- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Wednesday, 30 November 2011
Strike Day 3
The banner has made it to the march with 100s if not 1000s of others.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Strike Day 2
We're just warming up prior to the march & rally.
Reports are that well over 90% of members are out.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Reports are that well over 90% of members are out.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Early Pickets
The day starts.
After yesterday's announcement of more pay restraint, more job cuts & regional pay it would be bonkers to not be on strike.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
After yesterday's announcement of more pay restraint, more job cuts & regional pay it would be bonkers to not be on strike.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPhone
Thursday, 24 November 2011
Six days to the N30 strike
I came across this by Harry Paterson,Freelance writer & music journalist and thought it was worth sharing.
N30 : Support The Strike
Posted: 23rd November 2011 in Blog
Tags: Bankers, Greed, Pensions, Public Sector, Scargill, Strike, Unions 0
We could be here ‘til next century, discussing the legacy of Thatcher, such is the landscape-altering impact of that vile woman’s contribution to British politics. So we won’t bother, then.
Instead, let’s take a look at one of the more insidious, but no less damaging, phenomena for which she can be rightly blamed. Namely, this mean-spirited, resentful and uncharitable world-view shared by so many. This is best illustrated by a conversation I heard on a radio ‘phone-in, the other day, discussing public sector pensions.
The outraged caller railed furiously against trade Union bosses’ plans for industrial action in defence of public sector pensions (they’re always ‘bosses’, aren’t they? Mob bosses, Mafioso chiefs and crime lords, being the comparison we’re supposed to make).
Why should public sector workers have gold-plated pensions? She demanded, angrily. Where do they get off having such a sense of automatic entitlement? Her pension, from the private sector, was nonexistent so she certainly wasn’t supporting any such action, she’ll have you know!
Depressingly, it’s this sort of attitude that’s largely responsible for getting us into this mess in the first place. Older readers will recall the huge industrial battles and bitterly charged disputes that defined the 80s. Wapping, GCHQ Cheltenham and, of course, the miners’ strike.
Then, as now, the same surly and jealous attitude pervaded. We’re all suffering, we’re all making cut-backs so why should Scargill’s greedy, commie miners be exempt? This also had the knock-on but devastating effect of alibiing the craven, spineless capitulation and outright treachery of Neil Kinnock, Norman Willis et al, as the miners were left isolated, unsupported and abandoned by the Labour party and TUC bureaucracy.
We all know the result. The miners lost and the trade union movement as any kind of vehicle for progressive social change was shattered for generations. Over the following decades, wages plummeted, protection from unscrupulous employers all but vanished and job security and a living wage dropped to a low not seen since before the war.
We’ll join those particular dots shortly, but for now let’s look at some of the most common objections to the strikes on November 30th. This one, from a friend of mine, is typical “…I’ve had pay-cuts in my job in the private sector and simply cannot afford to keep subsidising over-generous public sector pensions”
There are a lot of obvious responses to this; firstly, well why didn’t you join a union and/or fight against the slashing of your terms and conditions? Why resent another group of workers who have the balls to defend their pay and conditions when you didn’t?
Of course, his objections, and those of many others, basically fall into the category of ‘well I’ve been punched in the face, mugged and then shit upon and I didn’t do a thing about it so you should just lie back and take it too’ Not very noble that, is it? Not particularly logical as any kind of argument against, either.
Put more simply, though, look at it this way: you go for an interview, discuss the role, pay and conditions and maybe do a bit of haggling, maybe not, and then you and your employer sign a supposedly legally binding contract which lays out the obligations and benefits for both sides.
Imagine, then, a year or two into the job, you turn around, one day, and say to your boss, “Hey, you know that bit of my job we agreed on? Signed a contract to say I’d do it? Well, not really feeling that anymore so I aint doing it” Can you imagine the response? Yeah, your ass would be sacked PDQ.
So, with that in mind, why is it ok for the government to now turn around and tell their workforce that a significant part of their pay and conditions, a part significant enough to have been the deciding factor in millions of workers taking the job in the first place, is scrapped?
