My manager has denounced non-strikers but I truly can’t afford it

[Strik]

In the office today the topic of upcoming strikes came up (public sector). My manager is as left-wing as they come and was not shy in sharing her contempt for people who don’t choose to strike. I’m really worried because I can’t afford to go on strike and she’s (obviously) going to find out that I’m not striking. I’m worried it’s going to damage our relationship. Has anyone been in this situation before?

I thought that was the case, it was years ago when I was involved in a union and then spent a bit of time in HR in a unionised company (thankfully wasn't too involved in dealing with them!)

Would some of the posters be ok then if op just came out if the union because she doesn't want to strike? That has been suggested. So she comes out of the union but would still benefit from any pay increase anyway. (That's not directed at you its a general comment)

@ohfook

Good post.

I think it largely depends on your upbringing/area that you're from.

Your outlook I think also depends a lot on the industry and I can only guess that some who have posted here have been very lucky with their choice of employer... they might think differently if as happened where I worked their CEO had gone on record not long after arriving in post as saying that if he had his way he was going to scrap all legacy T&Cs, contracts etc....

Since those T&Cs dictated to a major degree factors such shift length and predictability of stop/start times, days off, rosters, career structure etc etc etc... what he actually did was ensure that a very high proportion of employees, a lot of them very conservative ( with both a big C and small c) were fully paid up members of unions/professional associations various.

More importantly the CEO ensured there was very solid support from members in the union I was in when it came to ballots for IA and actual IA itself on a couple of occasions.

@FatherJackHackettsUnderpantsHamper (i don't have time space to come back to all points one by one but generally...)
I am not about to tell people what words they can and can't use. I have used scab here as shorthand talking generally (i think i may have told OP that what she has done is scab behavoiur? I can't remember exactly) and would in speech generally. I have not and would not use it to someone's face because i believe that we are each beholden to our own conscience.

Having said that: it is not on to join a union for benefits, then vote yes to strike action and then not take it. That has been done to death in this thread. I hope everyone reading has got it now.

In my personal opinion? if you're in a union you must be all in. If you vote no to strike action and the majority vote yes? you really ought to strike. There are hardship funds. I know what they cover, many of my wider family were affected by various strike actions up to and including the miners strike. I know that many families split and aren't yet reconciled. I know women who left striking husbands, and i know families that went through severe poverty all while supporting the striker. Each family / worker must make their own decision.

And if you're in the union and you break a strike? well, you are the one making that decision and must accept the consequences. Better, tbh, to leave the union over that. Non union strike breakers - I wouldn't shout scab at them but i would remember who has my back if they want favours from me (this topic also done to death on this thread. It is not bullying to cooperate and work professionally but not to do favours over and above)

Workers who don't strike/are non union get the benefits of improvements to terms and conditions in the same way they get the detriments when these get worse. It is part and parcel of living in a society with the right to join a union if you want. A win for workers, IMO, is a win for all workers.

It really is all a matter of doing the best for you and your family. That is fine (unless it is shafting your colleagues - but even then, who knows?) Joining a union "for the benefits" then voting to strike and not striking? meh.

I hope OP and everyone who agrees with her enjoy their weekend.

Which was won for them through demonstrations and striking, in days when the stakes were much higher for the working poor.

tribunemag.co.uk/2023/03/how-workers-won-the-weekend

Lots of people aren’t in a union. Are the CFs? Or are they just people who aren’t in a union? Should they be on lower pay?

So many posters are - unpleasantly - trying to create obligations where they don’t exist. Language like ‘guilty of’ or ‘Have a think about that’, trying to shame people doing the job they are employed to do.

Unions are not obligations, and union members can make choices - they are not entitled to impose these choices on others. If you are going to find it a ‘kick in the teeth’ to see others cross the picket line, then maybe don’t get up at 5.30am to go to a picket line? That’s an actual choice too. You aren’t entitled to spite others.

@WeightInLine I think you've missed the point. The OP is in a Union and has voted for strike action. But isn't going to take part. Its the hypocrisy that's upsetting people.

Yes YABU. You need to strike. If you were my colleague and you didn't, I wouldn't be impressed with you either. To not strike, is to undermine their efforts to improve things for all of you! Workers are stronger when they stick together.

Also people have very long memories…