• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cameron for Cash

Yet since signing up to it in 1973, we've had 5 Labour governments, 4 Conservative governments and one Conservative/Lib Dem coalition headed by 6 different Prime Ministers and not one of them has left the EU.

No I don't believe it is a 'force for good'. Firstly, because I'm not a ten year old who sees the world only in a black and white, evil vs good view. And secondly, because unlike people on both sides (but especially those on the right), I can see and acknowledge both its positives and negatives. It is neither a force for good, nor a force for evil. It has done some good. Yes, even for us! And it has done some bad. Some of the ideas surrounding it were a bit silly. Especially in terms of the euro, you can't have a single currency unless you're going to have to a closer political union. Its either all in or all out imo. And I have always vehemently been against the UK joining the euro. But the rhetoric surrounding the EU is frankly ridiculous.
 
Crawley said:
I believe I was that twit?

Saying the labour party is a party of the trades unions is rubbish. They are mere puppets of the Trades Unions, reacting to their every jerk of the wire.

And your comparison is nonsense.

People in trade unions often have no choice but to join up (not the old closed-shop, but purely to protect their futures), whereas shareholders 100% choose where they invest their money.
If they don't agree with a company donating, they can sell their shares instantly.
Click to expand...

The assistant General Secretary of Unite is Diana Holland.

(She's been in the news a lot recently because she looks after the drivers that are potentially going on strike)

She also has another job.........

Treasurer of the Labour Party. :ross:
 
southstand1882 said:
This. Politicians would have you believe the world would end if we pulled out.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And, as I said, the rhetoric emanating from the right that the EU has done nothing good for either Europe or the UK and that everything about it is corrupt, bloated and some kind of evil is similarly hyperbolic and ridiculous.
 
Hootnow said:
Indeed. And, as I said, the rhetoric emanating from the right that the EU has done nothing good for either Europe or the UK and that everything about it is corrupt, bloated and some kind of evil is similarly hyperbolic and ridiculous.
Click to expand...

It is corrupt it is bloated, not evil though just deluded and a massive massive waste of money. Maybe other people like wasting money but i do not, we are having a roast today and i am already planning that monday we will have curry with the left overs and maybe get to make a pie on tuesday if the is enough left. I hate wasting money and that is what having to many layers of government does.

Either get rid of westminster and keep the EU or pull out of the EU.
 
monkeybarry said:
working time directive
improvements in employement law in favour of employees
improved maternity and paternity
data protection legislation
freedom of information legislation
move towards equality in pay for men and women
food info - ie, the transpaicy of food content has improved massively
greater consumer protection legislation
good inroads into air quality and such like (not solely the EU - but look at the US and China attitudes towards the environment for the alternative)
ease of travel between member states
theoretically better trade links across the EU
freedom to live and work in another EU country with relative ease
and the flip side to the above - a large and willing workforce that will do the jobs in the UK the brits are too arrogant/proud/ignorant to do
increased competition with flights resulting in cheaper flights (safer flights also i beleive)

thats all i can think of - some of our more esrtwhile posters may be able to add more (or even correct me!?) on the UK pre and post EU
Click to expand...

The price we have had to pay has meant it has not been worth it, we are not even allowed to deport people who want to blow us up and as for maternity leave that is killing a lot of small business
 
Gilzeantoscore said:
Because as I stated previously, the Labour Party is affiliated with the union movement. There would be something wrong if they did not donate to Labour. Last time I checked the tories were the official party of the idiot aristocracy and not business. So that is a difference even you should be able to understand. BTW, I never said there was anything wrong with companies donating. Crawley said the unions should not be able to and I replied well, why then should business?
Click to expand...

So in other words, there is no actual difference - only a bickering over semantics with another internet alias ?

Cheers.
 
DanishWhite said:
So in other words, there is no actual difference - only a bickering over semantics with another internet alias ?

Cheers.
Click to expand...

Are you conceding that point? I had already agreed with it. My point re Crawley was not based on semantics. It was over a double standard i.e. that it's OK for the tories to do something, but not Labour. Quite a common attitude on here, I've noticed.
 
parklane1 said:
I am neither Tory or Labour and i feel they are both as bad as one another for looking after their friends, however i can not agree with that at all. I hope you are saying that tongue in cheek because that statement would take us back to the days of slave labour.

And i say this as a employer who has had a few problems with unions myself
Click to expand...

You missed out the bit where I explained why that doesn't happen.

Crab.C.Nesbitt said:
Lmao mate what decade are you living in mate? So if you don't like the way your company is run you just leave your job and walk right into another one eh? Get real there are far fewer job opportunities as opposed to job seekers out there and it's an employers market, a fact which mployers are exploiting not just with regards to recruitment but also exploitative working practices e.g. Employing people on rolling fixed term contracts to avoid having to give employees the rights that they should have as effective full time employees, or signing in people up to 37.5 hour and expecting that they willroutinely work 50-60 hour weeks without any overtime etc. I think nowadays unions are needed more than ever, but they shouldn't be led by Marxist dinosaurs!
Click to expand...

This isn't the industrial revolution. Way before employment law or powerful unions got involved, management theory evolved a long way beyond what you describe. Any half-arsed manager/director now knows that in order to get your staff to perform they need to be motivated, and that to motivate them, treating them in a reasonable manner is the fastest, quickest and cheapest way.

It may be that when few jobs are available, employers are at a bit of an advantage - the same works both ways though, and employees will be at an advantage during booms.
 
scaramanga said:
It's precisely what I said and then explained why - you trimmed that explanation out in your response.
Click to expand...

