Virgin Trains Strike Christmas

[donegal]

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/...-vote-13911015

[gazaprop]

From the Union boss Cash -

“The message needs to get through to Sir Richard Branson on his luxury island retreat in the sunshine that those who are financing his lifestyle through their hard graft have had enough and are prepared to fight for justice in their workplaces.

However -

RMT boss Mick Cash is now paid £150,000 a year
Cash, 57, is leading the long-running dispute over driver-only trains.

Figures show Cash’s total pay package has gone up by 4.3 per cent — four times the rate of public sector workers’ pay.

Included in the £149,676 deal is a car allowance of £3,700 and a rail season ticket subsidy of just under £3,000.

The RMT also made a pension contribution of £32,576 last year on top of his £98,000 salary.

Assistant general secretary Mick Lynch’s £105,520 also included more than £1,400 towards a season ticket and a pension contribution of £18,600.

Which members are funding these two clowns luxury lifestyle?

[Little Londoner]

From the Union boss Cash -

“The message needs to get through to Sir Richard Branson on his luxury island retreat in the sunshine that those who are financing his lifestyle through their hard graft have had enough and are prepared to fight for justice in their workplaces.

However -

RMT boss Mick Cash is now paid £150,000 a year
Cash, 57, is leading the long-running dispute over driver-only trains.

Figures show Cash’s total pay package has gone up by 4.3 per cent — four times the rate of public sector workers’ pay.

Included in the £149,676 deal is a car allowance of £3,700 and a rail season ticket subsidy of just under £3,000.

The RMT also made a pension contribution of £32,576 last year on top of his £98,000 salary.

Assistant general secretary Mick Lynch’s £105,520 also included more than £1,400 towards a season ticket and a pension contribution of £18,600.

Which members are funding these two clowns luxury lifestyle?

Are these two "Clowns" fleecing the Tax Payer for £millions like Virgin trains NO.

What would you think a reasonable rate of pay was for people who are the figurehead of the Union which is funded by it's members, taking into account they are the people who would be in the "dock" should any ILLEGAL action take place.

Obviously there are far easier ways of earning higher amounts of pay like Chief Executive of Sefton Council or a Hospital Trust paid for by you and me. The pay of Union Officials is for it's members to ratify not someone with a grudge against organisations that are there to protect their members and look after their renumeration and well being.

Perhaps you would like going bowing and scraping with your cap in your hand to your employer begging for a raise to your pittance or perhaps somewhere to carry out your ablutions or make your workplace safe?

Now if you pursued MP's with the same rancour about the money they get quite easily with the opportunity to further line their pockets with outside interests I might stand with you.

You have every opportunity to join a Union and if you are serious enough take on responsibilities and work your way up and seek "Election" to the ONE or TWO positions that YOU think are overpaid.
But then again you'd have to put in far more hours than the workers you want to represent.

[said]

Are these two "Clowns" fleecing the Tax Payer for £millions like Virgin trains NO.

What would you think a reasonable rate of pay was for people who are the figurehead of the Union which is funded by it's members, taking into account they are the people who would be in the "dock" should any ILLEGAL action take place.

Obviously there are far easier ways of earning higher amounts of pay like Chief Executive of Sefton Council or a Hospital Trust paid for by you and me. The pay of Union Officials is for it's members to ratify not someone with a grudge against organisations that are there to protect their members and look after their renumeration and well being.

Perhaps you would like going bowing and scraping with your cap in your hand to your employer begging for a raise to your pittance or perhaps somewhere to carry out your ablutions or make your workplace safe?

Now if you pursued MP's with the same rancour about the money they get quite easily with the opportunity to further line their pockets with outside interests I might stand with you.

You have every opportunity to join a Union and if you are serious enough take on responsibilities and work your way up and seek "Election" to the ONE or TWO positions that YOU think are overpaid.
But then again you'd have to put in far more hours than the workers you want to represent.

But you have omitted to state the obvious! Yes, if you are a public service worker who is working within a protected environment earning a continued and regular salary, or if you are working within a similarly protected position - obviously it is of benefit to try to get as much money as possible! It is how the Unions survive - more money for their clients means more money for them! But if you are working in the much wider dispersed private sector, working for an employer who is struggling to maintain a business to keep his employees employed, employees who do not have the same protection and regular salaries as their counterparts - the unions are not so interested. They are not happy to represent perhaps five employees with very little return for their efforts that could never bring the results that mass strike bullying could achieve - and just who is it that has to pay for these 'pay rises'? It is those who are not allowed to strike for fear of bringing their own employment to an end who have to pay more. So the Unions are acting as Robin Hood in reverse - they rob the poor to give to the rich i.e. their clients and subsequently themselves! This is so obvious in the amount of money that the unions pay to their staff and to the huge amount of money they spend on sponsoring the Labour Party! The fact that the Labour Party claim that they are the 'Working People's' party is a complete fallacy for that reason!

