Unions subsidised by the taxpayer - £500,000 in Sheffield alone..

[Sarkysod 10]

If this is true that SCC are paying over half a million quid for Union Reps off its own payroll, I think it is deplorable.

 

I'm not against Union Reps, but not a penny should come out of public purse to fund their salary other than for their normal work duties. If they're conducting Union business, then it is the Union that should be paying them.

 

I think I will be contacting my local councillors to clarify this but I suspect with all three of them being Labour they will fully support the misuse of public funds in this manner. I will not be leaving them with any doubt of my opinion!

Good luck, but please remember who are the big sponsors of the labour party.

[ChrisT70 10]

union officials are entitled to fair and reasonable time to conduct official union duties within that role as part of the recognition agreements in place with various employers and unions. whether that time can be classed as "lost pay" made up by tax payers is debatable i would imagine. it forms part of their normal working day im amongst other duties. however abuse of that role would be wasting their time and the employers time if not spent on actual legitimate union duties. very hard one to call, and unions are allowed to have their reps working for them while employed to do "work duties".

[wednesday1 10]

So a person's opinion on the spending of public funds doesn't count now just because they're unemployed?

 

 

 

Depends on the circumtances of why they are I suppose.

I just love the hypocrisy of some of the right-wingers on here!

[wednesday1 10]

If this is true that SCC are paying over half a million quid for Union Reps off its own payroll, I think it is deplorable.

 

I'm not against Union Reps, but not a penny should come out of public purse to fund their salary other than for their normal work duties. If they're conducting Union business, then it is the Union that should be paying them.

 

I think I will be contacting my local councillors to clarify this but I suspect with all three of them being Labour they will fully support the misuse of public funds in this manner. I will not be leaving them with any doubt of my opinion!

 

 

 

:hihi:I bet they're quaking in their boots!

[grafikhaus74 10]

Correct me If I'm wrong, but you have previously stated that you are unemployed, If that is the case you will be Council Tax exempt anyway.

 

...and

 

What he isn't even a tax payer? Glad you spotted that; what happens to our taxes has got nothing to do with him anyway. LOL.:thumbsup. Whatever happened to his real job, more like f.a. job.Not even a non job.

 

...and

 

Ah Grafikhaus, here we are again - or are you Tebbit in disguise? I don't know what job it is you do in order to finance the good things in your miserable, stinking life.....but you might care to reflect on that fact that practically every employment right, which you no doubt take for granted, is in place because trade union activists, at some point in the near or distant past, put themselves on the line to secure a better deal for collective workers. Perhaps you've achieved the right to redundancy pay, the right to take out a grievance against your employer, etc., etc., on your own, have you? Nope, thought not. Grow up and stop spouting Cameron's rubbish for him.

 

Actually I did. Against SCC. With no help from their paid poodles in the union.

 

Aah. Doncha just love these vile leftie individuals who live on this forum and think nothing of spouting personal insults. Wednesday1 (a Wednesdayite and a Labour supporter ), get with the programme, son. I was unemployed and therefore chose to tell the truth about A4e etc. Now I'm in a well-paid position (the type that prevents me from posting 4000+ times, like you) - not that that's got anything to do with you.

 

But that's the lefties for you. Shout down the opposition, resort to personal insults and pretend you believe in free speech.

 

I'd put in a quote from the Daily Mail, but I fear you lot would have an attack of the vapours.

Edited May 2, 2011 by grafikhaus74

[barny_100 10]

I am confused by this. I am a union rep working within the public sector. All reps are allocated a percentage of time within the working week to spend on TU time. This is not unusual & is how the system works in the private sector. We also have recourses allocated for TU work, how else would we be able to carry this out. This is a legal reuiremen of the employer. If anyone on here actually knows what is involved it is beneficial & cost effective for the employer in the long run as Max explained.

 

Any full time officials are paid employed by the union and paid by them not the employer. I have a feeling that the figures quoted are the number of hours etc for all the p/t reps added together. I think for example the articles quoted 18 full time officials in Sheffield alone. That is not true - there will probably be 1 or 2 full time officials for the whole region.

 

This is just a case of people twisting the information.

 

This is just a case of people not reading stories they find uncomfortable.

 

All 429 councils across the country were asked to disclose the number of council-paid employees working full-time on trade union business during the years 2009, 2010 and 2011.

 

They were also asked to reveal the salary bill for these employees and the estimated annual cost of the other resources they are using, such as office space and telephones.

