UPDATED: Bus drivers to strike on Monday

Bus drivers to strike on Monday

Bus drivers to strike on Monday

First published in News
Last updated

BUS drivers in Weymouth and Bridport are set to strike again on Monday for the second time in three weeks.

Sixty drivers who are members of the Unite union and employed by the First bus company will stage a 24-hour walk out starting at 4.30am.

Most buses ran during the last strike on January 20 and First says it again hopes to run a full service as much as possible.

Managers and supervisors from across the Dorset, Hampshire and Berkshire area will be brought in to cover shifts.

The dispute centres on drivers' pay, currently £8.30 an hour, which the union says has dramatically fallen behind their regional counterparts.

Talks to solve the dispute appeared to be paying off and a strike day planned for Monday this week was called off - but more action was threatened if negotiations broke down and no settlement was reached.

Drivers voted on a 'substantially improved pay offer on Wednesday, putting off a further strike today, but that offer has been overwhelmingly rejected as there are 'too many strings attached' which would have meant a reduction to drivers' terms and conditions. That has led to the strike day on Monday, although Unite has offered to meet the company for further talks on a 'fair settlement' before it starts.

Unite regional officer Bob Lanning said: “The crux of this dispute is that our members are lagging behind the pay of their counterparts working for other regional bus operators, at a time when household bills are going through the roof.

“We regret any inconvenience caused to the travelling public, but our members feel that they have been pushed to the wall by this cheese-paring management.”

Managing Director for First Hampshire Dorset & Berkshire Marc Reddy said: “We are extremely disappointed that despite the revised offer being fully recommended by the trade union, the trade union membership has balloted to decline the offer.

“Like the previous day of industrial action on 20 January, we are determined to run as full a service as we can next Monday. At the same time, we remain open to further talks with Unite to bring about a satisfactory resolution.”

Comments (55)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:59am Thu 6 Feb 14

youngpete says...

You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area. youngpete
  • Score: -20

12:54pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

youngpete wrote:
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
What gives bus drivers in Weymouth the right to strike and hold the population of the town to ransom. Its not even as if the service that they currently provide is either;

Reliable
Professional
Curtious
Value for money

Prove youself worthy of the terms and renumeration of your employment contract before seeking financial reward.

My children have to rely on the bus service to get to and from school and often they are left standing at the bustop in the rain as the scheduled bus never arrives or is driven ignorantly past them without stopping.

These guys think they own the roads of Weymouth and do not obey the speed limits or observe the safety of others on the road or pavement.

If you dont like the terms of your contract find another job and allow other desrving people take you place.
[quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]What gives bus drivers in Weymouth the right to strike and hold the population of the town to ransom. Its not even as if the service that they currently provide is either; Reliable Professional Curtious Value for money Prove youself worthy of the terms and renumeration of your employment contract before seeking financial reward. My children have to rely on the bus service to get to and from school and often they are left standing at the bustop in the rain as the scheduled bus never arrives or is driven ignorantly past them without stopping. These guys think they own the roads of Weymouth and do not obey the speed limits or observe the safety of others on the road or pavement. If you dont like the terms of your contract find another job and allow other desrving people take you place. Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: -6

1:06pm Thu 6 Feb 14

radiator says...

Well done the unions when the country is crippled in parts by this awful weather and people are losing their livelihoods, houses, farmers having to have there animals put down.It makes me sick that the unions can inflict this misery on people just look at the tube strike in London with all the misery and the financial loss to this country, these people ought to know what its like to be self employed for we dont have the luxury of pensions, overtime rates, sick pay etc.
This is another reason not to let Labour back in as the unions will have a field day again.
Well done the unions when the country is crippled in parts by this awful weather and people are losing their livelihoods, houses, farmers having to have there animals put down.It makes me sick that the unions can inflict this misery on people just look at the tube strike in London with all the misery and the financial loss to this country, these people ought to know what its like to be self employed for we dont have the luxury of pensions, overtime rates, sick pay etc. This is another reason not to let Labour back in as the unions will have a field day again. radiator
  • Score: -9

2:23pm Thu 6 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

radiator wrote:
Well done the unions when the country is crippled in parts by this awful weather and people are losing their livelihoods, houses, farmers having to have there animals put down.It makes me sick that the unions can inflict this misery on people just look at the tube strike in London with all the misery and the financial loss to this country, these people ought to know what its like to be self employed for we dont have the luxury of pensions, overtime rates, sick pay etc.
This is another reason not to let Labour back in as the unions will have a field day again.
It's called standing up for yourself, it's a shame more people don't do it instead of becoming a political door mat for all mainstream political parties. Well done the bus drivers and remember, solidarity is your strength.
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Well done the unions when the country is crippled in parts by this awful weather and people are losing their livelihoods, houses, farmers having to have there animals put down.It makes me sick that the unions can inflict this misery on people just look at the tube strike in London with all the misery and the financial loss to this country, these people ought to know what its like to be self employed for we dont have the luxury of pensions, overtime rates, sick pay etc. This is another reason not to let Labour back in as the unions will have a field day again.[/p][/quote]It's called standing up for yourself, it's a shame more people don't do it instead of becoming a political door mat for all mainstream political parties. Well done the bus drivers and remember, solidarity is your strength. woodsedge
  • Score: 16

2:27pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Jim4512 says...

Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases.
Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases. Jim4512
  • Score: 19

3:13pm Thu 6 Feb 14

elloello1980 says...

youngpete wrote:
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people!

"get up, stand up.
Stand up for your rights
get up, stand up.
Don't give up the fight"

(happy birthday Bob Marley)
[quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley) elloello1980
  • Score: 13

4:25pm Thu 6 Feb 14

youngpete says...

Jim4512 wrote:
Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases.
Not so,it is illegal to pay under the minimum wage for 'paye' workers.These people have secure jobs with a pension & overtime,these strikes cost the economy millions of pounds.You wont get the same pay in sleepy dorset as you will get in highly populated area's with higher living costs & nor should you expect it.
[quote][p][bold]Jim4512[/bold] wrote: Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases.[/p][/quote]Not so,it is illegal to pay under the minimum wage for 'paye' workers.These people have secure jobs with a pension & overtime,these strikes cost the economy millions of pounds.You wont get the same pay in sleepy dorset as you will get in highly populated area's with higher living costs & nor should you expect it. youngpete
  • Score: -9

4:34pm Thu 6 Feb 14

koeterwaals says...

elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote:
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people!

"get up, stand up.
Stand up for your rights
get up, stand up.
Don't give up the fight"

(happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed.

Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
[quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none. koeterwaals
  • Score: -8

5:33pm Thu 6 Feb 14

elloello1980 says...

koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
[quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family. elloello1980
  • Score: 10

5:41pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Jim4512 says...

youngpete wrote:
Jim4512 wrote:
Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases.
Not so,it is illegal to pay under the minimum wage for 'paye' workers.These people have secure jobs with a pension & overtime,these strikes cost the economy millions of pounds.You wont get the same pay in sleepy dorset as you will get in highly populated area's with higher living costs & nor should you expect it.
Sorry to burst you bubble youngpete but just because something is illegal does not mean it does not happen. That's why if your going to pay someone less than minimum wage you pay them in cash not PAYE. If you opened your eyes and ears you might of heard recently that the government is cracking down on business paying less than minimum wage.
[quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Jim4512[/bold] wrote: Fair play to the bus drivers. For the job they do which is the same as other bus drivers who get paid more for doing the same job. I dont hear many complaints about women having to get paid the same as their male counterparts. Also it seems fine for public sector workers to go on strike because they say that they are so hard done by. For work ethics the does not comee into it, migrant workers come here working for less than minimum wage in a most of cases.[/p][/quote]Not so,it is illegal to pay under the minimum wage for 'paye' workers.These people have secure jobs with a pension & overtime,these strikes cost the economy millions of pounds.You wont get the same pay in sleepy dorset as you will get in highly populated area's with higher living costs & nor should you expect it.[/p][/quote]Sorry to burst you bubble youngpete but just because something is illegal does not mean it does not happen. That's why if your going to pay someone less than minimum wage you pay them in cash not PAYE. If you opened your eyes and ears you might of heard recently that the government is cracking down on business paying less than minimum wage. Jim4512
  • Score: 11

6:25pm Thu 6 Feb 14

armoriem says...

