3-bed flat in a Yuppie paradise

If he’d spoken to any of his neighbours he’d have found out they’re all City boys. Who I assume he can’t bear.

Would have thought he’d be glad to be shot of the place.

The older I get, the less shocked I get by the utter hypocrisy of people

Its quite shocking what he is doing and appears, from what little I know, to be quite indefensible given his political views.

It may be contractually true but still nowhere near right.

At a time when the unions are campaigning strongly and threatening a general strike to protect the pensions that their members feel they were promised, is it not hypocritical for this union to try and renege on the agreement and pension that they offered their former chairman?

I can’t see why the location of the flat, which appears to be the only issue which concerns the OP, is of any significance or importance.

“He shouldn’t like his neighbours and if he does he is a hypocrite”, is quite frankly a completely ridiculous argument.

If you’re a former union leader, all you deserve, and should want, is a northern 2 up 2 down FFS.

It’s not right wing press opportunism, of course not.

I’m not sure why anybody ever thought he was a good socialist.

So Yorkshire miners have finally woken up to the fact he was Thatcher’s greatest ally in her campaign to legislate against the abuse of union power and democratise the unions.

He has principles does Arthur, to the detriment of all that side with him.

Scargill is not a socialist and was never on anyone’s side but his own.

The rights and wrongs of the contract are one thing, but if the union were shortsighted enough to sign it, surely they’re legally obliged to meet it – unless of course old Arthur had undue influence over the process. Which I guess isn’t beyond the realms of possibility.

I always thought his heart was in the right place, but that his approach unwittingly played right into Thatcher’s hands. So maybe that makes him an ineffectual socialist, rather than a bad one.

is it not hypocritical for this union to try and renege on the agreement and pension that they offered their former chairman?
Posted 8 hours ago # Report-Post

“Counsel for the NUM, Nicholas Davidson QC, argued the case was about whether an obligation existed – not whether one ought to exist.

If it did exist, he added, Mr Scargill was entitled to have the benefit of it.”

How have you managed to invent hypocrisy from that position, Z-11?

I thought he was dead 😕

I love that he has been ‘retired’ from the union since 2002, lost his voting rights, yet still apparently is entitled to more than 60 grand a year in contractual pay and perks.

Certainly seems like a redistribution of wealth of which his Socialist Labour Party would be proud.

How have you managed to invent hypocrisy from that position, Z-11?

I think the hypocrisy might be in the bigger picture, something, as Mr junkyard says, is indefensible. This makes trying to defend his position a bit silly.
Fortunately Scargill is in the minority and this type of behaviour is not rife within the unions or more left wing elements of society.

The court was also asked whether there was a limit to the fuel allowance for Mr Scargill’s house in Barnsley, South Yorkshire, and if the NUM was expected to meet the costs of its security system and his annual tax return for the rest of his life.

Priceless.

I love that he has been ‘retired’ from the union since 2002, lost his voting rights, yet still apparently is entitled to more than 60 grand a year in contractual pay and perks.

True? Who from? That’s really quite shocking. In fact, not far from banking shocking.

Fortunately Scargill is in the minority and this type of behaviour is not rife within the unions or more left wing elements of society.

What is Bob Crows salary?

Scargill… …was never on anyone’s side but his own.

Along with every other union leader/politician/etc.

“That’s really quite shocking. In fact, not far from banking shocking.”

Really not far away from banking shocking?

Come now. Calm down. its not like the tax payer was cleaning his moat out for him.

a limit to the fuel allowance for Mr Scargill’s house in Barnsley, South Yorkshire, and if the NUM was expected to meet the costs of its security system

And it’s a tidy sized house, albeit in Barnsley which is not an insubstantial moderating factor, easier to heat when there was plenty of free coal about.

Really not far away from banking shocking?

Come now. Calm down. its not like the tax payer was cleaning his moat out for him.
No axe to grind here paul. £60K/year for what is to all intents and purposes a pension. That’s batshit crazy! Earning £45K is considered rich!

