To be stressed out about pressure to strike

[peppapighastakenovermylife]

Without saying too much, my 'organisation' has announced strike action.

I really do not want to do it but feel awful at not. I wouldnt actually have to cross a picket line or anything (can simply work at home) but feel like I 'should' strike.

The strike is over our pensions. I understand the impact but feel that I can't worry about something now that will happen in probably 35 - 40 years time. I feel pretty lucky to even be able to afford to pay anything into a pension, let alone a company one. The returns are still better than other private pensions. However I understand why some are striking.

It is potentially two days strike. I cannot afford to lose that money. I am the main wage earner and just come off SMP. If I strike food will either be going on the credit card with no clear means of paying it off soon. There are more pressing issues such as redundancy, fuel costs, reductions in tax credits and so on looming. I feel like I need to worry about now rather than way in the future and do not have the 'luxury' that many well paid members of staff might have of not really noticing the loss of a days pay.

Would you strike? Have you gone on strike in the past? I am too 'young' (I wish ) to have really been in this situation before

Do you know what the turnout was? Last strike action here was 55% for 45% against with a 27% turnout. So a strike went ahead on the votes of 15% of union members. I don't blame any union members not supporting a strike on the basis of figures like these.

Two days is a heck of a lot of money to lose.

We have just had to have a vote to have a 5 day unpayed holidays. In other words a weeks paycut but this is to try to save as many jobs as possible.

The best scenario here is that I keep my job but lose a weeks pay

or
lose my job and have all the time off from work because I won't be working.
that's by the way.

Start planning for the loss in pay, you are a union member then you are a two faced hypocrite if you don't strike (I'm sure your not - just unwordly to union ways)

2 days pay is nothing compared to what you're fighting for. ( if it's what I think it is )
This particular issue may not effect you yet - but that's not how you should be thinking - we'd have nothing if it wasn't for unions fighting for better pay and conditions - how many men fought for women's rights in the workplace?
Stop being selfish - find your backbone and support your union.

Peppa: I think the proposed pension changes are important. You're right that they aren't catastrophic to existing members like you and me. However, the proposals for new entrants are far more worrying and they will particularly disadvantage (most likely predominantly female) members who choose to work part-time for a period. Even if they come back to work full-time for many years, this will have a significant impact on their pension. As you know, it's already difficult enough for those members and can very easily lower their long-term earning potential anyway, so it's really dreadful that they're going to get screwed over in their pensions too.

I think I've missed something as the OP never seemed to specify what the pension changes are - so how can anyone judge if they are significant or not?

The OP and I are in the same profession and pension scheme, vj.

I think I'm in the same 'company' as you and I agree, it is hard. I voted against strike action on pensions, but the whole point of unions is 'one for all', so I will be going on strike.

It is galling knowing that you will still have to do exactly the same work but not get paid for it.

I guess it's your decision, but look at the bigger picture, if no one takes a stand, then ordinary workers are going to be in a hell of a state in a few years. One of the issues is the anti-union laws that have been enacted over the last few decades. Sometimes you have to strike about the issues you are legally able to strike about.

But sympathy though, its horrible to have to lose money that you can't really afford to.

I do see the bigger picture - just wish the timing could have been a bit better perhaps! I guess with all the cuts and redundancies going on, and the number of people my age with no real option to start any pension, there seemed more important things to worry about now

Based on this I probably will strike although I think it may also be the straw that breaks the camels back.

Damsel: do you see my point though that our work load will not reduce? I see it almost as them winning as they get to pay us less but still get the same amount back

I do now also see why many staff are not union members!

I'm not saying that it's right or wrong for them to strike. Just that with a union, once the ballot is counted, you act as a unit.

VJ - I am not up to scratch on the exact details but it is something like a new entrant to the pension scheme will be 400k worse off over the course of their retirement and someone on the scheme will be 150k worse off

I think striking is the 'right' thing to do, just one added awful stress.

As an aside, no action has been called over our redundancy situation - so in a way I kind of feel I am taking a pay loss to support those who will remain in work when I will lose my job (but they wont strike for 'me' ). Does that make any sense. I do realise it is a much much bigger picture than that though.