To those who think my husband should be glad he has a job let me say this, yes he is glad he has a job but what the bus company is offering is grossly unfair and is in real terms a PAY REDUCTION. The pay increase over the year is around £700 BUT what the company wants back in terms of enhanced shift pay, sick pay and other benefits from the drivers in return to this rise amounts to around a £1,000! so basically the pay rise means the drivers will be around £300 a year WORSE OFF. Some pay rise eh? Also Weymouth drivers are they only ones in the region who have up to 5.5hrs driving without a break and longer sometimes if they are running late included in their shifts. Can YOU imagine driving for 5.5hrs without stopping? dangerous isn't it? The drivers are trying to get the number of hours driving without a break down to 4.5 to make it safer for the public. Shifts are often up to 10 hours a day BTW.

To those who blame the drivers for not providing a reliable service and think that because of this they don't deserve a pay rise, bear this in mind.. It is not the drivers who set the times or the routes, it is the council and company desk jockeys in Southampton. It is not the drivers who supply inadequate buses which cannot cope with the amount of work and constantly break down, it is not the drivers who plan idiotic traffic systems which lead to gridlock and delay services BUT it IS the drivers who have to put up with all of the above and bear the brunt of the public's displeasure when services run late because of the above. The drivers also don't set the price of the fare so you can hardly blame them for the service not being value for money.

The drivers simply want fairness and to be on a par financially with their colleagues in other parts of the county. They are happy with their contract terms as they stand at present but quite rightly are objecting to changes to the terms which will leave them (and their families) worse off in exchange for a few pence an hour 'rise'
To those who think my husband should be glad he has a job let me say this, yes he is glad he has a job but what the bus company is offering is grossly unfair and is in real terms a PAY REDUCTION. The pay increase over the year is around £700 BUT what the company wants back in terms of enhanced shift pay, sick pay and other benefits from the drivers in return to this rise amounts to around a £1,000! so basically the pay rise means the drivers will be around £300 a year WORSE OFF. Some pay rise eh? Also Weymouth drivers are they only ones in the region who have up to 5.5hrs driving without a break and longer sometimes if they are running late included in their shifts. Can YOU imagine driving for 5.5hrs without stopping? dangerous isn't it? The drivers are trying to get the number of hours driving without a break down to 4.5 to make it safer for the public. Shifts are often up to 10 hours a day BTW. To those who blame the drivers for not providing a reliable service and think that because of this they don't deserve a pay rise, bear this in mind.. It is not the drivers who set the times or the routes, it is the council and company desk jockeys in Southampton. It is not the drivers who supply inadequate buses which cannot cope with the amount of work and constantly break down, it is not the drivers who plan idiotic traffic systems which lead to gridlock and delay services BUT it IS the drivers who have to put up with all of the above and bear the brunt of the public's displeasure when services run late because of the above. The drivers also don't set the price of the fare so you can hardly blame them for the service not being value for money. The drivers simply want fairness and to be on a par financially with their colleagues in other parts of the county. They are happy with their contract terms as they stand at present but quite rightly are objecting to changes to the terms which will leave them (and their families) worse off in exchange for a few pence an hour 'rise' armoriem
  • Score: 29

6:34pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’

The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes!

The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
[quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage. Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: -8

6:47pm Thu 6 Feb 14

peskykat says...

I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they
deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday.
I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday. peskykat
  • Score: 18

7:01pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

peskykat wrote:
I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they
deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday.
To work SERVING the public is the drivers choice, its like working in a frozen food factory and complaining that the temperature is too low! There will always be polite members of the public and rude ones, if bus drivers cant cope with bad mannered members of the public then find another job.

Surely the bus driver can refuse to allow entry onto the bus and dont they have panic buttons and CCTV and if they ever need help they are always in eye sight of another fellow colleague bus driver for crying out loud they always arrive in threes!
[quote][p][bold]peskykat[/bold] wrote: I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday.[/p][/quote]To work SERVING the public is the drivers choice, its like working in a frozen food factory and complaining that the temperature is too low! There will always be polite members of the public and rude ones, if bus drivers cant cope with bad mannered members of the public then find another job. Surely the bus driver can refuse to allow entry onto the bus and dont they have panic buttons and CCTV and if they ever need help they are always in eye sight of another fellow colleague bus driver for crying out loud they always arrive in threes! Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: -7

7:14pm Thu 6 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’

The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes!

The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.[/p][/quote]Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone. woodsedge
  • Score: 8

7:22pm Thu 6 Feb 14

radiator says...

Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks
,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.
Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me. radiator
  • Score: -12

7:41pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Jim4512 says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
peskykat wrote:
I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they
deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday.
To work SERVING the public is the drivers choice, its like working in a frozen food factory and complaining that the temperature is too low! There will always be polite members of the public and rude ones, if bus drivers cant cope with bad mannered members of the public then find another job.

Surely the bus driver can refuse to allow entry onto the bus and dont they have panic buttons and CCTV and if they ever need help they are always in eye sight of another fellow colleague bus driver for crying out loud they always arrive in threes!
Im sure in the job description it does not say "must be prepared to take S**T of people as you will be providing a service"
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]peskykat[/bold] wrote: I am behind the bus drivers 100 percent, they rarely get the respect they deserve, they get moaned at if they are late even though it is usually because the bus is so old that it has broken down or traffic is busy - especially on a Wednesday between Dorchester and Weymouth during the summer because of the Market therefore busy traffic, a bus that can fly over the long queues of traffic hasn't been invented yet ! The fare is great value even though about 75 percent don't even have to pay for their trip. Some of the passengers are rude , noisey and smelly , some people say the drivers are there to provide a service, maybe so but at the end of the day regardless of who you are and what service you provide everyone desverves to be shown respect. Good luck to all those drivers on Monday.[/p][/quote]To work SERVING the public is the drivers choice, its like working in a frozen food factory and complaining that the temperature is too low! There will always be polite members of the public and rude ones, if bus drivers cant cope with bad mannered members of the public then find another job. Surely the bus driver can refuse to allow entry onto the bus and dont they have panic buttons and CCTV and if they ever need help they are always in eye sight of another fellow colleague bus driver for crying out loud they always arrive in threes![/p][/quote]Im sure in the job description it does not say "must be prepared to take S**T of people as you will be providing a service" Jim4512
  • Score: 9

7:46pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

woodsedge wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’

The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes!

The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.
Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist.

ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant.

I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs

I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned.

But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.[/p][/quote]Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.[/p][/quote]Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist. ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant. I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned. But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance. Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: -11

8:00pm Thu 6 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’

The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes!

The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.
Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist.

ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant.

I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs

I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned.

But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.
It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and for my part I apologise for going off the deep end. I speak through experience when I say that ACAS are a waste of time when it comes to break downs in industrial relations. Recently there was a situation where a police authority went to binding arbitration and lost, and then refused yo comply with the ACAS ruling. When working people put their heads above the parapit and take industrial action it is always the very last resort. So on some occasions working people have to stand up and defend themselves. I would suggest that those people who are understandibly peeved off with the situation, should get onto the employer and question why they want to pay the staff less than a living wage.
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.[/p][/quote]Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.[/p][/quote]Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist. ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant. I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned. But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.[/p][/quote]It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and for my part I apologise for going off the deep end. I speak through experience when I say that ACAS are a waste of time when it comes to break downs in industrial relations. Recently there was a situation where a police authority went to binding arbitration and lost, and then refused yo comply with the ACAS ruling. When working people put their heads above the parapit and take industrial action it is always the very last resort. So on some occasions working people have to stand up and defend themselves. I would suggest that those people who are understandibly peeved off with the situation, should get onto the employer and question why they want to pay the staff less than a living wage. woodsedge
  • Score: 9

8:05pm Thu 6 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

radiator wrote:
Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks

,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.
Judging by the vast majority of posters that have given you a minus mark, you are in the minority. By the way a leading national paper, in the middle of industrial action on the underground, voted by 77% of the British public are in support of trade unions. Like I say grow a backbone.
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.[/p][/quote]Judging by the vast majority of posters that have given you a minus mark, you are in the minority. By the way a leading national paper, in the middle of industrial action on the underground, voted by 77% of the British public are in support of trade unions. Like I say grow a backbone. woodsedge
  • Score: 1

8:16pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

woodsedge wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being.

Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to.

Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’

The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes!

The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.
Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist.

ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant.

I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs

I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned.

But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.
It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and for my part I apologise for going off the deep end. I speak through experience when I say that ACAS are a waste of time when it comes to break downs in industrial relations. Recently there was a situation where a police authority went to binding arbitration and lost, and then refused yo comply with the ACAS ruling. When working people put their heads above the parapit and take industrial action it is always the very last resort. So on some occasions working people have to stand up and defend themselves. I would suggest that those people who are understandibly peeved off with the situation, should get onto the employer and question why they want to pay the staff less than a living wage.
This a very emotive subject and by the morning the quantity of comments linked to this story will probably take the spotlight off the Portland precept meeting, )

But one thing is for sure the people of Weymouth reading these comments will have a clearer understanding.

By the way was First National stripped of their rail franchise, perhaps they are penny pinching because of the inept incompetence.

Lets hope that this matter is resolved before innocent citizens who not only are getting Scr***d over by the government and big business but also their local service providers.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.[/p][/quote]Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.[/p][/quote]Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist. ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant. I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned. But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.[/p][/quote]It takes a brave man to admit when he is wrong, and for my part I apologise for going off the deep end. I speak through experience when I say that ACAS are a waste of time when it comes to break downs in industrial relations. Recently there was a situation where a police authority went to binding arbitration and lost, and then refused yo comply with the ACAS ruling. When working people put their heads above the parapit and take industrial action it is always the very last resort. So on some occasions working people have to stand up and defend themselves. I would suggest that those people who are understandibly peeved off with the situation, should get onto the employer and question why they want to pay the staff less than a living wage.[/p][/quote]This a very emotive subject and by the morning the quantity of comments linked to this story will probably take the spotlight off the Portland precept meeting, ) But one thing is for sure the people of Weymouth reading these comments will have a clearer understanding. By the way was First National stripped of their rail franchise, perhaps they are penny pinching because of the inept incompetence. Lets hope that this matter is resolved before innocent citizens who not only are getting Scr***d over by the government and big business but also their local service providers. Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: 10

8:43pm Thu 6 Feb 14

radiator says...

Woodsedge, I am not sure I like your rather sniping remark about growing a backbone,thats typical of a red flag waving little man that you are.I have noticed on nearly all your posts you have to resort to remarks like that.
Perhaps you should change your pseudonym to Thrush.
Woodsedge, I am not sure I like your rather sniping remark about growing a backbone,thats typical of a red flag waving little man that you are.I have noticed on nearly all your posts you have to resort to remarks like that. Perhaps you should change your pseudonym to Thrush. radiator
  • Score: -8

9:09pm Thu 6 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

radiator wrote:
Woodsedge, I am not sure I like your rather sniping remark about growing a backbone,thats typical of a red flag waving little man that you are.I have noticed on nearly all your posts you have to resort to remarks like that.
Perhaps you should change your pseudonym to Thrush.
Well I can tell you that I definitely hate your continual whinging when working people stand up for themselves. Perhaps you should let go of the apron strings and grow a pair like the First National workers, perhaps a pseudonym of eunuch would best suit you, mind you a radiator is sometimes full of hot air!
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Woodsedge, I am not sure I like your rather sniping remark about growing a backbone,thats typical of a red flag waving little man that you are.I have noticed on nearly all your posts you have to resort to remarks like that. Perhaps you should change your pseudonym to Thrush.[/p][/quote]Well I can tell you that I definitely hate your continual whinging when working people stand up for themselves. Perhaps you should let go of the apron strings and grow a pair like the First National workers, perhaps a pseudonym of eunuch would best suit you, mind you a radiator is sometimes full of hot air! woodsedge
  • Score: 7

9:17pm Thu 6 Feb 14

MaidofDorset says...

I wonder why they are always advertising for new drivers? Why do they have a staff retention problem?
I wonder why they are always advertising for new drivers? Why do they have a staff retention problem? MaidofDorset
  • Score: 5

10:49pm Thu 6 Feb 14

Hippyhooker says...

I'm in total support of the Tube drivers strike in London, it must be really hard to manage on £45K basic a year ! Same goes for Weymouth bus drivers they are paid a living wage for the job they do, they should get on with it, I know there are drivers complaining about the rate and have only recently joined the company, were they not told the hourly rate when they went for an interview? One thing for sure they will never get the better of First group, many depots have tried and failed and ended up worse off!
I'm in total support of the Tube drivers strike in London, it must be really hard to manage on £45K basic a year ! Same goes for Weymouth bus drivers they are paid a living wage for the job they do, they should get on with it, I know there are drivers complaining about the rate and have only recently joined the company, were they not told the hourly rate when they went for an interview? One thing for sure they will never get the better of First group, many depots have tried and failed and ended up worse off! Hippyhooker
  • Score: -13

8:54am Fri 7 Feb 14

Simon 1965 says...

Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:-

1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living.

2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area.

3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western.

4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat.

5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed.

Simon N.
Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: -5

9:10am Fri 7 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:-

1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living.

2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area.

3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western.

4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat.

5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed.

Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors. woodsedge
  • Score: 6

10:09am Fri 7 Feb 14

Simon 1965 says...

woodsedge wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
First have been struggling for a few years now, and their net debt (built up during the years of the previous stewardship and policies of Sir Moir Lockhead) is horrendous. The decision to sell their London operations (and a significant amount of their turnover in the process) was due to the urgent need to reduce their debt mountain - their businesses in Wigan, Chester and Redditch for sold for the same reason, and their operations in North Devon, Northampton and parts of Scotland closed down completely.

As for Weymouth, you can`t expect any business to cross subsidise profitable areas just to keep a presence in the area - only three routes actually make a worthwhile financial contribution (1, 2 and 10), the rest either turnover a small profit, barely break even, or are at constant risk of deregistration.

As for the overall profit that First do make (less substantial loan interest repayments), quite a lot of it actaully goes to pension funds.

Cheers
Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.[/p][/quote]First have been struggling for a few years now, and their net debt (built up during the years of the previous stewardship and policies of Sir Moir Lockhead) is horrendous. The decision to sell their London operations (and a significant amount of their turnover in the process) was due to the urgent need to reduce their debt mountain - their businesses in Wigan, Chester and Redditch for sold for the same reason, and their operations in North Devon, Northampton and parts of Scotland closed down completely. As for Weymouth, you can`t expect any business to cross subsidise profitable areas just to keep a presence in the area - only three routes actually make a worthwhile financial contribution (1, 2 and 10), the rest either turnover a small profit, barely break even, or are at constant risk of deregistration. As for the overall profit that First do make (less substantial loan interest repayments), quite a lot of it actaully goes to pension funds. Cheers Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: -3