What is Bob Crows salary?

His salary is in the public domain– is yours?

RMT union decides its officers salaries, like all unions- i would guess Bob crow’s members are mostly happy with the situation.

Actually, I must apologise, I’ve misled you about the figures and have given you the wrong impression about Arthur’s predicament.

Scargill also gets his NUM pension on top of the 60 grand. I’d hazard a guess it was generously based on his final salary of 70 grand in 2002. And the state pension, obviously.

According to one report, officers from the NUM-related trust currently paying his ‘salary’ told a court that during a nine-year period, they weren’t even aware he was employed by them!

Lions led by donkeys etc…

His salary is in the public domain– is yours?

Why on earth would it be? weird.
I don’t care what the plastic socialist earns (£140,000 p/a BTW). I did laugh when I read that he thinks he’s a communist though! 😆 Don’t think he really thought that one through. If there is a revolution, he’d be on the wrong side of it.

wrecker– you have a one sided view granted, but even you must realise that peoples politics is not related to their income, you get plenty of right wing types on minimum wage– how does your logic stack up ?

i like the norwegian idea– all salaries/wages and taxes are on line for all to see!!!

Like Derek Hatton he’s become what he detests. But he was right back in 1984…

Trade Unions are accountable to their members, they pay their levies and if there is any issue with salaries etc –its their business or do you think its your business ??

That depeneds if you are a union member.

EErr, yes…. isn’t that what i said ?

If I was a tube worker, I’d vote to give Bob Crow a payrise. He gets them a fantastic deal. And he instantly gives right-wingers erectile dysfunction, which is worth a Christmas bonus in itself.

ohnohesback – Member

Like Derek Hatton he’s become what he detests. But he was right back in 1984… Arthur was a brave man really, back in the day. Few people have felt the full apparatus of the state turned on them like he had during the strike (police, secret service, media etc, for a sustained period).
He was never right, though. I don’t think even his greatest admirers would say that. He was played for a right wing stooge and served up an irreversible victory to an anti-union government.

IMO he did what he could to resist an irressistable force. And don’t get me started on that treacherous windbag Kinnock…

DD– have a good mate who works on tube line maintenance– all his gang support Bob crow- politically as well !

garry lager- agree, his hand was somewhat forced by the tories, but he failed to pressure the TUC leadership at a critical time,many unofficial actions were taken by other union members,but the lack of support from TUC was appalling, although not in the least surprising……

Like Derek Hatton he’s become what he detests. But he was right back in 1984

I would break the swear filter if i started on that hypocrite.

As a rabid lefty i have no issue with folk dragging themselves out of poverty and improving their lot. However there comes a point when, as a committesd soiclaist, you are just taking the piss if you become too wealthy [ unless he donates a large portion to good causes of course] and there is little difference between you and the fat cat bankers.

From a socialist point of view Scargills “salary” is indefensible
His lot has been far better than the members he represented and who ultimately keep him.

Ah Kinnock the Pillock- he was a real arse, a proper reactionary ****, still is ,got his reward for services to capitalism– a gong..

And don’t get me started on that treacherous windbag Kinnock…

Why not? 😉

My blood pressure… and I’ll grind my teeth.

Dave Nellist who the pillock expelled for being a socialist,had to share an office in westminster with Blair– blairs mates soon got him a new berth with someone more amenable to his slippery qualities– G Brown …..

And don’t forget Gorgeous George…

Scargill was a bit of an old ‘tankie’, but his members supported him because he was a fighter, and you need people who are prepared to fight fire with fire, not like now with all these wimpish **** who worry only about themselves– all talk and no action– even their talk is piish….

Are you listening Ed?

Millibland– ffs– another forgettable twerp- heard some shite about ‘One Nation’ — quoting Disraeli -wtf– talk about setting the bar low !