Are the Lib Dems broken.

[Marmora Man]

TT3,

Your posts seem a tad over the top and your desire to return to historical class war quite amusing. However, some facts:

I have been involved in a number of TUPE transfers going back into the 90s. A key advisor I have used in the past has summarised the key changes in the new TUPE legislation for me recently as:

1. New provisions extending the scope of TUPE to service provision changes: it is now clear that TUPE covers situations where services are outsourced, taken back in-house or passed to a replacement service provider. MM Comment: This provides greater protection for employees no matter what form the change of business owner takes. Where is the harm here TT3?

2. A new obligation on the outgoing employer to supply information about transferring employees to the incoming employer by providing "employee liability information" at least two weeks before the transfer occurs. MM Comment: This protects both employee and employer by providing greater clarity about all involved.

3. A new joint liability for failure to inform and consult employee representatives about a TUPE transfer. MM Comment: Further protection for employees and a stronger guarantee regarding consultation

4. Clarification of how employers may lawfully dismiss employees or change terms and conditions of employment in connection with a TUPE transfer. MM Comment: Clarity is always helpful and, on occasions it is necessary to dismiss employees or change ToRs for the greater good. At least these circumstances are being spelt out.

5. New special provisions that make it easier for insolvent businesses to be transferred to new owners. Some of the outgoing employer's pre-existing debts to transferring employees will not pass to the incoming employer; and the waiver of restrictions on varying terms and conditions of employment (subject to certain conditions) when a business is insolvent. MM Comment: This may be what you are concerned about - but most employees, when faced with a choice between a business going into administration and closing down - or accepting time / pay / benefit changes to continue in employment have opted for the latter over the last two years. cf various three day weeks, pay rise foregone etc - at least in the private sector

I may return to comment on your proposition that Unions are protecting "workers rights".

[Marmora Man]

TT3

On unions: A "cut & paste" from an earlier MM comment:

Personally, I belive most strikes and union organised action a total waste of time. There was a period in history when Trades Unions were able to achieve significant improvements in conditions and pay for their members using solidarity and the option of strikes as negotiation tactics.

Those days are long past - sufficient employment legislation is in place to protect all workers. Unions these days have morphed into activist movements where the interests of union members and the company's customers come in a long way behind political posturing and rhetoric. cf: Bob Crow and RMT Union, The BA dispute, the RCN's recent rhetoric about strikes in protest against Gov't action etc.

[StraferJack]

say what you like about Crow and posturing, but I would argue his unions members are well served by him

[Loz]

StraferJack Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> say what you like about Crow and posturing, but I

> would argue his unions members are well served by

> him

How about the BA cabin crew then? Two years of strikes only to accept pretty much what was offered at the start.

[StraferJack]

I wasn't making a case for strikes, BA or otherwise. Just countering the point that was made that they are no longer relevant or succesful

[thomastillingthe3rd]

loz/?? You can only play what?s in front of you , but as neither of you are making much sense i'm going to give you your bat back, its getting fairly dull.

MM - that legislation is the 2006/7 TUPE amendment changes that came in under the last Labour Administration, and yes you are right they did offer protection by closing some loopholes exploited by business. However I was talking about new legislation in the pipeline that is going to rip all that up and more, so go find yourself a union.

As for generalised statements about unions I can only talk about experiences of the 'here and now'. Recently my partner had his company propose a reduction in redundancy consultation from 3months to 4 weeks. They held out and won, the company then announced 40 redundancies and each of those people benefited from an extra 2months wages. If the company had its way they would have been out with 1months consultation. Basically the extra 2months, paid for most people's subscriptions going back years and provided a better financial cushion. I know lots of lots of friends who are currently benefiting from being part of an organised collective, very de-rigour actually right now.

Thanks for the covering fire strafer!

[StraferJack]

TT3 - I'm not sure I'd be covering your back all the way on these arguments. I was merely pointing out a truism about Bob Crow's success. I haven't said I think that's entirely a good thing.

