Not read all the post, but do know that in teaching, staff are not allowed to be brought in to replace striking members of staff.
I am striking too btw.


Edit: After having read some of the thread, the issue for me is this. It is not about crossing the picket lline, it is about covering someone elses job.
Sorry but that is a big no no for me.

I support any individuals right to strike.

I support any individual's right to not strike.

I wonder what difference this strike action will actually make?

I wonder if the pension's remained at their current level, how many people will have to lose their jobs to fund them?

When there isn't enough money to sustain the current situation, then the situation must change.

What I haven't seen from the Union leaders is an alternative plan, which will protect both the current terms and conditions of the workforce and not cost the country a (currently) unsustainable amount in return. Once I do see one, I might have a bit more sympathy with the unions. I already sympathise with those who are at risk of losing their job or having their terms eroded.

every worker has their right to withdraw their labour

every worker has a right to work

the only thing that matters is what is right for you. We all have different thought,ideas,motives and reasons to do what e do and say when it comes to breaking a strike and crossing a pickett line.

things to think of

Iam a greedy barsteward for taking the kings shilling why do i need the money?
can i afford to loose money will my family be able to live and eat?
will i be in debt to anyone?
what do my colleagues think of me when its all over?
is the job safe if we loose?
will i be out of work?

My union, UCU, has put forward alternative proposals, it did several months ago. I would imagine other unions did the same. Our pension scheme is extremely well run & financially healthy. Because those in the private sector, many on much higher salaries, chose to put their wages in extremely poorly managed schemes we are expected by equally suffer. What a sad state we have slipped into.

Tigertot, is there a link to the proposals so I could take a look at them and decide for myself if I think it would work?

I'm not against Unions, they can be a very powerful tool for protecting those who are unable to protect themselves, however I do have a (possibly misguided) view that the Unions have become self serving, politically motiviated vehicles for the individuals leading them, and have lost touch with the prinicple they exist for. I suppose you could say the same about the current and last few governments that this country has had too...

Quote batleyrhino="batleyrhino"Tigertot, is there a link to the proposals so I could take a look at them and decide for myself if I think it would work? I'm not against Unions, they can be a very powerful tool for protecting those who are unable to protect themselves, however I do have a (possibly misguided) view that the [uUnions have become self serving, politically motiviated vehicles for the individuals leading them, and have lost touch with the prinicple they exist for[/u. I suppose you could say the same about the current and last few governments that this country has had too...'" That's hardly surprising given the example set by Chief Executives & Boards of Directors. Talk about self-serving hypocrites!!! For those in any doubt I suggest you look at this: www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15827683

Quote batleyrhino="batleyrhino"Tigertot, is there a link to the proposals so I could take a look at them and decide for myself if I think it would work? I'm not against Unions, they can be a very powerful tool for protecting those who are unable to protect themselves, however I do have a (possibly misguided) view that the [uUnions have become self serving, politically motiviated vehicles for the individuals leading them, and have lost touch with the prinicple they exist for[/u. I suppose you could say the same about the current and last few governments that this country has had too...'" That's hardly surprising given the example set by Chief Executives & Boards of Directors. Talk about self-serving hypocrites!!! For those in any doubt I suggest you look at this: www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15827683

Slightly off topic, but I saw some of the news yesterday talking about Top Bosses pay & bonuses and I was dismayed at the poor standard of journalism / balanced view that was given. They even trotted out a hair dresser who seemed to think that 'working in a bank was not that hard' when talking about the head or Barclays, and seemed to think their jobs were equivalent because she was standing up all day. Many people don't seem to realise that the job market is precisely that, a market. You aren't paid in proportion to how unpleasant the job is to do, its generally in proportion to how skilled you are at teh things that matter, and how many other people there are with a similar skillset (or the ability to attain that skill level).

One interesting piece was that people didn't think Top Bosses should earn as much as footballers. Whilst I do think that both are paid obscene amounts of money I can see how they are equivalent. Both sets of people are in a position they are because they have shown talent that few others have. They are also lucky enough that their talent enables a wider organisation to generate huge revenues. Its these reasons why they are paid so much, becuase even though they are paid obscene amounts of money, they generate many times that through doing the job.

If you answer phones in an office, or cut hair, or clean bins, it may not be that pleasant, but your contribution to that company does not have so much impact on the profit of that company as someone in a higher position.

