Jump to content

Strikes ?


Observer II

Recommended Posts

In 20/21 the total pay bill for Nurses was £47 bn, the next year 21/22 the total spending under the planned budget for NHS England was £133.7 bn. The plan for 22/23, rose to £152.6 bn to over come the backlog. The budget for 23/24 is already set at £160.4 bn for NHS England. So next years increase in the budget is less than the nurses are asking for. The calculations have already started for the next April at the end of November and the best that the Nurses can expect is to increase that offer, but they want more than the whole budget increase for NHS England.

What do they want then? Well since their demands exceed the Governments ability to pay from what they have put before the markets, and given the result when Government last tried to increase spending, it would appear that this is a naked attempt to bring down the Government. Just like the strikes on the railway it seems. In both cases the amounts demanded exceed the public's ability to pay even if they wanted to and the unions must know that only too well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts too,  clearly political strikes. In terms of hardship, they're in the same boat as everyone else, indeed better off than many; and  we're all going to suffer if inflation takes hold.   If they were serious about appropriate spending within the NHS, they'd be campaigning for more clinical and less admin staff, especially high paid superficial bosses and woke diversity officers.  😠

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The silence from the Labour benches is deafening. Labour should be responsible & rein in some of these demands. The railways .you can understand the need to keep guards &  keep ticket offices open ,but the drivers are doing quite well as it is.

There is no doubt in my mind that the sole motive is to topple the government & install a puppet Labour government with the union leaders pulling the strings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This does all look like it’s a bit politically motivated by the unions. The way I see it is that the cost-of-living increases were caused by covid, and Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine and it’d be much the same whichever political party was in power.

Key workers did have to work through the pandemic and their efforts were appreciated by the public. The question is, would we have stood outside and clapped for these people if we knew that when it was all over, they’d be putting us all back at risk again by striking?

Another thing that annoys me and doesn’t make any sense is why emergency replacement drivers aren’t allowed to use the blue lights, sound the siren or drive fast. These things are either needed in an emergency or they aren’t and shouldn’t play any part in a pay dispute.

  

Bill 😊

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Bill said:

Another thing that annoys me and doesn’t make any sense is why emergency replacement drivers aren’t allowed to use the blue lights, sound the siren or drive fast. These things are either needed in an emergency or they aren’t and shouldn’t play any part in a pay dispute.

It may be their level of training that prevents this.

They may well be perfectly capable of driving the vehicle at normal speeds and road conditions.

But may not have the level of competence required when the lights and sirens are going and speed is of the essence.

nearest i can compare it with is riding a tt bike slowly round the isle of man, my level of competence, and the best of the racers going round at speeds exceeding 90mph on the curves. i have the ability to ride the bike but not the ability to race the bike.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh come on Sid. Blue lights only warn other drivers there’s an emergency vehicle coming so that they don’t end up getting in the way. There's no special skills needed for this other than knowing where the on off switch is and it’s the same with the siren. The whole thing smacks of sour grapes from some jobsworth who’s being an obstructive prat and I could envisage this same person following the ambulance to ensure it’s also the slowest vehicle on the road.

 

Bill 😊

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seems the Army has been doing a better job than the UKBF at major airports, during the strike, according to passengers.  Not a surprise given the best they can do in the Channel is to "taxi" the illegal migrants into the UK.  Time imo the UKBF was disbanded and new force established under military terms of employment, that will follow orders from the elected Government.    :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a woman in the pub a while back that was moaning about costs. Turns out that she was paying £200 a month extra for a personal trainer at her gym because she said she needed the motivation. I think anyone who drives to a gym then pays to walk on a treadmill needs a reality check or a brain transplant.

 

Bill 😊

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What you and I would class as frivolous or unnecessary would be seen as an essential part of life for most of the younger generation. I could probably live for a month on what some pay for their mobile phone contract, and likely another month for their tv package.

There may be a few that are genuinely struggling to make ends meet but the unions would have us believe it’s like that for everyone. Most can’t be struggling that much if they can afford to lose their wages through strike action.

