Join the Labour Party and save your country!
Comments
-
Clearly not the bar is high enough to stop the tube unions to announce 3 more separate days of strikes :roll:
I suppose you do have a point there, for example the tube drivers - it's an appalling management failure that they didn't sack them all years ago and automate the trains.As for strikes, in the current legislative environment, i see them as a result of management failure, so any legal strike, is genuine and i d support it.
But seriously, to say that all strikes are caused by management failure is no more plausible than saying that they are all caused by Moscow-funded Trots.
I've been on the end of some pretty horrendous changes in T&Cs (and there is xxxx all u can do about it, other than leave and lose your redundancy terms) and the bar to call a strike is so high (if the work place even recognises a trade union, which in the private sector is rare) then yes, if the work force feel so aggrieved that they lose pay and risk their jobs to go on strike, i d say that is a management failure.
maybe there are a few cases where the work force is so unreasonable they d down tools on a whim but then they d be in breach of their TC and could be sacked, few would risk this as you ll get no unemployment benefit and into the bargain get a bad employment record.
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/tube-strike-2016-third-union-backs-industrial-action-as-three-days-of-walkouts-draw-closer-a3159651.html"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
In other news, trust in Corbyn falls to record lows:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/12106543/Jeremy-Corbyn-loses-the-trust-of-Labour-voters-as-belief-in-him-falls-to-almost-half-that-of-Ed-Miliband.html
Half the level enjoyed by Ed Miliband and now on a level with Nigel Farage. Welcome to the political fringes..."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Well, take the unions to court and seize the assets of their leaders then? they are legal strikes or Boris would have done just that.0
-
CBA to read it - but I assumed it would be something like that. Bit of a gambler's fallacy going on there, I think. A bit like insurance companies putting up your premium every year because every year the chance of you having had an accident increases.
??????????????????????????nuclear war becomes more likely than not when the weapons have been held onto for a certain period of time
Read the link I posted. Although the likelihood of nuclear war is very low in any given year (certain crisis years excepted), the longer the given time period, the higher the probability of it happening.
No, it's not a fallacy, it's basic statistics. If a nuclear war is a 1 in 1000 year event, then there's a 10% chance that one will occur over the course of a century. The problem is that nuclear war is a 1 in X year event, and we have no way of accurately calculating X, ergo no way of calculating the chances of a nuclear war happening over time period Y.
Lies, damn lies and statistics!!
That assumes there WILL be a nuclear war in period Y, this is not the case. To say it is a 1 in a 1000 year event does not mean that 999 years after the last one then it is a certainty in the next year.
Statistically if a cyclist has an accident once a year, it could mean he had 3 in one year and none in two years.
No, it doesn't assume that there will be a nuclear war, it assumes that over a long enough period of time, a nuclear war would occur every 1000 years (although obviously in this case that would be a highly unlikely scenario, unless the extremophile bacteria that inherited the Earth after us discover how to make nuclear weapons). In which case, it would still be a 1 in 1000 year event, and the chances of it happening within a certain time period within that 1000 years would remain unchanged.
Similarly, if I toss a coin once, I have a 50% chance of getting tails. If I throw it twice, there is no certainty that I will get tails once and heads once, but if I toss the coin enough times, then the heads:tails ratio will work out at about 1:1 eventually.
Read the link. You'll use up 5 minutes of your life, it's not some super advanced statistical theory or obfuscation, it's simple probability explained for the layman by scientists.0 -
CBA to read it - but I assumed it would be something like that. Bit of a gambler's fallacy going on there, I think. A bit like insurance companies putting up your premium every year because every year the chance of you having had an accident increases.
??????????????????????????nuclear war becomes more likely than not when the weapons have been held onto for a certain period of time
Read the link I posted. Although the likelihood of nuclear war is very low in any given year (certain crisis years excepted), the longer the given time period, the higher the probability of it happening.
I've been thinking about this, and I assume that you are referring to the misconception that some people have that the outcome of a random event will affect the outcome of the random event if repeated. For example, a gambler might say to himself that the last 5 rolls of a die haven't been 6, therefore the next one must be a 6. As you say, that is a fallacy, but it is not the same concept as the one I was talking about above.0 -
They are legal but they are still acting very selfishly, given the impact on millions of ordinary working Londoners and businesses. Bring on driverless trains.Well, take the unions to court and seize the assets of their leaders then? they are legal strikes or Boris would have done just that."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
No point in striking if no one notices.
