Some very interesting analysis here: http://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/robin-mcalpine/whats-really-happening-at-grangemouth-and-what-it-tells-us

May I mention you last point Trekster regarding other people experiencing implementation of poorer conditions, etc.?

I have always struggled to understand this point of view. Particularly with the example of the teachers. I recall several threads on STW in the past when teachers were striking – or threatening to strike – over pay and conditions (particularly pensions) and being amazed at the number of people who told them to “suck it up because everyone else is getting shafted too”

What happens in two or three years if conditions worsen again for you? If your daughter was then forced to accept further reduced conditions would you tell her tough luck because it happened to me too?

Honestly depressed by this. We are just racing each other to the bottom of the food chain instead of supporting people who are fighting – not out of greed – but to preserve already hard-won conditions of employment that had previously been agreed to.

Whether people at grangemouth earn 55k or not is irrelevant to what anyone else earns. They were offered these terms and accepted them. Why shouldn’t they fight to preserve them? Not saying that being 100% inflexible is the answer – times change and companies do to – but to strip it down to the basic premise that “i’ve had the shaft so i’ve no sympathy for anyone else” really don’t understand i’m afraid 😕

That whole area will soon become a complete wasteland. There is NOTHING else there for people to do.Anybody got good reasons why the whole thing shouldn’t be nationalised,surely it is an important enough resource?

Well – the chances are it will become a fuel terminal (such as already exist all round the country). Nowhere near as many jobs of course…

That whole area will soon become a complete wasteland. There is NOTHING else there for people to do.Anybody got good reasons why the whole thing shouldn’t be nationalised,surely it is an important enough resource?

Because we have excess refining capacity in the UK, the margins are crap, the investment required each time the EU brings in new rules is huge, we’re broke? Petrochemicals is marginaly better than refining in terms of margins, but it’s hugely cyclical.

Personaly, I think production should have been through a nationalised company like Statoil or Arramco, but there’s good reasons why we didn’t go down that route too.

Ah,thanks Mr other piece of cutlery

Because we have excess refining capacity in the UK, the margins are crap, the investment required each time the EU brings in new rules is huge, we’re broke? Petrochemicals is marginaly better than refining in terms of margins, but it’s hugely cyclical.

Personaly, I think production should have been through a nationalised company like Statoil or Arramco, but there’s good reasons why we didn’t go down that route too.

Good, people are beginning to think of the economics behind it. It’s terrible that lots of people could lose their jobs but this chat of buying the place out just to keep it running at great loss doesn’t make sense to me.

Been a bad month for Scottish energy, with the downturn in marine renewables and this, Salmond must be sweating a bit under the collar with the lynch pins of his future economy starting to crumble. Not good for my long term job prospects either :/

mt – Member

Ernie, I’m amazed you believe it to be true.

That ultimately it’s the workers themselves who decide whether to accept management’s offer, not the union officers ? 😀

Ineos management agrees with that statement and have given the rejection of the offer by the workforce as the reason for pulling the plug and announcing closure.

Grangemouth oil refinery on the brink as majority of workers reject rescue plan

Personally I’m amazed some people still believe what they read in the Sun that “trade union barons” make all the decisions.

Now, call me suspicious, but this Grangemouth thing stinks of backroom fat cat political manoeuvres by parties with interests across the UK as a means of undermining confidence in the Scottish Economy in a bid to sway public opinion away from independence.

Now, call me suspicious, but this Grangemouth thing stinks of backroom fat cat political manoeuvres by parties with interests across the UK as a means of undermining confidence in the Scottish Economy in a bid to sway public opinion away from independence.

Or more likely, the reluctance to embrace Fracking in the way the US has means the cost of producing ethyene in this country hasn’t dropped by 66% (which the US has) in the last few years, making us hugely uncompettative. The KG cracker at Grangemouth would be ideal if Fracking went ahead as (IIRC) Wilton O5 cracker takes an (expensive as it’s essentialy petrol) Naphtha feedstock.

If Grangemoth stays open it’d be a consumer of Fracked gas from south of the border.

Now, call me suspicious…….

I think conspiracy theorist would probably be a better description.

A couple of points from an interested party!
I did not vote (read sign an “irrevocable legally binding” pre-contract contract) yes on this issue for the following reasons. No union influence was considered in this decision.
I had less than 3 days to consider it.
No consultation had taken place.
The document was only a summary and open to company changes.
The offer contained a bribe of £10000 and an extra 2% pension contributions which I didn’t want to take from a skint(distressed) company for my personal gain.
I could not sign for my benefit to shaft others who are due to retire in the next few months who no longer can due to changes in the rules.
I could not sign for my benefit to shaft others who will be made redundant in the next while, when they close the 3-5 plants they have already said they will close, who will get stat redundancy as opposed to their current promise.
Shift workers were asked to take double the salary drop of day workers.
I could not sign up for mandatory overtime which will impact on my family life.
I did not like the idea of committing to no industrial action for 3 years and having to walk through picket lines. (A more minor one).
I am now intrigued to see that the union is promising to sign me up for these and other changes without consulting me.
It’s not about pensions and a pay freeze, there is a whole lot more to it and I am inclined to believe that this package was made as unpalatable as possible (particularly to union members) to persude us to reject it and then blame us for shutting the plant.
By the way the refinery is making more losses than the petrochemicals and will struggle to make a profit in future due to the cost of the infrastructure/services which are currently shared with PC business.
PS HL Turner for sale. 😛