Striking, as a last resort, to resist this seems to me not only perfectly reasonable but clear-cut and morally, legally and logically unassailable. Apparently not, though…
Because as well as the the jealous, the resentful, the cowardly and the terminally stupid, there are also those who trot out Cameron’s hypocritical mantra that we’re all in it together. We simply can’t afford for teachers, nurses, firemen, dinner ladies etc to have “over generous” pensions subsidised by the tax payers. We all need to make sacrifices in UK PLC’s hour of need.
I see. Like Vodafone did when they got off scot-free with £8 BILLION POUNDS of dodged tax owed to the exchequer? You’d think, given the current climate, us tax payers could’ve done with that cash in the public coffers. What with us all being in it together and that.
Or how about the chiefs of effectively nationalised banks continuing to rake in multi-million pound bonuses for being crap at their jobs? Yeah, be nice to see those boys taking one for Team Britannia. You know, what with us all being in it together and that…
This, of course, exposes another lie they’d love you to swallow. You see, we’re not all in this together as patriotic Brits, doing our bit and making sacrifices. Bollocks to that! After all, what sacrifice are the bankers making? What cuts are we seeing among those made fabulously rich by stealing, ripping-off and driving the economy into the ground? No, the working class are in this together; employed, unemployed, public sector, private sector, young, old, working, retired and all scraping by on a pittance in comparison, while the super rich and their mates in government want those at the bottom to pay for the greed of those at the top.
So, as Arthur tried to point out during the miners’ strike, this is not just about one group of workers defending their interests. It’s about all of us because if the coalition gets away with stealing the pensions from their own workforce, you can bet your bottom dollar they’ll be coming for the rest of us next. Count on it.
Find your back-bone, find your integrity and take a stand. Join the strike. If you’re not in the public sector, support the strikers and their actions. Make your support known. And if you can’t do that then at least allow cold, hard, self-interest to motivate you because remember; today it’s the public sector, tomorrow it’ll be you. Don’t say you weren’t warned…
N30 : Support The Strike
Posted: 23rd November 2011 in Blog
Tags: Bankers, Greed, Pensions, Public Sector, Scargill, Strike, Unions 0
We could be here ‘til next century, discussing the legacy of Thatcher, such is the landscape-altering impact of that vile woman’s contribution to British politics. So we won’t bother, then.
Instead, let’s take a look at one of the more insidious, but no less damaging, phenomena for which she can be rightly blamed. Namely, this mean-spirited, resentful and uncharitable world-view shared by so many. This is best illustrated by a conversation I heard on a radio ‘phone-in, the other day, discussing public sector pensions.
The outraged caller railed furiously against trade Union bosses’ plans for industrial action in defence of public sector pensions (they’re always ‘bosses’, aren’t they? Mob bosses, Mafioso chiefs and crime lords, being the comparison we’re supposed to make).
Why should public sector workers have gold-plated pensions? She demanded, angrily. Where do they get off having such a sense of automatic entitlement? Her pension, from the private sector, was nonexistent so she certainly wasn’t supporting any such action, she’ll have you know!
Depressingly, it’s this sort of attitude that’s largely responsible for getting us into this mess in the first place. Older readers will recall the huge industrial battles and bitterly charged disputes that defined the 80s. Wapping, GCHQ Cheltenham and, of course, the miners’ strike.
Then, as now, the same surly and jealous attitude pervaded. We’re all suffering, we’re all making cut-backs so why should Scargill’s greedy, commie miners be exempt? This also had the knock-on but devastating effect of alibiing the craven, spineless capitulation and outright treachery of Neil Kinnock, Norman Willis et al, as the miners were left isolated, unsupported and abandoned by the Labour party and TUC bureaucracy.
We all know the result. The miners lost and the trade union movement as any kind of vehicle for progressive social change was shattered for generations. Over the following decades, wages plummeted, protection from unscrupulous employers all but vanished and job security and a living wage dropped to a low not seen since before the war.
