONAL Financial Crash caused by the irresponsible actions of Bankers & Politicians (none of whom, incidentally, have been held accountable for their crimes.) But of course you won't read about that in the popular press or hear it on the telly - just another of the ways history is rewritten by the ruling establishment who clearly believe that we're all gullible enough to fall for their lies. Fortunately, as illustrated by many of today's comments here, not everyone is that dumb... SmileyD
  • Score: 22

9:57pm Fri 5 Sep 14

musesboy says...

Ho ho, brilliant! For once the moanerati (to borrow HJarrs' phrase) get a taste of their own thumbs down medicine.

A number of posts on here complain that no-one is explaining why the strikes are happening yet plenty of reasons have been posted. Nuff said I reckon.
Ho ho, brilliant! For once the moanerati (to borrow HJarrs' phrase) get a taste of their own thumbs down medicine. A number of posts on here complain that no-one is explaining why the strikes are happening yet plenty of reasons have been posted. Nuff said I reckon. musesboy
  • Score: 17

10:56pm Fri 5 Sep 14

JeevesMcMontague says...

Sussex jim wrote:
Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands.
Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010.
If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary.
"
One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments.
[quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands. Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010. If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary. "[/p][/quote]One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments. JeevesMcMontague
  • Score: -18

6:57am Sat 6 Sep 14

We love Red Billy says...

SmileyD wrote:
Bertie1966 wrote:
Fercri Sakes wrote:
We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery.

A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.
What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living.
"Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is." - you've obviously got a very poor memory then.It was actually an INTERNATIONAL Financial Crash caused by the irresponsible actions of Bankers & Politicians (none of whom, incidentally, have been held accountable for their crimes.) But of course you won't read about that in the popular press or hear it on the telly - just another of the ways history is rewritten by the ruling establishment who clearly believe that we're all gullible enough to fall for their lies. Fortunately, as illustrated by many of today's comments here, not everyone is that dumb...
The bankers were certainly at fault but you fail to mention the people who were lent the money who then defaulted on repayments. That is what brought down the house of cards
[quote][p][bold]SmileyD[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Bertie1966[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fercri Sakes[/bold] wrote: We have socialism for the rich (bail outs, QE, subsidised low wages) and capitalism for the poor. Austerity only benefits the top 1%. If they had put that money into our pockets instead we may have had a consumer-led recovery. A big thank you to all the strikers. Somebody needs to stand up to this race to the bottom.[/p][/quote]What a load of rubbish!! Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is. It's the private sector that are heroes for getting the country back on track. You take more holiday, more sick days, claim more benefits than the private sector and then winge when it gets taken away. Try doing an honest days work for an honest days pay. It's better than sitting on your backside moaning about people who work for a living.[/p][/quote]"Strikes, labour paying you too much and your OTT wages are what got the country in the mess it is." - you've obviously got a very poor memory then.It was actually an INTERNATIONAL Financial Crash caused by the irresponsible actions of Bankers & Politicians (none of whom, incidentally, have been held accountable for their crimes.) But of course you won't read about that in the popular press or hear it on the telly - just another of the ways history is rewritten by the ruling establishment who clearly believe that we're all gullible enough to fall for their lies. Fortunately, as illustrated by many of today's comments here, not everyone is that dumb...[/p][/quote]The bankers were certainly at fault but you fail to mention the people who were lent the money who then defaulted on repayments. That is what brought down the house of cards We love Red Billy
  • Score: -10

7:50am Sat 6 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Sussex jim wrote:
Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands.
Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010.
If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary.
"
10 hour day in the private sector? What do you want? A medal?

It is a shame that so many take pride in the long hours they work and the low pay they earn. You people need to get up off your knees and work towards decent employment conditions. We work some of the longest hours in Europe, yet are way less productive than our European neighbours such as Germany, Netherlands etc (they also get better benefits, longer holidays etc). We should work smarter and reap the benefit through better working conditions.
[quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands. Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010. If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary. "[/p][/quote]10 hour day in the private sector? What do you want? A medal? It is a shame that so many take pride in the long hours they work and the low pay they earn. You people need to get up off your knees and work towards decent employment conditions. We work some of the longest hours in Europe, yet are way less productive than our European neighbours such as Germany, Netherlands etc (they also get better benefits, longer holidays etc). We should work smarter and reap the benefit through better working conditions. HJarrs
  • Score: 27

12:49pm Sat 6 Sep 14

theargusissoinformative says...

HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
'Targeted for more cuts'. To me, this means some necessary rebalancing that has been procrastinated over for too long.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.[/p][/quote]'Targeted for more cuts'. To me, this means some necessary rebalancing that has been procrastinated over for too long. theargusissoinformative
  • Score: -29

1:14pm Sat 6 Sep 14

Bluebeef says...

