You don’t like unions eh ?
How about when the Government breaks it own laws on discrimination between the sexes, who will fight such a case when it will cost the Governement tens of mi££ions of £’s ?
The background to this case is that the employer concerned evaluated all the work carried out by certain grades of employee and then scored them on points in value to the employer.
The points were related to responsibility and work content, and when it discovered that the administration staff took lots of responsibility in terms of finance, in ensuring that prisoners had their parole cases heard competantly and the myriad other things, then the points awarded merited higher pay for many of those staff.
Please bear in mind that the employer in this case had actually lost in court previously, had agreed at pay negotiations to rectify their pay system, and then simply gone back on its commitment and had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the courts again by the union.
Oh…and who would have fought this woman’s case for her when she was hounded by her bullying manager ?
Maybe we should let the employer behave as disgracefully as it likes eh ?
What actually happened is that the employer simply ignored its own findings. despite the fact that it effectively awarded lower pay to women than to men who carry out work of equal value to the employer, note, this does not mean the same work.
Its taken a total of 10 years, 7 of those in the courts, with the employer agreeing that the employees were in the right, but yet still refusing to agree terms.
By dragging out their stone age male/female pay policy in the courts, this has resulted in a huge backpay compensation build up, at least £50 millions, and with pension entitlements it could be a good deal more.
Please remember that the 1957 cases so far are simply test cases, a class action if you will and it has established in law that the employer was wrong.
Of course, all the previous posters condemning the unions must(to use their logic of hyperbole and brad sweeping genralistaions) would obviously prefer that employers were free and unfettered in the persuit of breaking the law of the land, and would prefer that unions didn’t fight discrimination, you’ll note how sweeping this latter statement is, just as the posts of others are sweeping in their genralisations of anti union rhetoric.
Don’t you think that being part of the military shields youself from a great many of the problems that non-military staff face, such as instant dismissal, having done my time in the military myself, I also used to look down on unions, until I left the military and became one of those workers, suddenly a lot of the security and perks went, and suddenly I realised things were not as I had led myself to believe.
Many of those restrictions have their roots back in the day when employers were just exploiters, using casual labour and providing their employees without employment security from one day to the next, where gangmasters would pick and choose who to employ from the queues outside the gates, promotion and careers non-existant, and anyone raising so much as a murmer about safety would be dismissed on the spot.
Some unions do stupid things that are not in their memebers interests, nor the public, but so do employers, its way too broad a sweep you make with that brush.
If you don’t like the union in the NYC transport strike, and you think that they were wrong, then fine, but to then include all unions and try to bring in some wider debate where you stereotype all unions in all situations when you actually don’t provide cites, and appear to simply hold your own biased opinion is just poor intellectual rigour.
If you wish to comment upon a specific situation where a company moved its production overseas then do so, but also remember this, there is no way that any US workforce would be prepared to work for the same pay and conditions as, say, an Indian, or a Chinese and the gap between them is so great that production will always move to such areas where costs are lowest.
What it does show is that the consumer is only interested in low prices, not in anything else, and screw the US factory, that’s capitalism, and it shows you just how employers would behave in the US if they could get away with it, and this would drag down you own pay and conditions as the bad employer undercuts the poor, and is in turn undercut by the worst.
Never mind, maybe you like your knee to twitch, without any intervention from your upper conscuisness, some of us prefer to use the thing that sets us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom.