Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

B692 - Labour Reform (Repeal) Bill 2014 Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryptographic)
    Ok, yes. But the difference still remains that union ballots are exclusive and GE/Local voting is inclusive. Massive difference.
    But the fact is that anyone can be part of the TUC.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    But if everyone joined a union they could vote for or against strike action and liase with other unions. Its not an exclusive club (unlike the conservative party...) Anyone can join the TUC
    The Conservative party is more open than almost all unions. It's members are usually elected by a larger amount of the electorate than the Labour party, and it's nominations for MPs have a larger % of people from non-political backgrounds than Labour.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    But the fact is that anyone can be part of the TUC.
    1 union, if every union was that way (and all free), then it would be inclusive.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryptographic)
    The Conservative party is more open than almost all unions. It's members are usually elected by a larger amount of the electorate than the Labour party, and it's nominations for MPs have a larger % of people from non-political backgrounds than Labour.
    Yet its MPs also overwhelmingly, even more overwhelming than labour, attended a minority of private schools....
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryptographic)
    1 union, if every union was that way (and all free), then it would be inclusive.
    You have no knowledge of Trade Unions, unsurprisingly. Go away and read up then enter back into the debate when you know what you are talking about. I suggest you start by googling TUC.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cryptographic)
    The Conservative party is more open than almost all unions. It's members are usually elected by a larger amount of the electorate than the Labour party, and it's nominations for MPs have a larger % of people from non-political backgrounds than Labour.
    Hear hear! Look at the resurgence if New Labour through the Red Princes. Also lot were back room guys, charity representatives (political), trade union reps ect.

    You also have to remember the Tories and Liberals don't have the Unions short listing, picking candidates, demanding cabinet positions, funding the Labour Party and voting in their internal elections and that is why we have Ed rather than David Miliband - check the 2010 Wikipedia Labour Party leadership election if you don't believe me!
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    Or so you would like to believe. Maybe you should attend meetings yourself and you would see the vast majority are just normal people worried about their job security and quality of life. The trade unions in this country have 6 million members, are you trying to say that two million of them are militants? Do you really think the other 4 million would hang around if they were?

    84% of the general public think public sector workers have a good reason for striking, to say only 'militants' want to strike shows just so out of touch you truly are.
    Oh yes, fair enough for the majority. But there is a significant sector of militant and radical Tu who always vote and are very involved in shaping TU policy and strikes and they often make the strikes happen due to the moderate normal members don't bother to vote (much like the cartoon on page 1)
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    You have no knowledge of Trade Unions, unsurprisingly. Go away and read up then enter back into the debate when you know what you are talking about. I suggest you start by googling TUC.
    Yes but the TUC reps all other Unions, if you are a member of the TUC then you are usually a member of another Union like the NUT, DUM, GMT ect

    For a radical head of a trade Unioj look no further than the late Bob Crow much like KingArthur Scargill.

    Look don't get me wrong I support non militant and sensible Unions like the ATL whoare representative and moderate but some like Unite and Unison and the infamous NUT where one member want to conduct a citizens arrest on Mr Gove.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Will95206)
    Oh yes, fair enough for the majority. But there is a significant sector of militant and radical Tu who always vote and are very involved in shaping TU policy and strikes and they often make the strikes happen due to the moderate normal members don't bother to vote (much like the cartoon on page 1)
    If by significant sector you mean trots, they are a (very much hated) small minority and **** all/over by everyone else. Just look at Mark Sewotka...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by redferry)
    You have no knowledge of Trade Unions, unsurprisingly. Go away and read up then enter back into the debate when you know what you are talking about. I suggest you start by googling TUC.
    So you are suggesting that people go out and pay to join every single trade union just to stop the strikers blackmailing them? I have to admit, I do admire the sheer audacity and hypocrisy of many unions, they argue for equality while sitting in their big big corporate HQs, collecting nice fat paycheques.
    • Offline

      12
      It is worth noting what is actually being repealed here. In this case, Aye!
      • Wiki Support Team
      • Welcome Squad
      Offline

      18
      ReputationRep:
      I kind of like the idea of removing all restrictions on unions whilst also removing all protections, purely from an experimental level really. But what we have right now in TSR-land is an absolutely disastrous situation of no restrictions and every single protection, it's weighted so unfairly that it causes extreme damage to anyone other than the trade unionist. Workers outside unions get mullered, consumers get decimated, businesses get screwed over and then it all loops round like a self-fulfilling prophecy so the effect intensifies. The real life situation is much more desirable, which is what this bill seeks to bring back.

      Why anyone would oppose that is beyond me. Why should we allow unions to strike without holding a vote? Why should we allow unions to run such votes in any way other than a secret ballot? You see, I'd actually go as far to say that the trade union reforms passed by the Thatcher/Major governments actually went a way towards protecting the individual worker. The secret ballots are absolutely essential to protect the individual for discrimination, intimidation, bribery, etc. Given the extremism presented in trade unionist ranks I would fear for my existence if my vote was known to the big bad mafia don union boss. Holding a vote before strike action happens is also important because a union should be democratically accountable to its members and should not be allowed to strike unless they approve of it, we don't want another event like the miner's strike. This bill brings back sensible and fair regulations whilst still ensuring that protections (like the right to strike) are in place.

