Union members' attitudes towards their non-union member colleagues.

[Big time 10]

Employees in a unionised workplace that have chosen not to join the union are often resented by some of their colleagues that are union members, because the non-union members can of course reep the "benifits" that the union wins for the employees of the company even though they've not paid into the union.

 

I can understand why this causes some resentment, but isn't this attitude of the union members towards their non-union member colleagues akin to the capitalist approach, in as much as you as an individual get of of life what you put in, so if you dont join the union and pay into it you dont get the benefits of it?

[skinz 10]

Depends if the attitude has a debilitating effect on those singled out?

[Conrod 10]

Some people just don't want to support an organisation that is militant and left wing - should be their choice.

 

If an employee of mine joined a union he'd soon be out of a job.

[skinz 10]

Some people just don't want to support an organisation that is militant and left wing - should be their choice.

 

If an employee of mine joined a union he'd soon be out of a job.[/QUOTE]

 

 

Not much of a choice.

[Big time 10]

Depends if the attitude has a debilitating effect on those singled out?

 

Supposing it was strictly the case that you only reep the benifits won by a union in a particular workplace if you are a paid up union member in said workplace, and all the non-union members miss out; fair enough many would say, but then you'd have an unequal workplace of have's and have-not's, just like in capitalist societies where those who make that extra effort reep the rewards while the rest, that havn't, get left behind.

[Mister M 1,625]

Some people just don't want to support an organisation that is militant and left wing - should be their choice.

 

If an employee of mine joined a union he'd soon be out of a job.

 

And you'd be breaking the law tough guy.

[Conrod 10]

And you'd be breaking the law tough guy.

Not at all, he'd lose the job for a different reason. I'd find something - but won't employ a leftie or union-type.

[Alien52 10]

Not at all, he'd lose the job for a different reason. I'd find something - but won't employ a leftie or union-type.

Thanks for the ad in your signature.Now know who to avoid.

[alchresearch 214]

Employees in a unionised workplace that have chosen not to join the union are often resented by some of their colleagues that are union members

 

That's certainly not my experience of the situation.

 

After reading the latest UNISON propaganda magazine and the mistruths and misleading information in it I'm surprised that unions have any respect from bosses or members.

 

Prentiss was bleating on about how an average public sector worker's pension is £4000, but "fat cat bosses of Britain's top 100 companies are on over £200,000 a year". What a strange comparison to make. Why not compare it like for like?

 

And its funny Prentiss didn't mention his own £99,000 a year salary and the loophole he's utilised to channel 60% of it to his pension so he doesn't pay tax.

[ampersand 10]

Not at all, he'd lose the job for a different reason. I'd find something - but won't employ a leftie or union-type.

 

In spite of stiff competition, that must be one of the most idiotic posts I've read this week

[rickiethecat 10]

What puts people off joining unions is the extreme left-wing political views of their leaders and their ties with the labour party.

 

I think the idea of having a union to represent workers' rights at work is fine in principle but in practice it ends up with union leaders causing unnecessary conflict at work and trying to get their members out on strike for the most trivial of reasons.

[alchresearch 214]

What puts people off joining unions is the extreme left-wing political views of their leaders and their ties with the labour party.

 

I think the idea of having a union to represent workers' rights at work is fine in principle but in practice it ends up with union leaders causing unnecessary conflict at work and trying to get their members out on strike for the most trivial of reasons.

 

Spot on. The UNISON magazine is nothing more than just petty coalition bashing, often with stuff which is blatantly wrong or misleading - like the pension thing I mentioned above. Why couldn't they compare a public sector worker pension with a person in the private sector doing the same job?