Emma - the unions have a function but sometimes I feel their ego gets in the way and the members are often pawns in a game.

The threat of being labelled a scab is used as a means of keeping the membership in order

Unions are not a bad idea, particularly in some lines of work. Like Emma's. I'm not in one, since there isn't really one with my particular line of work in mind. My wife, who works for the same organisation, does have one. Odd.

The union I could join is currently refusing to budge from it's demands for an 8% pay increase. Given the current climate, that, in my book, means it's campaigning for some people to be made redundant so others can have more cash in their pocket. That isn't something I feel I can support.

I think that can be true. I distinctly remember my mum being one of a large majority of members of her union who voted against strike action, only for the union to declare that they were going on strike anyway. Not sure whose interests they were trying to serve there. Somebody at the Union got to be on TV a lot though......

Which just proves in some instances they are worthwhile, in others they are not. It depends if they can be bothered.

Some of the things the union here come out with are ridiculous.

See my above post. Inability to think outside the box.

Unions have their value in certain areas - health and safety - employment law etc and they can be a good catalyst for positive change.

What I also think is odd is that strike action is declared by taking the majority who voted not the majority of the members/workforce. If say 51% of those who voted vote for strike then the strike is on rather than what % of the total workforce voted for a strike

My missus' brother-in-law is a Leeds binman. He said the main reason they've voted in favour of the deal now is because most binmen have a clause in their contract stating that, after 12 weeks of consistent strike action, the contract can be terminated.

Not sure how true that is, or how it would actually work in practice (contravenes Employment Law surely?), but there you go.

That'll be because a strike is called by a union for its members and based on the wishes of those members. Why should those who are not members of the union and do not pay it subscriptions have the right to influence whether its members can or cannot take industrial action?

When I first joined the Civil Service I also joined PCS (or CPSA as it was at that time). It took me about six months to figure out that the sole aim of the local representatives were to make it onto regional or national committees so they could get more paid time off work. I decided at that point my subscriptions would be better spent elsewhere.

When Unions take into account the bigger picture that their demands on (generally) pay and conditions will have on the overall workforce and their longer term viability, then they will start to receive some sympathy from me. Everything has to be as they insist right now, and bugger the consequences later.

As things stand at the moment, they are frequently looking for a fight where it is completely inappropriate to do so, with the Bin Strike being a classic example. Precisely how did they "benefit" their members with the actions they took?

My wife works at a local council, and as such is part of the union, now when they pay review came around they were offered 1% which the union suggest the employees voted to strike, as they wanted 2%.

Now most of the people who work for a council, will earn less than £20k, so 1% represents less than £200.

Now when your docked pay, and any loss in pension contributions is taken into consideration, they were losing close to 0.5% of their annual income, with no definite benefit.

Take the 1%, and be glad you still have a job in the current climate.

I'd find it difficult to tell if our bin men here were on strike. It would be hard to distinguish it from one of those weeks when they just seem to decide they don't fancy it and the bins don't get collected.

My union at work have also been arguing about the level of cost of living increase this year. Its been over 9 months. Who's going to pay the interest on my £300?

Had there been a little more rhyme and reason to the way the replacement crews were used I wouldn't have bothered how long it went on for.

As it was we had our bins emptied three weeks in a row, then missed two weeks, did a week and now haven't had them done for the last three.

Still, fortnightly collections will be the norm before long so having four weeks rubbish piled up because the bin crews didn't empty them last time will be the norm.

In Kirkees it is very confusing. I think this is how it works.
The first week the recycling bin will be emptied. The second week the rubbish bin. The third week the recycling bin and the glass bin. The fourth week the rubbish bin.

However we sometimes have weeks where the glss and recycling might be put out, or where the recycling and rubbish might be put out. Because our bins are collected on Mondays, some weeks are also missed due to bank holidays, and the one bin I want, a garden waste bin, we are not provided with!

When the temp bin men collected our general waste last week I was very impressed that he picked up bits of it that fell out when it didn't all go into the bin wagon.
I wonder if the regular crew would have done the same?
I hope that the lad involved gets a permanent job, if he wants it, in the future.
The main stumbling block to the settlement was the need to rationalise routes. Let's hope this has been done.
I find it interesting that the unions involved in this dispute are the same as those whose female (mainly) members have gained the most from the overdue implementation of the Equal Pay legislation which they also fought for.
IMO the binmen have previously over the years always used the threat of industrial action & the spectre of rubbish piling up in the streets to obtain pay deals that were not merited.
It is only now Labour is no longer in charge in Leeds that there has been the stomach for this fight.