Who's the most hated- Blair or Thatcher?

Even the drivers have one and they are pretty well paid

I’ve always thought that was an oddity. But I only worked in F1 for 18 years so don’t know a lot about the industry to be honest.

Anyway you union lovers are all still missing my original point. I’m not actually a union hater except for those who threaten strike action at every opportunity, which are thankfully quite rare today. I just hated the big unions back in the Thatcher days.

Maybe I am being naive

Yup. Frighteningly so.

Except for the bit when you wanted to shoot strikers

It’s like being asked to choose between two particularly pungent and foul turds, you know – the type that you find unflushed in the lav that scream “lactose intolerant” or “had too much Guinness and bombay mix last night”.

The only redeeming feature of either that I can possibly think of is that one of them has died.

Yup. Frighteningly so.

yeah whatever, I get by without union protection.

One thing that I notice here is quite a lot of hatred for employers. The very people who actually provide you with an income in the first place.

The current government would get rid of most of that stuff in a second if they thought they could get away with it. Unions are one of the main reasons why they can’t.

Okay grum, since you are obviously an expert on employment law, explain to me (the naive moron) why the government would get rid of most employment law today if it wasn’t for the unions? Serious question.

yeah whatever, I get by without union protection.

You do get union protection – even without being in a union, as I’ve tried to explain to you.

One thing that I notice here is quite a lot of hatred for employers.

Where? Crap straw man.

One thing that I notice here is quite a lot of hatred for employers. The very people who actually provide you with an income in the first place.

You sound like you think they’re doing the workers a favour. You could also say they are cynically exploiting the workers efforts for profit. Or have a more balanced take on the subject….

Maybe I am being naive

I think you are being a bit goady and trolly and its pretty hard to work out what you really think whilst being pretty easy to judge what you are like
Its a bit boring as well tbh

Okay grum, since you are obviously an expert on employment law, explain to me (the naive moron) why the government would get rid of most employment law today if it wasn’t for the unions?

Put very simply – because the people who fund the Tory party would be able to make more profits if they could get away with treating their employees worse. It’s pretty obvious surely?

JY +1

cookeaa – Member

As it is our energy needs are met mainly by various forms of gas fired station now (Open and closed cycle turbines) with some oil and gas fired boiler efforts a bit of ageing nuclear plant, plus some other minor stuff…

FWIW in Scotland, renewables are the biggest producer at about 40% (25% nuclear, 20% coal, and only about 6% gas- yes I know that’s not 100% pedants, I did all the maths on my fingers). I know we’re better together but in this instance I think we’ll decline to take our turn at being bummed by Putin 😉

Okay grum, since you are obviously an expert on employment law, explain to me (the naive moron) why the government would get rid of most employment law today if it wasn’t for the unions?

They already have reduced employment rights, as of 6/4/2012 you can be sacked without recourse to unfair dismissal in the first two years (was one year prior to this). They are also trying to erode the right to strike as once they can ban striking they can carry on eroding other rights.

I think you are being a bit goady and trolly

That’s a bit rich coming from you.

Actually you are right though. I have zero interest in politics or unions. But I did really hate unions growing up in the 80’s.

Where? Crap straw man.

I can smell the hatred from here.

Put very simply – because the people who fund the Tory party would be able to make more profits if they could get away with treating their employees worse. It’s pretty obvious surely?

and the voters? Would they like it?

I am an employer and a strong supporter of good unionism – I was also a member of the AUEW for over 20 years. I would love to see some people on here try and negotiate a personal employment contract from ground zero…..

I would disagree with the comments on the previous page about unions securing workers rights, my son, teenager limited experience and skills has to accept a zero hours contract, other older people in family can sit around at home dicking about on the Internet get paid well and have great term of employment, the difference is market value not employment rights.

I understand quite a few employer obligation came from EU laws rather than Union battles but would agree that good employers know the value of happy staff but again it’s the more widespread acceptance of that dynamic they has reduced the need for unions.

Lastly on a slight aside my recollection of the coal miners strike was a complete lack of unity on their part in fact the my only first hand experience was miners fighting miners.

I’m also an employer and feel the unions have, and continue to play an important role in the economy. Unions, like businesses can at times become too dominant – a monopoly of labour is as dangerous to public interests as a monopoly of any other kind – but overall, many of the laws and conditions negotiated for UK workers have wide ranging benefits to both the public and the economy.

Just as (to paraphrase Tolstoy) an army is always best prepared to win the last battle it fought in, so we are now looking at yesterday’s issues. At present, I do feel that many larger firms are effectively side-stepping a lot of obligations by using agency workers to a very high degree, skewing the playing field in their own favour.

Zero hour contracts should be banned, full stop. People should have a minimum number of hours guaranteed. You don’t need Unions to enact employment protection laws.

Unions have bankrupted the US airlines and most of their car companies. Our car industry was given a huge helping hand into obscurity by the unions.

I am employer and thankfully unions are irrelevant. I have to keep staff, clients and shareholders happy. I fail if I ignore any of them. Shareholders know that I prefer to have relatively small teams that are paid more than elsewhere. They are happy, they work hard and enjoy it and they do a good jobs for clients. So everyone is happy. No need for external interference, it’s really very simple. The unions could be useful and explain pensions to their members, that would be a good start.

Rights are indeed protected by Europe – and we respect them too. One of the benefits of EU membership.

and the voters? Would they like it?

Of course they wouldn’t! But then that’s where party spin departments come in to play.

