Strike!

[MickiQ]

Does she say why? One of the things I would consider as being a better union would be whether it takes strike action or not.

I don't know I do know she used to be in NEU when it was called NUT some years ago but moved to NASUWT because she wasn't happy with NUT.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

These strikes haven't the objective of bringing down the government tbh.

Yeah this. Not to come over all AA but 'bringing down the government' just gets you Keir Starmer doesn't it. It absolutely shouldn't be the aim.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Yeah this. Not to come over all AA but 'bringing down the government' just gets you Keir Starmer doesn't it. It absolutely shouldn't be the aim.

They're on their way out anyway I suspect. So why make the extra effort?

 

[hash tag]

Yeah this. Not to come over all AA but 'bringing down the government' just gets you Keir Starmer doesn't it. It absolutely shouldn't be the aim.

But what's the alternative

 

[Serge Forward]

But what's the alternative

Bring down a Starmer government as well.

 

[JTG]

But what's the alternative

Bully whoever's in charge into concessions whatever shade of Tory they are

 

[existentialist]

Bring down a Starmer government as well.

Some major strikes might well put the shits up HM Loyal Opposition, and give them a bit more of an idea of how the cookie is crumbling...

 

[The39thStep]

Some major strikes might well put the shits up HM Loyal Opposition, and give them a bit more of an idea of how the cookie is crumbling...

I think Labour has the ability and no doubt nouse to speak left or to those concerned about pay when it suits them. However, it's purely tactical and their opinion poll lead provides a cushion against the shits being put up them. Their modus operandi is being seen as fit to govern. Disaffiliation from Labour and the withdrawal of funding, however, might make a difference but unfortunately, that's not likely at the moment.

 

[Lord Camomile]

Yeah, my political analysis is weak and ill-informed, but while I do believe Starmer's Labour simply naturally lean quite Right, I also think they are chasing where they think the votes are..

So if it's demonstrated there's votes in the direction opposite to where they're currently running, it may at least encourage them to reconsider and possibly make some concessions where they're willing to.

For example, maybe the Labour party might openly support Labour, ffs

 

[Magnus McGinty]

The DM have been whinging today about how many union leaders sit on the Labour Party's executive. Obviously that's supposed to make Tory voters balk but for me it's surprising how crap they are even with those folk sitting there.

 

[hitmouse]

A few days old now, but here's an update on the latest absolute pisstake of an offer from UCEA, and what Unison branches are doing in HE:

Unions 'shocked' by revised higher education pay offer | Article, News | News | UNISON National

Those on the highest grades are offered the highest percentage rise, as new strikes dates are announced

www.unison.org.uk

The employers made a marginally improved offer which, compared to the original one, provides an improved – but still below inflation – offer for those on and above spinal column point 42. However, it did nothing to address issues of poverty pay and declining pay for all.


UNISON’s negotiators were shocked that the employers thought it appropriate to direct the £140m they added to the pay bill, across the country, at the 60,000 highest paid staff on national pay scales, leaving those at the bottom end struggling.

Original offer

Spinal points 3-5 – 7%

Spinal points 6-14 – 7%

Spinal points 15-25 – 6%

Spinal points 26-42 – 5%

Spinal points above 43 – 4%

Latest offer

Spinal points 3-5 – 8%

Spinal points 6-14 – 7%

Spinal points 15-25 – 6%

Spinal points 26-42 – 5%

Spinal points above 43 – 5%

UNISON also has a further round of industrial action planned, focusing on the 2022-23 pay dispute.

The following dates are planned (though any of these could be withdrawn):

Glasgow School of Art – 16, 21, 22 February

Leeds Beckett University – 8, 9, 10 February

Manchester Met University – 6, 7, 8 February

Queen Margaret University – 21, 22, 23 February

School of Oriental and African Studies (University of London) – 1 and 8- 10 February

University of Brighton – 16- 17 and 20-21 February

University of Leeds – 8-12 and 22-24 February

University of the West of England – 14, 15, 16 February

 

[AmateurAgitator]

Meanwhile in France . . .