[thomastillingthe3rd]

as for BA

staff will get a 7.5% payrise over 2years

top up payments for low salary workers

all travel benifits re-instated (backdated)

fmaily and friends still get -10% on travel

bbc not me.

Considering what BA wanted to do , their union seems to have done pretty well for them from what i am reading. I know the BBC is not the EDF news machine, but i will take my chances that they are closer to the truth.

[Loz]

thomastillingthe3rd Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> as for BA

>

> staff will get a 7.5% payrise over 2years

> top up payments for low salary workers

> all travel benifits re-instated (backdated)

> fmaily and friends still get -10% on travel

>

> bbc not me.

... which is pretty much what was on the table two years ago. In the meantime, the striking staff have lost a lot of wages, Unite has had its cabin crew membership drop by nearly half, a struggling employer has lost ?150M (which will no doubt mean more layoffs) and the BA cabin crew are at war with each other. BA now have a whole load of trained standby cabin crew, so they are in a much better position to handle any future strike action taking away a lot of union muscle. Also, the original deal included share options - this has been withdraw, so it's arguably a worse offer accepted.

Meanwhile, the issue that triggered all this - the Mixed Fleet - will still go ahead as BA planned. The cabin crew numbers on each plane are dropping, as planned.

I think when the cabin crew tot up what was gained vs what was lost they will find that they are very much in the red.

[thomastillingthe3rd]

mmmm the Metro !!

Clearly the cabin crew look really happy and willie walsh is no more.

next

[thomastillingthe3rd]

2009

Oct 6: BA announces 1,700 cabin crew job cuts and pay freeze

Never happened

What did happen was Walsh wanted to break the union, and then get on with some really deep cutting, he failed. The offers at the beginning were never offers just antagonisms i reckon.

[James Barber]

Someone mentioned avoiding general election. I think all the parties want to avoid one.

Labout because they could lose all those Scottish Labout seats to the SNP.

Conservatives because they want to see the reduction in seats from 650 to 600.

Liberal Democrats because the legislation for fixed term parliaments is close to being passed.

[????]

Yeah right TT - insults, lies and unwillingness to actually answer reasonable points in a debate. Stick to what you know next time son. Infact as my last post

"Can we have a reasonable debate? Can you stop avoiding answering points that have been put to you reasonably, insulting and saying people have said things they haven't? I'm not holding my breathe, if you want to arse about I'm quite happy to do so in the Lounge."

[Loz]

thomastillingthe3rd Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 2009

>

> Oct 6: BA announces 1,700 cabin crew job cuts and

> pay freeze

>

> Never happened

Eh? Cabin Crew have had a pay freeze for the past two years. And cabin crew per flights have been reduced by 1 person from 15 to 14 - the main issue the union fought in the courts and lost.

> What did happen was Walsh wanted to break the

> union, and then get on with some really deep

> cutting, he failed. The offers at the beginning

> were never offers just antagonisms i reckon.

If that is failure, I'd hate to see him succeed. BASSA is virtually dead - it was notable that the announcement of the agreement was from Unite, not BASSA. And the 'antagonistic' offers two years ago were accepted this week. Walsh has made BASSA look like chumps. He's broken them. Their membership has halved in the last year.

Even the much vaunted restoration of travel perks is conditional on successful implementation of new procedures.

And your previous post claimed Willie Walsh was 'gone'. Well, he's now running IAG - the parent company of BA. A big promotion.

[thomastillingthe3rd]

A big promotion !!! u don't half make things up.....he said "travel perks would be re-instated over his dead body" ....the shareholders made the call, and Willies dead body got shifted out.

As for the rest of it There will also be a pay increase totaling 7.5 percent over two years?4 percent this year, backdated, and 3.5 percent next year.....so backdated cancels out the pay freeze. Management has also agreed that there will be no unilateral imposition of any new terms and conditions without full negotiations with the union.

