I agree, I'm not at all convinced the public still supports the striking rail or mail workers and I wonder if both unions are harming their cause by striking over Xmas. Nurses would be different, I think.
I'd probably have taken train up to Huddersfield this weekend but that's not an option now, so I'd like to thank Mick Lynch and the lads at the RMT for saving me from what will probably be an absolute stinker of a match. Hopefully the rail strike will go on until the end of the season.
It’s a ridiculous argument to suggest that we cannot pay people properly. The issue is that we have ground wages and conditions down until huge numbers of working people need benefits. A crazy system, one that benefits poor employers and those wealthy enough to game the system through buy to let, effectively a Government sponsored wealth creation scheme. People have been squeezed and this cost of living crisis has brought it to a head. For all of you who doubt whether you support these actions, tell everyone how this juggernaut of inequality and falling living standards will be reversed without appearing a bit unreasonable?
The Royal Mail is a private company, and is very definitely part of the private sector. It was privatised in 2013. It's an absolute gift to those who champion selling off public services without realising what a rip-off it usually ends up being that almost 10 years after it happened many people still don't realise. The Govt sold its last remaining shares in 2015. Structurally, there is no ideological difference between Yodel and the Royal Mail.
It’s also worth noting that every right wing paper, MP and Twitter account is on message today saying that support is falling for strikes. It’s a massive, collective effort to shape the narrative and it’s simply not true. Power to the people!
My point was simply a strategic one. I'm not convinced that people who don't receive Christmas cards or gifts or are able to travel to see relatives over the festive period are likely to support the strikes, however legitimate the grievances may be.
There's a reason why the people going on strike are either in the public sector (nurses) or are employees at train and postal companies where some of the worker rights and protections were carried over after privatisation. The sort of innovations that the delivery firms have implemented have mostly made workers' conditions much worse. Yodel's drivers, for example, are self-employed and have to supply their own vehicle and smartphone (both fitting Yodel's requirements, of course). They also get paid according to the number of parcels they deliver. There are little to no protections, such as sick pay, either. A Yodel worker goes on strike and there's another one, with no contract, no worker protections, no rights (relatively speaking) to step in. It's a race to the bottom, and it's baffling to me that anyone with a job cheers on those who are determined to reach the bottom as quickly as possible. Anyone who works for someone else (especially if that someone else sets all the rules) is vulnerable. It's happened (and will continue to happen) in so many industries – treating people like robots until the robots can do it quicker, more efficiently and more cheaply and the people can be dispensed with once and for all. That day is coming for a great, great many of us (or our children), so attitudes towards some of the solutions – such as a universal basic income (paying people an appropriate amount of money to have a fulfilling life but not to work) – are going to have to shift radically or else it's going to be a tough future. Those who already benefit from unearned income (whether that's as a pensioner or a landlord) also need a workforce and economy that works for everyone. And before any pensioners say they've earned their pension – yes, of course they have, but they're no longer economically productive in the same way a worker is.
This just demonstrates how easily people are manipulated to side with those in charge, boiling the issue down to whether Christmas cards get delivered or whatever. The only thing that matters in a mature debate is whether the strike action is justified. If it's appropriate in May it's appropriate in December. If people disagree with the strikes full stop, that's a perfectly justifiable stance. Not one I agree with, but fair enough. But it's the trope of the simpering right-wing media to say: "Oh but what about the inconvenience?" It's specifically designed to divide people who work for a living (which is the majority) and set them against one another. It's also why the medical staff take resorting to strike action so seriously. They know the consequences can be much more significant than whether a Christmas present arrives on time.
I'm afraid that strikes me as naively idealistic. Most people care only about their own small worlds. They won't care about the legitimacy of the action, they care about whether it impacts them. And it is likely to impact them more over Christmas than at any other time of the year (certainly, in the case of the mail strikes). I don't disagree that the media stokes that feeling.
They may as well give up when public opinion turns against them then. But for now, most of the polls suggest that the public support the workers in their right to take strike action, despite the inconvenience. Of course, that may well change but I think any person who actually thought about it for a few minutes might recognise that their Christmas card is probably not more important than a worker's right to fight for a fair deal. And that if they are incensed by the disruption on the rail they really ought to direct that ire consistently towards the rail companies whose performance is abysmal all year round (despite their huge profits). The 'how does this directly affect me right now' ideology neatly sums up why almost everything is so rubbish and getting worse. And large chunks of the media cheerleads in order to ensure people think like this at every turn.
And support whose side in the dispute; the Government that has trashed the economy? Nigel Farage’s? GB News’s? People know where they stand.