 

Of the 429 councils, 319 councils responded to the Freedom of Information request. Of these, 132 had a paid full-time union official in at least one of the last three years.

 

The total salary bill over the three year period for full-time union reps was £35million, while a further £2million has gone on the cost of providing additional council resources.

[alchresearch 214]

Just find it odd that somebody would find the 'union subsidy' story worth posting a link too, yet there has been no mention on here of local Tory Andrew Cook donating £750,000 to the Cons. Cook who help sabotage the loan to Sheffield Forgemasters, thus stopping the creation of hundreds of real jobs in the city.

 

And like its been said before, there is no evidence that orders would have been placed with Forgemasters for nuclear power station parts. The rival plants in Germany and the Far East are already in operation. Forgemasters would be coming to the party very very late.

 

Anyway, it has nothing to do with this thread, it just looks like you're slinging a bit of mud to deflect from the original post.

[Douglas J 10]

...

But that's the lefties for you. Shout down the opposition, resort to personal insults and pretend you believe in free speech.

 

OK, but there's no need to shout down the opposition, resort to personal insults and pretend you believe in free speech.

[boldforester 10]

...and

 

 

 

...and

 

 

 

Actually I did. Against SCC. With no help from their paid poodles in the union.

 

Aah. Doncha just love these vile leftie individuals who live on this forum and think nothing of spouting personal insults. Wednesday1 (a Wednesdayite and a Labour supporter ), get with the programme, son. I was unemployed and therefore chose to tell the truth about A4e etc. Now I'm in a well-paid position (the type that prevents me from posting 4000+ times, like you) - not that that's got anything to do with you.

 

But that's the lefties for you. Shout down the opposition, resort to personal insults and pretend you believe in free speech.

 

I'd put in a quote from the Daily Mail, but I fear you lot would have an attack of the vapours.

 

Re-read my post carefully. My point is that the fact that these employment rights, from which you claim to have benefited as an individual, are only in place at all because of agreements achieved through previous collective action. Do you seriously think that grievance procedures were put in place by benevolent bosses? Whatever we may think about full time union officers - and, in fact, some of our views may not be as far apart as you might suppose - workers (however well paid) only got rights in the first place because of trade union organisation.

[grafikhaus74 10]

Re-read my post carefully. My point is that the fact that these employment rights, from which you claim to have benefited as an individual, are only in place at all because of agreements achieved through previous collective action. Do you seriously think that grievance procedures were put in place by benevolent bosses? Whatever we may think about full time union officers - and, in fact, some of our views may not be as far apart as you might suppose - workers (however well paid) only got rights in the first place because of trade union organisation.

 

Well thanks for that, boldforester, and certainly a nicer tone than your original post. All I'm doing is quoting from personal experience and 'having enough years on my back' to be able to air my thoughts. I've worked for companies where the very mention of unions would have got you the sack. I've also worked for 100% union-based companies. Neither are any bloody good.

 

My experience of working for SCC was that the unions were firmly in the pocket of the most malign, vindictive 'bosses' I've ever encountered - simply happy to maintain the status quo in order to have a cushy existence.

 

And no, I'm not 'Norman Tebbitt in disguise' (and don't have a 'miserable, stinking life'). I loathe politicians of any colour. They are to blame for all the problems in the world.

[Hairyloon 10]

I've worked for companies where the very mention of unions would have got you the sack. I've also worked for 100% union-based companies. Neither are any bloody good.

Most sensible post on the subject that I have read for a long time.

My experience of working for SCC was that the unions were firmly in the pocket of the most malign, vindictive 'bosses' I've ever encountered - simply happy to maintain the status quo in order to have a cushy existence.

You don't think that might be because they are paid by those very same bosses?!

[wednesday1 10]

[quote name=grafikhaus74;7588446Aah. Doncha just love these vile leftie individuals who live on this forum and think nothing of spouting personal insults. Wednesday1 (a Wednesdayite and a Labour supporter )' date=' get with the programme, son. I was unemployed and therefore chose to tell the truth about A4e etc. Now I'm in a well-paid position (the type that prevents me from posting 4000+ times, like you) - not that that's got anything to do with you.

 

But that's the lefties for you. Shout down the opposition, resort to personal insults and pretend you believe in free speech.

 

I'd put in a quote from the Daily Mail, but I fear you lot would have an attack of the vapours.

 

 

as they say, let he who is without sin....... just remembering you verbal assault on Wildcat a while back!