[gazaprop]

Are these two "Clowns" fleecing the Tax Payer for £millions like Virgin trains NO.

What would you think a reasonable rate of pay was for people who are the figurehead of the Union which is funded by it's members, taking into account they are the people who would be in the "dock" should any ILLEGAL action take place.

Obviously there are far easier ways of earning higher amounts of pay like Chief Executive of Sefton Council or a Hospital Trust paid for by you and me. The pay of Union Officials is for it's members to ratify not someone with a grudge against organisations that are there to protect their members and look after their renumeration and well being.

Perhaps you would like going bowing and scraping with your cap in your hand to your employer begging for a raise to your pittance or perhaps somewhere to carry out your ablutions or make your workplace safe?

Now if you pursued MP's with the same rancour about the money they get quite easily with the opportunity to further line their pockets with outside interests I might stand with you.

You have every opportunity to join a Union and if you are serious enough take on responsibilities and work your way up and seek "Election" to the ONE or TWO positions that YOU think are overpaid.
But then again you'd have to put in far more hours than the workers you want to represent.

Mmmmm - good speech but not on what I was talking about.
I was making the narrower point of what I perceived to be hypocrisy.
All of what you say may or may not be true but - I hold the view that when members pay their hard earned into a club and the jonny at the top says - taa very much, a good wedge of that will look very nice in my account - he's no better than Branson.
I finish by saying if you believe the Union hierarchy is decided along the lines of a meritocracy then keep your eyes peeled back end of next month - wouldn't like to hear you'd tripped a£&e over t!t down the stairs on Santa.

[Little Londoner]

Mmmmm - good speech but not on what I was talking about.
I was making the narrower point of what I perceived to be hypocrisy.
All of what you say may or may not be true but - I hold the view that when members pay their hard earned into a club and the jonny at the top says - taa very much, a good wedge of that will look very nice in my account - he's no better than Branson.
I finish by saying if you believe the Union hierarchy is decided along the lines of a meritocracy then keep your eyes peeled back end of next month - wouldn't like to hear you'd tripped a£&e over t!t down the stairs on Santa.

The Union I am in sends out a Monthly Journal so every member knows what has been going on at Head Office and within different Companies that have members represented.
When any "Johnny at the Top" job becomes or is becoming vacant the interested parties put out their "Manifesto" and the members of each Branch select by vote who they think is the best Candidate. The top 4 Candidates decided by the number of Branches voting for them are submitted to the Electoral Reform Society who send out a ballot paper to each member along with another Vision from each candidate as to how THEY see the way forward. Your ballot paper is then sent back in a pre paid envelope to the Electoral Reform Society and they count the votes and relay the result to the Executive Council and thence on to the Members.
The sad thing is that people only relate to the old guard the Scargills (even though his hatred of Thatcher was vindicated Everything he forecast was true and now we have no mining Industry) The Red Robbo's etc etc.
I am retired now but am still a Retired Member of My Union because the benefits far outweigh the price of being a retired member.

[Little Londoner]

Is that it End of Argument??? Treat the workers like human beings instead of Serfs and you might get somewhere.

[silver fox]

Is that it End of Argument??? Treat the workers like human beings instead of Serfs and you might get somewhere.

It's OK, too many can't see beyond the end of their own nose, any industrial dispute/union action comes about for a reason, but of course many just can't see or think past how it affects them personally, every dispute brings out the anti-union contingent, many think they would love to see the unions banned as long as it has no effect on them.

Let's ban the unions and go back to the "good old days" when employers hired and fired at will, when wages were governed by how little the employer could get away with, all these anti or non union people think they would not be affected, but they most certainly would.

[said]

It's OK, too many can't see beyond the end of their own nose, any industrial dispute/union action comes about for a reason, but of course many just can't see or think past how it affects them personally, every dispute brings out the anti-union contingent, many think they would love to see the unions banned as long as it has no effect on them.

Let's ban the unions and go back to the "good old days" when employers hired and fired at will, when wages were governed by how little the employer could get away with, all these anti or non union people think they would not be affected, but they most certainly would.