By the way the refinery is making more losses than the petrochemicals and will struggle to make a profit in future due to the cost of the infrastructure/services which are currently shared with PC business.

Hmm, depressing.

Just a question. No matter how bad the deal being offered did you not think that it would be better to accept the offer rather than have no job at all or did you not think they would carry out their threat to close the refinery

Just a question. No matter how bad the deal being offered did you not think that it would be better to accept the offer rather than have no job at all or did you not think they would carry out their threat to close the refinery

Blimey, you still think it’s the unions fault for the closure?

Do you also think it’s better to just sign up to something no matter how bad it is? Would you?

Do I regret not signing? – no for the reasons given above. I fully realised the potential outcome.
Will I reconsider to help save the plant/site? Quite possibly.
Am I happy to take a hit in T’s and C’s? Yes but it needs to be done fairly.
Will I look for another job? Yep, moral is going to be truly crap if we keep going as it has been for months now due to management attitudes.
PS they ain’t closing the refinery, please quote your facts correctly before asking emotive questions.

El bent wtf you on about. And sorry I meant the petrochemical bit.
But I was interested in the decision making.
Not blaming people.
Personally I would have signed and looked to move on when it suits me.
I’ve had to go through this at Cooper Cameron in the 90’s

So if you were due to retire in March and due to one of the changes you would not be able to retire for another 5 years would you still sign?

Vs the company closing the site today then yes.
As now you get retired anyway.

But I am sure there is a lot for you to consider and it’s not as simple as it sounds

Ernie –

I doesn’t work like that. Unite like all trade unions is a democratic organisation, it can’t simply agree to less favourable terms for its members. Any decision has to be made by its members.

That’s simply not true. I’ve watched union reps sign their members up to things that don’t benifit anyone else other than the rep without any vote taking place. Admittedly I was on the companies side negotiating with the union so was very happy for that to happen, but there’s no neccessety for a rep or area rep to poll before agreeing or not. This was with Unite union in the south west.

Edit, and to quote LD above,

I am now intrigued to see that the union is promising to sign me up for these and other changes without consulting me.

people who are fighting – not out of greed – but to preserve already hard-won conditions of employment that had previously been agreed to.

Hmm. I don’t think it’s that simple. As employees they are working in a commercial market place. There can be no guarantees. If there isn’t the money then the previously agreed conditions have to change. That’s how the current system works. No-one has a right to a job or a particular salary.

It would be nice if we did, mind, but it has been tried and proven difficult to make work!

Re this dispute – surely the workforce doesn’t really hold many good cards nowadays with the global economy. Very easy for a company to just shut up shop and go somewhere else.

That’s simply not true. I’ve watched union reps sign their members up to things that don’t benifit anyone else other than the rep without any vote taking place. Admittedly I was on the companies side negotiating with the union so was very happy for that to happen

Yes it’s true. Trade unions are democratic organisations which can’t simply agree to less favourable terms and conditions of employment without the involvement of their members.

The fact that you have known corrupt union reps doesn’t change that. I have also known a corrupt union rep, and like the ones you knew he too was glove in hand with management. The history of trade unionism is littered with management stooges which have stitched up their members. Scabs, traitors, and self-serving turncoats, are nothing new. And management isn’t free of odious characters either.

The final decision at Grangemouth will rest with the workforce.

Grangemouth shareholders meet after vote on new workers contract

Quote :

The company which runs the crisis-hit Grangemouth oil refinery are to meet with shareholders after a ballot over new contracts for workers.

Unfortunately it’s those hard won benefits the unions negotiated that makes UK companies so uncompetitive in the global market. The company I work for is the same, great holidays and pension and other benefits, but I’m under no illusions that the benefits will likely be at risk at some point in the future. I think the unions would do far better working with companies to recognise the vastly different world we’re now in compared with when these benefits were negotiated, and find ways to enhance the companies competitiveness whilst minimising the deterioration of benefits. instead we get the same old strategy of stubbornly fighting the inevitable and advancing tide link King Knute. No point in having great benefits if your company goes bust.

Unfortunately my experience of Union reps is not positive. They only have their own interests at heart and not the interests of their member and are just hell-bent on sticking it to the management whatever the cost.

