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

[gnvqsos 10]

If an employer provides a caring, fair environment where employees' needs are supported and their conditions and pay are fair - to the point that they feel happy and fulfilled, what would any of them gain by joining a union? I'm sure the union would gain from more subs - after all, the union leaders need their subsidised houses and inflation-busting wage rises just as much as the bankers do.

 

A low-performing, dysfunctional individual may wish to use a union to hide behind and avoid/delay managerial action. Or, some left-wing fool who thrives on the 1970s shop steward "them'n'us" mentality might just like being awkward to 'them ### in suits'. I have no time for either, so union membership is not something I will tolerate.

 

So who decides on the fairness of the environment and earnings.If you are the sole arbiter then you are bit of a magician.I think you are scared of someone confronting you,and acting in a cowardly fashion.Its like the teacher who sends out the child who persistently challenges their authority.I think you are the one hiding and sheltering behind your perceived power base.A good employer would engage and transform their dysfunctional staff rather then cajole them into submission.You sound like a cross between Blakey and Mike Baldwin-I'll get you Butler,you wait!:hihi:

[Tony 10]

Why would an average employer (or average employees) want dysfunctional staff, still less to engage with and transform them?

 

The normal workplace isn't a refuge from social services.

[banjodeano 31]

Why would an average employer (or average employees) want dysfunctional staff, still less to engage with and transform them?

 

The normal workplace isn't a refuge from social services.

 

And even more worrying, why would an employer employ dysfunctional staff :huh:

[Guest sibon]

People like Conrod are the future. A future where there is no need of unions.

 

An employer who refuses to recognise fundamental rights of individuals set out here, is in no way the future. No matter how well he claims to treat his employees.

 

Especially one who avows that he will sack anyone availing themselves of their right... but for some other spurious reason. That is pretty poor form, don't you think?

[ab6262 202]

And even more worrying, why would an employer employ dysfunctional staff :huh:

employers only usually find dysfunctional staff once they are past the probation period, then the barrack room lawyers and union wannabees appear, i know my rights etc etc there is no place for grabbing union members and union leaders in todays global financial situation!

[Big time 10]

An employer who refuses to recognise fundamental rights of individuals set out here, is in no way the future. No matter how well he claims to treat his employees.

 

Especially one who avows that he will sack anyone availing themselves of their right... but for some other spurious reason. That is pretty poor form, don't you think?

 

I bet you're happy to see BNP members "named and shamed" and outed from their employment, wherever it is.

 

I remember the hoohah in the news about BNP members being teachers a couple of years back - I bet you were one of the voices saying it shouldn't be allowed.

[I1L2T3 10]

People like Conrod are the future. A future where there is no need of unions.

 

Many small employers operate successfully using Conrod's approach. A small enterprise is a different kettle of fish to one which employs hundreds or thousands over many locations. Think about that then take the rose tinted glasses off.

[Mecky 10]

If an employer provides a caring, fair environment where employees' needs are supported and their conditions and pay are fair - to the point that they feel happy and fulfilled, what would any of them gain by joining a union?

 

But how many employers do? I suspect what you call fair is not what I call fair

[Guest sibon]

I bet you're happy to see BNP members "named and shamed" and outed from their employment, wherever it is.

 

I remember the hoohah in the news about BNP members being teachers a couple of years back - I bet you were one of the voices saying it shouldn't be allowed.

 

It is lovely of you to tell me what you think I think.

 

Sadly, you are wrong.

 

I'm not quite sure what your post was supposed to mean in relation to my point about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

 

Perhaps you could expand. Without the projection, if possible.

[taxman 12]

Your bizarre yet self inflicted position is one that would make Yossarian weep.

 

Once again, people like Conrod are the future. A future where there is no need of unions.

 

Repeating yourself doesn't make you right. Conrod has already stated that he would break the law by sacking someone for being a member of a union but would fabricate evidence in order to make it look as if they'd been sacked for another reason.

 

Your support for his attitude says everything we need to know about you.

[Tony 10]

Conrod said that his employees have no need of unions because of their working conditions. Wouldn't you say that is the best possible scenario?

 

Are you as lucky in your working conditions as you would be working for Conrod?

Your support for his attitude says everything we need to know about you.

Please elaborate.

[ricgem2002 11]

Conrod said that his employees have no need of unions because of their working conditions. Wouldn't you say that is the best possible scenario?

 

Are you as lucky in your working conditions as you would be working for Conrod?

 

Please elaborate.

thats the trouble conrad says this conrad says that we only have his word for that .(if any of his employees comes on and says anything he will sack them ):hihi: