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

you're a scab gretalse, you shouldn't be allowed in the union.

a 'scab' blimey are we going back to the dark ages

Why, I pay my money just like everyone else and the union are more than happy to accept it.

Nothing bad or unpleasant has happened to you gretalse but you have weakened the case of your colleagues and shown them a major 'fuck you' attitude, and I find it staggering that anyone would be anything other than deeply ashamed of crossing a picket line- a selfish, hostile act.

Southeastastra the word for a person who chooses to cross a picket line is 'scab'. There isn't another word for it so it's hardly going back to the dark ages is it? You wouldn't say we were going back to the dark ages because someone called a 'kettle' a 'kettle' would you???

gretalse the clue is in the name "union".

I'm a leftie but I find people talking about scabs very depressing. That is the language of the 1980s and all it does is weaken the unions case as it makes them sound thuggish and extreme.

what weakens the unions is the I'm alright jack attitudes of their members, and whats depressing is how unashamedly selfish, divisive and ignorant these people are.

You take what you want and then cross picket lines because you don't feel like going on strike, you're lower than the people making the cuts and taking your pensions in the first place.

wook- It may have weakened their case but their case was ridiculous, they were were demanding a pay rise way above inflation.

What I don't get is if crossing a picket line is so serious and a betrayal of the union then why aren't members of the union who do it expelled from the union?

Agree Buzz - Scabs are happy to take the benefits their striking colleagues eventually achieve though -

I don't know how they sleep at night - they're lower than the bosses who are trying to screw them.

gretalse was this 'ridiculous' demand after a pay freeze or successive rises below inflation perhaps? In which case it wouldn't be altogether ridiculous. And even if not, why shouldn't a working person go for the best deal, when you can be 100% sure the employers will go for the biggest profits.

scab was the language of the 1980s for a reason: it was during that time the idea that people could do what the hell they liked and that there was no such thing as responsibility to others was so heavily promoted.

And I agree that scabs should expect their fellow members to be angry if that is what they do. They're fast enough to grab the benefits of other people sticking their necks out and fighting for better conditions. If you don't agree with the union's actions leave the union. You'll still get the benefits others have fought for but at least you won't be freeloading just for the insurance benefits.

ilovesooty - what do you mean by insurance benefits?

Be in the union and strike or don't be in the union - it is a no brainer. Imagine my surprise when some of my colleagues didn't go on strike then worked overtime to cover striker's shifts - scum.

Surely its better for the union for people to not go on strike and stay in the union then it is for them to leave the union. If someone doesn't go on strike but remains a member then at least the union still gets their membership fee which it can use to finance its operations. If someone leaves the union they still go to work and the union doesn't get their money anymore.

peppa - was referring to the posters who state they're in a union just in case they need protection re allegations or similar but are prepared to scab rather than show solidarity with colleagues.

Imagine my surprise when some of my colleagues didn't go on strike then worked overtime to cover striker's shifts - scum.

Have some people no sense of basic decency?

leandro I'd prefer the unions to kick the scabs out. It's a matter of principle.

And I object to my union fees being used to help them in any way: I'd let them swing when it came to asking for help. Not my decision thogh.

I do see your point and I'd never cross a picket line but it seems that better for the unions to at least get something ie money which is essential for the union to be effective than nothing from some people.

finance of operations doesn't mean much when those operations are sabotaged by the scabs.

They should be kicked out of the union, they also should not get any advantages won by the union, eg if a strike is called against pension cuts and they win, scabs should still get a pension cut, since they clearly weren't bothered about losing it in the first place.

If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem. Scabs are scum.

www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/dec/28/jayaben-desai-obituary

Try the link above for the life story of a truly inspirational female trade unionist and the equal inspirational show of solidarity from the postal workers.

But, hey, these low paid women shouldn't have been so 'ridiulous' should they? Imagine the stress they put on other people who didn't want to join their 'intimidating' and 'dark ages' union.

Far better for this strike never to have happened and for low paid women workers to have never stood up for their rights, right??

Oh look, here are some more women who paved the way for those of us who believe our work matters and should be paid fairly :

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/04/made-in-dagenham-history-women-strike

Good for you OP. Don't strike. I wonder where people in the public sector think the money for final salary pensions, pay increases etc will come from considering we spend over 120 million £ per day just on the interest repayments for the debt the last government racked up.

Imagine my surprise when some of my colleagues didn't go on strike then worked overtime to cover striker's shifts - scum

I'm a non-unionised worker and have worked extra time when there has been a strike, why does that make me scum?

You are free not to strike. I think you said you weren't even in the union. If you think the strike should not be taking place then that's a legitimate view which can be expressed. The country cannot afford public sector pensions and the very early retirement ages and the pensions so many very low paid women and men in the private sector work very hard to fun. The time has come to stop it all as the money has run out. Strikes will make no difference.

Thanks Xenia, nice to see someone on this thread who isn't an 80s throwback or out and proud Trot.