Who pays for all of the generous terms which unions seek for their members. (Bankers is not a good answer: tiny amount of money in relative terms)
Either:
1 raise taxes and disincentivise business or entrepreneurs from starting/growing businesses in the UK (Ask yourself why so many French businesses have relocated here)
2 Borrow the money (Blair tried that irresponsibly leaving UK in very poor shape) Snag you need to pay back.

In general terms everyone has had a crap few years but things are getting better.

Please will everyone help business to grow to employ more people to pay more tax to pay better wages to nurses , BHCC staff etc etc.

Striking is retrogressive and pointless except for union leaders: never forget what Scargill did to his members without a democratic mandate.
Who pays for all of the generous terms which unions seek for their members. (Bankers is not a good answer: tiny amount of money in relative terms) Either: 1 raise taxes and disincentivise business or entrepreneurs from starting/growing businesses in the UK (Ask yourself why so many French businesses have relocated here) 2 Borrow the money (Blair tried that irresponsibly leaving UK in very poor shape) Snag you need to pay back. In general terms everyone has had a crap few years but things are getting better. Please will everyone help business to grow to employ more people to pay more tax to pay better wages to nurses , BHCC staff etc etc. Striking is retrogressive and pointless except for union leaders: never forget what Scargill did to his members without a democratic mandate. Bluebeef
  • Score: -21

1:22pm Sat 6 Sep 14

ourcoalition says...

JeevesMcMontague wrote:
Sussex jim wrote:
Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands.
Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010.
If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary.
"
One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments.
Oh dear - you just can't take it when the majority turn down your prejudiced views.

I worked a 14 hour day, like most days - got paid for 7.5 hours, and I'm in the public sector, but I haven't used a second of that time to "vote down" your comment. After all, that might deter you from coming on here (unlikely, of course) and giving us all the lunacy of the UKIP/Tory perspective on the world.

Fact is, half the private sector would be destroyed if taxpayers money wasn't used to buy its services - think road building, residential care, and so on.

Basically, all sectors are so integrated, that if you take out one the others fall over. This is basic economics and common sense (I ain't got no degree in any of this, but I have got eyes to see and a brain to think!). I might prefer a different political system, but we have capitalism. And, if we accept that for now this is how it is, then at the very least, I expect it to be run properly - this Government can't, or is it won't, do even that - most glaring example - the East Coast rail franchise, where the private firm, having received hundreds of millions in subsidies, walked out on the contract 2 years early. It was then run by the public sector, made a £1.5 billion profit for the treasury (with no subsidy), and then....it has been re-tendered to the private sector, with an in-house bid prohibited, with a "get out clause" built in, and, again, a state subsidy for the length of the contract.

Insane, to sum it up, but entirely in line with the vicious hatred this Government has of the public sector.
[quote][p][bold]JeevesMcMontague[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands. Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010. If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary. "[/p][/quote]One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments.[/p][/quote]Oh dear - you just can't take it when the majority turn down your prejudiced views. I worked a 14 hour day, like most days - got paid for 7.5 hours, and I'm in the public sector, but I haven't used a second of that time to "vote down" your comment. After all, that might deter you from coming on here (unlikely, of course) and giving us all the lunacy of the UKIP/Tory perspective on the world. Fact is, half the private sector would be destroyed if taxpayers money wasn't used to buy its services - think road building, residential care, and so on. Basically, all sectors are so integrated, that if you take out one the others fall over. This is basic economics and common sense (I ain't got no degree in any of this, but I have got eyes to see and a brain to think!). I might prefer a different political system, but we have capitalism. And, if we accept that for now this is how it is, then at the very least, I expect it to be run properly - this Government can't, or is it won't, do even that - most glaring example - the East Coast rail franchise, where the private firm, having received hundreds of millions in subsidies, walked out on the contract 2 years early. It was then run by the public sector, made a £1.5 billion profit for the treasury (with no subsidy), and then....it has been re-tendered to the private sector, with an in-house bid prohibited, with a "get out clause" built in, and, again, a state subsidy for the length of the contract. Insane, to sum it up, but entirely in line with the vicious hatred this Government has of the public sector. ourcoalition
  • Score: 24

4:45pm Sat 6 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

"Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)."

And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension?

Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning.

It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it.
"Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)." And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension? Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning. It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it. Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -21

5:53pm Sat 6 Sep 14

HJarrs says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
"Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)."

And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension?

Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning.

It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it.
I'm afraid it's history Stevo.
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: "Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)." And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension? Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning. It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it.[/p][/quote]I'm afraid it's history Stevo. HJarrs
  • Score: 18

6:19pm Sat 6 Sep 14

SmilingPhil says...

HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
"Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)."

And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension?

Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning.

It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it.
I'm afraid it's history Stevo.
That's the point he appeared to be making which demolished your claim that workers fought to get a state pension.

