To be shocked and not a little afraid of the Tory plans for trade unions announced today

[thinkingmakesitso]

Sorry if there is already a thread on this, but I couldn't find one.

These plans go way too far and amount to a blatant attack on the Labour party - an attempt to destroy it once and for all.

No rights for workers at all - what would be the point of striking if your employer gets two weeks to organise agency staff to fulfil your role? What would it ever achieve?

Can anyone who voted Tory really say this is what they wanted? That this is any way fair? I feel utterly wretched about this. What right do these people have to do this?

They're preparing for a strike from the nurses, it's clear as day.

Fucking nurses. Who needs them?

Let them just go and get another job if they don't like having their pay frozen for 9 years.

I also think people have forgotten the stuff that has been gained by unions. People take the decent working conditions for granted. Most working people today have only worked under relatively strong legislation. They expect their contracts to be honoured, their workplaces to be safe, to have their holidays paid if employed etc. I expect to be paid as well as a man doing the same job as me.
None of these things were fought for by companies.

Yeah Bathtime it's alright I'm sure we'll manage, perhaps Dave will come and give me a hand with my PT's.

Employment Relations Acts of 1999 and 2003
The Sex Discrimination Act 1975
The Equal Pay Act of 1970
The Race Relations Act 1976
The Disability Discrimination Act 1995
The National Minimum Wage Act, 1998
The Working Time Directive 1999
The Employment Relations Act 1999

Gosh, I didn't realise how much Labour had done for workers rights and promoting equality. Most of these were introduced by Labour governments.

Why do people vote Tory again?

all interesting points, worth thinking about. re the voices of those who can be bothered to vote, I sort of get that but tend to see the power of union as being, well, union. So if people really can't be arsed then surely unions would naturally die out anyway.

I think that's really sad myself but I don't know what we can actually do?

I don't know if anyone is familiar with the website maidinlondonnow.blogspot.co.uk/

I have been following her for some time and my feeling is that there is a lack of interest in unionisation generally. It's as if even people who have no rights are okay with it at some level - is it because they dream of being a big boss who craps all over others in future?

sorry, didn't mean to derail, just puzzled.

Gosh, I didn't realise how much Labour had done for workers rights and promoting equality. Most of these were introduced by Labour governments.

Fair point, but these weren't delivered as a result of strike action.

Why do people vote Tory again?

The wellbeing of a worker is based on a combination of their rights and the state of the economy.... No point having all the rights in the world if the economy can't generate and maintain well-paid employment. So, rightly or wrongly, more 'workers' made a judgement that their overall wellbeing was best served by the Tories who, they believed, would be better guardians of the economy.

People do remember the Left wing militancy of the late 70's and early 80's and the damage done to the economy and workers. They also recognise the huge rise in living standards for all, especially the poorest, since then.
All that has been delivered by the Right.
Socialism destroys everytime in every country.

I think striking for higher pay or better conditions (which amounts to the same thing) should usually be illegal.

We're supposed to live in a market economy. If anyone but a bunch of workers got together in an attempt to set a monopolistic price for what they were selling, they'd be breaking the law. The same should be true for workers selling their labour.

A long time ago, when the choice might have been the big local employer or nothing, and there wasn't much of a social security system to step in in the case of nothing, allowing strikes might have made sense. It's reasonable to pit a unified workforce against a sole employer.

Now it is easier for people to move jobs, and to move home if necessary for moving jobs, and if all else fails, social security is better.

carol - yes, but I feel as living standards for the poorest are going down now.

Disconcerted - are we supposed to live in a market economy? if that economy is delivering situations where the CEO is paid £400k and the cleaner is paid min wage on a zero hour contract, is that a good thing?

if you think it is, not much I can do about it, but having previously not worried about equality much, the last few years have even made me think "WTF is going on?" For reference, I am 39 so was a toddler when the unions were being militant.

Also, I recall watching a programme on the railways where they said even Thatcher didn't want to privatise them. I find that interesting because we still pour money into them and bigwigs now make a massive profit and get paid huge salaries. If that's an example of the market economy at work, I'm not convinced.

I'm still amazed that the last few years haven't produced a party based on the 99%. I tried starting a thread about that in politics but no one seemed to get my points.

Butterfly No party for the 99% is partly because everyone in the UK is in the 1%

and this is how the Cuntservatives will destroy the NHS: by making it impossible for staff to continue working for it

Such rhetoric!
Such wit!
It never ceases to amaze me ... the pathetic level of insults that lefties so easily resort to.

Why do people vote Tory again?

You can have all the workers rights in the world! But if you've a shit economy, they mean nothing.

Economics will trumps politics every time.

and this is how the Cuntservatives will destroy the NHS: by making it impossible for staff to continue working for it

The Tories, for all their faults, have not cut NHS spending (it was one of the few areas protected) and have committed to billions extra over the course of this parliament.... Is this enough? Arguably even more is needed, but it's certainly not the actions of a party bent on destroying the NHS. Why do the Left bang on about this!.... The founding principle is that it provides healthcare for all that's free at the point of delivery (FAPOD) - and the Tories aren't planning the change this. The founding principle isn't that it's necessarily a wholly publicly managed and operated service, which is really the Left's issue.. However, if the FAPOD is maintained and the care is good, the bulk of the public don't really care about whether staff are employed by the state, any more than they care whether their bin men are employed directly by the council or by a contractor....

Ironically I believe it is the monopolistic state-run providers that the left are so attached to that don't provide the competition necessary for a labour market to develop which employees could benefit from, with those who are talented and in demand employees being able to flex their muscle in a more constructive and effective manner than the crude and damaging tool that is the 'strike'.

er caroldecker ever heard of relative poverty?
How poor do people have to be or how shit do their terms and conditions at work have to be before they move out of the 1%

Lots of indicators are cleverly presented to make people feel that things must be getting better.

For example recently we learned that we should be celebrating because lots of new jobs have been created. Most of the new jobs were, however, "self employment". All well and good - self employment is the best example of striving - Yey - however, the new self employed are among the lowest earners - not such good news.

Next, as if by magic, we are told that wages are rising. That's great, you say, breathing a sigh of relief - but this time - just a couple of weeks later - hey presto the "self employed" are no longer included in the figures.

What better way to make wages look as if they are going up than by leaving out the lowest paid people.

No actual "lying" is involved, and manipulating figures in this way, with the help of a lazy and fundamentally right wing press, means we are all left vaguely feeling that we are heading in the right direction (even though you might look at your adult children, or your own wages, and scratch your head a bit).

And they wonder why nobody trusts them.

^People do remember the Left wing militancy of the late 70's and early 80's and the damage done to the economy and workers. They also recognise the huge rise in living standards for all, especially the poorest, since then.
All that has been delivered by the Right.
Socialism destroys everytime in every country.^

Yes, everyone seems to remember that but nobody seems to remember the disgraceful state of our public services in the early 90's or the mass unemployment. It's a funny old world, isn't it?

Oh btw, in the 80's the number of adults unable to meet the basic necessities of life stood at 14%, now it's 33%. That's not a huge rise in living standards, that's a huge fall.

figment and irretating do you want to put some links to your made up statistics

Sure - it's hard to do links on my phone. I love the way you just assume they are made up though. Does that tell you something?

Ironically I believe it is the monopolistic state-run providers that the left are so attached to that don't provide the competition necessary for a labour market to develop which employees could benefit from, with those who are talented and in demand employees being able to flex their muscle in a more constructive and effective manner than the crude and damaging tool that is the 'strike'.

What's the difference between monopolistic state-run providers, and monopolistic private providers? Is there one?

carol, you want statistics after not citing any evidence whatsoever to support your assertion that living standards have increased? You first.

Here you go carol.

Hope it works. If not, you can find it on the "ripped off Britain" blog under the heading "graphs at a glance: how to raise wages - ignore the wage of the lowest paid person".
www.blog.rippedoffbritons.com/2015/06/graphs-at-glance-self-employed-are.html?m=1

What's the difference between monopolistic state-run providers, and monopolistic private providers? Is there one?

Both are undesirable in my opinion