Industrial Relations in 2010

My view has changed completely from an instinctive support for strikers to an instinctive support for The Management.

We all get more reactionary as we get older (and I've got a lot older...) which may be part of it.

But where Scargill was quite right in his views on what Thatcher was trying to do to the industry (as history has proved), the likes of Bob Crow just piss me off.

It's not just the cases like the union standing up for reinstatement of drivers who were found with empty bottles and smelled of alcohol on the grounds that despite the above two facts there was no empirical proof they'd been drinking.

Way back when there was a genuine need for unions because the working class (back when we actually had one) was genuinely oppressed and exploited.

However a Tube driver earns ?30-40k/year for a short working week with loads of holidays. Hardly an oppressed mass.

Similarly there are far more people queuing up to become firefighters than vacancies - which doesn't suggest they're that hard done by.

And BA Cabin Crew earn about twice what cabin crew on other airlines earn.

As in all industries, management will be seeking to implement efficient working practices. Ideally that would be done in concert with organised labour however I can't help feeling that *any* proposal, whatever its merits, is instinctively judged by the unions on "how many people this means we need to employ", not "what is best/appropriate for the health of the company/the needs of the served public".

This is just wrong. Most businesses have laid off staff - in my sector it's been about 10-25% (and no I wasn't one of them) - in the last few years. Why some feel they should be immune is just beyond me. Sometimes things *can* be done better with fewer people and it's not a Thatcherite agenda, just good management.

/rant

Posted By: Old Man, Oct 27, 19:11:07