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 have sympathy with you in some ways as I am not someone who has ever struck, even when I worked in areas where there was striking. I personally don’t agree with it. BUT, I have never joined a union and I have never voted to strike. You have done both so you have entered into a contract to strike. This is why people shouldn’t just blindly join unions without understanding the point of them. I do think it’s pretty poor if you stay in the union and want to benefit from their help but don’t strike. If I were you and felt as you do and were in your position of realising that I had voted for strike action I didn’t want to participate in then I would leave the union. It’s the only fair thing to do.

Supporting Industrial Action ethically counts for absolutely nothing and going into work actually weakens/undermines the position of those that do actually take IA.

If the OP wasn't prepared to strike, for whatever reason, including family, they should not have voted yes to the action.

But if only managers or the better paid workers were to strike, the strike would collapse.

The point of the union is collective action. You get the protection of the Union, their legal advise, the pay & conditions etc they win for you etc & in exchange you work collectively to fight for your rights & conditions.

If your circumstances have changed since you voted & you really, really can’t afford to strike anymore then speak to your union about hardship funds but don't take crossing a picket line lightly.

No I don’t but this poster has specifically said that she has lost ‘thousands’ which means either she is very highly paid and privileged or she is exaggerating

OTOH I do remember our Union Reps being very veryclear in associated comms on the issue that if you were not prepared to actually withdraw your labour you should not vote "yes" to IA.

Thanks for clarifying - that seems clear enough, then; but I suppose it depends on how active your union reps are and how good their communications. I get the distinct impression that some of them are so longstanding and entrenched in their position and associated fundamental beliefs/politics, that they forget that others may not be as aware of it all as they are.

I would also hope that they would make clear to people what their free options are and not just assume/browbeat everybody into doing what they personally believe is the right thing.

But surely using logical thinking OP could’ve come to that conclusion? I’m not in a union, don’t know anyone who’s in one (at least none that have spoken about it), but even I know that a union works if members act as a collective. It’s called a ‘union’ not a ‘suggestion’.

That being said though, especially after reading another thread the other day where an OP’s DP and many posters couldn’t decipher typos and make context connections, logical thinking isn’t something many take the time out of their day to engage in.

You would be a fool to leave a union over disagreeing in strike action in health care. The union does far more than organise strikes??? Especially if you make a ginormous mistake? Indemnity insurance?

FWIW we were all very open and honest who was striking and who wasn’t, it was no problem. No hard feelings or bullying either way!

Thank god we don’t work with a lot of you lot!

I always thought that the employers were punished by having to pay employees for not working!

Apply a bit of critical thinking here, OP.

Why should employers be “punished”?

Why would anyone ever work if you could strike, get paid for it, secure a pay rise. Surely everyone would go straight back out on strike again immediately and continue that cycle?

I have little time for most modern unions as my work involves working with people who have often taken advice of one and it’s caused issues. With no exception, every single union I’ve ever encountered is shit at local level. I’ve been privy to meetings where I’ve seen union reps basically barter people.

But I can’t get my head around voting for strike action then sitting back and planning to pass a picket of fellow members, collect your day’s wages, and then clapping yourself on the back when the action has had a positive outcome.

I hate when there are strikes covered on tv/in the press and strikers hide behind their placards. If you believe in something and cote to support it, support it.

Honestly OP, if this is real, think really hard about what you’re going to do on strike days. Passing a picket, especially when you’re a member, will mean you’ll get eaten alive.

obviously hyperbolic but imagine if someone from your workplace voted to remove certain rights from women. Professional courtesy is the best I’ll be able to afford them. It’s all nice and kumbaya to call it a personal decision but personal decisions do affect the collective, especially when your personal decision becomes normalised. Some posters are just ridiculously individualistic and won’t think beyond the ‘me’.

I think it's probably time to lay off OP for not understanding that voting for strike action meant that she would join in, rather than just giving agreement for those who want to/can afford to to do so. It may seem obvious to you, but not everybody is au fait with how industrial action works. Without it being clearly explained, I can understand how voting No might seem to some that they are signalling their clear disapproval of others who do want to strike.

