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

Corrupt trade union boss steals £165,000 from members watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Notorious_B.I.G.)
    in response to my making fun of your bragging about being an employment law specialist
    I didn't brag about it. I said that my trade union and employment law experience meant I was better able to comment on employment law and industrial relations issues. Presumably you don't actually deny that to be true, do you?

    I really have no issue with your line of work, voluntary work whatever; I just take offence at arrogance, specially where there is not a reason in the whole wide world to be arrogant
    You seem to be confused. Pointing out that my knowledge of employment law is superior to yours is not arrogance, it's an expression of fact. You claim no expertise in that area. In any case, your accusation of arrogance is laughable in light of comments like;

    Wait. Are you trying to tell me that you specialise in employment law? And you have the gall to suggest I am stupid?

    Hahahah, I would sooner admit to ******** myself.

    No, I only need to be involved in an area of law which isn't mainly dealt with by high-street paralegals and retired school teachers at the local Citizens Advice.
    Physician, heal thyself.

    given your line of (voluntary) work.
    Yes, I have been a volunteer caseworker at a law centre while I've studied. In that capacity I've done five preliminary hearings and a four-day discrimination trial, drafted ET1s / particulars of claim, instructions to counsel, Rule 30 applications, probably written over 100 advice letters, dealt with clerks and insurers, taken witness statements, drafted schedules of loss.

    Perhaps more relevant, I'm starting my pupillage in September next year at an employment-oriented set and it was the experience I gained volunteering at a law centre that pushed me over the line. In light of that and my prior trade union experience, unless you claim some particular expertise in employment law, my claim to superior knowledge and experience was not arrogance but simply a straightforward factual assertion.

    What precisely is it you do? You seem very cagey about that. I suspect probably a frustrated legal academic, maybe a tutor at some regional university where you feel embittered the world never recognised your true genius and potential. See, I don't care if that's what you do, I wouldn't look down on you for it or think worse of you. But if it or something like it is true, there's no doubt you carry around a pretty big chip on your shoulder as a result of it. But I guess at least you get to feel like the big man going on the Relationships forum to interact with 17 year olds having boyfriend problems, and doling ACAS advice to high school students. It's all so unthreatening, so unlike your experience of the real world.

    Anyway, time to add you to my ignore list so I don't have to see your vapid, substance-free posts anymore. You are a very self-absorbed, nasty, paranoid, arrogant person but what makes you particularly unpleasant is that gnawing black hole of insecurity that radiates from you, that is evident from almost every post you make and every laughable boast and outburst of misplaced snobbery. Goodbye
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    I didn't brag about it. I said that my trade union and employment law experience meant I was better able to comment on employment law and industrial relations issues. Presumably you don't actually deny that to be true, do you?



    You seem to be confused. Pointing out that my knowledge of employment law is superior to yours is not arrogance, it's an expression of fact. You claim no expertise in that area. In any case, your accusation of arrogance is laughable in light of comments like;



    Physician, heal thyself.



    Yes, I have been a volunteer caseworker at a law centre while I've studied. In that capacity I've done five preliminary hearings and a four-day discrimination trial, drafted ET1s / particulars of claim, instructions to counsel, Rule 30 applications, probably written over 100 advice letters, dealt with clerks and insurers, taken witness statements, drafted schedules of loss.

    Perhaps more relevant, I'm starting my pupillage in September next year at an employment-oriented set and it was the experience I gained volunteering at a law centre that pushed me over the line. In light of that and my prior trade union experience, unless you claim some particular expertise in employment law, my claim to superior knowledge and experience was not arrogance but simply a straightforward factual assertion.

    What precisely is it you do? You seem very cagey about that. I suspect probably a frustrated legal academic, maybe a tutor at some regional university where you feel embittered the world never recognised your true genius and potential. See, I don't care if that's what you do, I wouldn't look down on you for it or think worse of you. But if it or something like it is true, there's no doubt you carry around a pretty big chip on your shoulder as a result of it. But I guess at least you get to feel like the big man going on the Relationships forum to interact with 17 year olds having boyfriend problems, and doling ACAS advice to high school students. It's all so unthreatening, so unlike your experience of the real world.

    Anyway, time to add you to my ignore list so I don't have to see your vapid, substance-free posts anymore. You are a very self-absorbed, nasty, paranoid, arrogant person but what makes you particularly unpleasant is that gnawing black hole of insecurity that radiates from you, that is evident from almost every post you make and every laughable boast and outburst of misplaced snobbery. Goodbye
    No, from the outset, you framed the discussion to be how much more do I know about employment law than you. Person: I disagree with you about trade unions. You: well, do you have any idea how much more I know about employment law than you. You did the same thing with other posters in this thread, which rather suggests it is you searching for a little ego bump.

    And no, I don't give ACAS advice to anyone. That's kinda the whole point of my snobbery.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    As a (reluctant and disillusioned) Labour Party member and someone who has been involved in trade unions as a branch officer, I find Lavery's behaviour to be disgusting. And unfortunately, his conduct is not rare in the really left-wing trade unions. Len McCluskey had his house paid for by the union, so did Scargill.
    That's another thing we share, shopfloor experience. I was with USDAW for a good while and been on enough floors to know the nature of what appals you. What we don't seem to share is the element of surprise, things like this are everyday occurrences within Union world.

    We will differ on this: the idealistic vision of a Union's leadership making the best interests of their members the top priority is just that, a vision. Their best interests are, it's great for Tube drivers to earn what they do and it was great for Bob to remain their favourite leader forever. Not so great for millions of affected Londoners who find it all a bit unjustified but good for their lot anyway. They are as human as the 'greedy bosses' and to them the only way to a better life is the Union path. Not working their way up from the shopfloor, to take the easy route instead. I met enough of them, don't deny they exist and they are the ones on board for a free-ride and not for the very noble cause other Union activists like yourself follow. Whether they are the real left, they are in charge.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by zhog)
    We will differ on this: the idealistic vision of a Union's leadership making the best interests of their members the top priority is just that, a vision.
    I don't really understand what you mean. Presumably you would accept that, say, the leadership of a union like UNISON is pursuing what they believe to be the best interests of their members? Now people can legitimately differ on what they believe is the best way to achieve that objective, but I don't think there's some conspiracy and that most union officers are really 100% in it for themselves and selling out their members best interests.

    Union officers are normal people. That means they're not perfect, they have sometimes contradictory tendencies and qualities and motivations. But day-in, day-out, full-time union officers do what they're paid to do (represent people in disciplinary proceedings, refer members to union solicitors, engage in collective bargaining).

    Their best interests are, it's great for Tube drivers to earn what they do and it was great for Bob to remain their favourite leader forever. Not so great for millions of affected Londoners who find it all a bit unjustified but good for their lot anyway.
    Okay, but it's not that unions obligation to do what is best for Londoners. How can you hold it against them that they do what they believe is in the best interests of their members? That's a somewhat contradictory argument you're making; claiming on the one hand they're pursuing their members interests too aggressively, and on the other that somehow it's really a conspiracy and they have no interest in their members best interests.

    They are as human as the 'greedy bosses'
    Yes. I think we are in agreement that humans are humans.

    You know I haven't claimed union officers are perfect. But it's illogical to argue that because union officers aren't perfect, therefore unions are worthless institutions. The answer to these things is to reform so that the issues that exist can be remedied.

    I note that people who attack trade unions are quite happy to enjoy the benefits and rights trade unions have won for them. In other words, freeloading.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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: October 21, 2017
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?
Useful resources

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

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