      So yes, I don't think I've ever supported something so strongly in this House and I really hope this passes, though I suspect it won't.
      • Wiki Support Team
      Offline

      19
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Will95206)
      Hear hear! Look at the resurgence if New Labour through the Red Princes. Also lot were back room guys, charity representatives (political), trade union reps ect.

      You also have to remember the Tories and Liberals don't have the Unions short listing, picking candidates, demanding cabinet positions, funding the Labour Party and voting in their internal elections and that is why we have Ed rather than David Miliband - check the 2010 Wikipedia Labour Party leadership election if you don't believe me!
      Of course the unions have a big influence in the Labour Party, seeing as the Labour Party is a trade union party.
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Cryptographic)
      So you are suggesting that people go out and pay to join every single trade union just to stop the strikers blackmailing them? I have to admit, I do admire the sheer audacity and hypocrisy of many unions, they argue for equality while sitting in their big big corporate HQs, collecting nice fat paycheques.
      A says someone who doesn't even know what the TUC is...
      Offline

      14
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by redferry)
      A says someone who doesn't even know what the TUC is...
      As far as I can see it is a 'congress' where Trade Unions send representatives. Basically a trade union for trade unions.
      Offline

      8
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by O133)
      Of course the unions have a big influence in the Labour Party, seeing as the Labour Party is a trade union party.
      Oh yes, I know their history and beginning have a lot of links ect. But would you agree with me that the RL Labour Party has lots it Socalists and trade union links and it real representative function, that if the working classes. They represent the middle class more than ever now than that of the workers.
      • Wiki Support Team
      Offline

      19
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Will95206)
      Oh yes, I know their history and beginning have a lot of links ect. But would you agree with me that the RL Labour Party has lots it Socalists and trade union links and it real representative function, that if the working classes. They represent the middle class more than ever now than that of the workers.
      Yes, and I don't think Ed Miliband has been enough of a breath of fresh air. Hence I joined the Socialists on here.
      Offline

      16
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Cryptographic)
      As far as I can see it is a 'congress' where Trade Unions send representatives. Basically a trade union for trade unions.
      No, actually the trade unions for trade unions are ACTS and SUE
      Offline

      22
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by Life_peer)
      Sorry if I am being daft, but what does this actually do? I am honestly unaware of the legal status concerning trade unions in the UK and would like know more before I make a decision. The act that this bill seeks to repeal already repealed an unknown set of laws concerning trade unions and allowed companies to hire less people for temporary work, if I understand it correctly. Does it mean that while the existing act caused deregulation, this one would reinstate the former laws, which are…? What exactly?

      Could you please abstract the key elementary issues covered by these bills?

      I have always considered trade unions to be vile organisations with hardly any support, using widely damaging means of protest, and with strong evidence suggesting that their leaders were being paid off by employers to control the working class masses by creating the false impression of unity against oppression, yet never reaching the full potential.

      On the other hand, I recognise that the working class does not have adequate work conditions and that the gap between the rich and the poor widens continually which negatively impacts the economy because the purchasing power decreases. I would very much fancy a change that would redistribute the wealth from footballers (generally sportsmen), actors, politicians, and celebrities in general – all those unnecessary professions that get paid for hardly any work and contribute next to nothing to the society, unlike a postman or a garbage man, for instance – to the ones who create real values and whom this society depends on but, unfortunately, labels them as easily replaceable.

      Thanks.
      The latter is going to be difficult. Not surprised the right detest unions so much, but I figure that employee rights ranks well below the rights of a business to make profit. I'm not an expert on these rules myself, but the previous legislation required businesses take on permanent employees, not just fill it up with temporary staff. That bill was important for job security.
      • Wiki Support Team
      • Welcome Squad
      Offline

      18
      ReputationRep:
      (Original post by That Bearded Man)
      The latter is going to be difficult. Not surprised the right detest unions so much, but I figure that employee rights ranks well below the rights of a business to make profit. I'm not an expert on these rules myself, but the previous legislation required businesses take on permanent employees, not just fill it up with temporary staff. That bill was important for job security.
      But some people want temporary jobs and don't want job security. Some of us want zero-hours contracts too. Some of us don't want to be roped into something, we just wanna be in, make some dosh and get out. Hell, I'm desperate for a temp job right now but I can barely find any and the ones I do find aren't interested in poor old Jarred :moon: Then one or two of the JSA staff have a go at me, talk down to me and treat me like a scumbag for not having a job yet but then go on to cancel my appointment due to strike action less than a month later. Ungratefulness! I'd do their job! I'm desperate for some pre-uni moolah.

      Anyway there was a point to this rant:

      The labour market is a lot like any market, you shouldn't introduce unnatural and arbitrary controls into a market because it is capable of managing itself better than when a government assumes it thinks it knows what people want, we should let the market shift to reach that point naturally. I suppose it's all supply and demand at the end of the day. I'm certainly not an economist, but the market's going to revolve around that principle. If there are temporary jobs available it's because people are willing to work them and the presence of temporary jobs does not come at the expense of the man looking for a permanent job either.
     
     
     
    TSR Support Team

    We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

    Updated: July 20, 2014
  1. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  2. Poll
    Did TEF Bronze Award affect your UCAS choices?
  3. See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  4. The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.