Taxpayers pick up £68m bill for thousands of union reps

tootall – ah – services aren’t you?

mostly electricity at the moment – yes.

military services and gchq are the only folk who cannot join unions IIRC

You forgot the police.

So, what would that moderate increase be? 5%, 10%, 50%? Surely you must have a figure. In fact, far from being irrelevant, it appears to be the very crux of your economic argument…

The crux of your argument is that increased wages reduce profitability/ and/ or increases prices. Surely, you must have some numbers to support your hypothesis, rather than asking me to prove a negative…

I thought the police had a union, just are not allowed to strike.

The police have a federation.

I saw this article over the weekend and wondered how many pages the SWT thread would reach to!!

Interesting comments on how unions/union reps/HR departments add to the smooth operations of a company. I am sure that most people would agree that their value added is broadly similar, surely?

Nice chart (but not nice story from NYT) – OECD gives reasonably balanced view on the multiple causes here.

Given inflation at around 2% pa (? targets at least!), I don’t think many companies would be successful if they agreed to 5%-10% wage increases, particularly if these rates are compounded. Hard to see many top-lines growing much above inflation in the current climate.

I would love to see the reaction of Brazilians, Russians, Indians, Chinese, Turks etc to this thread!

TooTall – Member

Ernie – I come from a family that hasn’t been represented by unions for at least 3 generations on both sides I can find (not available to me or my father). I fully support the collective representation of anyone – what I object to is a confrontational approach and taking stances on issues that they cannot hope to influence. Oh – and people stopping lockers for cyclists!

You might well now want to sound all fair-minded and moderate with regards to trade unions, but your first post paints a completely different picture :

TooTall – Member

Unions – a great idea stuck firmly in the last century. I have yet to have any dealings with a rep under 50 or who hasn’t got a mighty chip on his shoulder and teh ability to quote meaningless references from memory. I’d have had 400 more lockers for cyclists by now if it wasn’t for one of our union reps

Posted 18 hours ago

It’s clear that by claiming that they were a great idea “in the last century” you think that trade unions no longer have any role to play. Of course people who come out with bollox like that are simply just using it as a smokescreen for their deeply felt hostilities.

Very much like the person who says, “I’m not a racist but….” or, “I believe that charity starts at home”. What they are really saying is “I am a racist and I am a greedy selfish person”.

I don’t believe that you think trade unions were a great idea “in the last century” – explain to me why you think they were……why were trade unions a good idea in the 1980s but not today ?

Furthermore your ridiculous claim that every union rep has a big chip on his shoulder and quotes meaningless references from memory betrays the contempt that you feel for trade unions and how much you despise them.

I take it from you comments that you are part of management and that you deal with trade unions. I can’t being to imagine how difficult it must be for the union reps and full officials at your work place to deal with someone like you who feels so much contempt and hostility towards them. Or what it does for industrial relations.

If the trade unions felt the same level of hostility towards management which you clearly feel towards them, then your workplace wouldn’t be able to function.

Employers in Britain have everything stacked in their favour with regards to trade unions, British employment law being the most restrictive on trade unions in the western world playing no small part, but that isn’t good enough for you – you would rather employees had no representation at all.

With regards to this :

Union rep objecting to lockers in office areas (rather than in other areas) because of H&S issues to his union members. This came from a few mingers not sorting their sports kit out in lockers and being smelly types. The solution is to deal with the mingers (minority) rather than remove all office-based lockers.

WTF is that about ? …..why have you even mentioned it on this thread. Are you seriously expecting people to support your argument against trade unionism on the basis of a single incidence involving a single union rep of which none of us knows anything about ? ffs

Sometimes I am truly amazed at the capacity of managers to be daft. Or perhaps it’s more a case that you think everyone else is daft ?

Interesting comments on how unions/union reps/HR departments add to the smooth operations of a company. I am sure that most people would agree that their value added is broadly similar, surely?

both are needed but as has been shown by this thread it really depends on the quality of the peole who do the jobs. I have had HR managers who were fair and reasonable and ones I would not believe them if they told me the time. I have met unions reps who I would not choose to represent me for balance.

