Showing posts with label strike. Show all posts
Showing posts with label strike. Show all posts

Thursday, 10 May 2012

And the World Turns

Three weeks away from my blog, a mostly forced hiatus due to moving house, and the world has become a very different place now to the one I was looking at when I last posted.

Of course, that last post was about the French presidential election and those of us that follow the news will know that socialist Francois Hollande was elected by what Alex Ferguson might call 'a squeaky-bum margin'. Of course, that means that despite the left-wing victory, France remains a deeply-divided country, and the sheer weight of debt across Europe means that no leader will be able to instantly approve large swathes of public sector spending. However, it was cheering that since the majority approval of Hollande's plan for growth on the night of his victory in Tulle, David Cameron has started slipping the 'g' word into his speeches. Of course, there is a big difference between words and deeds, but who knows, maybe the notion that you need growth to boost tax revenues is finally getting through to our leader. Meanwhile, for Hollande, there will be no time to settle into his new role. His first job will be finding an economic plan that mollifies the puffy German premier, Andrea Merkel.

And frankly, who would be poor Andrea at the moment? It's not enough that Great Britain continue to cock a snook at Europe and that she has now lost her closest ally in trying to preserve the fragile finances of the Eurozone (and I think we can agree that 'Merllande' just doesn't sound as sexy as 'Merzoky'.) She now has to contend with Greece's fractured election process, which sees the vote spreadeagled over a variety of left and right wing parties, some pro-Europe and pro-austerity, and others against. With the chance of a coalition being formed that can take the country forward virtually non-existent, there will most likely be further elections in a few weeks time, and a further period of political instability and economic stagnation.

Across the pond, American president Barack Obama has come out in favour of gay marriage, a view apparently shared by our own David Cameron but one which he is afraid to run past his own rumbling backbenchers. Nick Clegg has sold yet another portion of his party's soul for a vague suggestion that there might be a chance to reform the House of Lords, but I hope he's not holding his breath waiting for the discussions to begin.

Finally, I would like to offer my solidarity to the 400,000 public sector workers from PCS and Unite who have gone on strike today in the UK protesting at the proposed changes to their pension schemes. When will our government learn? They cannot continue to pay bankers fat bonuses while in the same breath claiming that the pensions of low-paid workers are unaffordable. It is a stance that lacks credibility and hopelessly undermines their 'All in this together' tagline. And while our own health workers are out on strike protecting their agreed terms and conditions, worldwide that trend is echoed. The foreign office notes that multiple social conflicts are ongoing in socialist Bolivia, where public transport strikes and ongoing health worker strikes have paralysed the capital city, La Paz, and other urban areas across the country.

Wednesday, 29 June 2011

A Short Story About Fairness

Imagine you went to the supermarket this afternoon. It's a nice sunny day, all is well with the world, and you have nothing major planned for the evening, so you decide that you'll buy something nice for dinner.

You pick up a decent-sized pair of pork chops, some exotic-looking salad and a colourful trifle for dessert. You'd normally spend far less than this on dinner, but you've had a long day, worked hard, served the public admirably despite some very difficult circumstances, and frankly, you deserve it. You go to the counter, hand over a £10 note, and retire to your modest home and start cooking.

The pork chops are sizzling in the pan and smelling delicious when there's a knock at the front door.

You take the pan off the heat and get to the door to find that it has been opened for you, and that the supermarket manager is standing in the doorway. You recognise him from his picture, which you saw earlier above the supermarket's most prominent advertising slogan. He is dressed in an extremely sharp suit and has a no-nonsense expression on his face.

Slightly nonplussed, you say, 'Can I help you?'

'Yes sir,' (or miss, or madam). 'There's a bit of a problem, I'm afraid. You see, the supermarket is experiencing some financial difficulties and I need to speak to you about the goods you purchased this afternoon.' He points past you to where the salad is arranged neatly on your plate.

'I'm sorry,' you say, 'I'm not following you.'

'Sir, I understand that you purchased a number of items this afternoon for £10. I'm sorry, but the cost of those goods is now £20, and I must ask you to make up the difference for me now. It's only fair to those of us that work in the supermarket.'

You think you may have misheard, but he is not finished yet. 'Furthermore,' he continues, 'I'm afraid you didn't spend long enough in the shop today.'

You laugh. He doesn't. 'How much longer should I have spent in there?' you ask.

'In order to purchase goods in our store, you must spend at least an hour there each time you shop. It's only fair, because our service is quicker than people get in other stores.'

You are dumbfounded and cannot say anything. The manager waits patiently while you absorb what he has said. After a minute or two, he says, 'Sir, I'd like to ask you to pay me that extra £10 now and return to the store with me for another twenty minutes. Oh, and I'll have to ask you to return those pork chops as well, please. No refunds, I'm afraid.'

By now, quite angry, you demand to know why you should return the pork chops.

Smoothly as anything, the manager says, 'It's only fair, sir. Not everyone can eat pork chops.'

QUESTION: Are you angry at the supermarket for moving the goalposts after you have agreed terms?

If your answer to this question is 'yes', please support tomorrow's public sector strikes over pension reform.

Thursday, 1 April 2010

Got to get it right

The great thing about the forthcoming long weekend is that it will give me a chance to catch up with those tedious jobs, the ironing, the general tidying, that I normally allow to go undone for long periods when I'm at work. After all, I hardly ever get visitors, so whether my books are in their allocated positions on the shelves or spread over the floor is not particularly relevant. More importantly, it frees up time for me to write blog entries, particularly when there is something well worth talking about.

One of those things caught my eye today - a political headline which will go largely unnoticed in the entirely unwarranted media frenzy that is kicking in already even though a date for the general election has yet to be set (so who do you want? That sadistic Scottish bully who took the economy down the toilet, the far-too-smooth public-school educated Toff who looks so earnest on interviews, it's as if his head is about to explode, or that...what's his name? The other guy.)

Okay, so my analysis of the situation is more than a little crude, and this entry will not be about the election. Regardless of who gets in, there will be tough decisions to be made, and the only thing that seems certain is that things are likely to get worse before they get better. Furthermore, if you work in the public sector, it's probably best to look away now, because we are the chief target for private sector media agitators, who see it as our responsibility to 'share the burden' (did we share the boom?)

Earlier today, for the second time in five months, the British judiciary have made a ruling that it is illegal for a trade union in Britain to strike. As before, the devil is in the detail, and as the union supporting the BA cabin crew were forced to reballot on the basis of a number of votes taken from workers who had already been made redundant, so now the RMT have had their noses bloodied for apparently collecting more 'yes' votes than there are workers in key areas, and balloting a number of signal boxes that don't exist.

I am sympathetic towards the trade union sides, particularly when you consider the sheer size of a national ballot and the organisation that must go into co-ordinating the voting. There are hundreds of thousands of ballot slips, to be delivered on time to the correct addresses, the response must be swiftly counted and the outcome delivered in a way that fully supports the media goals to be achieved from the outcome. It is an operation akin to a tap-dancing comedian delivering a long-winded joke to the most sceptical of audiences.

Even so, if the media stories about the RMT vote collections are true, it is vitally important that such things are not allowed to happen. As well as making all trade union supporters look like fools, it allows the management of companies like BA to undermine the efforts of those involved and use obfuscation to distort the true message that is being sent out.

It is little short of scandalous to see representatives of the main political parties criticising trade unionists for exercising their democratic right to strike. In these difficult financial times, low-paid workers do not desert their posts for days at a time for frivolous reasons. They do it, as the BA crews did, because they believe that cutting crew numbers leads to reduced safety for those on board and lower standards of service. They do it, as the RMT surely will when their members are re-balloted, because reduced maintenance could lead to more scenes like those at Hatfield and Potters Bar. It's worth remembering that while strikes may affect your holiday or travel plans in the short-term, it is the last resort option afforded to those who are there to deliver the service without the support of their own intransigent management.