And yet even the area rep (and this guy was responsible for all of the Airbus guys at Filton for starters) advises me personally, that my factory rep was free to sign up to something without consulting the members first.
I think I’ll take his word for it.

I think I’ll take his word for it.

Because he was so trustworthy ? 😀

According to you the geezer was totally corrupt……..remember ?

I’ve watched union reps sign their members up to things that don’t benifit anyone else other than the rep

I do a lot of work now with German machine suppliers and their unions work very differently. When I asked a union rep who the enemy was, he said I was, as a manager. I responded that I felt we should be working as a team so as to beat our real enemies, our competitors. He looked somewhat surprised.
The Germans have always operated in this way, and I’m in no way saying that management is good and unions bad, but I am saying that the two should be aligned to a common end goal. Company success.
I think the rifts too deep to be able to fix in any realistic time scales though, hence the bludgeoning approach you’ll see from both sides.

Ernie, local factory rep signed up, not the area rep. He just told me it was ok for the factory rep to do so.
Area rep was Andy McDowel, if you’re a unite member, ask him the question.

tinybits I can’t comment on what a union rep chose to tell you or didn’t tell you. You obviously take a critical attitude towards trade unions as many people do, specially those like you who are involved in management. You can say what you like about what you claim to have experienced I’m never going to be in a position to challenge you, even if you claim that a union rep had a dump on your desk.

But the reality is that trade unions are among the most democratic institutions in our society, whatever some individual trade unionists might or might not do.

And it is also a reality that the management at Grangemouth has very clearly stated that the reason the closure was announced was because the workforce was not voting to support the changes in terms and conditions. On this occasion at least, I would take management’s word.

tinybits – Member
The Germans have always operated in this way, and I’m in no way saying that management is good and unions bad, but I am saying that the two should be aligned to a common end goa

The adversarial nature of British Unions and Mangement serves no-one. Germany for one (and Denmark was mentioned in the OpenDemocracy article IIRC) have workers reps sitting on the boards, so it’s not a case of the Unions defending workers against management decisions, it rarely gets that far as the workers have input in the decision making process. Which makes so much freaking sense!

*All of the above is ‘as I understand it’ – more than happy to be corrected!*

I’m not arguing at all about the fact that at Grangewood, the workforce was the one voting, not the workforce through a union, however, as per on the past page, while the Unions almost always consult, they don’t have[i] to. That’s all I’m saying.

I do have a bad view of unions, I’ve watched while a union would not move an inch, eventually sending a whole company down the pan, all jobs lost and I can’t help but think, how did that help the members.
On the other hand, I’ve watched a megalomaniac MD ride roughshod over employee rights, without a care in the world where a union would definitely have helped.
As I said above, I think a model where both ‘sides’ work towards a common goal would be the best, and I’ve not seen that in the UK sadly
Edit: Lifer spot on!

What I fail to see is that its losing Millions a week and yet some how they can stay open if the employees
give a loss of pay and change there Pensions.
Maths don’t add up and think the unions should go to company’s house.

Just been on Sky news, 120 contractors are being layed off.

wise words from lifer and tinybits. ‘Us and them’ mentality too entrenched in some people.

However, LD makes it clear that there is far more to this than what is reported in the mainstream media i.e. every news outlet seems to be lazily re-reporting what the PR-briefed Ineos management are spouting. Particularly noticeable was Callum McLean emphasising on TV the other day how much site staff are paid in relation to the average scottish wage.

It appears as though the Unions backed down..

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24671184

Oh look, it was just a big game of hardball after all

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24671184

See – I’m confused now. ernie_lych was adamant that it was the workforce, not the Union, that had to accept or turn-down the deal on offer. So – how did Unite manage to ballot the membership so quickly in order to agree to the new T&Cs today?

Some scary numbers in the bbc report, 2000 contractors laid off and millions in grants and loan guarantees? Not sure if that is right.

“The Scottish government has indicated it will support the company’s application for a £9m grant to help finance the terminal and the UK government has given its prequalification approval for a £125m loan guarantee facility.”

Ineos statement. I hope Mr Ratcliffe remembers to add Tweedle Dum and Tweedle Dee (McCluskey and Rafferty) to his Christmas card list

£9M in a grant from the Scottish Govt. (actual money up front)
£125M in a loan guarantee from the UK Govt. (standing behind a potential loss as they did with the banks)
2,000 Contractors laid off. But due to be taken back on again once the plant is operating??
I think BP made some commitment too.

About time the unions reassessed their role in the workplace? Less grand standing and trying to defend the conditions of very well paid employees in dying industries and back to their roots defending those who are getting totally (and illegally) shafted.

I hope this makes them realise they do not run private industry (thank god no one was stupid enough to nationalise Grangemouth) and there is a big difference between looking after their members and playing politics.

I however doubt much will change other than the unions will get weaker and the people who really need union support won’t get it (no Kudos in protecting Eastern European veg pickers).