Casual Bystander Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Not sure if there is any point in explaining the whole thing as I think most of us have seen the story (if not, basically the DWP sent a memo that suggested their workers should support the Union). They have now amended that position adding the words "at work" to their still hugely biased position. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-28882560 So despite the DWP claiming there was nothing wrong with the initial memo, the only people who think this way are the DWP - even BT have remained somewhat quiet on the matter, and refusing the apologise for their blatant bias they have clearly felt it necessary to add an addendum. Clearly if there was nothing wrong with the initial memo then why amend it? The very act of amending it tells it's own story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Big deal, my union is recommending that people vote YES, and plastering posters urging them to do so in my place of work. My position is that the union, and all unions, should take no position either way and concentrate on looking after their members interests instead. Meanwhile, the members can vote yes or no when we get to September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 Big deal, my union is recommending that people vote YES, and plastering posters urging them to do so in my place of work. You don't really understand the difference do you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Big deal, my union is recommending that people vote YES, and plastering posters urging them to do so in my place of work. It's not the union thats recommending it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 It is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 It is. ^^ Still not getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Given the amount of inane posts you make, you're the one not "getting it" pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 Given the amount of inane posts you make, you're the one not "getting it" pal. Nope, still not getting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 Okay chum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pandarilla Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 It is. Eh? Its the Dept of Work and bloody Pensions. How is that a union? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 Eh? Its the Dept of Work and bloody Pensions. How is that a union? No, no... just leave him to it. I'm sure he'll work out the obvious flaw in his argument at some point. It might be a while but I'm sure he'll get there in the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blaven Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 No, no... just leave him to it. I'm sure he'll work out the obvious flaw in his argument at some point. It might be a while but I'm sure he'll get there in the end. Go on, give him a clue. Just use a U and an E. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted August 22, 2014 Share Posted August 22, 2014 Big deal, my union is recommending that people vote YES, and plastering posters urging them to do so in my place of work. My position is that the union, and all unions, should take no position either way and concentrate on looking after their members interests instead. Meanwhile, the members can vote yes or no when we get to September. It's in the member's interest to vote yes. Bit obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 It's in the member's interest to vote yes. Bit obvious. No it's not, it's up to individual members to make their own minds up and it's the unions job to concern themselves with other things. Eh? Its the Dept of Work and bloody Pensions. How is that a union? I never said it was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 No it's not, it's up to individual members to make their own minds up and it's the unions job to concern themselves with other things. Kind of makes the term Union rather redundant then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted August 23, 2014 Share Posted August 23, 2014 No it's not, it's up to individual members to make their own minds up and it's the unions job to concern themselves with other things. I never said it was. Ah dear. Someone doesn't know what unions do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 I rather simplistically expected them to serve the member's best interests, like chasing a pay rise after four barren years and, like the DWP should have, stayed neutral on such a divisive and emotive issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 24, 2014 Author Share Posted August 24, 2014 I rather simplistically expected them to serve the member's best interests, like chasing a pay rise after four barren years and, like the DWP should have, stayed neutral on such a divisive and emotive issue. That's a contradictory statement. On one hand you want them to better the lives of their members, yet on the other you only want them to do that if it agrees with your own political stance. It's simply not a like for like comparison. One is an employer who decides whether you stay in a job and whose decisions are made based on political ideology the other is an optional body that is looking to benefit their members. You have a choice whether to agree or not with the union without it affecting your employment, the way the DWP went about it gave the impression that if you didn't agree with them you would be out of a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted August 24, 2014 Share Posted August 24, 2014 That's a contradictory statement. On one hand you want them to better the lives of their members, yet on the other you only want them to do that if it agrees with your own political stance. It's simply not a like for like comparison. One is an employer who decides whether you stay in a job and whose decisions are made based on political ideology the other is an optional body that is looking to benefit their members. You have a choice whether to agree or not with the union without it affecting your employment, the way the DWP went about it gave the impression that if you didn't agree with them you would be out of a job. It's not contradictory at all. I expect both to be neutral, or at least give the appearance of being neutral, and both are government bodies, or representative of such. By bettering member's lives I mean their terms & conditions and pay - the populace will decide the referendum. I expect many of the members to vote yes, but that is by the by. I know membership is optional, but in this day and age I would suggest that I cannot afford NOT to be a member. I would be equally opposed to the union recommending a, "No", vote, and am on record at the last general meeting as saying so. The DWP shouldn't have done what they did, but neither should the union. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casual Bystander Posted August 24, 2014 Author Share Posted August 24, 2014 It's not contradictory at all. It quite clearly is, whether you are willing to accept that is a different matter of course. You expect the union to "serve the member's best interests" yet want them to remain neutral on a subject which will affect their members. That is a contradiction. I expect both to be neutral, or at least give the appearance of being neutral, and both are government bodies, or representative of such. A union is a government body? Is that so? The DWP shouldn't have done what they did, but neither should the union. Well at least you are half right. That's a start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.