To think we wouldn’t be having as many strikes if we weee under Labour government?

lurkinglittleladybug · 2022-12-17T07:14:12+00:00

I find all these strikes we are having in our country quite worrying. Especially the NHS nurse and paramedic strikes. I support them fully and think they deserve a fair wage… But can’t help but think there wouldn’t be all these strikes or at least if there were they would be resolved quicker and therefore fewer strikes if we were under Labour government right now?

Original poster

lurkinglittleladybug · 17/12/2022 07:14

Sorry typo were not weee🤦‍♀️

OP posts:

hay5689 · 17/12/2022 07:17

Hasn't Kier Starmer said the 19% pay rise for nurses is unaffordable? If that's what they are going for they'd be striking regardless of who was in government.

LlynTegid · 17/12/2022 07:18

Yes I think would be the case. Though the Tories will then say 'what about the winter of discontent in 1979'.

Msgrieves · 17/12/2022 07:20

There is no way to possibly know. Its like all of those people with covid who say that it would be so much worse if they were not vaccinated. False, no possible way to know.

helford · 17/12/2022 07:24

hay5689 · 17/12/2022 07:17

Hasn't Kier Starmer said the 19% pay rise for nurses is unaffordable? If that's what they are going for they'd be striking regardless of who was in government.

Nurses have said they will call off the strike IF Govt will talk about pay... just talk.. FFS.

Sunak has pointedly said he will not do that, he wants the nurses/nhs strike, sees it as a way to hammer Labour.

Labour have said they would talk pay = no strike.

Pictograph · 17/12/2022 07:25

It's impossible to answer this question without a crystal ball. Labour are generally more sympathetic to public sector workers, but the budget deficit is so large that any party would be trying to reduce it.

carefulcalculator · 17/12/2022 07:30

hay5689 · 17/12/2022 07:17

Hasn't Kier Starmer said the 19% pay rise for nurses is unaffordable? If that's what they are going for they'd be striking regardless of who was in government.

They are only asking for such a high number due to the wage stagnation since 2020, which would never have happened under Labour. Tories' have starved services of funds and been very hard on pay over the long term.

The problem we have is the Tories won't discuss. Because they're ideologically opposed to the whole concept of a functioning NHS.

The nurses' starting point is 19%. They are expecting to negotiate.

carefulcalculator · 17/12/2022 07:30

Sorry, since 2010

Mardyface · 17/12/2022 07:31

This Tory government is running the country into the ground. Anybody who votes for this Tory government next time is either not paying attention or a hedge fund manager.

I don't know if the nursing strikes would be happening under labour - probably not- but they would be hard pushed to manage any single issue you can more badly than this government is.

carefulcalculator · 17/12/2022 07:34

Msgrieves · 17/12/2022 07:20

There is no way to possibly know. Its like all of those people with covid who say that it would be so much worse if they were not vaccinated. False, no possible way to know.

Humans are the most powerful species precisely because they can hypothesise.

I think anyone with a brain can see that Labour 2022 would pay public sector workers better than Conservatives 2022 thus averting strikes ever emerging.

Also scientifically/statistically given the vaccine works it is pretty unremarkable to assume it worked for X individual.

DdraigGoch · 17/12/2022 07:36

hay5689 · 17/12/2022 07:17

Hasn't Kier Starmer said the 19% pay rise for nurses is unaffordable? If that's what they are going for they'd be striking regardless of who was in government.

They'd settle for less. That's how a negotiation works.

TheGuv1982 · 17/12/2022 07:37

There we’re strikes when Labour were in government, Fire Service was a big one that was pretty controversial at the time.

Would there be as many strikes now due to the cost of living crisis? Hard to say. I suspect public sector wages would have increased more over the proceeding 10 years to now, as well as capacity not being shrunk so catastrophically, so perhaps the need to strike wouldn’t have been so acute.

hay5689 · 17/12/2022 07:37

@carefulcalculator do you know what they'll settle for? I'm not goading you I'm genuinely interested, I can't keep up with who wants what at the moment!

DuckonaBike · 17/12/2022 07:40

Agree with carefulcalculator. We’re seeing the result of 12 years of underfunding public services here. It’s going to take a long time to come back from this.