11:15am Fri 7 Feb 14

elloello1980 says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
koeterwaals wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)
I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.
It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.
And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.
Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.
Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist. ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant. I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned. But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.
dig dig dig...
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]koeterwaals[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]I don't see it as standing up for their rights, I see it more as greed. Why is it their right to get a pay rise when the majority of the populace get none.[/p][/quote]It's their right to fight for their own needs and well being. Just because others are not willing to fight against poor pay, and put up with poor working conditions (or whatever), does not mean anyone else shouldnt be entilted to. Greed is wanting more than enough, required to be able to provide for your family.[/p][/quote]And its people's 'we want more than we signed up to' attitude like yours which is punishing the every day working person, ‘should we just sit there and take it??’ The Union leaders and company bosses should be left to do what they are there to do and that is negotiate, why should the populous of Weymouth be deprived of a service which not only are we over charged for but also pay double for through subsides which the council pay to the bus service provider generated from our taxes! The bus drivers are being manipulated like pawns by the union officials who think they are something more than they actually are, they have no power today in the 21st century – You want better working conditions then work it up the company structure and in stead of sitting on your backsides striking start managing your managers, instead of taking it out on the poor and vulnerable who rely on the bus service to travel to work to earn their minimum wage.[/p][/quote]Not another 'red under the bed' Thatchers child. If you read the article and had kept track of the story, you would have known that they do not 'want more than they signed up to' they want to protect what they have and what the company are proposing to take away! It's the employer that is doing the 'punishing' not the union or the members, rake a look at the companies profit margin, it's not as if they can't afford a working wage. You have one good idea re the current situation of paying twice, once to the company and once through your tax, RENATIONALISE PUBLIC TRANSPORT. You would only pay once then. And do you know anything about the draconian balloting legislation in this country, you know the worse one throughout all of Europe? It's the members that vote in line with the Tory legislation on postal ballots. Instead of criticising those who are prepared to defend their jobs, why don't you take a leaf out of there books and grow a backbone.[/p][/quote]Ok I stand corrected on my first paragraph, I concede to you on that point - fell foul of the sensationalism of the journalist. ACAS are there for a reason so is employment law I have had no pay rise in 5 years and we all know that with the cost of living its effectively a pay cut I have been given the choice to either loose what little employee benefits I had or be made redundant. I am not arguing the fact that workers should not stand up for their rights but you have to understand through my earlier comments its the members of the public who are the being made to suffer through no fault of their own and who in most cases now either have to take a day off work or payout for taxi fairs I am no tory I am a Libertarian and I despise centralised power the closer to 'grass-roots' the power of the individual begins the better as far as I am concerned. But the drivers should all do themselves a favour and use means which their union leaders are far less likely to want them to use - mediation and raising public awareness and avoid giving the leaders even bigger egos and self importance.[/p][/quote]dig dig dig... elloello1980
  • Score: -3

11:16am Fri 7 Feb 14

elloello1980 says...

radiator wrote:
Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.
you mean Thatcher?
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.[/p][/quote]you mean Thatcher? elloello1980
  • Score: 4

11:28am Fri 7 Feb 14

Dont JustSitThereVote says...

woodsedge wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:-

1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living.

2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area.

3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western.

4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat.

5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed.

Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures.

And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it.

So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage.

..... Just a thought
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.[/p][/quote]I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought Dont JustSitThereVote
  • Score: 4

1:03pm Fri 7 Feb 14

Simon 1965 says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought
we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right.

I can only state facts.

Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus.

Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive!

The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house.

All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you).

As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts...............


Cheers
Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.[/p][/quote]I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought[/p][/quote]we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right. I can only state facts. Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus. Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive! The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house. All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you). As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts............... Cheers Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: -1

1:33pm Fri 7 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

Hippyhooker wrote:
I'm in total support of the Tube drivers strike in London, it must be really hard to manage on £45K basic a year ! Same goes for Weymouth bus drivers they are paid a living wage for the job they do, they should get on with it, I know there are drivers complaining about the rate and have only recently joined the company, were they not told the hourly rate when they went for an interview? One thing for sure they will never get the better of First group, many depots have tried and failed and ended up worse off!
I work in London, live in Dorset (grew up here, live in rented accommodation, not a second home owner).
£45k might seem like a lot of money to live on in central London but it really isn't.The cheapest two bed flat in the grottiest area of central London is presently around £1000 per month. After a 5% pension contribution, £45k gives you about £2500 a month net.
That's a flat. Now imagine you have three kids.
Personally i don't agree with the Underground strike action. Boris is trying to get people out of ticket offices and onto platforms. 750 jobs will go, but they've had over 1000 applications for voluntary redundancy. I think the Union is being a little short sighted in this - ticket machines will replace ticket offices, but computers can never (or not yet) replace human emotion and interaction, which is what those staff will be doing when they are on the platforms. However, i support the strike by local bus drivers. It's about time private sector workers got their fair share of the profits earned by these big companies. Sadly, though, if everybody gets the pay rise they deserve, we get something called inflation - because companies will put prices up. Profits are the unpaid wages of the working class, and it will ever be thus.
I'm also with Woodsedge. The utilities and public transportation need to be renationalised. We don't want a return to the union domination of the past, but newer commercial models (cooperatives, social enterprises, local authority trading companies) provide better value for money. The irony is that this could be achieved quite quickly. If the govt stopped subsidising the transport companies and the utility companies, it could buy them back for market value - i.e., next to nothing. Of course, a lot of people who bought shares in those companies and still hold them would lose out. But selling off these companies was always going to be a mistake when they could then be taken over by conglomerates.
[quote][p][bold]Hippyhooker[/bold] wrote: I'm in total support of the Tube drivers strike in London, it must be really hard to manage on £45K basic a year ! Same goes for Weymouth bus drivers they are paid a living wage for the job they do, they should get on with it, I know there are drivers complaining about the rate and have only recently joined the company, were they not told the hourly rate when they went for an interview? One thing for sure they will never get the better of First group, many depots have tried and failed and ended up worse off![/p][/quote]I work in London, live in Dorset (grew up here, live in rented accommodation, not a second home owner). £45k might seem like a lot of money to live on in central London but it really isn't.The cheapest two bed flat in the grottiest area of central London is presently around £1000 per month. After a 5% pension contribution, £45k gives you about £2500 a month net. That's a flat. Now imagine you have three kids. Personally i don't agree with the Underground strike action. Boris is trying to get people out of ticket offices and onto platforms. 750 jobs will go, but they've had over 1000 applications for voluntary redundancy. I think the Union is being a little short sighted in this - ticket machines will replace ticket offices, but computers can never (or not yet) replace human emotion and interaction, which is what those staff will be doing when they are on the platforms. However, i support the strike by local bus drivers. It's about time private sector workers got their fair share of the profits earned by these big companies. Sadly, though, if everybody gets the pay rise they deserve, we get something called inflation - because companies will put prices up. Profits are the unpaid wages of the working class, and it will ever be thus. I'm also with Woodsedge. The utilities and public transportation need to be renationalised. We don't want a return to the union domination of the past, but newer commercial models (cooperatives, social enterprises, local authority trading companies) provide better value for money. The irony is that this could be achieved quite quickly. If the govt stopped subsidising the transport companies and the utility companies, it could buy them back for market value - i.e., next to nothing. Of course, a lot of people who bought shares in those companies and still hold them would lose out. But selling off these companies was always going to be a mistake when they could then be taken over by conglomerates. JamesYoung
  • Score: 7

2:02pm Fri 7 Feb 14

elloello1980 says...

Simon 1965 wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought
we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right. I can only state facts. Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus. Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive! The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house. All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you). As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts............... Cheers Simon N.
"(they would be willing sellers I can assure you)."

are you sure you don't work for First?

hehe
[quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.[/p][/quote]I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought[/p][/quote]we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right. I can only state facts. Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus. Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive! The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house. All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you). As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts............... Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]"(they would be willing sellers I can assure you)." are you sure you don't work for First? hehe elloello1980
  • Score: 1

2:11pm Fri 7 Feb 14

Simon 1965 says...

elloello1980 wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote:
Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
Simon 1965 wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.
I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.
I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought
we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right. I can only state facts. Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus. Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive! The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house. All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you). As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts............... Cheers Simon N.
"(they would be willing sellers I can assure you)." are you sure you don't work for First? hehe
Ha ha!

No I don`t, god forbid!

Outside ot my public sector job, I do a bit of freelance journalism for the transport industry, a topic that has always interested me - I therefore feel A divine right to set the record staight when I see untruths and unfair comments being posted!

I am now going back under the stone I crawled up from now!