They are legal but they are still acting very selfishly, given the impact on millions of ordinary working Londoners and businesses. Bring on driverless trains.Well, take the unions to court and seize the assets of their leaders then? they are legal strikes or Boris would have done just that.
Something to consider.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
No point in striking if no one notices.
They are legal but they are still acting very selfishly, given the impact on millions of ordinary working Londoners and businesses. Bring on driverless trains.Well, take the unions to court and seize the assets of their leaders then? they are legal strikes or Boris would have done just that.
Something to consider.
What, you mean like a philosophers' strike?0 -
Already considered.
No point in striking if no one notices.
They are legal but they are still acting very selfishly, given the impact on millions of ordinary working Londoners and businesses. Bring on driverless trains.Well, take the unions to court and seize the assets of their leaders then? they are legal strikes or Boris would have done just that.
Something to consider.
It is about proportionality. What we are looking at here is a few thousand tube staff being able to make daily life miserable for millions and cost businesses millions every day. For what? LU is proposing to hire some staff to work the night shifts that people in London want. I assume because their members wouldn't agree to do this without an unreasonable level of financial/holiday compensation on top of already over-generous pay and benefits.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/4d15a8d2-b878-11e5-bf7e-8a339b6f2164.html#axzz3xjRgMGqc
Clearly not proportional.
These are for the most part not skilled jobs: there are many people who could do those jobs and who would be very happy to work for that sort of money and on those terms.
If you commuted in London you would probably have a different view. Most people I know who rely on the tube are of the view that the tube workers are selfish luddite bastards who should be sacked. Although there is a view that we should encourage them to go ahead - this article is from mid last year but still quite amusing: take note of points 2, 3, 8 and 9
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11728240/Why-Tories-should-support-the-Tube-strike.html"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
So, in summary.
As an impact strike, what they are doing is spot on?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
The actions of a few having an impact on many? It's just not fair.So, in summary.
As an impact strike, what they are doing is spot on?Ecrasez l’infame0 -
Life isn't fair. The point remains.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19783001#p19783001]BelgianBeerGeek[/url] wrote:
The actions of a few having an impact on many? It's just not fair.So, in summary.
As an impact strike, what they are doing is spot on?
If you want a strike to be noticed and effective, it has to have impact. Directly on the decision makers if possible.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
I'm glad you say that life isn't fair because there seem to be a lot of people who have a problem understanding that, especially on matters of income and tax.PBlakeney wrote:
Life isn't fair. The point remains.[url=http://www.bikeradar.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=19783001#p19783001]BelgianBeerGeek[/url] wrote:
The actions of a few having an impact on many? It's just not fair.So, in summary.
As an impact strike, what they are doing is spot on?
If you want a strike to be noticed and effective, it has to have impact. Directly on the decision makers if possible.
I take your point that a strike need to have an impact to be effective but the point about proportionality remains. In the case of the tube strike they are only hastening their own demise by their disproportionate actions as public opinion has swung firmly against them. This will make it easier to pass more legislation restricting strikes like the current union bill, and also possibly speed up driverless trains and other automation that makes them redundant altogether.
So its a case of short term pain for long term gain for most of us in London. Not that it bothers me too much as I can use the bike or take the overland and walk, but I say bring on the strikes !
And when leftie types come on here in future bleating about how hard it is to strike or tube workers being made redundant, I can just quote your wise words that life isn't fair "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Simply repeating what I keep getting told.Stevo 666 wrote:And when leftie types come on here in future bleating about how hard it is to strike or tube workers being made redundant, I can just quote your wise words that life isn't fair
That it appears to be true is sad. That people want to keep it that way, sadder.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
-
Were you looking at that last prediction that you made?Rick Chasey wrote:Facepalm."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Good negotiation on both sides and it looks like tube strike is off.
as i said, bad management usually is at the root cause, as for being political, if that were the case, the strikes would still carry on.0 -
This is an on-going dispute.mamba80 wrote:Good negotiation on both sides and it looks like tube strike is off.
as i said, bad management usually is at the root cause, as for being political, if that were the case, the strikes would still carry on.
In my experience it is resistance to change that drives many strikes - in addition to the political motive. Businesses change and need to change the way they and their staff operate/are deployed, but the unions seem unable to accept this simple fact of life.
The other view is that is a relatively prosperous modern country the unions are (like socialism) becoming increasingly redundant, so their leaders are causing trouble to justify their own existence."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:
This is an on-going dispute.mamba80 wrote:Good negotiation on both sides and it looks like tube strike is off.
as i said, bad management usually is at the root cause, as for being political, if that were the case, the strikes would still carry on.
