Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to not want df to go on strike

65 replies

mumof2children · 29/03/2010 22:00

money atm is very tight in the house..... we are struggling to stay afloat due to me being on smp for the last 3 months ( getting a full wage in may)

if he goes on strike will will loose £300 for the week, and atm that would mean unable to do the food shop and provide nappies formula for the baby.

aibu

OP posts:
valleyqueen · 29/03/2010 22:11

Do the union provide special payments for strikers with families. I know some do but I am not sure how much or if the strike has to last a certain length of time. There are a few people at work in unison and they do this.

I am not sure if he is bu or not. Which sounds like a cop out I guess I understand where both of you are coming from, him standing by his co-workers and his beliefs and your worry about money. I crap myself everytime GMB ballot so far not happened where I work.

TestPleaseDelete · 30/03/2010 09:40

Message deleted

runnybottom · 30/03/2010 12:54

He would be being a scab, whether well intentioned or not.
My DH went on strike right after our ds3 was born, it was worrying and finacially difficult. But no way would he have crossed that picket line, not if we were all starving.

To not strike your df would have to quit the union, and probably his job.

jeee · 30/03/2010 12:57

If money wasn't an issue, how would your partner feel about striking?

ericnorthmansmistress · 30/03/2010 13:46

They should have a hardship fund. IMO if he's in the union and the union calls them out to strike then he has to strike.

Doublebuggy · 30/03/2010 14:50

"But no way would he have crossed that picket line, not if we were all starving."

Really?

I just do not get this. A picket line is more important than your family?

Weird.

Pikelit · 30/03/2010 15:21

I can understand why, from a financial perspective, you'd prefer your partner not to go on strike. But I could never encourage anyone to cross a picket line. Ever.

I'm sure the union will have arranged hardship payments.

Rockbird · 30/03/2010 15:23

I don't get it either Doublebuggy. His first priority is to his family. If by him striking it will seriously mean that you will be unable to afford to feed your child, then he needs a bloody great kick up the arse.

runnybottom · 30/03/2010 20:48

He would have quit first. I would have found another way to feed us.

Principles are important. The union is important. You do not pass a picket, its that simple.

Not weird in the slightest. How do you think you have all the employment rights you enjoy now?

OrmRenewed · 30/03/2010 20:51

Yes his first duty is to his family. But if his job is under threat, or he faces pay freezes or cuts, then his family's well-being is under threat. It isn't right to capitulate to employers if they are in the wrong.

Original poster
mumof2children · 30/03/2010 21:11

my oh is not in the union, but if he does go into work it may be seen as supporting management itgwim and cause difficult working conditions for him.

i am also afraid that if he does go on strike, that he could get sacked as he wouldn't have the backing of the union.

if we could afford to loose the money i would support him 110%

OP posts:
Rockbird · 30/03/2010 21:16

But a job with a pay freeze is better than no job.

Runnybottom, you can't keep trotting out platitudes from the seventies, things are different now. I'd rather feed my children than have principles. And he's not even in the union, but is being forced to strike. Very democratic that is

runnybottom · 30/03/2010 21:35

Excuse me, they are not "platitudes from the seventies", they are our principles, which have cost us dearly yet we still hold them. You have no right to belittle them or us.

If you are not in the union you have no obligation to strike. Either join the union or go to work, your choice.

Monty100 · 30/03/2010 21:40

Rockbird

Runnybottom - well said.

remotecontroller · 30/03/2010 21:54

Another thumbs up for runnybottom

daftpunk · 30/03/2010 21:57

100% agree with runnybottom.

thesecondcoming · 30/03/2010 22:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

echt · 31/03/2010 05:53

OP - your chap needs to get in the union and toe the line.

Or he can do what he's already being doing, which is to take advantage of the sacrifices made by union members to secure his wages and conditions of service, without being in the union.

Runny bottom is right.

Nat2010 · 31/03/2010 06:08

Message deleted

Cyberman · 31/03/2010 06:59

Message deleted

MarillionMum · 31/03/2010 07:05

Message deleted

skidoodly · 31/03/2010 07:45

Agree with runnybottom

oh and you'll have plenty of sympathy for any hardship you suffer because your husband is on strike.

ilovemydogandmrobama · 31/03/2010 08:18

My partner may go on strike. No one ever wants to go on strike as it means that relations between management and the staff are very low.

Yes, it's going to be difficult for the days he isn't paid, but it will be infinitely worse if the company is allowed to implement unilateral changes of terms and conditions and the changes being proposed are in direct violation of an earlier agreement.

Here's what I don't understand about people who are in industries that is highly unionized, but choose not to go on strike. If the union does secure better terms and conditions and this includes pay, and one is not in the union, then do the non union workers accept the better terms?

And object to people saying, 'union types who have never done a days work'.

whifflegarden · 31/03/2010 08:38

Yanbu. Unions are outdated anyway and have no place in this century in their current shape/form.

thesecondcoming · 31/03/2010 08:52

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.