We’ll join those particular dots shortly, but for now let’s look at some of the most common objections to the strikes on November 30th. This one, from a friend of mine, is typical “…I’ve had pay-cuts in my job in the private sector and simply cannot afford to keep subsidising over-generous public sector pensions”
There are a lot of obvious responses to this; firstly, well why didn’t you join a union and/or fight against the slashing of your terms and conditions? Why resent another group of workers who have the balls to defend their pay and conditions when you didn’t?
Of course, his objections, and those of many others, basically fall into the category of ‘well I’ve been punched in the face, mugged and then shit upon and I didn’t do a thing about it so you should just lie back and take it too’ Not very noble that, is it? Not particularly logical as any kind of argument against, either.
Put more simply, though, look at it this way: you go for an interview, discuss the role, pay and conditions and maybe do a bit of haggling, maybe not, and then you and your employer sign a supposedly legally binding contract which lays out the obligations and benefits for both sides.
Imagine, then, a year or two into the job, you turn around, one day, and say to your boss, “Hey, you know that bit of my job we agreed on? Signed a contract to say I’d do it? Well, not really feeling that anymore so I aint doing it” Can you imagine the response? Yeah, your ass would be sacked PDQ.
So, with that in mind, why is it ok for the government to now turn around and tell their workforce that a significant part of their pay and conditions, a part significant enough to have been the deciding factor in millions of workers taking the job in the first place, is scrapped?
Striking, as a last resort, to resist this seems to me not only perfectly reasonable but clear-cut and morally, legally and logically unassailable. Apparently not, though…
Because as well as the the jealous, the resentful, the cowardly and the terminally stupid, there are also those who trot out Cameron’s hypocritical mantra that we’re all in it together. We simply can’t afford for teachers, nurses, firemen, dinner ladies etc to have “over generous” pensions subsidised by the tax payers. We all need to make sacrifices in UK PLC’s hour of need.
I see. Like Vodafone did when they got off scot-free with £8 BILLION POUNDS of dodged tax owed to the exchequer? You’d think, given the current climate, us tax payers could’ve done with that cash in the public coffers. What with us all being in it together and that.
Or how about the chiefs of effectively nationalised banks continuing to rake in multi-million pound bonuses for being crap at their jobs? Yeah, be nice to see those boys taking one for Team Britannia. You know, what with us all being in it together and that…
This, of course, exposes another lie they’d love you to swallow. You see, we’re not all in this together as patriotic Brits, doing our bit and making sacrifices. Bollocks to that! After all, what sacrifice are the bankers making? What cuts are we seeing among those made fabulously rich by stealing, ripping-off and driving the economy into the ground? No, the working class are in this together; employed, unemployed, public sector, private sector, young, old, working, retired and all scraping by on a pittance in comparison, while the super rich and their mates in government want those at the bottom to pay for the greed of those at the top.
So, as Arthur tried to point out during the miners’ strike, this is not just about one group of workers defending their interests. It’s about all of us because if the coalition gets away with stealing the pensions from their own workforce, you can bet your bottom dollar they’ll be coming for the rest of us next. Count on it.
Find your back-bone, find your integrity and take a stand. Join the strike. If you’re not in the public sector, support the strikers and their actions. Make your support known. And if you can’t do that then at least allow cold, hard, self-interest to motivate you because remember; today it’s the public sector, tomorrow it’ll be you. Don’t say you weren’t warned…
Wednesday, 23 November 2011
Save your pension - join the strike - show the hypocrites
One more reason that our strike with others on November 30th is successful
Pension-slashing minister Francis Maude could pick up £731k retirement pot
by James Lyons, Daily Mirror 22/11/2011
THE Tory minister ruthlessly slashing the pensions of millions of public sector workers could be in line to pocket a £731,000 retirement pot.
Francis Maude, 58, is among a number of Government ministers amassing vast, taxpayer-funded nest eggs.