Cheers
Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Simon 1965[/bold] wrote: Before anybody has a go, I DO NOT work for First, or any other bus company, but I do have some comments to make, based on the above:- 1) First drivers do not get (on average) any less than Go Ahead owned Damory, South West Coaches, Bluebird or Barrys staff. I would suggest that despite their many faults, First remain the best employer in the area if you wish to drive buses for a living. 2) First are in a no win situation - its a very seasonal network, and a large number of the passengers that use the buses outside the tourist season are OAP`s, which would be fine, except the Dorset CC reimbursement rate for carrying these passengers is amongst the lowest in the UK - therefore, despite First being a global organisation, and often referred to as making obscene profits, nothing could be further from the truth in Weymouth - in most years, First do (at best) little more than break even in this area. 3) First have NOT lost any rail franchises - they have just been granted a two year extensio on Great Western. 4) I do feel for the drivers, but this is the wrong battle at the wrong time. First will have to make majot cutbacks in the network if they concede to these demands at this tiime, just to stay afloat. 5) I work in the public sector, I have not had any rises in five years, and am paying considerably more for my pension, which I will get substantially later than originally agreed. Simon N.[/p][/quote]I to am not (thankfully) an employee of FirstGroup. I think you forgot the most important information from your post. FirstGroup trading results for last year posted a underlying operating profit of £335 million! It's not like they cannot afford to pat a living wage is it. Included in that profit margin was the selling of 10 London depots for development. Again a classic example of what should be money coming into the public coffers to support public sector workers like yourself, instead of lining the pockets of foreign investors.[/p][/quote]I think Richard Branson will argue with that, I am sure I recall something about First National over bidding by 1.5 billion to take control of the west coast line from Richard Branson which ended in a commons investigation which discovered that First National could not add up basic accountancy figures. And I am sure that First National made £20 million half year losses on the east coast line and the government were considering taking over control of it. So how are they going to recover this money that they have lost??? A possible way would be to overcharge for a sub standard service else where within their transport services and cut back paying their employees a decent wage. ..... Just a thought[/p][/quote]we could debate this all day as the responses to date seem to depend on whether the respondents political leanings come from the left or the right. I can only state facts. Firstly, I do not know who First National are? First Group was a merger of the Badgerline and Grampian holding companies, and were originally known as First Bus. Richard Branson successfully argued that the West Coast tender proces was legally flawed, which was nothing to do with the tenderers themselves, it wasa Department of Transport issue. If you want to look at other successful tenders in the past few years, look at South West Trains - the money that Stagecoach paid to retain that was massive! The East Coast Line was a National Express group franchise (Nothing to do with First) - NX themselves chucked the tender in early, when the Government took it back in house. All businesses small or large, need to at least break even to survive, First indeed have a disgraceful record in Weymouh over the past few years, bus this stems from the fact that its a basketcase of an area to run buses in due to various factors including the OAP reimbursment rate - why do you think no body else runs in compettion here, or has ever made an offer to First to buy it? (they would be willing sellers I can assure you). As I said, I have no particular left or right leanings, just state the facts, but as usual the truth always hurts............... Cheers Simon N.[/p][/quote]"(they would be willing sellers I can assure you)." are you sure you don't work for First? hehe[/p][/quote]Ha ha! No I don`t, god forbid! Outside ot my public sector job, I do a bit of freelance journalism for the transport industry, a topic that has always interested me - I therefore feel A divine right to set the record staight when I see untruths and unfair comments being posted! I am now going back under the stone I crawled up from now! Cheers Simon N. Simon 1965
  • Score: -1

2:48pm Fri 7 Feb 14

radiator says...

elloello1980 wrote:
radiator wrote:
Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.
you mean Thatcher?
Do you bus driversmean the Thatcher that dragged this country back from the claws of anarchy brought on by the numerous strikes.
Do you want to see this country brought to its knees again by unions with strike after strike?it seems its going that way as even as I am writing this I see the teachers are planning another strike.By the way I am not a Tory out and out just someone with a bit of common sense.Getting back to the bus drivers personally I think that £8.30 is a bit low for this type of job but causing misery to hundreds of people by striking I dont agree with.Remember they are not hurting the firm that much they are hurting people who are trying to get to work to do a days work.
[quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.[/p][/quote]you mean Thatcher?[/p][/quote]Do you bus driversmean the Thatcher that dragged this country back from the claws of anarchy brought on by the numerous strikes. Do you want to see this country brought to its knees again by unions with strike after strike?it seems its going that way as even as I am writing this I see the teachers are planning another strike.By the way I am not a Tory out and out just someone with a bit of common sense.Getting back to the bus drivers personally I think that £8.30 is a bit low for this type of job but causing misery to hundreds of people by striking I dont agree with.Remember they are not hurting the firm that much they are hurting people who are trying to get to work to do a days work. radiator
  • Score: -1

4:28pm Fri 7 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

radiator wrote:
elloello1980 wrote:
radiator wrote:
Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.
you mean Thatcher?
Do you bus driversmean the Thatcher that dragged this country back from the claws of anarchy brought on by the numerous strikes.
Do you want to see this country brought to its knees again by unions with strike after strike?it seems its going that way as even as I am writing this I see the teachers are planning another strike.By the way I am not a Tory out and out just someone with a bit of common sense.Getting back to the bus drivers personally I think that £8.30 is a bit low for this type of job but causing misery to hundreds of people by striking I dont agree with.Remember they are not hurting the firm that much they are hurting people who are trying to get to work to do a days work.
I actually agree that the trade unions misused their power in the 70s and their had to be a change. But that said do you not think the balance of power has moved to much towards employers re establishing the master servant relationship? If you are "Not a Tory out and out" yet you believe that working people cannot withdraw the only bargaining chip they have, their labour, and you accept that £8.30 ph "is a bit low" (not to mention the loss of terms and conditions), then what do you suggest the bus drivers do to get a living wage? And those taking industrial action aren't "hurting the firm" because people are venting their spleen at the employees and not putting any pressure on a company that simply can afford paying a decent rate.
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Oh yes stand up for your rights just like the shipyards,steelworks ,car factories,docks that I can remember being destroyed by the communist led unions.I am not saying that bus drivers are not doing a good job but when they stop other people getting to there place of work by there actions they get no sympathy from me.[/p][/quote]you mean Thatcher?[/p][/quote]Do you bus driversmean the Thatcher that dragged this country back from the claws of anarchy brought on by the numerous strikes. Do you want to see this country brought to its knees again by unions with strike after strike?it seems its going that way as even as I am writing this I see the teachers are planning another strike.By the way I am not a Tory out and out just someone with a bit of common sense.Getting back to the bus drivers personally I think that £8.30 is a bit low for this type of job but causing misery to hundreds of people by striking I dont agree with.Remember they are not hurting the firm that much they are hurting people who are trying to get to work to do a days work.[/p][/quote]I actually agree that the trade unions misused their power in the 70s and their had to be a change. But that said do you not think the balance of power has moved to much towards employers re establishing the master servant relationship? If you are "Not a Tory out and out" yet you believe that working people cannot withdraw the only bargaining chip they have, their labour, and you accept that £8.30 ph "is a bit low" (not to mention the loss of terms and conditions), then what do you suggest the bus drivers do to get a living wage? And those taking industrial action aren't "hurting the firm" because people are venting their spleen at the employees and not putting any pressure on a company that simply can afford paying a decent rate. woodsedge
  • Score: 2

5:45pm Fri 7 Feb 14

radiator says...

Even though I think that the £8.30 isnt a great deal for the type of the responsible job that these drivers do, what happens if they get a rise? why then the other depots will want the same then it will spiral out of control.What about the thousands of other people on a minimum rate such as care workers shop assistants they deserve more but again the cost will have to be met by spiraling prices.As for the division between employer and employee that hasnt changed for hundreds of years even worse during Victorian times.
I do know what its like to be an employer by the way as I used to have 50-60 men at different times working for me albeit on a self employed basis, so I know what its like to negotiate terms and conditions and having to get jobs done on time or face penalty's .I was very fortunate in one way that there was never any problems with unions although there was always one or two self elected that had to be dealt with.
Even though I think that the £8.30 isnt a great deal for the type of the responsible job that these drivers do, what happens if they get a rise? why then the other depots will want the same then it will spiral out of control.What about the thousands of other people on a minimum rate such as care workers shop assistants they deserve more but again the cost will have to be met by spiraling prices.As for the division between employer and employee that hasnt changed for hundreds of years even worse during Victorian times. I do know what its like to be an employer by the way as I used to have 50-60 men at different times working for me albeit on a self employed basis, so I know what its like to negotiate terms and conditions and having to get jobs done on time or face penalty's .I was very fortunate in one way that there was never any problems with unions although there was always one or two self elected [shop stewards] that had to be dealt with. radiator
  • Score: 0

8:46pm Fri 7 Feb 14

JamesYoung says...