 

Bill 😊

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can understand people going to a gym during winter, especially if they work all day, dark when they go to work and dark when they get home, so any outdoor activity is difficult and nobody wants to go jogging in the dark. so a gym is the best alternative to having a room cluttered with treadmills, exercise bikes and weights.

An extra £50.00 per week for somebody to tell you to get off your fat (censored) and get running. It begs the question what a personal trainer charges per person. If they have six clients a week then that is an extra £300.00 per week they would be getting on top of what they already charge.

as for struggling to make ends meet, i was reading where somebody earning £20,000 per year was classed as low paid. Yet here's me getting by on £6,000 a year plus savings and Mrs sids pension (less than £40 per week)

The thing about the strikes is not the loss of wages, one or two days, but the amount of disruption it causes (and no doubt the overtime needed to get things back right again). In the past strikes could last for months at a time and were called at a moments notice. now they give the bosses a months notice in writing that they will be on strike for two days in january thus giving the bosses plenty of time to plan ahead to either minimise disruption on the day or arrange thins so that after there is less disruption afterwards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s much the same here Sid. For the past four years we’ve lived on just state pension, and we do alright, even managing that winter break I was on about a while back. It might be a different story if we tried to live what’s regarded as a more normal lifestyle but we’re comfortable and happy with our standard of living.

It’s all relative though. The current problems affect everyone irrespective of what job they do and it seems to me that those taking industrial action at the moment are in the main those who believe they’re worth more than others simply because they’re classed as key workers. I don’t see people in lessor roles like shelf stackers threatening to strike despite them probably suffering a lot more than the likes of ambulance and train drivers.

If the unions were united and truly fighting to improve working conditions and low wages for all workers then it wouldn’t be so bad but now they’re little more than greedy little individual pressure groups concerned only for their members and sod everyyone else.

 

Bill 😊

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

not yet eligible for the state pension, but getting closer everyday. My main goal in life is to live long enough to claim at least ten years back.

just done a quick check and I will be getting the new rate apparently. will make a great difference hopefully.

What a lot of people tend to think is that they are 'key' workers and that their workplace or business would collapse if they were 'let go'.

in fact the amount that they would be missed is about the same size as the hole left in a bucket full of water after you have taken your hand out of it, no matter how hard you splash it about or how long you hold your hand in the hole size remains the same......:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it is probably because of the pay scale increments they suggest. the ones doing the work get the least and the ones doing the 'managing' get the most.

And then there are the MP's who say "we can't afford for you to have a 2% rise" and then vote themselves a 30% rise for saving money. does not go down well with the lower paid.....🤭

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree Sid, which begs the question are they really "independent";  perhaps a National policy of flat rate rises plus a percent, would rectify the disparity in time. As for politicians,  Jeff Taylor came up with a good idea, they should be paid on results, calculated on the improved GDP per capita ?    :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Observer II said:

Jeff Taylor came up with a good idea, they should be paid on results,

in that case our MP's would be paying us.

The thing with 'independent' review bodies is that they never have the man on the street in them. it is usually some business or financial crony of the person who set it up. the excuse being that they know about finance whereas us ordinary plebs are thicko's when it comes to money.

 

Was surprised earlier by a pensions advert that stated on average we change jobs every five years. That being the case having a stable workforce would seem an impossibility and may be a factor in pay scales. Who is going to pay somebody a decent wage if after five years they are going to leave anyway. might as well pay them the bare legal minimum and have done with it in that case. if they leave before then well there will always be somebody else looking for a job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just trying to get my head round some of the verbage being used over these strikes -  the latest being a requirement for Unions to provide for a minimum level of service when on strike, which tends to defeat the objective of a strike and deny a hard won and fundemental right of workers to withdraw their labour. Perhaps this will end up in the ECHR ?   If a statutory minimum level of service provision is established, it would seem consistent that it should apply to all services at all times, thus a Government responsibility and onus.    But I still return to the fact, that "Independent" Pay Review Bodies have been used, and accepted by the employers side, but ignored by the Unions, which clearly undermines their claims.    :unsure: 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...