But while the millionaire can look forward to a potential £43,000-plus a year income in his old age, he is cutting schemes for nurses, teachers and public sector workers.
Advertisement >>
The shocking sum is almost eight times the average £5,600 civil service employee’s pot.
Union chiefs yesterday branded Cabinet Office Minister Mr Maude and his well-to-do colleagues shameless hypocrites.
Len McCluskey, of Unite, which calculated the figures, said: “A typical public sector worker would have to work almost three lifetimes to get a pension like many of the ministers who are attacking our public services.
“Unite supports good pensions for all workers including MPs.
“What we don’t support is a cabinet of millionaires attacking the pensions of the men and women who care for our sick, teach our children and keep our streets safe.
“It’s another example of how out of touch the Government is.” Mark Serwotka, of the civil service PCS union, added: “They’ll be completely untouched by their cuts.”
MPs can grow their pension pot by up to one 40th of their final salary – currently £65,738 – each year in return for putting in 11.9% of their wage packet.
Senior ministers, who earn more, can also pay in at the same rate and receive one 40th of their total frontbench earnings on top of their Parliamentary pension.
Veteran Tory Mr Maude, who is masterminding the showdown with unions, earns about £98,700.
He will have chalked up 27 years as an MP and eight as a minister during two spells in Parliament if he keeps his job until the next election in 2015.
If he paid in at this top rate he would get a pension over £60,000, according to Unite. Payouts are limited to two-thirds of an MP’s salary but it still means he could get £43,825.
He and Chief Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander are playing hardball ahead of a national stoppage that is set to see millions of workers walk out of their jobs over the row next Wednesday.
Mr Maude has also been accused of bullying after threatening to bring in anti-strike laws.
David Cameron has surrendered his Prime Minister’s pension, which is worth half of his final salary in the top job, but still benefits from the generous pay and perks.
Contributing at the top rate, Mr Cameron – already worth an estimated £3million – would be entitled to £32,977 by 2015. His even richer sidekick George Osborne would get the same.
It is almost six times the typical £5,600 public sector pension. Someone in a private scheme would have to save up more than half a million pounds.
Deputy PM Nick Clegg could retire on £26,403 a year if he quits Parliament at the next election. Mr Alexander would get £26,403 while Business Secretary and Lib Dem Vince Cable would take home £39,551.
Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary busy demolishing the NHS, would pick up an identical amount if he opted for the top rate but a spokesman said last night he had chosen a lower one. Fellow Tory Eric Pickles, who has been inflicting brutal cuts on town halls across the country, could rack up £43,825.
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/most-popular/2011/11/22/pension-slashing-minister-francis-maude-could-pick-up-731k-retirement-pot-115875-23579471/#ixzz1eVvg0Hjn
Pension-slashing minister Francis Maude could pick up £731k retirement pot
by James Lyons, Daily Mirror 22/11/2011
THE Tory minister ruthlessly slashing the pensions of millions of public sector workers could be in line to pocket a £731,000 retirement pot.
Francis Maude, 58, is among a number of Government ministers amassing vast, taxpayer-funded nest eggs.
But while the millionaire can look forward to a potential £43,000-plus a year income in his old age, he is cutting schemes for nurses, teachers and public sector workers.
Advertisement >>
The shocking sum is almost eight times the average £5,600 civil service employee’s pot.
Union chiefs yesterday branded Cabinet Office Minister Mr Maude and his well-to-do colleagues shameless hypocrites.
Len McCluskey, of Unite, which calculated the figures, said: “A typical public sector worker would have to work almost three lifetimes to get a pension like many of the ministers who are attacking our public services.
“Unite supports good pensions for all workers including MPs.
“What we don’t support is a cabinet of millionaires attacking the pensions of the men and women who care for our sick, teach our children and keep our streets safe.
“It’s another example of how out of touch the Government is.” Mark Serwotka, of the civil service PCS union, added: “They’ll be completely untouched by their cuts.”
MPs can grow their pension pot by up to one 40th of their final salary – currently £65,738 – each year in return for putting in 11.9% of their wage packet.