They didn't.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: "Sure. Decent working conditions, including pensions came about through often vicious industrial action for example in mining, ship building, steel making etc. Paid with their lives and livelihoods. People were imprisoned and deported. Trade unions were set up to help protect and promote ordinary people and through the trade unions the Labour Party was borne to give ordinary working people a voice in parliament (though the modern Labour Party has transformed into a managerialist party now)." And you seriously think that those who were deported somehow won better conditions and a pension? Pay and conditions improved thanks to a variety of factors, not least the realisation that people work better if they are happy and earning. It was the Liberals who created the modern state pension, and there is no evidence that the workers had to fight to be given it.[/p][/quote]I'm afraid it's history Stevo.[/p][/quote]That's the point he appeared to be making which demolished your claim that workers fought to get a state pension. They didn't. SmilingPhil
  • Score: -18

6:24pm Sat 6 Sep 14

SmilingPhil says...

ourcoalition wrote:
JeevesMcMontague wrote:
Sussex jim wrote:
Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands.
Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010.
If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary.
"
One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments.
Oh dear - you just can't take it when the majority turn down your prejudiced views.

I worked a 14 hour day, like most days - got paid for 7.5 hours, and I'm in the public sector, but I haven't used a second of that time to "vote down" your comment. After all, that might deter you from coming on here (unlikely, of course) and giving us all the lunacy of the UKIP/Tory perspective on the world.

Fact is, half the private sector would be destroyed if taxpayers money wasn't used to buy its services - think road building, residential care, and so on.

Basically, all sectors are so integrated, that if you take out one the others fall over. This is basic economics and common sense (I ain't got no degree in any of this, but I have got eyes to see and a brain to think!). I might prefer a different political system, but we have capitalism. And, if we accept that for now this is how it is, then at the very least, I expect it to be run properly - this Government can't, or is it won't, do even that - most glaring example - the East Coast rail franchise, where the private firm, having received hundreds of millions in subsidies, walked out on the contract 2 years early. It was then run by the public sector, made a £1.5 billion profit for the treasury (with no subsidy), and then....it has been re-tendered to the private sector, with an in-house bid prohibited, with a "get out clause" built in, and, again, a state subsidy for the length of the contract.

Insane, to sum it up, but entirely in line with the vicious hatred this Government has of the public sector.
Now you've got that off your chest, can you explain what good these strikes are doing for anybody apart from doing Labour's election campaigning for it?
[quote][p][bold]ourcoalition[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]JeevesMcMontague[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sussex jim[/bold] wrote: Good evening, Argus readers. I am back after working a ten hour day in the private sector. It seems that there have been so many thumbs down to sensible comments today, that this must be a co-ordinated effort by public workers with time on their hands. Back in the eighties the late Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher started a speech in Parliament with the words- "The last Labour government- and I mean THE last..." Unfortunately, Labour did not expire in 1979 having served its purpose: the stupid electorate dragged it on until 2010. If things had been different we could now be enjoying such a prosperity that strikes and protests would be unnecessary. "[/p][/quote]One imagines they all called in sick today in order to vote down these comments.[/p][/quote]Oh dear - you just can't take it when the majority turn down your prejudiced views. I worked a 14 hour day, like most days - got paid for 7.5 hours, and I'm in the public sector, but I haven't used a second of that time to "vote down" your comment. After all, that might deter you from coming on here (unlikely, of course) and giving us all the lunacy of the UKIP/Tory perspective on the world. Fact is, half the private sector would be destroyed if taxpayers money wasn't used to buy its services - think road building, residential care, and so on. Basically, all sectors are so integrated, that if you take out one the others fall over. This is basic economics and common sense (I ain't got no degree in any of this, but I have got eyes to see and a brain to think!). I might prefer a different political system, but we have capitalism. And, if we accept that for now this is how it is, then at the very least, I expect it to be run properly - this Government can't, or is it won't, do even that - most glaring example - the East Coast rail franchise, where the private firm, having received hundreds of millions in subsidies, walked out on the contract 2 years early. It was then run by the public sector, made a £1.5 billion profit for the treasury (with no subsidy), and then....it has been re-tendered to the private sector, with an in-house bid prohibited, with a "get out clause" built in, and, again, a state subsidy for the length of the contract. Insane, to sum it up, but entirely in line with the vicious hatred this Government has of the public sector.[/p][/quote]Now you've got that off your chest, can you explain what good these strikes are doing for anybody apart from doing Labour's election campaigning for it? SmilingPhil
  • Score: -8

12:20am Sun 7 Sep 14

Valentinian says...

Ambo Guy wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.
I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!!

Another day another username eh Stevo?
What a complete bozo you are, voting down everyone multiple times whilst voting yourself up! Not a single constructive comment and still with that all pervading stench of stale urine about you.....
[quote][p][bold]Ambo Guy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.[/p][/quote]I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!! Another day another username eh Stevo?[/p][/quote]What a complete bozo you are, voting down everyone multiple times whilst voting yourself up! Not a single constructive comment and still with that all pervading stench of stale urine about you..... Valentinian
  • Score: -3

8:41am Sun 7 Sep 14

menton says...

If you don't like the job/pay, leave. Dead simple really.
If you don't like the job/pay, leave. Dead simple really. menton
  • Score: -10

10:35am Sun 7 Sep 14

Ambo Guy says...

Valentinian wrote:
Ambo Guy wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.
I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!!

Another day another username eh Stevo?
What a complete bozo you are, voting down everyone multiple times whilst voting yourself up! Not a single constructive comment and still with that all pervading stench of stale urine about you.....
Oh dear. I can see you're very upset that we found out about your criminal record (that would explain your deep hatred of then police) but you have to understand that these comments about 'stale urine' really don't bother me. There's really no need to stop posting under Handy-ish Andy anymore as we've kinda guessed that that name and Valentinian are one and the same.
Ahh bless your little tantrums are quite sweet really!!
[quote][p][bold]Valentinian[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ambo Guy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]Thank you everyone for the thumbs down. Yet again a thumbs down just shows that you're unable to discuss the points I've raised and proves me right.[/p][/quote]I was wondering where Stevo/ok,jared had got to!! Another day another username eh Stevo?[/p][/quote]What a complete bozo you are, voting down everyone multiple times whilst voting yourself up! Not a single constructive comment and still with that all pervading stench of stale urine about you.....[/p][/quote]Oh dear. I can see you're very upset that we found out about your criminal record (that would explain your deep hatred of then police) but you have to understand that these comments about 'stale urine' really don't bother me. There's really no need to stop posting under Handy-ish Andy anymore as we've kinda guessed that that name and Valentinian are one and the same. Ahh bless your little tantrums are quite sweet really!! Ambo Guy
  • Score: 14

8:32pm Sun 7 Sep 14

Handy-ish Andy says...

"Oh dear. I can see you're very upset that we found out about your criminal record (that would explain your deep hatred of then police) but you have to understand that these comments about 'stale urine' really don't bother me. There's really no need to stop posting under Handy-ish Andy anymore as we've kinda guessed that that name and Valentinian are one and the same.
Ahh bless your little tantrums are quite sweet really!!"

So Valentinian is the one who hacked my profile?

How did you find that out?

Meantime, can I ask if you've ever joined in any of the discussions on here?
"Oh dear. I can see you're very upset that we found out about your criminal record (that would explain your deep hatred of then police) but you have to understand that these comments about 'stale urine' really don't bother me. There's really no need to stop posting under Handy-ish Andy anymore as we've kinda guessed that that name and Valentinian are one and the same. Ahh bless your little tantrums are quite sweet really!!" So Valentinian is the one who hacked my profile? How did you find that out? Meantime, can I ask if you've ever joined in any of the discussions on here? Handy-ish Andy
  • Score: -11

8:44am Mon 8 Sep 14

subsub says...

Handy-ish Andy wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Handy-ish Andy wrote:
fredaj wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.
You beat me too it!
Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments?

There is no reason for these strikes.
If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own.

Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.
No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts.

For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector.

Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came.

These strikes achieve nothing.
Nail on head.
[quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Handy-ish Andy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]fredaj[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: I see the public sector is busy at work today voting down any comment that criticises the public sector and voting up any comment the compliments it.[/p][/quote]You beat me too it![/p][/quote]Have you noticed that no-one is able to argue against the anti-strike comments? There is no reason for these strikes.[/p][/quote]If they do not strike, the public sector workers will simply be targeted for more cuts. It has been the mistake of many in public and private sectors to meekly accept worsening employment terms that has led to a decline in the proportion of the nation's wealth that the 99% own. Many of the usual suspects posting on here would have you doffing your cap to your employer rather than having a grown up and sensible relationship between employee and employer and a just reward for work.[/p][/quote]No, there is no evidence that these workers are being targeted for cuts. For years under Labour, public service employees were far better paid than those in the private sector, who are the ones who actually earn the money that pays the public sector. Labour also brought in the minimum wage, which set the bar far too low for those who are on low pay, because employers in both sectors will get away with paying it whenever they can. An influx of foreign workers (also created by Labour) made this situation worse for the Brits. People come from abroad and accept the lowest level of pay because it is better than from where they came. These strikes achieve nothing.[/p][/quote]Nail on head. subsub
  • Score: 1

8:53am Mon 8 Sep 14

subsub says...

**** the unions.
**** the unions. subsub
  • Score: -6

7:56pm Tue 9 Sep 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

"Public Sector Worker" - An Oxxymoron
"Public Sector Worker" - An Oxxymoron Idontbelieveit1948
  • 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