I don't understand what you are saying. I am simply making the point that the unions are taking a risk in losing a deal of public goodwill by striking at this time of year. Perhaps that's ultimately not that important to them though and they won't regard it as weakening their bargaining position.
Again, that's not the point. The point is whether it impacts upon public support in these particular cases; it's perfectly possible to be irritated at not getting gifts or being able to travel and still to support a worker's right to fight for a fair deal more broadly. I don't really know whether public support matters that much to the unions but this whole exchange was sparked by the claim that the unions are still in a strong position in that respect. And for reasons which you explain in the second para (and which I agree are unfortunate), I am sceptical that that is the case, or will be for much longer.
I didn’t say they were a public company? But on that, I’m absolutely delighted we’re not wasting taxpayers money subsidising a dying business which can be done better by the private sector, without paying bumper public sector pensions. And of course, a difference is that Yodel workers aren’t striking and ruining people’s Christmas/ businesses. They can chose any day to strike. This isn't just standard strike action. The dates have been purposely designed to damages the lives of the most amount of people possible during a moment of light in a bleak year, to use them as leverage. Plus it gives greater airtime to the union bosses and makes it easier for the workers to stomach, by getting a day off around Christmas when usually they might have to be working. Don't blame the media for the majority of people obviously realising that the strikes are deliberately targeting them, and giving them lots of pain for very little personal benefit. Also, the phrase 'justified' is completely simplistic. It might be justified from a poor individual's standpoint to slap 1m people in the face for a pound each. No one 'deserves' their life to be worse off, but that includes both workers and taxpayers. Inflation is the real enemy and something will need to give. You can't give lifelong pay increases to tackle temporary energy inflation and expect everything to be fine. I personally find it unethical to demand that the majority, who are also going to be worse off (and often have worse job security), pay even more in taxes (or products) to subsidise those with the largest gun. With perhaps the exception of issues of life and death (and even then, there are better ways of doing it). So as someone who finds striking an inherently selfish act, and see unions as mafia-like blackmailing organisations, who get paid huge amounts by poor working people, irrespective of what they do or who they hurt, I very much fall into the category of person you mentioned in your post. I feel awkward getting in peoples way in the street as to not disrupt their lives, let alone telling them their Christmas presents won’t come unless they pay me a double digit pay increase. But to provide a bit of balance, I also find it unethical for the government to freeze the personal allowance threshold at a time with high inflation, to have not done more over the last decade to help individuals insulate their homes and for generally being catastrophically self-serving, and incompetent which has significantly exacerbated our problems.
You appear to be assuming that loss of support is a one way street or at least you do not mention how it may affect the Government. I think people who support the strikes now are unlikely to change their minds. I think people who are ambivalent about the strikes are as likely to get frustrated with the Government as the unions. Overall, you are buying into a narrative of union intransigence as the main feature of the dispute to concentrate on.
I'm not buying into anything, I was simply responding to a point about levels of public support, with which I disagree. I don't think the unions are being intransigent (and certainly no more so than the government) but I am also unsure that they have played this right strategically by going on strike now rather than, say, early in the new year. That is, if public support is an important factor to them.
If I misinterpreted you I withdraw the point, but in saying that the Royal Mail risked losing out to the private sector the strong implication was that the Royal Mail was part of the public sector. Your point about taxpayers and the Royal Mail is a very relevant one though, considering how much the taxpayer lost thanks to the huge undervaluation of the business when it was sold off. It was underpriced by approximately £1 billion, at a cost to the public purse, and the taxpayer still subsidises the business to the tune of £227 million a year – to protect the shareholders, of course. Those in power already have the big stick, but they want a bigger one. Much bigger. The only reason the workers have a stick at all is because they are unionised and there are more workers than bosses (or politicians). And so all that's left is to turn the rest of the population against the unions, which sections of the media has encouraged the public to do for yonks. Yodel drivers can't strike. They can only quit. Because Yodel drivers are self-employed and are not unionised. They are literally at the bottom of the pile when it comes to the labour pyramid. Hard work for poor pay and conditions and almost no protections. That the consumer experience is marginally cheaper merely demonstrates the effectiveness of the race to the bottom ideology. And once robots can replace the people they will. The strikes are not targeting the public. They are targeting the employers and the Government. The public are inconvenienced, no doubt, and I completely get your point about that inconvenience to the individual but the divide and conquer technique is so well worn now that so many workers in other sectors identify more readily with the bosses and government than their fellow worker. It's a red herring pitching the taxpayer versus worker narrative because workers literally are taxpayers and in many cases taxpayers are workers too. But I completely understand that all this really resonates with 'hard working people' who also haven't had a pay rise for years and are facing the same inflationary pressures. No argument from me about your last par. The economy has been catastrophically managed by design as far as the great majority of us are concerned but – to my mind – the answer is not to gripe about those who are organised enough to stand together in pursuit of a better deal just because no one is standing up for us / me.