In cases like this you have to really look at the whole deal, understand the details, yes it may not be perfect but its a good deal for both sides. Both sides are in a much better position than were they could have been. Change is coming but its how that change is managed and how it impacts of the people working for the company.

as for reasonable debate, are you seriously asking us to discuss the line about ....."spending 30% above your income? " now that belongs in the lounge son, its a red top catch all with no real meaning or depth.

Anyway are the liberal democrats broken, well they are looking very light in leadership. One is now pretty much reviled by by the nation, the other is passing of speeding tickets on his mates, the nations favourite has been nailed by the right wing press and is being re-modeled as the Tony Benn of the party, Simon Hughes is .....well nowhere to be seen. Not looking good.

[thomastillingthe3rd]

hey James could you explain the 3 reasons for avoiding a general election, bit more detail about the cons and libs reasons? i am not quite getting them . Thanks

[Loz]

thomastillingthe3rd Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> A big promotion !!! u don't half make things

> up.....he said "travel perks would be re-instated

> over his dead body" ....the shareholders made the

> call, and Willies dead body got shifted out.

When you go from leading BA to leading the company that owns and runs BA and Iberia then that is a big promotion. What else you you call it? Put it this way - I bet he got a payrise. A big one.

You can bet Willie Walsh had to sign off this deal as well, since he still effectively runs BA. And whilst the 'dead body' quote is true, I suspect he was playing politics. He wanted to take BASSA down and effectively punishing anyone involved with the union meant that support did not build for strike action. As the strikes continued, less and less CC got involved, leaving only the core troublemakers.

I see you've avoided the point about the state BASSA (and to an extent Unite) have ended up in. CC membership through the floor and gone from being the big CC union to a bit-player. Walsh has pretty much destroyed them as a force for cabin crew.

> as for reasonable debate, are you seriously asking

> us to discuss the line about ....."spending 30%

> above your income? " now that belongs in the

> lounge son, its a red top catch all with no real

> meaning or depth.

Erm - you have the wrong poster, TT3. I didn't say that at all.

[Loz]

thomastillingthe3rd Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As for the rest of it There will also be a pay

> increase totaling 7.5 percent over two years?4

> percent this year, backdated, and 3.5 percent next

> year.....so backdated cancels out the pay freeze.

Backdated to 1 Feb 2011... so no, it doesn't cancel out the 2 year pay freeze. In fact, all non-BASSA staff got the same deal last year, so the union has had to do a massive climbdown and it lost the strikers money.

[thomastillingthe3rd]

For all those half educated muck spreader's out there....

When BASSA's membership was over 11000, there were around 14000 crew. This has since been reduced by the 2000 cabin crew who took voluntary severance. Those who took severance were all senior crew and the majority of them were members of BASSA. Although there have been resignations since the industrial dispute began, there are still people joining and re-joining BASSA today. There are many people who spend much of their time bad mouthing the union and indeed many who did not take part in the industrial action. Neither of these things has stopped them from continuing to come to BASSA for help when they find themselves off sick or the subject of disciplinary action.

No group of people, be they management or union, will always make the right decision at the right time. There will always be those who wish for confrontation and those who will always seek compromise. What is important in the case of BASSA is that, overall, they have always worked to secure the best terms and conditions for their members.

as for the rest of it, they have secured an average of 2%+ for every year , 2years back dated and 2 years going forward. this could also rise. Most people i know have been on a pay freeze for the last 2years, and have no idea about the next 2years. Obviously not those corporate mouthpiece's wallowing in their comfort zone's though, maybe that's why loz thinks 8% + spread across 4years is shoddy.

enjoy dear x

[Huguenot]

With RPI inflation running at 5.3%, I guess nobody's going to get a round of applause for fixing only a 2% raise after a 2 year pay freeze.

However, I must admit I'm confused. On another thread in this section tt3 you seem to be celebrating the spending cuts (even though this is wierd given government spending is still rising) and damning the lack of coverage with a student-like desire to believe any hearsay or conspiracy theory you come across.

Your question to James appeared to be deliberately baiting him, and not a small bit snotty. If you are geninely unaware why a general election is not in the interests of either party, then I can assure you that you're not the astute political commentator you think you are, and I advise you to google it.

