to not want df to go on strike

[mumof2children]

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

ok so let's say everyone has the right to strike. Do you think that bankers have the right to strike for their bonuses?

My dad worked at Royal Mail when we were younger, He didn't strike because he couldn't afford to lose the money. He had to feed us.

MarillionMum , is your TV stuck in the 1970s (like your taste in music )?
Northern monkeys? Flat caps?

Jeez, what utter garbage you are spouting.

I don't actually believe that striking is the best solution in most instances but you are spouting rude, ignorant rubbish.

Message deleted

Message deleted

YANBU because I do not think the stikers will get what they are demanding so what is the point in putting you and your family through economic hardship.

Unfortunately, BA workers are just the latest in a long line of employees who are finding out tht there is a global market for labour. Fact is that BA runs a global airline and like most other global airlines it can pick up crew around the world wherever its planes land who will work for less. Been happening in the shipping industry for decades.

Eventually, BA workers will have to accept pay and conditions that everyone else in the global airline industry has. It is not possible to overturn the iron rule of supply and demand.

I do however understand how employees feel that they cannot go against what the union says. The same thing happened during the miners strikes. Another example of a union trying and failing to over turn economic logic.

Historically unions enshrined the pay disparity between men and women.

Abetadad is very right, there will be people to do these jobs, strike or not.

If you can't put food on the table, you have a young baby and his job would be at risk I am sorry, but YANBU, I wouldn't want him to strike.
I admire principles but we have to be realistic, what will striking actually achieve? If all it would achieve would be unemployment and hardship and no change to pay/conditions/whatever then it's pointless to strike.

Is it over a 3% pay increase, even more bonkers then. Lots of people in the area I work in have had imposed pay cuts (take the 10% pay cut or be redundant), it's not the economic environment to be demanding more pay. Tough as things are.

Both my DH and I work in a non-unionised envronment.

To cope with the recent economic difficulties, my DHs company asked the employees to vote to change their Ts and Cs to be able to reduce their working week in order to save money and prevent the possibility of redundancies. By a huge majority, the staff voted in favor of the reduced working week and were put on reduced hours. Now, a year later, they are slowly being put back onto a full working week.

No stikes. No redundancies. And no unions to get in the way of discussions between staff and management.

I have been a member of either Unison or the Royal Colege of Nursing for 15 years. Yes neither are perfect but, one of the few perks of working for the NHS is that it's common place and encouraged that everyone joins a Union.

Although I'm fortunate to have never needed their services personally with regards to workplace issues and pay and conditions it's essential that they continue to do the work they do. Union involvement has prevented nurse from getting totally shafted re pay and conditions at both a local and national level and play a vital role with regards to both these issues as well as issues such as workplace bullying (which unfortunately is rife in the NHS).

At the moment senior managers are trying to introduce weekend working for those of us on Monday to Friday 9-5 contracts, Unions are involved and rightfully so as when we took our jobs we did not sign up to weekend working with no added renumeration. It's just some bollox government initiative that has no real value (CAMHS teams covering A+E at the weekend to assess any potential emergency admissions, huge disruption of working lives and the CAMHS service for a TINY proportion of CAMHS attenders at A+E).

Unions are important.

WannaBe -- thanks. I do know quite a bit about the strike. It's being heard in the High Court, but would suggest that there are all sorts of reasons why a ballot would be deemed invalid, and to suggest that the union had anything to do with it is bizarre. It is a secret ballot, sent to home addresses.

All it takes is one ballot paper to be invalid, and throws the whole ballot into question. That is a massive massive burden if you think about it. Compare this to a general election where spoiled ballot papers, for instance, are simply discarded and not counted.

No one is asking for a job for life. Just that the process is fair. And it's not about pay.No one is getting a pay rise (except the bosses who manage to get a good bonus). But that's not even in dispute.

And this is not directed at you, WannaBe but there seems to be a general incomprehension that some workers are truly motivated by pride in their industry and are horrified by the cuts which are being proposed. The Rail Regulator has also expressed deep concern that some of the measures being proposed would have a direct effect on safety. People are genuinely concerned and are willing to make personal sacrifices for this.

TheCrackFox - "Historically unions enshrined the pay disparity between men and women".

Too true. That is something not many people knew about until the recent case of the pay of care workers (largely women) versus pay of bin men (largely men) in many local authority areas was exposed. There is the famous case at British Leyland way back of women that stitched car seats being underpaid compared to men. The union knew about it but did nothing about it for years - focusing on the pay and conditions of men and calling strike after strike but doing nothing about equality issues. The women won thei rcase in the end to be paid the same as men on the production line.

Union leaders (men) negotiating with management leaders (men) often came to agreements where male dominated jobs got better pay rises and protected conditions but these improvements were largely paid for by female employees not getting pay rises or conditions. The union and the employer could both claim victory.

thanks, for all your replys....but it look like striking wont be going ahead, a huge pressure f both of our mind