And just to add a bit of context, the Royal Mail – now a private business – soaks up around £200m of public money a year. The biggest stake is held by an equity fund controlled by a Czech billionaire who also owns Sparta Prague (Watford's opponents in the 1983-84 Uefa Cup!). It is not a failing business for its shareholders. Dividend paid to shareholders in 2021 was more than £400 million. A total of more than £880million has been paid out to shareholders in the past three years. Now, because of the way it was privatised many of the workers may well hold shares. The top three earners in the business are paid £4million a year between them. The postal delivery workers are paid on average £22,000 for a service that literally makes or breaks Christmas, according to some of the posts here. * (Tricky finding reliable data here – some casual pay rates are £10.50 to £13 an hour, for example).
I don’t necessarily agree with your post, but it is a good one all the same! I will add re: Royal Mail that whilst there was an initial surge that suggested the government underestimated the cost of the business, but it has since almost halved from the original listing price. I think the government underestimated the interest and FOMO of retail investors, but sold at a price which was fair with regards to its long term prospects (which I reckon are pretty poor!)
This was good until the end bit. True that old people are not productive units. Neither are children or many disabled people. But all still have to eat and the means to live. Pensions are awful anyway in comparison to Europe. They stole years off by putting up the age. Carers allowance too, is a disgrace. If you are examining who is productive and who is not, look at the 7 out of 8 'workers' who were laid off furloughed during the pandemic and think only 1 in 8 of us were considered 'key workers' who do the actual work of keeping the country going. That is not tip tapping on a computer, moving money around, speculating, advertising, stockbroking, hedge funding, working the tills and all those jobs of administrating capitalism. Now if we really wanted to put workers towards production, the solution seems obvious and glaring. With the help of technology, cutting out useless jobs and cooperating between us for plentiful production, we'd only have to work a couple of mornings a week and you retire at 42 and pursue all your interests in life.
In our family, of those of working age, 4 out of 4 of us were key workers. We all just had to work extra hard while the suit people were all at home sitting around for all those months. And even their pay was more than we were earning! Their capped two thirds or whatever it was. Some fantastic amount. £2500 per month or something. To earn that as a carer now, before stoppages, I would need to work 240 hours in the month or 60 per week. In my family we were in the pandemic: Carer, Paramedic, School Cleaner and Supermarket worker. All of us are paid very low and very badly. That's what I can't understand. We are the key workers that are most needed. Why are we the worst paid? And please don't say they are easy jobs or if you think so, then come and do them and tell me the same afterwards.
I think you may have misunderstood, because it was in no way a slight on pensioners, not even wealthy ones (!) – and certainly not on disabled people, or carers. Nor was it an audit of productivity. Part of the problem that's being unearthed during the coverage of these disputes is how poorly we value work or what it's for. I am fortunate that my work is fulfilling and creatively rewarding (most of the time). Effectively my hobby / interest is my work. It also makes sense economically for me. But the world wouldn't miss it if I disappeared tomorrow. No one's Christmas is ruined if I don't turn up tomorrow, so to speak. I suspect, though this is only a hunch, that if you asked a certain type of voter which industry was most important to the UK - computer games or fishing, they'd answer fishing. However, the computer games industry in the UK is roughly five times the size of the fishing industry. And as you say, as a society it's taken us less than two years to completely forget who the key workers actually are.
https://fb.watch/hoqJ_Rm_4o/ This is brilliant Patridgian rant stuff this morning on the TV. Who knew about "commercial Christmas"? That's a new one on me. What an utter lickspittle tory jackleg that interviewer is.
I don't think anyone here has attacked caring. The thing I've always struggled to work out is why people fail to see through the very obvious ways capitalism is rigged. The least desirable jobs are often the most poorly paid. But sometimes the most desirable jobs are poorly paid too (I am thinking of creative industries) because the perception is there's loads of people who would cut off a limb to get a foot in the door. (Mangled metaphor there). The thing about those jobs is that there tends to be (or tended to be) some scope for progression whereas a poorly paid carer or delivery driver who stays in the job doesn't suddenly hit the big time after ten years. It seems the only people who are guaranteed to do well are those who are able to set or heavily influence their salary. And I guess that is at the heart of this whole dispute.