That is exactly how the private sector are treated now because the Unions are only interested in 'clients' who are on full time wages and protected jobs - it is not worth their effort to negotiate on behalf of half a dozen people whose job may disappear at any time. The Unions will have an affect on everyone - I take it you agree to the Unions obtaining a pay rise for some people - paid for by an increase in taxes from everyone.

[said]

From the Union boss Cash -

“The message needs to get through to Sir Richard Branson on his luxury island retreat in the sunshine that those who are financing his lifestyle through their hard graft have had enough and are prepared to fight for justice in their workplaces.

However -

RMT boss Mick Cash is now paid £150,000 a year
Cash, 57, is leading the long-running dispute over driver-only trains.

Figures show Cash’s total pay package has gone up by 4.3 per cent — four times the rate of public sector workers’ pay.

Included in the £149,676 deal is a car allowance of £3,700 and a rail season ticket subsidy of just under £3,000.

The RMT also made a pension contribution of £32,576 last year on top of his £98,000 salary.

Assistant general secretary Mick Lynch’s £105,520 also included more than £1,400 towards a season ticket and a pension contribution of £18,600.

Which members are funding these two clowns luxury lifestyle?

I do agree, however - that everyone should have the opportunity to strike over Christmas. It is wrong that so many people, particularly shop assistants - should be made to work all over Christmas just because shoppers are unwilling to plan meals for a few days. All working people should be allowed to have 'family time' and Christmas is a good period for this since the weather is usually dismal and the days are short. I understand that it is impossible to arrange this for everyone - but even the medical staff and emergency services should be able to work to a satisfactory rota to give them time off.

[Alikado]

That is exactly how the private sector are treated now because the Unions are only interested in 'clients' who are on full time wages and protected jobs - it is not worth their effort to negotiate on behalf of half a dozen people whose job may disappear at any time. The Unions will have an affect on everyone - I take it you agree to the Unions obtaining a pay rise for some people - paid for by an increase in taxes from everyone.

The biggest problem in the Private Sector is the low numbers of Union Members who are often in a minority, the non Union Members often think they are saving a couple of quid but still gaining the benefits, making membership futile.
Union Membership is also a benefit to the employer who then only has one group to talk to, in my opinion membership should be compulsory in all organisations with more than 10 staff.

[Little Londoner]

That is exactly how the private sector are treated now because the Unions are only interested in 'clients' who are on full time wages and protected jobs - it is not worth their effort to negotiate on behalf of half a dozen people whose job may disappear at any time. The Unions will have an affect on everyone - I take it you agree to the Unions obtaining a pay rise for some people - paid for by an increase in taxes from everyone.

So what are you advocating Public Service/Civil Service/NHS Employees getting NO pay rises because the tax payer funds it.

Everyone is entitled to join a Union no matter what job they do.

[Alikado]

So what are you advocating Public Service/Civil Service/NHS Employees getting NO pay rises because the tax payer funds it.

Everyone is entitled to join a Union no matter what job they do.

I can't understand why people get worked up about the Public Sector Workers having a rise, they are doing exactly the same jobs and providing the same services as people in the Private Sector, many are on less money than the Private Sector.

[silver fox]

That is exactly how the private sector are treated now because the Unions are only interested in 'clients' who are on full time wages and protected jobs - it is not worth their effort to negotiate on behalf of half a dozen people whose job may disappear at any time. The Unions will have an affect on everyone - I take it you agree to the Unions obtaining a pay rise for some people - paid for by an increase in taxes from everyone.

It's only thanks to unions that any action has been taken on behalf of temporary or part time workers, kind of blows your theory out of the water.

Then your next moan is workers funded by the taxpayer, I presume you would include MPs, the house of the retired, the senior execs of all utilities which are in reciept of government subsidy, the unions do what they can while working under the constraints of a government which regards them as an enemy.

[Little Londoner]

I can't understand why people get worked up about the Public Sector Workers having a rise, they are doing exactly the same jobs and providing the same services as people in the Private Sector, many are on less money than the Private Sector.

Yes and a bigger workload. I would imagine a Nurse in the NHS works many times harder and under greater pressure than a Nurse at a Private Hospital and probably for less money.

Also Firemen in Private Sector services eg Airports/Large Production Plants are nowhere near as busy as Public Sector Fire Services and again probably on better money and if they are out of their depth who comes to their Assistance The Public Fire Service.

In years gone by people joined public service jobs because they usually offered a decent pension (which had to be paid for) but when they retire perhaps in their 50's after 30 years service the Pension is the stick to beat them with usually by better paid people who never thought about their future and blew their money. Like anyone can be in a Union Anyone can pay into a pension, but until the government forced employers to provide pensions few did.