I don’t think many companies would be successful if they agreed to 5%-10% wage increases, particularly if these rates are compounded. Hard to see many top-lines growing much above inflation in the current climate.

really depends on what you mean by successful but yes they would probably make less profit- but hey those who “RISK” capital deserve more reward than those who earn the money for them under capitalism apparently.

as has been shown by this thread it really depends on the quality of the people who do the jobs

Although an important differentiating factor is that trade unions are democratic organisations. Elections can remove a rubbish union rep, no such mechanism exists for managers…….specially if they’re the guvnor’s son, or shagging his daughter.

Of course often union members are left with a useless rep because no one wants to do the job, or management sacks the effective rep, or whatever. But the mechanism exists. Too often people forget that trade unions represent among the most, if not the most, democratic institutions in our society.

Not quite b r, as an agency we charge for providing a service. If you don’t use that service it costs you nothing. Quite simple really and as a result we get exactly £0 nothing from the taxpayer, all our costs are met with revenue generated by the agency.

Hmm, still not answered the question – do I have a choice of providers for the service your agency provides, or must I come to you?

A bit like the planning department in my local council, I’m sure they could claim that they aren’t a cost to the taxpayer, but they have a monopoly and when I submit plans (which I must if I want to build) I have to pay their rate.

Ernie – I mean that many of the views expressed and the combatant approach to issues is more like the head-to-head clashes of the 70s and 80s than a more tempered and reasoned approach I would hope for today. Your view that I am management is an interesting one and demonstrates your class warrior and tired stance as the defender of the downtrodden proles more than my inability to articulate my position with clarity.

I don’t say that unions were a good idea in the last century at all. You put words in my mouth whilst evidently frothing from yours. I fully support the principle of unions – but most all union officials approach issues with your clenched-fist, no change, workers rights attitude. I have engaged with superb union officials in the past, but for some reason those I kept tabs on became disillusioned with the way their higher officials didn’t move with the times. I only reflect on their experiences having never had the chance to join a union myself.

Shouldn’t you be doing the night shift down t’pit or in t’mill?

but most all union officials approach issues with your clenched-fist, no change, workers rights attitude.

Never met one like that in many years of union activism

Your view that I am management is an interesting one and demonstrates your class warrior and tired stance as the defender of the downtrodden proles more than my inability to articulate my position with clarity.

It demonstrates that I have read your posts. The hint is here : “I take it from you comments that you are part of management”. I suggest that you work on articulating your position with greater clarity if you are giving out the wrong impression.

Although having said that, I am perfectly happy to be called a “class warrior” if you feel you need to do that. My sole motivation in politics is to argue for a better deal for ordinary working people, I’m not interested in anything else and it’s not something I’m ashamed of. Nor is a stance I’m ever likely to get “tired” of.

I don’t say that unions were a good idea in the last century at all. You put words in my mouth…..

I didn’t put any words in your mouth – I copied and pasted the ones which you had posted. What’s this mean then “Unions – a great idea stuck firmly in the last century” ? If I misunderstood perhaps you can clarify?

I fully support the principle of unions

No you don’t – you think all union reps have a big chip on their shoulder and they all quote meaningless references from memory. If you really support trade unions then tell me why you think they’re such a good idea. Up ’til now all you’ve done is slagged them off.

BTW your need to rely on childish comments such as “Shouldn’t you be doing the night shift down t’pit or in t’mill?” shows how weak your argument is. And it gives the impression of you being a jumped up arrogant and immature manager. Which is probably what you are.

TooTall – last time you or your mate think about buying a bike from me!
The only thing worse than right wing biggots hiding behind the coat tails of the rich and powerful is right wing biggots who lack insight as to their own nature, not to mention their place in history.

Rubbish forum coding….

The only thing worse than right wing biggots hiding behind the coat tails of the rich and powerful is right wing biggots who lack insight as to their own nature, not to mention their place in history.

Dekadense – this is either a very clever post or a very stupid one, its difficult to tell.

Bigotry is an unpleasant characteristic in anyone, but you insertion of bias towards right wing is in itself an example of bigotry. So aren’t you falling into the same trap as the one you accuse Too Tall of?

The joy of reading these threads on SWT is to watch when mere confirmation bias spills into outright bigotry. It happens regularly on all sides.

right wing bigot

Just because something is a cliche, doesn’t mean it isn’t true.

I’d be happy to stand up and say that bigotry is more a characteristic of the right than the left.

Anyway, he said “biggot”, which might be something nice.