radiator wrote:
Even though I think that the £8.30 isnt a great deal for the type of the responsible job that these drivers do, what happens if they get a rise? why then the other depots will want the same then it will spiral out of control.What about the thousands of other people on a minimum rate such as care workers shop assistants they deserve more but again the cost will have to be met by spiraling prices.As for the division between employer and employee that hasnt changed for hundreds of years even worse during Victorian times.
I do know what its like to be an employer by the way as I used to have 50-60 men at different times working for me albeit on a self employed basis, so I know what its like to negotiate terms and conditions and having to get jobs done on time or face penalty's .I was very fortunate in one way that there was never any problems with unions although there was always one or two self elected that had to be dealt with.
There is another way of looking at this.
In the late 1980, early 1990s, a bus driver and his shop assistant wife could feasibly buy a home. Now they can't.
We need to return this country to the position where everybody has the opportunity to own a home (or at least rent one with some security of tenure).
When you talk about the minimum wage, i've argued before that this is a taxpayer subsidy of private profits. The employee pays a minimum wage and the government pays tax credits, housing benefit, etc. There is no great benefit to small business from this, since they have to keep their wage bill low to compete with bigger businesses who enjoy economies of scale. Big businesses are the beneficiaries, particularly those that can offshore their profits and avoid taxes. What needs to happen is this system needs to be overhauled from the top down. Big companies need to pay a gross tax on sales made in the UK, as they can't be trusted to properly account for profits. The minimum wage needs to be dramatically lifted up to the point that people can afford to live on it without taxpayer subsidy. The government needs to stop supporting the housing market at the cost of everything else. Until recently, it was offering banks cheap cash under Funding for Lending on the pretence that it was ensuring there was money available for businesses to borrow, when any business owner would tell you credit was impossible to come by: the money was going, as ever, into mortgages. Oh, and while we are at it, its time for rent controls.
Only when the working man (private or public sector) can afford to buy into this country will things heal and the economy return to some level of normalcy. This current assurance that things are "returning to normal" is a dangerous lie. It is yet another unsustainable bubble built on debt.
[quote][p][bold]radiator[/bold] wrote: Even though I think that the £8.30 isnt a great deal for the type of the responsible job that these drivers do, what happens if they get a rise? why then the other depots will want the same then it will spiral out of control.What about the thousands of other people on a minimum rate such as care workers shop assistants they deserve more but again the cost will have to be met by spiraling prices.As for the division between employer and employee that hasnt changed for hundreds of years even worse during Victorian times. I do know what its like to be an employer by the way as I used to have 50-60 men at different times working for me albeit on a self employed basis, so I know what its like to negotiate terms and conditions and having to get jobs done on time or face penalty's .I was very fortunate in one way that there was never any problems with unions although there was always one or two self elected [shop stewards] that had to be dealt with.[/p][/quote]There is another way of looking at this. In the late 1980, early 1990s, a bus driver and his shop assistant wife could feasibly buy a home. Now they can't. We need to return this country to the position where everybody has the opportunity to own a home (or at least rent one with some security of tenure). When you talk about the minimum wage, i've argued before that this is a taxpayer subsidy of private profits. The employee pays a minimum wage and the government pays tax credits, housing benefit, etc. There is no great benefit to small business from this, since they have to keep their wage bill low to compete with bigger businesses who enjoy economies of scale. Big businesses are the beneficiaries, particularly those that can offshore their profits and avoid taxes. What needs to happen is this system needs to be overhauled from the top down. Big companies need to pay a gross tax on sales made in the UK, as they can't be trusted to properly account for profits. The minimum wage needs to be dramatically lifted up to the point that people can afford to live on it without taxpayer subsidy. The government needs to stop supporting the housing market at the cost of everything else. Until recently, it was offering banks cheap cash under Funding for Lending on the pretence that it was ensuring there was money available for businesses to borrow, when any business owner would tell you credit was impossible to come by: the money was going, as ever, into mortgages. Oh, and while we are at it, its time for rent controls. Only when the working man (private or public sector) can afford to buy into this country will things heal and the economy return to some level of normalcy. This current assurance that things are "returning to normal" is a dangerous lie. It is yet another unsustainable bubble built on debt. JamesYoung
  • Score: 4

7:16am Sat 8 Feb 14

mark@greenhill says...

The unions have only ever served the union management.

The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers.

It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill.

The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......
The unions have only ever served the union management. The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers. It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill. The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are...... mark@greenhill
  • Score: 1

9:32am Sat 8 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
The unions have only ever served the union management.

The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers.

It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill.

The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......
Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example?

The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system?
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: The unions have only ever served the union management. The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers. It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill. The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......[/p][/quote]Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example? The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system? woodsedge
  • Score: 0

10:28am Sat 8 Feb 14

mark@greenhill says...

woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
The unions have only ever served the union management.

The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers.

It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill.

The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......
Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example?

The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system?
The public opinion of the unions is that they are a good thing in theory.
If you ask the population of London what their view of the union this weekend, I seriously doubt you would find much support.
As for the miners strike being a reaction against the Govt of the day, It took a strong Conservative Govt to take on the unions and defeat them. Labour would have rolled over and given in, and that in turn would have cost this country an awful lot more than the dispute cost.
The unions destroyed the car industry, the ports, shipbuilding and many many other industries, and only a fool would want to give them the power to do it all again.
Finally, if you ask the population to choose tomorrow , which Govt they want to lead this country, I think you will find that labour with its present leader will prove to be unelectable.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: The unions have only ever served the union management. The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers. It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill. The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......[/p][/quote]Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example? The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system?[/p][/quote]The public opinion of the unions is that they are a good thing in theory. If you ask the population of London what their view of the union this weekend, I seriously doubt you would find much support. As for the miners strike being a reaction against the Govt of the day, It took a strong Conservative Govt to take on the unions and defeat them. Labour would have rolled over and given in, and that in turn would have cost this country an awful lot more than the dispute cost. The unions destroyed the car industry, the ports, shipbuilding and many many other industries, and only a fool would want to give them the power to do it all again. Finally, if you ask the population to choose tomorrow , which Govt they want to lead this country, I think you will find that labour with its present leader will prove to be unelectable. mark@greenhill
  • Score: -2

10:46am Sat 8 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
The unions have only ever served the union management.

The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers.

It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill.

The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......
Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example?

The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system?
The public opinion of the unions is that they are a good thing in theory.
If you ask the population of London what their view of the union this weekend, I seriously doubt you would find much support.
As for the miners strike being a reaction against the Govt of the day, It took a strong Conservative Govt to take on the unions and defeat them. Labour would have rolled over and given in, and that in turn would have cost this country an awful lot more than the dispute cost.
The unions destroyed the car industry, the ports, shipbuilding and many many other industries, and only a fool would want to give them the power to do it all again.
Finally, if you ask the population to choose tomorrow , which Govt they want to lead this country, I think you will find that labour with its present leader will prove to be unelectable.
I think if you were to ask the population tomorrow which party they would like to govern the country, their preferred option would be none! All parties have no credibility and do not assume I am a labour supporter because I am not. It wasn't trade unions that decimated industry in this country, it was successive governments red and blue. If you think we are moving out of a recession based on a services led recovery then you are wrong. The current so called recovery is built on debt and Monopoly money that will crash. Just in case you haven't noticed we do not actually manufacture anything, we have a property market that is a bubble that will eventually burst again, we have a transport system that no one can afford, we have a NHS under funded that is used as a political football and we have the same old Tory Goverment that lines the pockets of their ex school boy 'chums'. I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue.
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: The unions have only ever served the union management. The end result of strikes has always been the same thing, job losses for the workers. It seems that the unions and the strikers have forgotten the simple lessons learnt from the miners strike, namely the only person who kept his job and huge salary was the rabble rousing scargill. The biggest mistake the strikers could make, is to assume the public will back them, they won't, thankfully, this country has had a gutfull of strikes, militant, pickets and strikers, and will see them for what they are......[/p][/quote]Taking away the anti trade union sound bites from your post, please explain to me how, under the current strictest voting arrangments in Europe, where each individual member votes for or against industrial action by postal ballot counted by an independant scrutineer, how does this dispute serve the 'union management' and who the 'union management' are in this example? The miners strikes were in reaction against a tory government that were openly decimating the mining industry. This has been confirmed by the recent disclosure of government communications from Thatchers Goverment. As for public support, if you had bothered to read the previous posts you would have known that in a recent dependant poll 77% of the British public believes that trade unions are a good thing. I wonder what the results would be if you were to ask the same question of the British public in relation to our current political system?[/p][/quote]The public opinion of the unions is that they are a good thing in theory. If you ask the population of London what their view of the union this weekend, I seriously doubt you would find much support. As for the miners strike being a reaction against the Govt of the day, It took a strong Conservative Govt to take on the unions and defeat them. Labour would have rolled over and given in, and that in turn would have cost this country an awful lot more than the dispute cost. The unions destroyed the car industry, the ports, shipbuilding and many many other industries, and only a fool would want to give them the power to do it all again. Finally, if you ask the population to choose tomorrow , which Govt they want to lead this country, I think you will find that labour with its present leader will prove to be unelectable.[/p][/quote]I think if you were to ask the population tomorrow which party they would like to govern the country, their preferred option would be none! All parties have no credibility and do not assume I am a labour supporter because I am not. It wasn't trade unions that decimated industry in this country, it was successive governments red and blue. If you think we are moving out of a recession based on a services led recovery then you are wrong. The current so called recovery is built on debt and Monopoly money that will crash. Just in case you haven't noticed we do not actually manufacture anything, we have a property market that is a bubble that will eventually burst again, we have a transport system that no one can afford, we have a NHS under funded that is used as a political football and we have the same old Tory Goverment that lines the pockets of their ex school boy 'chums'. I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue. woodsedge
  • Score: 2