Original poster

lurkinglittleladybug · 17/12/2022 07:44

DdraigGoch · 17/12/2022 07:36

They'd settle for less. That's how a negotiation works.

Show quote history

This… conservatives inability to negotiate just shows how arrogant a party they are

OP posts:

Whatnextarghhhhhh · 17/12/2022 07:47

Msgrieves · 17/12/2022 07:20

There is no way to possibly know. Its like all of those people with covid who say that it would be so much worse if they were not vaccinated. False, no possible way to know.

Aside from all the vaccine studies that have studied the effectiveness?

Fedupofdiets · 17/12/2022 07:51

Well we would not have had Liz Truss in power for one thing, which has tipped many working household budgets over the edge so maybe. What makes me sick is when i read how MPs are very grateful to NHS workers - gratitude doesnt not feed people or heat homes. There is a lot of money in the NHS but too many senior posts and not enough staff at ground level where it really matters.

DdraigGoch · 17/12/2022 07:52

Pictograph · 17/12/2022 07:25

It's impossible to answer this question without a crystal ball. Labour are generally more sympathetic to public sector workers, but the budget deficit is so large that any party would be trying to reduce it.

Well neither Transport for Wales, nor Merseyrail are striking, and they're both run by Labour-controlled devolved governments. That should offer a clue.

Virginiaplain · 17/12/2022 07:55

I was listening to Alistair Campbell podcast and it was pointed out that substantially raising nurses, railway workers pay doesn't mean a one off payment of several millions it aso means they al receive a higher pension for the latter 2-3 decades of their lives (with everyone living so long ) so it is a penalty for future young tax payers to cover. And of course they will receive this higher amount for years to come. Can the country afford huge sums in the future. It's not straightforward.

MrsMurphyIWish · 17/12/2022 07:57

I’m a teacher. Under austerity we have had pay freezes and when we did have pay rises, it’s been a few percent. Over 12 years that has meant a career which could mean a comfortable life, means one now where you have to be careful with money when factoring other increased rises.

tbh, the conditions are worse. Public spending has been cut severely under austerity. Again, I don’t think Labour would have allowed it to have happened to this extent.

BigGreen · 17/12/2022 07:58

Yeah I think it's clear Labour would talk which would have averted some strikes. The London mayor has a reasonable record (though some TFL workers are part of these strikes).

WelshNerd · 17/12/2022 07:59

No @DdraigGoch , there's just no way of knowing what Labour would do.

Of course nurses are striking in Wales. it's actually easier for them to strike as our labour government was able to push back against some of the anti strike laws introduced. Welsh government have been clear that they can't offer more unless Westminster do the same.

And the Tories in Wales actually have the cheek to suggest tax rises!

MrsMurphyIWish · 17/12/2022 07:59

Oh and the pay rise we have been awarded has to come out of current (non-existent budgets). It’ll either mean no pay rise or cutting staff to fund the pay rise.

I don’t think Labour would have made those decisions.

MojoJojo71 · 17/12/2022 08:08

Virginiaplain · 17/12/2022 07:55

I was listening to Alistair Campbell podcast and it was pointed out that substantially raising nurses, railway workers pay doesn't mean a one off payment of several millions it aso means they al receive a higher pension for the latter 2-3 decades of their lives (with everyone living so long ) so it is a penalty for future young tax payers to cover. And of course they will receive this higher amount for years to come. Can the country afford huge sums in the future. It's not straightforward.

if my wages rose then I’d pay substantially more into my pension pot to cover the increase in my pension too. Although undoubtedly better than many, the NHS pension is nowhere near as good as it used to be and I feel many people forget that we pay for it. I pay 10% of my salary for mine and actually I know many colleagues who have withdrawn from the pension scheme recently because they can no longer afford the contributions.

MarshaBradyo · 17/12/2022 08:13

Hard to know. Labour like to be seen and are tied to the unions although that doesn’t help with funding issue. They also have a range in their party where some would be more pro union than not - as seen with pickets issue.

They could easily be finding it as difficult, far easier to look ok in opposition

Wales is also Labour where there are strikes.