The Strikes Thread

[westhamgardner]

Lynch and the RMT represents its members. They don’t work for you, me or anyone else who isn’t a member.

Unless I’m mistaken this a thread discussing the strikes not a governing body whether Lynch can or can’t organise them. Might as well stop discussing football tactics whilst we are at it as we can’t make a sub during a match

[hammers92]

Unless I’m mistaken this a thread discussing the strikes not a governing body whether Lynch can or can’t organise them. Might as well stop discussing football tactics whilst we are at it as we can’t make a sub during a match

Eh? That post makes absolutely no sense.

My point is about comments about the public not liking it, and how it’s unfair on people. The RMT do not care about the public, they care for their members only. So saying how normal people won’t like it is irrelevant and won’t push the RMT to accept a pay deal.

The Government at any point could make a serious offer. They’ve misunderstood just how far Lynch is willing to go,(for his members).

[Plashet Grove Pete]

That's the thing, lynch and the rmt care not for public support

Precisely. The more harm the public suffer, the better for Lynch and his ilk.

[bubbles1966]

Eh? That post makes absolutely no sense.

My point is about comments about the public not liking it, and how it’s unfair on people. The RMT do not care about the public, they care for their members only. So saying how normal people won’t like it is irrelevant and won’t push the RMT to accept a pay deal.

The Government at any point could make a serious offer. They’ve misunderstood just how far Lynch is willing to go,(for his members).

Perhaps the government do not care about the unions, they care about the taxpayer/voter/consumer - their paymasters and employers.

Perhaps the union has over-estimated their importance and misunderstood little their employers/the government is going to yield to them.

Use of buses, tubes and trains is still down 10%-30% and a population that has got used to WFH really doesn't care if it has to do a few more days here and there.

Here's an illustration of that in action: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslond ... r-AA14VhBf

[hammers92]

Perhaps the government do not care about the unions, they care about the taxpayer/voter/consumer - their paymasters and employers.

The same Government who are happy for private companies to continually mismanage the railways, provide poor service, expensive fares and still laugh all the way to the bank with their profits?

A publicly owned railway run with the intention of making a profit, which is reinvested back into the system is the way to go.

That would deliver value to the taxpayer, the voter, the consumer.

[bubbles1966]

The same Government who are happy for private companies to continually mismanage the railways, provide poor service, expensive fares and still laugh all the way to the bank with their profits?

A publicly owned railway run with the intention of making a profit, which is reinvested back into the system is the way to go.

That would deliver value to the taxpayer, the voter, the consumer.

Any train system that can't self-fund through revenue should go out of business.

The country's skint, it can't keep spending money running unsustainable transit systems. If services are running largely empty or unused then shut them.

[westhamgardner]

Eh? That post makes absolutely no sense.

My point is about comments about the public not liking it, and how it’s unfair on people. The RMT do not care about the public, they care for their members only. So saying how normal people won’t like it is irrelevant and won’t push the RMT to accept a pay deal.

The Government at any point could make a serious offer. They’ve misunderstood just how far Lynch is willing to go,(for his members).

The public are the taxpayer and the consumer. Lynch doesn’t care about the everyman but it doesn’t mean that public opinion holds no power. If it swings against the RMT why would the government give in to their demands?

[mumbles87]

Perhaps the government do not care about the unions, they care about the taxpayer/voter/consumer - their paymasters and employers.

Perhaps the union has over-estimated their importance and misunderstood little their employers/the government is going to yield to them.

Use of buses, tubes and trains is still down 10%-30% and a population that has got used to WFH really doesn't care if it has to do a few more days here and there.

Here's an illustration of that in action: https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/newslond ... r-AA14VhBf

The gov time and time again have proven they don't give too hoots about the general public

Otherwise they wouldn't be looking to cream off the top at times of national crisis and play political games during COVID

Striking workers are tax payers aswell. Unions protect jobs which even you don't want more people on the dole


The only reason this dispute hasn't been settled is the gov have a wet dream of finishing the unions and will play this out as long as they can

They are a disgrace to office and the sooner they bugger off into political wilderness the sooner the country and recover from the 12 years of simply criminal leading they have provided

[hammers92]

If it swings against the RMT why would the government give in to their demands?

I personally believe that it’s not about the RMT. It’s about not appearing to give strength to other unions who are/about to press the button and demand a proper pay rise. Which I wholly support, but I probably do understand why they’ve taken that position from an objective viewpoint.

[mumbles87]

The public are the taxpayer and the consumer. Lynch doesn’t care about the everyman but it doesn’t mean that public opinion holds no power. If it swings against the RMT why would the government give in to their demands?

Because work from home or not it costs people money. Especially the economy

[westhamgardner]

Because work from home or not it costs people money. Especially the economy

But it also costs those striking, just how long can people keep taking unpaid days to strike whilst conditions don’t improve? That’s another 6 days unpaid in December after all the action throughout the year. If the government don’t feel the pressure to back down then surely pressure mounts on Lynch to find a compromise.

[mumbles87]

But it also costs those striking, just how long can people keep taking unpaid days to strike whilst conditions don’t improve? That’s another 6 days unpaid in December after all the action throughout the year. If the government don’t feel the pressure to back down then surely pressure mounts on Lynch to find a compromise.

Not everyone will work every day.

I wouldn't be surprised if that week with 4 strike days that 2 days appear in one pay cut off and the other 2 in January

People will be on leave. Rest days etc not everyone will have to lose money.

[mumbles87]

Why the deal was rejected

It's never just the numbers it's the conditions

[S-H]

Did Jim ever get to Hereford?

[mumbles87]

Worth noting for all this "Christmas eve" strike isn't what it seems

Starts at 18:00, nobody will walk out mid shift so they will finish their shifts

Service doesn't run boxing day anyways

Customers won't be overly affected just the eng works

[Danny's Dyer Acting]

• Flexible working contracts, working and rosters

• New annual leave and sick pay arrangements

These definitely don't sound like they'll be things intended to improve the lot of rail workers and give them a better deal.

• Closure of all ticket offices

• Driver only operation of trains

• A review of all on train catering service leading to cutbacks

"Efficiencies" which will only see the passenger experience worsen and shareholder profits go up. RMT aren't just fighting for themselves.

[bubbles1966]

That's far from convincing - it just reads as though the union are against modernisation, innovation and recognising that demand for what they do has dropped.

The country's skint - money spent on empty trains, tubes and buses is money down the drain at a time when so many other things are genuinely needed. Government should pull the subsidies.

[Plashet Grove Pete]

That's far from convincing - it just reads as though the union are against modernisation, innovation and recognising that demand for what they do has dropped.

The country's skint - money spent on empty trains, tubes and buses is money down the drain at a time when so many other things are genuinely needed. Government should pull the subsidies.

Of course the union is against modernisation - indeed any form of change. Glad to see the tide is turning against the dinosaurs.

[Deepster]

Any red tops run with: The Lynch that Stole Christmas?

[Danny's Dyer Acting]

Job cuts, worsening of employment terms, degradation of level of service = "modernisation"

I'll get on the phone to the lads at the Oxford English Dictionary.