11:51am Sat 8 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority. woodsedge
  • Score: 1

12:34pm Sat 8 Feb 14

mark@greenhill says...

woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job mark@greenhill
  • Score: 0

12:59pm Sat 8 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage? woodsedge
  • Score: 1

2:00pm Sat 8 Feb 14

mark@greenhill says...

woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle. mark@greenhill
  • Score: -1

4:46pm Sat 8 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs. woodsedge
  • Score: 1

8:03am Sun 9 Feb 14

mark@greenhill says...

woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses.

You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary.

As for your previous comment

" I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue."

Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.[/p][/quote]And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses. You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary. As for your previous comment " I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue." Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen. mark@greenhill
  • Score: 1

4:40pm Sun 9 Feb 14

Simon Nicholas says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses.

You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary.

As for your previous comment

" I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue."

Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.
Correct Mark.

I am from a stong working class area, and voted labour all my life.
Unfortunately, I will not do so at the next election - I have seen the light.

Its all human nature at the end of the day - when the left get too much power, like in the seventees, is anarchy - when the right get too much power, the workers end up being underpaid and with poor conditions.
I don`t know if finding a common point inbetween is possible anymore, if it ever was.

We are in a GLOBAL MARKETPLACE for manufacturing and services, regardless what party is in power - if employers pay over the odds, they become uncompetitive and will go bust.

As for the bus industry, its NEVER paid good money, its even worse in the coaching industry - its very unfair to compare pay "company by company" as their allowances on things such as meal breaks, time taken to prepare and check a bus before the shift starts and driving time used "dead running" to take up duty, differ so much.

I have explained at length and detail in my earlier postings why Dorset is a basketcase for bus companies, ánd how First really have not got much leeway when it comes to pay enhancements, but Woodsedge appears to have ignored all that.

With public finances being continually hit, it will get worse before it gets better - the rate that bus companies get reimbursed in Doret for carrying pass holders is already peanuts........

Unfortunately, the left wingers seem to think that the public sector should have an open checkbook to pay for everything, and that private companies should not be allowed to make money.

Cheers
Simon N.
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.[/p][/quote]And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses. You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary. As for your previous comment " I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue." Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.[/p][/quote]Correct Mark. I am from a stong working class area, and voted labour all my life. Unfortunately, I will not do so at the next election - I have seen the light. Its all human nature at the end of the day - when the left get too much power, like in the seventees, is anarchy - when the right get too much power, the workers end up being underpaid and with poor conditions. I don`t know if finding a common point inbetween is possible anymore, if it ever was. We are in a GLOBAL MARKETPLACE for manufacturing and services, regardless what party is in power - if employers pay over the odds, they become uncompetitive and will go bust. As for the bus industry, its NEVER paid good money, its even worse in the coaching industry - its very unfair to compare pay "company by company" as their allowances on things such as meal breaks, time taken to prepare and check a bus before the shift starts and driving time used "dead running" to take up duty, differ so much. I have explained at length and detail in my earlier postings why Dorset is a basketcase for bus companies, ánd how First really have not got much leeway when it comes to pay enhancements, but Woodsedge appears to have ignored all that. With public finances being continually hit, it will get worse before it gets better - the rate that bus companies get reimbursed in Doret for carrying pass holders is already peanuts........ Unfortunately, the left wingers seem to think that the public sector should have an open checkbook to pay for everything, and that private companies should not be allowed to make money. Cheers Simon N. Simon Nicholas
  • Score: 0

6:10pm Sun 9 Feb 14

woodsedge says...

mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses.

You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary.

As for your previous comment

" I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue."

Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.
Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy.
[quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.[/p][/quote]And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses. You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary. As for your previous comment " I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue." Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.[/p][/quote]Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy. woodsedge
  • Score: 0

8:42am Mon 10 Feb 14

Parkstreetshufle says...

Dont JustSitThereVote wrote:
youngpete wrote:
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
What gives bus drivers in Weymouth the right to strike and hold the population of the town to ransom. Its not even as if the service that they currently provide is either;

Reliable
Professional
Curtious
Value for money

Prove youself worthy of the terms and renumeration of your employment contract before seeking financial reward.

My children have to rely on the bus service to get to and from school and often they are left standing at the bustop in the rain as the scheduled bus never arrives or is driven ignorantly past them without stopping.

These guys think they own the roads of Weymouth and do not obey the speed limits or observe the safety of others on the road or pavement.

If you dont like the terms of your contract find another job and allow other desrving people take you place.
Actually I think the first buses do follow the rules and are generally very good. I think it's south west - the grey buses. They seem to have their own set of rules for driving, none that I'm familiar with.
Financial reward? Really? The living wage is £ 7.60, I'd hardly call complaining about £8.30 ungrateful.
Nobody seems to do anything about the teachers striking - and we really are held to ransome there. Many of them get in excess of £30000, or something like £15 p/h. The bus drivers are trying to earn a living as far as I can see.
Why don't you campaign for better conditions for cycling? It would solve your problem and everyone else's...
[quote][p][bold]Dont JustSitThereVote[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]What gives bus drivers in Weymouth the right to strike and hold the population of the town to ransom. Its not even as if the service that they currently provide is either; Reliable Professional Curtious Value for money Prove youself worthy of the terms and renumeration of your employment contract before seeking financial reward. My children have to rely on the bus service to get to and from school and often they are left standing at the bustop in the rain as the scheduled bus never arrives or is driven ignorantly past them without stopping. These guys think they own the roads of Weymouth and do not obey the speed limits or observe the safety of others on the road or pavement. If you dont like the terms of your contract find another job and allow other desrving people take you place.[/p][/quote]Actually I think the first buses do follow the rules and are generally very good. I think it's south west - the grey buses. They seem to have their own set of rules for driving, none that I'm familiar with. Financial reward? Really? The living wage is £ 7.60, I'd hardly call complaining about £8.30 ungrateful. Nobody seems to do anything about the teachers striking - and we really are held to ransome there. Many of them get in excess of £30000, or something like £15 p/h. The bus drivers are trying to earn a living as far as I can see. Why don't you campaign for better conditions for cycling? It would solve your problem and everyone else's... Parkstreetshufle
  • Score: 2

7:39pm Mon 10 Feb 14

ksmain says...

elloello1980 wrote:
youngpete wrote:
You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.
And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people!

