Debates
04 Oct 07
05 Oct 07
Originally posted by WheelyJust because child labour is cheaper, doesn't neccesairly mean we should persue that course of ethics to gain maximum profits for the few.
Almost certainly true. Striking for anything other than injustice (I appreciate that this is hard to define) is generally damaging and self defeating but the right to strike itself, is vital to a healthy democracy.
Lots of people fought a dreadfully long time to get good rights for people and workers on the workfloor. Obviously capitalism has responded with a staunch reply.
Now it's time for a killing blow to be dealt. One way or the other. And I sure as hell am going down screaming and kicking, rather than do what I'm told to make some pig rich.
06 Oct 07
Originally posted by shavixmirThe only losers in the long run will be the srikers and bods like you.
Just because child labour is cheaper, doesn't neccesairly mean we should persue that course of ethics to gain maximum profits for the few.
Lots of people fought a dreadfully long time to get good rights for people and workers on the workfloor. Obviously capitalism has responded with a staunch reply.
Now it's time for a killing blow to be dealt. One w ...[text shortened]... hell am going down screaming and kicking, rather than do what I'm told to make some pig rich.
06 Oct 07
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirIn Australia we have seen the rights that unions and unionists worked tirelessly for almost a century to establish almost wither away as government has demonised the trades union movement and consistently ruled in favor of business. The funny thing is that people are letting those rights slip away hardly without a murmur. It seems that in twenty years time when the rights of the worker have become a long forgotten memory, if a movement were to spring up to defend workers rights they may have to fight hard if not harder than their ancestors did to claw back some of their self respect and recognition as being an integral part of any business enterprise.
Just because child labour is cheaper, doesn't neccesairly mean we should persue that course of ethics to gain maximum profits for the few.
Lots of people fought a dreadfully long time to get good rights for people and workers on the workfloor. Obviously capitalism has responded with a staunch reply.
Now it's time for a killing blow to be dealt. One w ...[text shortened]... hell am going down screaming and kicking, rather than do what I'm told to make some pig rich.
06 Oct 07
Originally posted by kmax87The UK trade unions successfully wrecked several major industries, notably the car industry, during the reign of a Labour government in the 1960s and 70s.
In Australia we have seen the rights that unions and unionists worked tirelessly for almost a century to establish almost wither away as government has demonised the trades union movement and consistently ruled in favor of business. The funny thing is that people are letting those rights slip away hardly without a murmur. It seems that in twenty years time w ...[text shortened]... some of their self respect and recognition as being an integral part of any business enterprise.
07 Oct 07
Originally posted by WheelyI must confess although this strike is particular problem to me in the middle of buying a house and the vendor is going bonkers at how slow my mortgage provider is being (and he is correct, they are) and threatening to pull out if things don't move quicker. I do not know what this strike is about?
You are so lucky that you don't have to work 16 hours a day, six days a week in appalling conditions with zero health and safety regulations and no vacation.
Why do you suppose that is?
Are they striking because they are forced to work a 96 hour week, seems very excessive are you sure about that? Also I would have thought that at least basic health and safety regulations were in place? Isn't it complulsory to allow full time workers holidays nowadays?
I actually did work many a 96 hour week at the start of my career, although I have to confess it was by choice putting a lot of hours in to get up the ladder and also independant to my career starting off 2 businesses at the same time. But I find it hard to believe that Royal Mail workers are regularly doing a 96 hour week, maybe I'm wrong, tell me more.
07 Oct 07
Originally posted by Squelchbelchahh yes of course I had just got out of bed (mainly to see why the dog was barking), serves me right for posting without the brain engaged fully
I think he meant that we don't have sweat-shop working conditions for the vast majority of people in the UK largely because of Trade Union influence over the years.
09 Oct 07
Originally posted by SquelchbelchIn the State-run industries such as the postal service we see overmanning and inefficiency as a matter of course.
I think he meant that we don't have sweat-shop working conditions for the vast majority of people in the UK largely because of Trade Union influence over the years.
The former nationalised industries such as telecommunications, gas, and electricity, were able to shed up to 40% of their workforces on privatisation, and provided a cheaper and more efficient service thanks to competition.
09 Oct 07
This nonsense is another example of how Labour governments in the UK allow the least qualified and most vociferous elements of society to hold the rest of us to ransom.
The answer is to sack the lot and recruit a new staff willing to work the hours for which thay are paid. Has Brown the guts to do what Margaret Thatcher did for us in 1980s?