Perhaps in our line of work it would be just as strong to refuse to work over a certain 3 days or something rather than 'strike' as our tasks still need to be done. However I then worry about those who miss out by us striking.

I do absolutely see your point that workloads will not reduce and that there are redundancies etc. But I think they are somewhat separate to the pensions issue. I also worry that our employers want us to focus on the former so that they can do all sorts of mischief top the latter; it's all a bit divide and conquer really. I think we need to fight for decent pensions, decent working conditions and not to have our colleagues made redundant and their workloads passed on to us (without increased pay). They'll still screw us over on the latter two, regardless whether we fight them on the former.

I thought we were balloted about strike action over redundancies at the same time(where I did vote for strike action!)but I don't know what's happenend about that. It may be that the decision hasn't been reached yet, so no propsoal to strike over?

Have you talked to your union about accessing the hardship fund? IMO you have to strike or resign from the union.

Firstly, those statistics are rubbish - as how do you know how long someone is going to be retired. Secondly - how can you possibly strike if you don't know the details of what they are striking over?
Thats ridiculous to me.

Peppapig.
Times are tough, it is now that those people who are not in a union should be in one tbh.

Often unions won't help people until they have been in for a set time. Once the shit starts sticking and people's job descriptions are changing for the worse they will have no one neogatioating on their behalf or fighting their corner.

I understand you don't agree with this paticular strike and like I've said I've been there before but wouldn't you want people backing you up if you came unstuck with your employers.

In recent months our union has helped to support a female worker who was being sexually harrased by a male colleague, It has supported a member of staff in a greivance procedure and helped at an Industrial tribunal. These are local issues that I know about.

If you weren't in a union who would help you if you needed it? Could you afford legal costs if you had to hire a solicitor?

A unions purpose isn't just to get you discounted home insurance you know!

peppa: I think the union should be doing loads more for people in your situation too. It's dreadful that they aren't.

Maybe ask the union about hardship funds and use the 'strike' time to work at home on what benefits you rather than the crap that clogs up your day to day and prevents you from doing it.

I will be striking, even though I did not vote for the strike, as that's what standing with your fellow members means. I am not particularly pleased about it, but weight that against the other benefits of union membership, such as ensuring my employment is fair and representing me if it is not (and more than one of my colleagues has had call on their services recently). So, out I will go.

vj: those figures are projections about how it would affect the 'average' employee in a similar situation to peppa. They aren't meant to reflect what would happen to everyone. The union has explained what the strike is about, and has provided some examples so people can understand how they or their colleagues would be affected.

I am also concerned that by striking we will now be seen as even more of a target for redundancy.

I am questioning union membership as on one occasion I needed them they were no help and on another have been some help but essentially cant change the outcome (job loss).

However I do now understand the union - strike issue a lot more clearly. I think this is a good thing . Learning curve

VJ - I do understand what the changes are, I just meant I couldnt remember the exact figures for the average person

I'm in the same "organisation" and not too happy about the strike either, I have been on strike before and I don't mind losing 2 days pay.
But I am not a fan of this union, I work in this organisation in a non-standard way and the union to me seems incapable of understanding anything except the traditional (male) full time way of working, permanent contract til cushy retirement with good pension. Given that a huge proportion of the organisation members don't work in this way, I get frustrated with the union focusing on the "traditional" rights.
I will probably strike out of general lefty habit, but I'm not keen. Like peppa, the same amount of work will be done, regardless, so losing pay for work you'll have to do anyway is galling.

I don't think they're allowed to target you for redundancy based on strike action or union membership. The union would, absolutely, fight this if it were to happen.

I should check with your pension provider that the union have their facts right. I work in pension administration and last time there were changes to our scheme the unions whipped up support using a lot of incorrect information, making the situation sound worse than it was!

Damsel - I realise they are not allowed to - doesn't meant they won't though will it. Of course they won't say it is the reason but...

Yeah, but any emerging relationship between union membership/participation in strike action and redundancy won't go unnoticed and the union would fight it. Your employers will be aware that this would cause them considerable problems so I doubt they'd do it that way. I'm sure the targeting for redundancies will still be horribly unfair, but not in any way that will get them into trouble.