disgoftunwells wrote:
On 29 May, 12:04, Tony Polson wrote:
Nonsense. *RMT would be striking because management were unilaterally
imposing an unacceptable form of wage negotiation. *That's a fundamental
issue and one that would form a perfectly legal basis for industrial
action. *Comrade Crow would have no problem rustling up a vote against,
so all requirements of the industrial relations legislation would have
been complied with. *

Please read what I said - "legislation to remove the right to
strike ....and [enforce compulsory arbitration]"

This would be nothing to do with the management and the RMT. If the
RMT launches a strike then would be striking about Government
legislation - i.e striking against a third party which is illegal
under the 1984 act (I think - I studied it 20 years ago - but
certainly one of them)


So you want a General Strike, rather than just TfL? ;-)


But ultimately, when faced with constant blackmail, a day of reckoning
has to arrive.

That's where you're wrong. *Decades of simmering discontent and periodic
strikes have led to more decades of simmering discontent and periodic
strikes. *Nothing has changed. *Nothing is bringing it to a head, so
there won't be a day of reckoning.

I was thinking more generally. When was the last time the miners went
on strike? Even Rover workers turned a new leaf, though ultimately too
late to save themselves.


Yes, when the majority of miners had been made redundant, strikes were
suddenly considerably rarer. Yes, when the majority of Rover workers
had been made redundant, strikes were suddenly considerably rarer.

So how are you going to make the majority of TfL workers redundant?


Workers keep getting what they ask for. The management can't do
anything. finally external stakeholders force the issue. In a
competitive market, external stakeholders are customers and act very
quickly.


Sounds good in theory. In practice, management does what is necessary
to keep disruption within limits with which their customers are
reasonably content. And that's where we are now.

"Tony Polson" wrote in message
...
disgoftunwells wrote:

Workers keep getting what they ask for. The management can't do
anything. finally external stakeholders force the issue. In a
competitive market, external stakeholders are customers and act very
quickly.

Sounds good in theory. In practice, management does what is necessary
to keep disruption within limits with which their customers are
reasonably content. And that's where we are now.

In the private sector, given a competitive market, if management and workers
don't get things more or less right the business goes bust and they all lose
their jobs. But in the public sector (including quasi-private businesses
that government can't allow to fail) management and workers get bailed out
until the country goes bust.

Peter

"Peter Masson" wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message
.. .
disgoftunwells wrote:

Workers keep getting what they ask for. The management can't do
anything. finally external stakeholders force the issue. In a
competitive market, external stakeholders are customers and act very
quickly.

Sounds good in theory. In practice, management does what is necessary
to keep disruption within limits with which their customers are
reasonably content. And that's where we are now.

In the private sector, given a competitive market, if management and workers
don't get things more or less right the business goes bust and they all lose
their jobs. But in the public sector (including quasi-private businesses
that government can't allow to fail) management and workers get bailed out
until the country goes bust.


I don't see the country going bust because London Underground drivers
are overpaid.

There is more chance of the country going bust because of the botched
part-privatisation (via PFI) of London Underground, costing very many
times the wage bill of all LU staff, not just its train drivers. And
no-one can blame Comrade Crow or the RMT for any of that nonsense!

On 29 May, 13:24, Tony Polson wrote:
disgoftunwells wrote:
On 29 May, 12:04, Tony Polson wrote:
Nonsense. *RMT would be striking because management were unilaterally
imposing an unacceptable form of wage negotiation. *That's a fundamental
issue and one that would form a perfectly legal basis for industrial
action. *Comrade Crow would have no problem rustling up a vote against,
so all requirements of the industrial relations legislation would have
been complied with. *

Please read what I said - *"legislation to remove the right to
strike ....and [enforce compulsory arbitration]"

This would be nothing to do with the management and the RMT. If the
RMT launches a strike then would be striking about Government
legislation - i.e striking against a third party which is illegal
under the 1984 act (I think - I studied it 20 years ago - but
certainly one of them)

So you want a General Strike, rather than just TfL? *;-)

I'm sure some legislation regarding strikes in essential services will
come in if the Conservatives win.

There'll need to be general acceptance of this and making binding
arbitration more accessible will be welcomed by sectors which, for
professional reasons, don't like striking, or have been exploited by
having a monopoly employer (e.g. nurses).

The TGWU would complain about any restriction of strike action but
wouldn't strike because to do so would be illegal under the 1982
legislation, and if sold correctly the new legislation would have
broad support.

David Cameron is a master at selling things, and in this instance he
would have the full help of Bob Crow and the RMT, who have spent much
of the last decade trying to convince the public that such legislation
is required.

disgoftunwells wrote:
On 29 May, 13:24, Tony Polson wrote:

So you want a General Strike, rather than just TfL? =A0;-)

I'm sure some legislation regarding strikes in essential services will
come in if the Conservatives win.

There'll need to be general acceptance of this

snip


OK, what's the USP? How will you get people to accept the inevitable
disruption that will occur, for benefits that are far from clear?


David Cameron is a master at selling things,


David Cameron is completely untested - he hasn't managed to sell
anything to anyone yet.


and in this instance he
would have the full help of Bob Crow and the RMT, who have spent much
of the last decade trying to convince the public that such legislation
is required.


If you think that there is widespread public support for such
legislation, then I think you are sadly mistaken.

There was a window of opportunity after the firemen's strike when the
public might have accepted no-strike legislation in the essential public
services - fire, police, ambulance, perhaps even the NHS. However, I'm
not sure that, even then, people would have had the stomach for seeing
such draconian legislation extended to workers in public transport. In
London, perhaps, but not nationally.

In message , at 14:13:54 on
Fri, 29 May 2009, Tony Polson remarked:
David Cameron is completely untested - he hasn't managed to sell
anything to anyone yet.

He sold someone the idea he should be leader.
--
Roland Perry