As i thought you did, back to the dark days thank GHod you are not in charge of the country. As i have said i have no love for the unions and have had problems dealing with them in the past, but i do see the reason why they are here and should remain here.

Would you also remove the vote from woman as well, can not believe that in todays world there are those who think that way.
 
parklane1 said:
As i thought you did, back to the dark days thank GHod you are not in charge of the country. As i have said i have no love for the unions and have had problems dealing with them in the past, but i do see the reason why they are here and should remain here.

Would you also remove the vote from woman as well, can not believe that in todays world there are those who think that way.
Click to expand...

So which bit about the simple market forces in my original post do you disagree with or not understand?

Just as a company producing bricky products cannot sell for a high price, a company with poor employment practices cannot get the best staff.
 
parklane1 said:
So you did not say there is no place for unions in todays world?
Click to expand...

In their current guise, absolutely not. There are many and varied ways of solving grievances without resorting to racketeering.

A case in point, in 2004 Bob Crow threatened strike action for the dismissal of tube workers accused of gross misconduct after a cleaner found over 100 cans of lager and cider and an empty bottle of whiskey in a mess hall in Farringdon.

Bob Crow caused an absolute fudging stink over the whole affair and blindly backed all involved, even fabricating lies about Metronet and reporting them to British Transport Police over handling of the incident.

An industrial tribunal, the correct way to deal with unfair dismissal, found all involved to be guilty. If Metronet had wavered, Crow would have got his guys off for being drunk whilst working on the track.

Bob Crows answer to everything... "If you don't like it, you need to be in a better union yourself".


In just about every dispute I see nowadays, the union is completely out of order. Unite are as bad as the RMT, this whole tanker driver debacle is undoubtedly politically motivated. As for the BA strikes, I don't know a single member of ground crew that agreed with them, I even knew people within BA cabin crew who didn't agree with the strikes, they were and still are a massively well compensated work force.

Then you have the furore surrounding the public sector workers and their pensions... I'm sorry, every single one of them is living in cloud cuckoo land if they think that pensions can remain the same... Again, what they were asking for is completely unreasonable.

It seems to me that unions simply take liberties at the public's expense.
 
scaramanga said:
So which bit about the simple market forces in my original post do you disagree with or not understand?

Just as a company producing bricky products cannot sell for a high price, a company with poor employment practices cannot get the best staff.
Click to expand...

I really believe that you are missing the point a little, if you did away with unions do you really believe that companies would always treat their workers fair. In a ideal world that would be perfect but its not a ideal world is it?. I have had a business for over 30 years and employ over 50 workers ( most of them union workers) and as i have said at least twice i am neither for or against unions, i have sat down with them on opposite sides and made agreements,did i get what i wanted? no i did not, did the unions ( workers) get all they wanted? no they did not.

But we agreed and it was a fair agreement and everyone went away fairly happy and thats what happens most of the time, of course you have bolshy union men but you also have greedy employers so it works both ways. You keep making the point that i edited out part of your post, i did so because the point i really disagree with was this.

There's no place for unions in the modern world. They are irresponsible, immoral and should be illegal.

I suppose you feel like we should go back to the"good old days" of fuedal owners, as a employer it may be good for me and certainatly make me more money, but you know what its immoral. All in my opinion of course.
 
parklane1 said:
I really believe that you are missing the point a little, if you did away with unions do you really believe that companies would always treat their workers fair. In a ideal world that would be perfect but its not a ideal world is it?. I have had a business for over 30 years and employ over 50 workers ( most of them union workers) and as i have said at least twice i am neither for or against unions, i have sat down with them on opposite sides and made agreements,did i get what i wanted? no i did not, did the unions ( workers) get all they wanted? no they did not.

But we agreed and it was a fair agreement and everyone went away fairly happy and thats what happens most of the time, of course you have bolshy union men but you also have greedy employers so it works both ways. You keep making the point that i edited out part of your post, i did so because the point i really disagree with was this.

There's no place for unions in the modern world. They are irresponsible, immoral and should be illegal.

I suppose you feel like we should go back to the"good old days" of fuedal owners, as a employer it may be good for me and certainatly make me more money, but you know what its immoral. All in my opinion of course.
Click to expand...

In the interest of clarity, I'll make the point for the third time.

In the modern world, with (mostly) free and open communication, an employer that treats its employees poorly will struggle. I have no interest in being able to mistreat employees, I never have and never will. As I stated above, the only way to have a motivated workforce is to treat them fairly. Without a motivated workforce, you may as well close your doors now.

Modern management theory evolved way past what you describe perfectly well without the aid of unions. There is no need for them to unduly skew the labour market and it will work perfectly fine without them.
 
scaramanga said:
In the interest of clarity, I'll make the point for the third time.

In the modern world, with (mostly) free and open communication, an employer that treats its employees poorly will struggle. I have no interest in being able to mistreat employees, I never have and never will. As I stated above, the only way to have a motivated workforce is to treat them fairly. Without a motivated workforce, you may as well close your doors now.

Modern management theory evolved way past what you describe perfectly well without the aid of unions. There is no need for them to unduly skew the labour market and it will work perfectly fine without them.
Click to expand...

Well i will clarify my point as well, i believe your view is wrong and to be honest naive, however that is your opinion and you are entitled to believe it if you wish. We will just have to agree to disagree over this.
 
parklane1 said:
Well i will clarify my point as well, i believe your view is wrong and to be honest naive, however that is your opinion and you are entitled to believe it if you wish. We will just have to agree to disagree over this.
Click to expand...

Why?

Scaramanga politely and intelligently backed up his opinion

Will you do the same?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back