I see two separate yet intertwined issues in the point you raise above OF. It is clear that the high pay levels of some executives is clearly damaging to the morale of their workforces, and is counter produtive to growth, this is without raising the issue of their value in terms of the work the executives are actually doing. The system that allows people to entirely self regulate their pay is a flawed one.

The second issue, is the one which I intended to focus on, and this is one which in my mind exposes the Unions for what they really are. A union is in place to protect all of its members, not a certain section. When a union insists on unrealistic pay (or pension) settlements, it is inevitably not protecting those who will lose their jobs as a result, and therefore fundamentally missing the point of it's own existance.

The irony that those who lead some of the unions are now equally as culpable for the current situation as some of the government with which they bicker is not lost on me...

A problem widely discussed on TV yesterday was that renumeration for CEO's of FTSE 250 companies bears no relation to company performance any more. Any hairdressers or footballer not doing their job very well would soon see their income drop. Companies whose profits and turnover fall, or share value drops, often continue to richly reward the top people who have overseen this.

Back to the picket line - I remember being on a 3 day strike a few years back now, when we took a local vote whether to support a national dispute. All involved (about 10 I think) supported the action. One reneged, and went into work. It caused a lot of bad feeling, that individual was largely ignored afterwards. So don't only think of the short term benefit or loss, consider possible longer term consequences.

Quote batleyrhino="batleyrhino"Tigertot, is there a link to the proposals so I could take a look at them and decide for myself if I think it would work? I'm not against Unions, they can be a very powerful tool for protecting those who are unable to protect themselves, however I do have a (possibly misguided) view that the Unions have become self serving, politically motiviated vehicles for the individuals leading them, and have lost touch with the prinicple they exist for. I suppose you could say the same about the current and last few governments that this country has had too...'" I found this link: recourse.org.uk/ucu-warns-of-ind ... d-through/ I haven't followed the other links through so do not know whether it will give you what you are after. UCU did set out its case several months ago, I read what they put forward & thought it a reasonable argument. I voted yes for action short of a strike, no for a strike. Both votes came out yes. I have continued to work 50 hours a week since, it is simply not possible to work to rule without it significantly affecting those I manage, the university (who are generally a fantastic employer) or the students we are here to support. Undoubtedly there are some within unions who do see it as a political battle & an opportuntiy to bring down the capatilist state. But they are a massive minority. Very few work in HE to get rich. Our VC who runs an organisation with a half billion pounds turnover, made £35m profit last year, has >40,000 staff & students - the second biggest in the UK, only earns c£250k. Now I happen to think no-one should or needs to earn any more than that, but the vast majority of people here earn relatively low wages but accept that for job security, good holidays & a decent pension.

Quote batleyrhino="batleyrhino"Tigertot, is there a link to the proposals so I could take a look at them and decide for myself if I think it would work? I'm not against Unions, they can be a very powerful tool for protecting those who are unable to protect themselves, however I do have a (possibly misguided) view that the Unions have become self serving, politically motiviated vehicles for the individuals leading them, and have lost touch with the prinicple they exist for. I suppose you could say the same about the current and last few governments that this country has had too...'" I found this link: recourse.org.uk/ucu-warns-of-ind ... d-through/ I haven't followed the other links through so do not know whether it will give you what you are after. UCU did set out its case several months ago, I read what they put forward & thought it a reasonable argument. I voted yes for action short of a strike, no for a strike. Both votes came out yes. I have continued to work 50 hours a week since, it is simply not possible to work to rule without it significantly affecting those I manage, the university (who are generally a fantastic employer) or the students we are here to support. Undoubtedly there are some within unions who do see it as a political battle & an opportuntiy to bring down the capatilist state. But they are a massive minority. Very few work in HE to get rich. Our VC who runs an organisation with a half billion pounds turnover, made £35m profit last year, has >40,000 staff & students - the second biggest in the UK, only earns c£250k. Now I happen to think no-one should or needs to earn any more than that, but the vast majority of people here earn relatively low wages but accept that for job security, good holidays & a decent pension.

Do NOT cross a picket line mate - although I understand your own personal situation - it just gives this pathetic excuse for a government the confidence to attack workers rights & working conditions, & WAGES.

History shows that privatisation & the Conservatives are only in it for themselves - keep united mate & PS JOIN a union because it is the only "Insurance Policy for Work" that you have & you never know when you might need its support !