For example:

“We want to invade Iraq. In doing so, we’ll take control of state oil production, keep an increasingly belligerent Iran in check and demonstrate to the people of the middle east that we’re not to be trifled with”.

Read as:

“Saddam Hussein possesses WMD and the delivery mechanism to launch it at Britain within forty five minutes. They have mobile chemical/biological warfare laboratories producing tonnes of the stuff. We’re also going to liberate the long-suffering people of Iraq”.

Do you see?

I know we’re better together but in this instance I think we’ll decline to take our turn at being bummed by Putin

The only thing we get significantly from Russia energy wise is coal, unlike Eastern Europe we don’t get any gas from there. Most of our gas comes from Norway, Qatar (LNG), and then from the Holland and Belgium interconnectors.

Do you see?

Not really if I’m honest.

we don’t get any gas from there

What about Gazprom then? They are certainly becoming a big player in gas supply to UK businesses. Not a household name because they don’t supply the domestic market (yet)

The unions could be useful and explain pensions to their members, that would be a good start.

They do an excellent job of explaining that employers are trying to erode them and you will pay more and be worse off.

QED

At present, I do feel that many larger firms are effectively side-stepping a lot of obligations by using agency workers to a very high degree, skewing the playing field in their own favour.

yes and no. Contracting can be better for individuals as well as for the employer – better pay, more flexibility to take time out, less need to fit in with the corporate culture etc.

My own experience with this is 3 1/2 years contracting on a sequence of contracts at the same client. Before that I lasted 8 months in a perm role in another company before being unceremoniously ‘managed out’ because a head of dept decided they didn’t like me. All employment laws were bypassed by the simple technique of my manager telling outright lies to HR.

I have more job security as a contractor as I’m judged on whether I can get the job done (which I can) rather than the subjective views of one senior person who’s able to exploit company hierarchy. I also get paid more as compensation for the lack of a perm contract so am no worse off financially.

So in this example, employment law gave me no advantage at all… a union might have stopped the gameplaying but would I have wanted to stay anyway?

Personally I don’t see mass movement towards contractors instead of perm staff as a bad thing. It’s another option, which may well suit people much better than the false security of a ‘perm’ contract…

What about Gazprom then? They are certainly becoming a big player in gas supply to UK businesses. Not a household name because they don’t supply the domestic market (yet)

As I understand it they are just a trading arm in the UK and sell whatever gas they make money on e.g. they have contact with Centrica

Centrica Press Link

As I understand it they are just a trading arm in the UK and sell whatever gas they make money on e.g. they have contact with Centrica

No, it was Centrica who bought the gas FROM Gazprom, not the other way round. There is much argument about how much Russian gas is imported into the UK. Gazprom reckon around 15%, other sources disagree. Centrica don’t even know themselves.

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/03/21/uk-ukraine-crisis-energy-britain-idUKBREA2K16N20140321

Contracting can be better for individuals as well as for the employer – better pay, more flexibility to take time out, less need to fit in with the corporate culture etc.

Agency workers do not contract and they do not get paid more to compensate them for it. Comparing your example to a zero hour agency contract is comparing chalk and cheese
Surveys consistently show that the employers do not choose these employers make them do it.

employment law gave me no advantage at all

That is like claiming that because you got robbed the laws dont protect you?

dragon – Member

The only thing we get significantly from Russia energy wise is coal, unlike Eastern Europe we don’t get any gas from there.

World markets and distribution mean it’s not that important exactly where your resource comes from any more though, a change in supply anywhere impacts price/availability.

Feel the benevolent warmth, people.

“Yes I’ve just bitten the head off a kitten. What’s it to you?”

scaredypants – Member
Feels a bit like comparing two dogshits, but …

Thatcher, I think, was pretty straight-up about being unpleasant whereas Blair has the extra little boost of promising quite a lot (to me as a leftish leaner anyway) and then turning out to be a disingenuous, grasping, Machiavellian little shit all along.

Doesn’t mean she was less nasty, just that she didn’t arse about justifying it with a load of platitudes; pretty much just told the nation to **** off if we didn’t like it (turns out a lot of the electorate liked to be treated rough, though)

I do wonder how much of Blair’s scheming was down to Campbell really – again, Ingham was a bit more old school rather than a marketing man

On balance then, if only for that toe-curling wankyness that was the “now is not a time for soundbites …” opening gambit,

Blair, by a nose

Both scum of the earth but agree Bliar by a short nose.

Wowzers!
I still can’t believe the amount of people on here who, still think Thatcher and Blair ran the country. And still affiliate themselves to the mainstream political parties.

Watch ‘the money masters’ 3.5-hours of educational awareness

Both are equal of doing bad things
But I may say Blair as what dangers he has brought to our door step.

Junkyard – lazarus
Agency workers do not contract and they do not get paid more to compensate them for it.

Correct. Then there are the other disadvantages – such as not being able to get a mortgage.

steffybhoy – Member
Wowzers!
I still can’t believe the amount of people on here who, still think Thatcher and Blair ran the country. And still affiliate themselves to the mainstream political parties.

TBH, you are bang on the money. it is the unelected and anti-fragile that make most of the running from within Whitehall. Having parties to squabble over is a distraction really and, in many respects, also a hindrance, preventing logical, long term thinking and planning.

Just as an aside, casual employees in Australia are guaranteed zero hours, have no unfair dismissal rights, no holiday pay, no sick pay…but they get a 25% premium over permanent employees. Seems like a fair balance between employer flexibility and worker self-protection.