French Union Cuts Power to Pressure Macron on Pensions

The strategy—cutting electricity to politicians and the wealthy while handing out discounted power and gas to the public—has drawn warnings of legal sanctions as the country prepares for another national protest next week.

www.wsj.com

 

[The39thStep]

Yeah, my political analysis is weak and ill-informed, but while I do believe Starmer's Labour simply naturally lean quite Right, I also think they are chasing where they think the votes are..

So if it's demonstrated there's votes in the direction opposite to where they're currently running, it may at least encourage them to reconsider and possibly make some concessions where they're willing to.

For example, maybe the Labour party might openly support Labour, ffs

I think you are on the right track ie in that the Labour Party can respond to pressure from below, it can also respond to the Trade Union bureaucracy. However, it also believes that, in the words of Mandelson, that the working class has nowhere else to go. In their view there is no working class vote to chase.

 

[Lord Camomile]

I think you are on the right track ie in that the Labour Party can respond to pressure from below, it can also respond to the Trade Union bureaucracy. However, it also believes that, in the words of Mandelson, that the working class has nowhere else to go. In their view there is no working class vote to chase.

Three cheers for FPTP

Oh, but also...

For example, maybe the Labour party might openly support Labour, ffs

This will be less likely when the biggest TU in the country opposes a motion to support striking workers

 

[Humberto]

Three cheers for FPTP

Oh, but also...


This will be less likely when the biggest TU in the country opposes a motion to support striking workers

If that really is a reflection of Labour's position then they are short-sighted.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I think you are on the right track ie in that the Labour Party can respond to pressure from below, it can also respond to the Trade Union bureaucracy. However, it also believes that, in the words of Mandelson, that the working class has nowhere else to go. In their view there is no working class vote to chase.

Mind you, they got told otherwise at the last GE. Lots in the North who were basically UKIP voted Tory for Brexit because Corbyn was remain. What a fuck up.

 

[AmateurAgitator]

Its always wise to not have any positive expectations of the Labour Party.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Its always wise to not have any positive expectations of the Labour Party.

I don't.

 

[The39thStep]

Mind you, they got told otherwise at the last GE. Lots in the North who were basically UKIP voted Tory for Brexit because Corbyn was remain. What a fuck up.

I’m still in contact with mates ( some voted leave, some remain , some I haven’t a clue which way) who work on the railways , hospitals , post , teachers and universities and I’ve asked all of them is Brexit discussed on the picket lines and they’ve all laughed and asked why have I asked them that question.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I’m still in contact with mates ( some voted leave, some remain , some I haven’t a clue which way) who work on the railways , hospitals , post , teachers and universities and I’ve asked all of them is Brexit discussed on the picket lines and they’ve all laughed and asked why have I asked them that question.

I'm active in a TU as a rep and Brexit isn't mentioned. Can't say the same for some of my old mates though who appear to have bought the line that it singularly is responsible for all of our ills.

 

[existentialist]

Three cheers for FPTP

Oh, but also...


This will be less likely when the biggest TU in the country opposes a motion to support striking workers

That's Brexit level marginality.

 

[Karl Masks]

Good turn out in bristol

 

[hitmouse]

That's Brexit level marginality.

Is Brexit level marginality when people keep insisting on mentioning Brexit on a thread despite its relevance to the topic at hand being marginal at best?

Anyway, have a question that I wondered if anyone could advise on: we had a member contacting us saying they'd been talking to a non-member who wanted to know if non-members taking part in action would be treated differently. I said I'd advise them to join cos they can't claim strike pay otherwise, but that non-members have the same legal rights and employers aren't allowed to treat people differently because of union membership. My branch secretary reckons I gave incorrect advice there, because non-members weren't included in/protected by the ballot and lawful dispute.
I still reckon I'm right, cos apart from anything else employers don't have a right to know who is and isn't a member, so that'd make treating non-members differently a non-starter, but I suppose I could be talking shit there, I was very close to saying that trade union membership is a protected characteristic under the Equalities Act until I googled it to check and realised it wasn't. Anyone know for sure?

 

[Pickman's model]

Is Brexit level marginality when people keep insisting on mentioning Brexit on a thread despite its relevance to the topic at hand being marginal at best?

