woodmally   10 #1 Posted May 13, 2015 So the RMT that funded Ed Millibands election as leader found that labour has lost the election.  So do they accept its the will of the people and move on. Dont be silly they will try to impose maximum disruption on working people for their own ends. They dont believe in silly things like democracy.  Before people say well its about pay well I have one question. Why did they not ballot for strike action till after the general election then? The pay problem was there before the General Election.  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-rail-strikes-rmt-union-to-vote-on-most-disruptive-industrial-action-in-living-memory-10243787.html Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
libuse   10 #2 Posted May 13, 2015 So the RMT that funded Ed Millibands election as leader  Hardly. They were kicked out of the Labour Party in 2004. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
woodmally   10 #3 Posted May 13, 2015 Hardly. They were kicked out of the Labour Party in 2004.  Oh were they. Sorry I'm getting mixed up with Unite. They are both as bad as each other so easy to get confused. But my comment about how coincidental it is that they are now striking after the general election stands. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ricgem2002 Â Â 11 #4 Posted May 13, 2015 Oh were they. Sorry I'm getting mixed up with Unite. They are both as bad as each other so easy to get confused. But my comment about how coincidental it is that they are now striking after the general election stands. I wonder where the workers of this country would be without the unions sticking up for their rights Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
woodmally   10 #5 Posted May 13, 2015 I wonder where the workers of this country would be without the unions sticking up for their rights  I dont have a problem with unions defending workers rights. I just am cynical that RMT are striking now we have a tory government. They didnt strike before the election when the wages were still an issue.  It seems less about pay more about holding this country to ransom. So I ask anyone who thinks its about pay to tell me why they didnt strike before the election. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
libuse   10 #6 Posted May 13, 2015 Oh were they. Sorry I'm getting mixed up with Unite. They are both as bad as each other so easy to get confused. But my comment about how coincidental it is that they are now striking after the general election stands.  Well, they were balloted in April so the chances were they could have been striking under any hue of government. They have voted for strike action in protest against this year's pay rise being a non-consolidated lump sum of £500 each, from an employer whose MD earns almost £700k and was offered a bonus of 5% this year.  FWIW, they probably won't actually strike, they are taking the ballot results back to ACAS to indicate the strength of feeling amongst their members. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
Guest sibon   #7 Posted May 13, 2015 I dont have a problem with unions defending workers rights. I just am cynical that RMT are striking now we have a tory government. They didnt strike before the election when the wages were still an issue.  It seems less about pay more about holding this country to ransom. So I ask anyone who thinks its about pay to tell me why they didnt strike before the election.  Indeed.  Why didn't they strike before the election, when we had a Tory government. Why wait until after the election when we've elected a Tory government. It just doesn't make sense  Actually, your argument has more holes than Swiss cheese. If I were you, I'd move away slowly and hope that this thread quickly disappears from view. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ricgem2002 Â Â 11 #8 Posted May 13, 2015 I dont have a problem with unions defending workers rights. I just am cynical that RMT are striking now we have a tory government. They didnt strike before the election when the wages were still an issue. Â It seems less about pay more about holding this country to ransom. So I ask anyone who thinks its about pay to tell me why they didnt strike before the election. but it appears you do have a problem with unions defending workers rights. its the workers who have called for this strike and its the unions job to do what its workers want. bob crowe of the tube drivers union took on Cameron about pay and conditions, but crowe threatened a strike before the Olympics and Cameron wanted to talk to him about this after the Olympics. remind me who won that one remember its no good closing the stable door after the horse has bolted Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
alchresearch   207 #9 Posted May 13, 2015 9200 out of 16,000 voted to strike. Yet they call it an "overwhelming majority". I call it slightly more than 50-50. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
ricgem2002 Â Â 11 #10 Posted May 13, 2015 9200 out of 16,000 voted to strike. Yet they call it an "overwhelming majority". I call it slightly more than 50-50. the government embellish things all the time do you pull them over it Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
evil woman   10 #11 Posted May 13, 2015 (edited) Indeed. Why didn't they strike before the election, when we had a Tory government. Why wait until after the election when we've elected a Tory government. It just doesn't make sense  Actually, your argument has more holes than Swiss cheese. If I were you, I'd move away slowly and hope that this thread quickly disappears from view.  I think it is because the electorate got fed up with militant unions decades ago and a strike a month ago would have handed another million votes to Cameron. Then of course the RMT fields 50 or so candidates in the council elections. I'm not sure that commuters stranded on a railway platform are more likely to vote for them. Edited May 13, 2015 by evil woman Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...
libuse   10 #12 Posted May 13, 2015 I think it is because the electorate got fed up with militant unions decades ago and a strike a month ago would have handed another million votes to Cameron. Then of course the RMT fields 50 or so candidates in the council elections. I'm not sure that commuters stranded on a railway platform are more likely to vote for them.  The electorate being fed up of workers fighting for better pay or conditions is a sign that the last few decades of government and media waging a divide and conquer campaign has worked. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Share this content via...