"get up, stand up.
Stand up for your rights
get up, stand up.
Don't give up the fight"

(happy birthday Bob Marley)
Elloello1980 - you must be really naive if you think that isn't going to happen anyway. The big companies will just do away with the 'non-working' workforce and reduce the workforce to a financial envelope it can afford (redundancies) or wind-up the company. Either way you lose your job. Apart from anything else there are a number of people either born in this country or who have moved from others to take your place.

so what are you going to achieve anyway. Another 1% which you will blow on something and you will be back for more next year claiming you are 'poor'.

And by the way I am pretty sure Bob Marley's song was nothing to do with getting extra money. Having a paid job is not a 'right' it is a priviledge of the few lucky to still have them. What they will achieve by striking is minimal or nothing compared to what these people are at risk of losing - their job - and when/if it comes around they will be able to do nothing about it.
[quote][p][bold]elloello1980[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]youngpete[/bold] wrote: You should be glad you have a job.Its no wonder so many immigrants are needed in this country as they have work ethics which would not see them striking every 2 minutes.Most people have not had a pay rise for the past 5 years or get the luxury of a company pension but we just get on with it.There will always be regional pay differences in national companies due to higher or lower living costs for that area.[/p][/quote]And it's people's 'just put up with it' attitude like you seem to have, that allows the gov and big corporations to takeover the country, taking all the money away from the people! "get up, stand up. Stand up for your rights get up, stand up. Don't give up the fight" (happy birthday Bob Marley)[/p][/quote]Elloello1980 - you must be really naive if you think that isn't going to happen anyway. The big companies will just do away with the 'non-working' workforce and reduce the workforce to a financial envelope it can afford (redundancies) or wind-up the company. Either way you lose your job. Apart from anything else there are a number of people either born in this country or who have moved from others to take your place. so what are you going to achieve anyway. Another 1% which you will blow on something and you will be back for more next year claiming you are 'poor'. And by the way I am pretty sure Bob Marley's song was nothing to do with getting extra money. Having a paid job is not a 'right' it is a priviledge of the few lucky to still have them. What they will achieve by striking is minimal or nothing compared to what these people are at risk of losing - their job - and when/if it comes around they will be able to do nothing about it. ksmain
  • Score: 2

7:53pm Mon 10 Feb 14

ksmain says...

woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses.

You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary.

As for your previous comment

" I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue."

Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.
Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy.
I shouldn't worry - these people may get their 3-4%, but come next year when First are making a 3-4% loss a few of these short-termers will be losing their jobs and moaning that they are unemployed.

Guess there is no pleasing some is there?
[quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.[/p][/quote]And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses. You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary. As for your previous comment " I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue." Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.[/p][/quote]Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy.[/p][/quote]I shouldn't worry - these people may get their 3-4%, but come next year when First are making a 3-4% loss a few of these short-termers will be losing their jobs and moaning that they are unemployed. Guess there is no pleasing some is there? ksmain
  • Score: -1

9:07pm Mon 10 Feb 14

Bert Fry says...

ksmain wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill wrote:
woodsedge wrote:
mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.
And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want.
I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party.
The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around.
As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability .
90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago.
Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job
Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?
I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs.
You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them.
Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.
I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.
And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses.

You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary.

As for your previous comment

" I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue."

Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.
Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy.
I shouldn't worry - these people may get their 3-4%, but come next year when First are making a 3-4% loss a few of these short-termers will be losing their jobs and moaning that they are unemployed.

Guess there is no pleasing some is there?
How big a dent is a 3-4% pay rise going to put on a profit of £300m+?
[quote][p][bold]ksmain[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mark@greenhill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]woodsedge[/bold] wrote: mark@greenhill, you obviously have not looked at the MORI poll results as the question on trade unions was not 'are they a good thing in theory'! The questions asked were are trade unions essential to protect workers interests with 77% agreeing and 14% disagreeing, only 39% thought that trade unions had to much power and 15% believe that trade unions have to much power under a conservative government. the poll was conducted across the UK and demonstrates that those that do not see the value of trade unions are in fact in the minority.[/p][/quote]And as polls from all points of view have proved in the past, if you ask the right questions in the right way, you can get any poll to say, whatever you want. I have been a member of a union, and can honestly say, the union management are just as concerned with empire building and lining their own pockets as the most corrupt Govt official of any party. The fundamental thing that the unions always like to overlook, is that for most companies, especially in a recession, is that the company has to be profitable to employ people first, then if the company is growing, to increase wages etc, not the other way around. As for this economy being funded on debt, yes it is, and labour would double that debt in the first year, simply to buy the votes of the gullible who would take short term gain over long term sustainability . 90% of the working public have not had a pay rise for years, but would never dream of striking and causing this country yet more financial trouble, choosing instead to work hard, pay down the debt and aim for an economy in better shape than it was 10 years ago. Sadly the unions prefer to cause as much grief as they can and to hell with the rest of us, which in the end always ends up with the union members losing their job[/p][/quote]Oh dear, it is a shame that when some people are confronted with factual information and an independent poll that does not give the responses that some people would like to see, the only avenue left is to make blanket statements without any substance. I know of many employers in the private sector Serco, AMEC, Babcock, DSTL, Magnox who have recognised trade unions and are looking to extend those recognition agreements. Trace unions on a daily base have a positive affect on both employers and employees, yet time and time again people choose to focus on the headline industrial action. You mention 'long term sustainability' But accept that the so called economic recovery is based on debt, how can those statements work? Returning to the dispute and with FirstGroup posting a 350 million pound profit for 2013, and accepting your premise that increases should be based on profit, this dispute could be resolved today by the company paying a living wage?[/p][/quote]I'm not saying that First shouldn't pay more, my point has always been and will always be that strike action does nothing but lose people the support of the public and ultimately the strikers their jobs. You can cry all you like that that is wrong, but the fact remains that this country has had more than it deserves of firebrand union bosses spouting their socialist clap trap and stirring up antagonistic bullies to ensure they get their own personal argument into the headlines, and just as the miners found, the public simply will not back them. Strikes have not and will not succeed at doing anything but ultimately lose the workers their jobs. Witness the recent dispute at the oil refinery in Scotland, the owners called the unions bluff and rightly made them back down. The argument should never have got that far, but the union management thought they could take the upper hand, the shame is that good hard working employees were caught up in the middle.[/p][/quote]I attempted to have a honest debate Without making it personal and all I get is the usual right sing spill with no substance! You had the opportunity to respond to the factual information I have presented in numerous comments, and the best you can do is regurgitate the same old dirge. I do not condone the action taken by Unite in Scotland and those union members and officials that picketed the homes of managers should have been dealt with by the police. Although I know that this will fall on death ears, the CWU members has taken their fair share of industrial action in defence of jobs and terms and conditions, and now they have negotiated a move into the private sector from a position of strength. This despite the Tories flogging off Royal Mail cheap to their friends in the city and capital venturists . But then again you would rather get angry with the workers instead of the Government, bankers and the Tory toffs.[/p][/quote]And all I hear from you is the usual left wing rubbish about oppressed workers having to stand up to evil capitalist bosses. You whine constantly about Tory toffs but fail to acknowledge that just as many Labour peers sit on the boards of most of the biggest companies in this country, and are quite happy to sit back and take the share dividends along with their salary. As for your previous comment " I do honestly believe that slowly working people are waking up to the political spin and misinformation, and instead of turning on each other they will eventually turn on those that are responsible, the politicians red and blue." Same old left wing cry, seeking anarchy and revolution which will never happen.[/p][/quote]Oppressed workers, evil capitalists bosses, anarchy and revolution, words used by you not me! There is only one person in denial not addressing the debate and just regurgitating the same points and it's not me. I have given clear examples to substantiate my arguments and you are not able to respond with objective debate, just same old brain washed dirge.and who said my politics are left wing, far from it actually, I am from the growing movement of working people who are fed up to the back teeth of the same old politics. The parties may as well merge into one party without any elections then people like you would be happy.[/p][/quote]I shouldn't worry - these people may get their 3-4%, but come next year when First are making a 3-4% loss a few of these short-termers will be losing their jobs and moaning that they are unemployed. Guess there is no pleasing some is there?[/p][/quote]How big a dent is a 3-4% pay rise going to put on a profit of £300m+? Bert Fry
  • Score: 1

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