Anyway, have a question that I wondered if anyone could advise on: we had a member contacting us saying they'd been talking to a non-member who wanted to know if non-members taking part in action would be treated differently. I said I'd advise them to join cos they can't claim strike pay otherwise, but that non-members have the same legal rights and employers aren't allowed to treat people differently because of union membership. My branch secretary reckons I gave incorrect advice there, because non-members weren't included in/protected by the ballot and lawful dispute.
I still reckon I'm right, cos apart from anything else employers don't have a right to know who is and isn't a member, so that'd make treating non-members differently a non-starter, but I suppose I could be talking shit there, I was very close to saying that trade union membership is a protected characteristic under the Equalities Act until I googled it to check and realised it wasn't. Anyone know for sure?

You're right that they shouldn't be treated differently. For example, I'm not a ucu member but I would be treated as they are, in terms of deduction of wages, if I refused to cross their picket line

 

[hitmouse]

You're right that they shouldn't be treated differently. For example, I'm not a ucu member but I would be treated as they are, in terms of deduction of wages, if I refused to cross their picket line

Cheers. I suppose the question is whether you would have any additional risk of disciplinary action for absence? I feel like you wouldn't/shouldn't, but I'm not 100% sure, also not totally clear on how it works in terms of different unions having jurisdiction over difference bits of the workforce?

 

[muscovyduck]

Cheers. I suppose the question is whether you would have any additional risk of disciplinary action for absence? I feel like you wouldn't/shouldn't, but I'm not 100% sure, also not totally clear on how it works in terms of different unions having jurisdiction over difference bits of the workforce?

I feel like you're going to get one answer for the in theory of this and another for in practice. In practice, they're definitely at more risk if the workplace know or suspect they're not in a union. However I'm not sure about in theory.

 

[Serge Forward]

Yes, in practical terms, you are potentially more at risk if striking when not a union member because if you do get disciplined, the union has no reason to support you. But in legal terms, according to TULR(C)A, you should not be discriminated against based on membership or non-membership of a union. This was aimed at unions but it also applies to employers.

Eta: unless the employer and union has a check-off system, the employer would have no way of knowing who is or isn’t a union member.

 

[andysays]

Yes, in practical terms, you are potentially more at risk if striking when not a union member because if you do get disciplined, the union has no reason to support you. But in legal terms, according to TULR(C)A, you should not be discriminated against based on membership or non-membership of a union. This was aimed at unions but it also applies to employers.

Eta: unless the employer and union has a check-off system, the employer would have no way of knowing who is or isn’t a union member.

Just to expand on this last point, a check-off system (where union subs are deducted from pay by employer) tells employers who some of the members are, but not all, as there is also an option to pay direct, eg by direct debit.

So not paying by check-off doesn't prove someone isn't a union member.

For this and other reasons, I've always thought it's best to pay subs direct rather than using check-off.

 

[Smokeandsteam]

Yes, in practical terms, you are potentially more at risk if striking when not a union member because if you do get disciplined, the union has no reason to support you. But in legal terms, according to TULR(C)A, you should not be discriminated against based on membership or non-membership of a union. This was aimed at unions but it also applies to employers.

Eta: unless the employer and union has a check-off system, the employer would have no way of knowing who is or isn’t a union member.

hitmouse Serge is correct (as is your Branch Secretary). The key issue is that the TULRCA regulations protects union members. Non member are unlikely to be covered by its provisions in the event of disciplinary action.

Also, the non-member was not balloted and therefore the union cannot formally induce him/her to strike.

Anyway, the solution is simple the non-member joins the union and is covered by the Act from the moment that they do.

ETA: on the latter point: is trade union membership covered by the equality act? the answer is: it depends. Philosophical belief is covered by the Act and so if someone was subjected to detriment because of engagement in a trade union or political activity due to a belief that they deeply held it would be possible to site the EqA, but TULRCA provides much more directive protection for tu activities

 

[Pickman's model]

Cheers. I suppose the question is whether you would have any additional risk of disciplinary action for absence? I feel like you wouldn't/shouldn't, but I'm not 100% sure, also not totally clear on how it works in terms of different unions having jurisdiction over difference bits of the workforce?

Generally ime management say in advance what will happen to strikers pay etc