Unions had a place in the past. These days with stringent H&S laws, employment law, moral and ethical working environments & employees........ it doesn't have a place. Hence the ever decreasing numbers/members

People are still scarred from the power strikes, bin strikes, ambulance strikes, fire strikes of the 70's and 80's. The train disruptions of recent haven't gone down well with the working population. My mate works on SW trains and he said we got a good pay rise I don't know why we are striking. Then he mentioned that the union had a desire to call an all out national train strike across the country. (I think at the time they had 4 franchises 'striking')

Job for life is long gone.

So less than 50% can dictate a strike - you think that is democratic in a binary vote? Even Brexit got >50%

Exactly my point the unions will deliberately force a poor situation in the hope of a bigger prizes - the workers are just pawns in a game. Fortunately the unions so intellectually sluggish they get beat every time.

It would be nice if I was a Russian oligarch or an eastern European mafia captain in which I could click my fingers and get a tory to do my bidding but alas I am not and so I have to side with many like minded people to get things done - we have to participate (rightly so) in a legal vote but the oligarchs do not.

Well that's convinced me then
And here's me thinking that it had A LOT to do with removing guards from trains and making them DOO ?
Now I am sure there a million opinions on the relevant safety or not of DOO but I can rest at ease in future when commuting that your mate got his pay rise and he was ok (wonder if hed have got a pay rise if there eerent unions?) And I dont have to worry about passenger safety.
Because I am absolutely sure the people at the very top getting 80% of any profits are solely interested in passenger welfare and providing great service and not profits

Correct
And just because they arent run fantastically well, doesnt mean there isnt a place for them
Yes they should be improved and updated, but anyone who thinks a majority of Business wouldn't exploit workers or shortcut on H&S for example in the name of improved profits without there being organisations to keep them in check is living in dream land.
"SOME" businesses may, lots wont.

So a union/workers "Getting Beat" is a good thing?
Irrespective of what the issue is???

Surely if they have a valid concern it would be a good thing if they won?

Their incompetence at achieving a good result shouldn't distract away from the intention of their action

I think the point being made is that a strike requires 50% of all votes casts in favour AND 40% of all [ipossible[/i votes.

If that is correct, a 51% vote in favour would require nearly 80% participation in the ballot. Or on 60% participation you’d need an approx. 66% vote in favour to sneak home, for example.

Brexit got 52% of votes but on ‘only’ 72.2% turnout - so not 40% of all those eligible.

Thank you, that's correct and it underpins my original point that Unions are more democratic than GEs or the recent referendum.

Depends on the circumstances - if like at Grangemouth they were going to bring the depot to a standstill unless the Ineos submitted then yes - SW trains just the same.

So we are saying if the firm has 100 employees of which 80 are members of the union only 60 vote so as long as 32 vote for it passes so a strike can be called if 32% of the workforce call for it?

You originally stated that it was a good thing they get Beat EVERY Time?
Is that not what your saying now?

Seems to be what your saying is that it depends on the circumstance now - And if that's the case then in those circumstances the issues they are bringing to the table are Worthwhile and you want them to Win?

Sounds like they do serve a purpose to me?

Oh - And being slightly sarcastic - Where did you get this evidence about those Depots/The rail industry?
Wouldn't be anecdotal would it?

What I am saying this if the employer wont budge the unions will lose every time because their position is much weaker - ask most workers would the rather work on lower pay or not work at all they will choose the former therein lies the problem for the union. SWT wont cave in and there is nothing the union can do to change that dynamic - its been in the news for months so just Google it? or isn't that sufficient for you.

I have said before and I will say it again I don't see where the unions fit in the modern working environment - so I don't see a major incident in the private sector that they can win.

Quote: "So we are saying if the firm has 100 employees of which 80 are members of the union only 60 vote so as long as 32 vote for it passes so a strike can be called if 32% of the workforce call for it?'" Yes. Although obviously, 20 of them would not be eligible to strike as non-union members. Similarly, if there were only 10 union members, and 4 out of 7 who participate in the ballot vote to strike, it’d be a legally mandated strike, for everybody except the 90 non-union members. Or if there were 66.65 million employees, but only 46.60 million were eligible to participate in the ballot and 13.05 million did not cast a vote, you’d need at least 18.64 million (rather than, for example, 17.41 million) for the walk out. The 40% of all the total electorate rule was applied to the 1979 Scottish devolution referendum, which failed to pass despite a 51.6% yes vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Scot ... referendum

Quote: "So we are saying if the firm has 100 employees of which 80 are members of the union only 60 vote so as long as 32 vote for it passes so a strike can be called if 32% of the workforce call for it?'" Yes. Although obviously, 20 of them would not be eligible to strike as non-union members. Similarly, if there were only 10 union members, and 4 out of 7 who participate in the ballot vote to strike, it’d be a legally mandated strike, for everybody except the 90 non-union members. Or if there were 66.65 million employees, but only 46.60 million were eligible to participate in the ballot and 13.05 million did not cast a vote, you’d need at least 18.64 million (rather than, for example, 17.41 million) for the walk out. The 40% of all the total electorate rule was applied to the 1979 Scottish devolution referendum, which failed to pass despite a 51.6% yes vote. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Scot ... referendum

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/ ... us-policy/ On the local news last night a partially sighted person stated that his boss told him that "he had to go to work" - non essential - and to do so he has to catch public transport. He was having difficulty shopping - he has to touched the items-if they are there - and partially blind people don't have the same entitlements as other vulnerable people, e.g. they don't get the urgent deliveries that "true"vulnerable get from supermarkets. They obviously struggle to see 2m. God knows how they get through the toilet process at work in a safe manner but then again how does anyone? Do the Tories have any idea about anything that they get involved in?

https://www.thecanary.co/trending/2020/ ... us-policy/ On the local news last night a partially sighted person stated that his boss told him that "he had to go to work" - non essential - and to do so he has to catch public transport. He was having difficulty shopping - he has to touched the items-if they are there - and partially blind people don't have the same entitlements as other vulnerable people, e.g. they don't get the urgent deliveries that "true"vulnerable get from supermarkets. They obviously struggle to see 2m. God knows how they get through the toilet process at work in a safe manner but then again how does anyone? Do the Tories have any idea about anything that they get involved in?