See when they do those TV interviews and there's the picketing in the background, that was me, that was. Except it was NUR (National Union of Railwaymen) in those days. Where they were doing the picket this morning on TV- at the side of the road ramp leading down into the basement under Euston - was a waste of time. It was a show picket. There for the cameras. The only thing driving down that basement is post office vans. As I worked at Euston, I was often on the show picket. Then, the BR headquarters was just across the road from the station, so we were usually in front of there. It was just boring really. They'd come and take photos of you sometimes. I wondered why one photographer was grovelling right down on the ground by our feet but when they printed the upwards-take photo in the paper, we looked massive and like bully bouncers at a night club. Also I was in the background for the first Dong of the BBC evening news when they said 'rail strikes continue..' I could tell you many funny stories about picketing and what we did to scabs etc. and getting arrested and so on. But it might be too boring...
Well yes, if you asked a 70 year old Mail reader. Equally, if you asked a 30 year old who gets their news from social media, they would say computer games. I'm not quite sure what point that proves other than that some people are out of touch?
Is having public support so important to strikers? If I was on strike I don't think I'd be concerned what people think of the rights or wrongs of it
First commuter on BBC News tonight, has it disrupted your journey - yes, do you support the strikes - yes.
Commerce is the true spirit of Xmas. I just wish people wouldn’t drag religion into it, I mean what’s that got to do with it?
I guess that depends on whether you think the government has a role in resolving the dispute? If it does, public support is a useful form of additional pressure.
Are there any recent polls that show whether the public support the strikes? I suspect the government would have their own internal polling and, based on their stance, I imagine "being tough" with the unions will play well with their base. The only poll I found that specifically asked the public if they support the nurses striking had a positive response of 54% (Daily Mirror 2nd Dec). Anecdotally, based on people I know, I would suspect the support for the other unions is less. But, as @Lloyd says, why should the unions care about that. However it does put Labour in a difficult position...which is why the government is probably happy for the disputes to continue.
Once when I was picketing, I got interviewed by Radio 1 Newsbeat. I didn't know it was that until afterwards. I just came back from buying a coffee and there was a man with a microphone and a box strapped to his front. As I arrived, he asked if he could interview me. I asked him what he was going to ask me.and he said, oh nothing to worry about just the same as I asked your mates. Something like that. I said OK and he pressed record on his box and said "aren't you sorry for the misery you're causing for thousands of commuters today?" I thought quick to myself, well what does he want me to say? He wants me to say, no I don't care, let them suffer! Something like that. So I thought that would be the last thing I would say. So I replied yes, I was sorry. I didn't want to be out here losing a day's pay either and that the people to blame for it are the railway board. I was pleased with the answer I gave him and you could see he was frustrated that he didn't get what he wanted. Picket Line Mixed Feelings: When the minibus of SWP students show up in an act of solidarity. Hmmmm. Great. Yes. Solidarity and we shall overcome! Union of Students you're in you say? (CoughTossersCough)
Another time I was picketing in Kent where I was living there. But I had to be careful because I worked at Euston and so it wasn't my workplace - secondary picketing - and against the law to start with. I couldn't go to Euston to picket because there were no trains. Smiley face emoji. Anyway, down in Kent they were determined to demoralise us and run one train. It was right at the end of the day. There were no passengers, but it was like a victory for them because they had a few scabs. The drivers were not on strike so they had a driver and a scab signalman had gone in, so the only thing they needed was a guard. They had the unit with the driver sitting there in the station. We had to picket down the end of the lane leading to the station, because the lane was BR property and we had already been warned by the police and the station manager who was the inspiration for trying to run one train. Well after a while one guard came in a taxi and it turned out they had brought him from Dover. About 100 miles in a taxi. He was a reasonable man though and when we explained the situation to him, he became unwell and decided that he would sign off sick, so ordered the taxi to take him back to Dover again. We wished him a safe journey and hoped he would feel better soon. Then after another long while, suddenly there is a roar and a speeding motor scooter is driving right at our picket line! We had to jump for our lives! It turns out it is a scab guard! Well we were gutted and very angry. There was then an incident for which I got arrested but only for stupid trespassing with another comrade, but they let us go pretty quick and didn't even caution us or anything. They didn't realise I was from a different BR region either. When we got back to the picket again, the train had gone. They had their victory and they ran their train. The comrades told me though that they had thrown the scab guard's motor scooter into the canal.
TBF to the NUS - their extremely vocal opposition (and boycott) of Barclays did have an effect in ending their direct involvement with the Apartheid regime in South Africa - also I've got friends who were backed to hilt legally by NUS appointed legal teams in court cases with some very nasty landlords.