What are you actually trying to say here? Or are you just taking a contrary position on every issue? I've no desire to discuss issues with debaters with no integrity.

[Loz]

Gosh TT3 - your writing style has improved! Except the last paragraph, where you seem to have suddenly lurched back to your normal style. Or are you just cutting and pasting BASSA press releases...?

Also, why are you continuing to claim the pay rise is backdated 2 years? According to an industry website the deal is:

Staff will be granted a two-year pay deal back-dated to February, worth 2.9% this year and up to 3% next year, below the 5% inflation rate estimated for the end of this year. However, BA has insisted on unspecified productivity concessions from staff to be agreed by July 1. Staff will get a further 1.1% this year and 0.5% next year if these savings are agreed.

And I never said the deal was 'shoddy' - I actually said you could have had that deal (or even a better one) TWO YEARS AGO! After two years of strikes the union has ended up with the same (or worse) pay deal and all of its demands about the New Fleet and the Mixed Fleet ignored. Not a good result. And a result that may yet still be rejected by the membership. Doubtful, as most CC are sick of the dispute, but possible.

If BASSA are in such good health, why was the deal announced (and negotiated) by Unite? Where has BASSA gone? Where has Duncan Holley gone?

[thomastillingthe3rd]

For those mathematically challenged above, and i suspect retired or unemployed or in L's case a corporate HR mouthtrap the following

The actual total is close to around 8% over 2 years, as i said the previous past 2 years nothing, however as the majority of the country got nothing (if you were employed you probably would know that) then you could see it as 2% year on year. Even if inflation was running at 8%, if you are not a public sector worker and are without significant union backing , you would not have had a hope of securing that, let alone potentially 4% for the next 2years.

As for writing styles generally the truth works for me, and as L, u clearly have been on here soooo long, you feel that you have the authority to type drivel; in the case of your TUPE knowledge that is an understatement. I would worry that anyone reading your advice on TUPE would not realise that they are being lectured by a dangerous halfwit at best. So for me , I is NOt Engaging Wit u anymore , Clearly old ED DHSS as u are.

H - was not baiting James or whoever he is, just asking his opinion / theory on points 2 n 3 , rushing u see.

As for cuts not sure where you get the pro from , just pointing out what a close friend told me , He is in charge of a live news desk told me what came from above regarding the pointless rally. Its odd that u think this conspiracy? On this very forum MM states in print that 35000 turned out for the march for the alternative, it was actually close to HALF A MILLION. Its just a ridiculous statement for MM to make, you have to ask yourself why?

Also I rarely like to entertain anyone with no integrity so i can see where you are coming from. However i note the number of posts you have made and suspect that you may have had quite a few 'un-integrals' on here in the past. Hopefully though not all your posts were like your AV position, which i must say seemed a bit in denial to be honest.

Anyway must run, I hear the church bells a ringing x

[Huguenot]

Oh well, I'm sure we can all only dream of your access to 'truth' ;-)

[Marmora Man]

TT3,

You must try reading posts before critiquing them. I did not claim the anti cuts march was attended by 35,000 I simply drew a comparison - multiplying the 350 by 100.

I find Loz's argument way more persuavive than yours on the BA strike.

[Loz]

Marmora Man Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I find Loz's argument way more persuavive than

> yours on the BA strike.

That's because my arguments generally involve putting forward my opinions backed by my view of the facts, with source indicated where I can. TT3's arguments involve lots of Class War 101 type sloganeering with a few very poor attempts at trying to goad people by calling them names, whilst ignoring any attempt at countering any actual arguments, all in a slightly over-excited, hard-to-read writing style.

BTW, TT3 - I am in no way connected with BA. Hell, I rarely even fly with them.

So, TT3: Are you admitting now the pay deal is not backdated two year, just a few months? And pretty much the same deal was on the table two years ago? And that the BA staff lost nearly a month's pay whilst on strike for absolutely nothing in return?