Senior ministers, who earn more, can also pay in at the same rate and receive one 40th of their total frontbench earnings on top of their Parliamentary pension.
Veteran Tory Mr Maude, who is masterminding the showdown with unions, earns about £98,700.
He will have chalked up 27 years as an MP and eight as a minister during two spells in Parliament if he keeps his job until the next election in 2015.
If he paid in at this top rate he would get a pension over £60,000, according to Unite. Payouts are limited to two-thirds of an MP’s salary but it still means he could get £43,825.
He and Chief Treasury Secretary Danny Alexander are playing hardball ahead of a national stoppage that is set to see millions of workers walk out of their jobs over the row next Wednesday.
Mr Maude has also been accused of bullying after threatening to bring in anti-strike laws.
David Cameron has surrendered his Prime Minister’s pension, which is worth half of his final salary in the top job, but still benefits from the generous pay and perks.
Contributing at the top rate, Mr Cameron – already worth an estimated £3million – would be entitled to £32,977 by 2015. His even richer sidekick George Osborne would get the same.
It is almost six times the typical £5,600 public sector pension. Someone in a private scheme would have to save up more than half a million pounds.
Deputy PM Nick Clegg could retire on £26,403 a year if he quits Parliament at the next election. Mr Alexander would get £26,403 while Business Secretary and Lib Dem Vince Cable would take home £39,551.
Andrew Lansley, the Health Secretary busy demolishing the NHS, would pick up an identical amount if he opted for the top rate but a spokesman said last night he had chosen a lower one. Fellow Tory Eric Pickles, who has been inflicting brutal cuts on town halls across the country, could rack up £43,825.
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/most-popular/2011/11/22/pension-slashing-minister-francis-maude-could-pick-up-731k-retirement-pot-115875-23579471/#ixzz1eVvg0Hjn
Sunday, 20 November 2011
All Out on November 30th - the workers united can never be defeated!
Members of unions including our own campaigning in Leicester city centre on November 19th for the strike on 30th November.
Thursday, 10 November 2011
NEW FROM LEICESTERSHIRE AGAINST THE CUTS
FOR LEICESTER CITY RESIDENTS:
The City Mayor, Sir Peter Soulsby, is conducting a very short on-line only consultation about the cuts he and the Labour administration want to make at the city council. The consultation can be accessed through this link:
http://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/ConsDetails.aspx?consID=407
Leicestershire Against the Cuts (LAC) believe that people should give all the services under threat the highest (6) marking and tell Sir Peter that we believe all these services are equally valuable to the people of Leicester.
LAC also believe that people should not complete the section on which three services they believe should be cut and instead use the space provided to tell the Mayor that cuts are not necessary and that he and his massive Labour majority should be building an alliance with other councils to fight the coalition government for the money to fund services vital to the needs of all whether they are old or young, male or female, in good health or not or need additional specialist assistance.
LAC will also be posting soon a letter you can send to the Mayor outling why you believe cuts are not necessary.
The consultation finishes on 25 November, so get your response in before then.
The City Mayor, Sir Peter Soulsby, is conducting a very short on-line only consultation about the cuts he and the Labour administration want to make at the city council. The consultation can be accessed through this link:
http://consultations.leicester.gov.uk/ConsDetails.aspx?consID=407
Leicestershire Against the Cuts (LAC) believe that people should give all the services under threat the highest (6) marking and tell Sir Peter that we believe all these services are equally valuable to the people of Leicester.
LAC also believe that people should not complete the section on which three services they believe should be cut and instead use the space provided to tell the Mayor that cuts are not necessary and that he and his massive Labour majority should be building an alliance with other councils to fight the coalition government for the money to fund services vital to the needs of all whether they are old or young, male or female, in good health or not or need additional specialist assistance.
LAC will also be posting soon a letter you can send to the Mayor outling why you believe cuts are not necessary.
The consultation finishes on 25 November, so get your response in before then.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