I wouldn't choose to watch women's sport; I wouldn't choose to watch men's sport either, as sport bores me solid. Yet, at the same time, I'm passionate about the principle that women's sport should be restricted to women only, and would gladly give my full support from the physically-inert shadows to the sporty people and fans whom this does greatly affect.

Your manager needs to shut up OP. It is none of anyones business what you do x

I am a very well paid public sector manager. Obviously I would like more money for myself - I might be happy with what I have but (a) more would be nice and (b) my skills and experience are still underpaid in terms of the wider private setor market. I am a member of UNITE and voted to strike. If we stike I shall strike. But mainly for the lower paid. If we were just talking about my pay, then I'd like more but I am satisfied and can afford to live. Others around me cannot. But I would resent like hell if they voted for me to strike and didn't do so themselves!!!!

By working she is not just failing to do her part but actively undermining those who are striking - striking to obtain better conditions for her and her family.

Supporting it ethically means nothing. It’s like people who say ‘oh I don’t support the meat industry’ and yet consistently buy and purchase mass produced meat.

@Strik

Obviously you should strike but if you financially cannot then I'd suggest you take paid leave for those days instead.

At least then you aren't going to be undermining the strike by getting the work done in your coworker's absence.

It’s not that the OP will be working through the strike, it’s that she’s in the Union and has actively voted for the strike action. But then plans to work through it.

I think you have more to fear from your colleagues finding out, OP, than your manager. You have been foolish at best.

If you're a member of a union and your union calls you out to strike you should strike whether you voted yes or not.

Ffs the OP made an honest mistake. Yes she ought to have taken social responsibility and found out more about strikes, as we all ought as it's our duty as citizens in a democracy, but there's no need to attack her.

How about actually offering support or directing her to some so that she can actually join the strike, as she clearly would if she weren't scared of what might happen to her? Wouldn't that be in the spirit of collective action? Collective action is about supporting one another!

@SunRainStorm

Obviously you should strike but if you financially cannot then I'd suggest you take paid leave for those days instead.

Might be worth investigating but FWIW I know some employers won't allow change of shift patterns, leave etc, once strike dates are announced.

You can't book annual leave on announced strike days.

My last employer would allow annual leave if booked prior to the strike date announcement but not otherwise.

Working to rule is also a form of strike action so people who can't afford to strike can still support their colleagues. Get in exactly at your start time, take your breaks, leave on time, don't do anything outside your expected job role.

If your colleagues or manager give you shit because they in the position where they can lose pay but you can't, you'd be within your rights to raise a grievance.

I really don’t think you should tell
people what threads to post on @Carryonkeepinggoing, if you’ll pardon the direction ;)

I'm surprised at the number of people who seem unaware about the history of industrial action and the benefits we have because of unionisation.

I support public sector strikers. I’d never criticise a colleague for what the OP describes but OP does come across as selfish and individualistic. I’d definitely judge them poorly. But that isn’t anybody’s business either.

Have you checked out what is available from your union in the way of strike pay? Some will have funds for this, and although they can't cover everyone's losses, they often prioritise those in greatest need - the strike will be more effective the more people take part.

Working to rule is not a form of support. Striking is the form of support. Working to rule is an action in itself, and only supportive if that is the action everyone is taking. Breaking a strike is breaking a strike.

Not everyone has an exact start or finish time, and exact role, or even "gets in" to an office - it is possible to wfh and still strike.

People who strike are not "people who can afford to lose pay" - they are people whose ethics say that they are willing to fight for themselves and other people regardless of the impact it has on their immediate position. If people only struck when they can afford to, there would be no strikes at all. The point is that the disputes about pay are that people also can't afford to live even when in work!!!

I do not agree with "giving shit" to strike breakers, and as a manager (who would be on strike) I would not do it, nor would I allow any member of staff to do so. But that doesn not mean we have to like or collude with strike breaking either. I don't have to like any individual either. I can be professional and still maintain my own right to like or dislike something. As can others.