In my experience it is resistance to change that drives many strikes - in addition to the political motive. Businesses change and need to change the way they and their staff operate/are deployed, but the unions seem unable to accept this simple fact of life.
The other view is that is a relatively prosperous modern country the unions are (like socialism) becoming increasingly redundant, so their leaders are causing trouble to justify their own existence.
So, the employees have to re adjust to some corporate master plan that changes with each new CEO ?
as i said, management with clear channels of communication, taking on board and acting on employees concerns is the way forward.
why is worker representation becoming redundant? dont see you calling for the CBI to be disbanded lol!
as i said, its very hard to call a strike, union leaders acting illegally can lose their homes, unlike a bad employer who can hide behind limited status.0 -
It's funny, isn't it, that despite the undoubted left-wing credentials of the Tube Drivers' union leaders, the reason they're striking is pure greed - give us the money and screw everyone else. Whatever happened to "to each according to his needs", comrades?mamba80 wrote:Good negotiation on both sides and it looks like tube strike is off.
as i said, bad management usually is at the root cause, as for being political, if that were the case, the strikes would still carry on.0 -
Tube drivers have made the mistake that other workers have made in the past - pricing themselves out of a job. Automated trains will come and when it does, the public will have FA sympathy for the drivers.
As Stevo said earlier, these strikes just make it easier to introduce legislation curbing the unions. Happened 30 odd years ago and it seems lefties don't learn. Which brings us full circle back to Jezza.0 -
And coming back to Jezza, even the Independent thinks that his policies on the unions are a big pile of steaming leftiebollox:Ballysmate wrote:Tube drivers have made the mistake that other workers have made in the past - pricing themselves out of a job. Automated trains will come and when it does, the public will have FA sympathy for the drivers.
As Stevo said earlier, these strikes just make it easier to introduce legislation curbing the unions. Happened 30 odd years ago and it seems lefties don't learn. Which brings us full circle back to Jezza.
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/jeremy-corbyn-s-view-on-trident-is-defensible-on-strikes-it-isnt-a6818311.html
Although I like the comparison of his policy on a nuclear-free Trident as being 'like offering a chocolate free Mars bar' "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The Belfast telegraph had a good headline relating to Corbyn's Labour. "There's no talking to the a death cult!"
I read on only to realize it wasn't Labour but ISIS that was the death cult. You must be able to see why I made my mistake, it was on Google news as a story related to a main story about Corbyn's chief advisor quitting. I thought it was the advisor giving his reason for leaving. Honest mistake.0 -
The latest gem from the man who claims to listen to the people, but presumably not the Falkland Islanders, 99.8% of whom said they wanted to remain part of the UK:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/12117755/Jeremy-Corbyn-wants-a-Northern-Ireland-style-power-sharing-deal-for-the-Falklands.html"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Stevo 666 wrote:The latest gem from the man who claims to listen to the people, but presumably not the Falkland Islanders, 99.8% of whom said they wanted to remain part of the UK:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/southamerica/argentina/12117755/Jeremy-Corbyn-wants-a-Northern-Ireland-style-power-sharing-deal-for-the-Falklands.html
Regardless of the rights an wrongs of this issue, i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects, there is EU, migrants, Steel, housing, rent, flooding etc etc that people want to know what Labour will do, instead he rants on about marginal stuff ffs.0 -
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.mamba80 wrote:...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
Tend to agree,however, people do want to hear from the alternative choice.PBlakeney wrote:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.mamba80 wrote:...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.Tail end Charlie
The above post may contain traces of sarcasm or/and bullsh*t.0 -
Frank, I disagree. Both Bally and I have said on here before that we want to hear more from Corbyn. Lots moreFrank the tank wrote:
Tend to agree,however, people do want to hear from the alternative choice.PBlakeney wrote:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.mamba80 wrote:...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.
This thread has a lot of the examples that explain why. "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
PBlakeney wrote:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.mamba80 wrote:...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.
DC could well blow his head off but so long as Labour focus on the abstract, they ll be the gift that keeps giving to the Tories and of course Steve0
0 -
I don't care if they focus on the marginal stuff or the main issues TBH. They have spoken out on quite a few key issues.mamba80 wrote:PBlakeney wrote:
I've said it before and I'll repeat it again.mamba80 wrote:...i cant for the life of me, see why Corbyn opens his mouth on these subjects...
The best thing Labour could do is keep schtum and let DC shoot himself in the foot.
DC could well blow his head off but so long as Labour focus on the abstract, they ll be the gift that keeps giving to the Tories and of course Steve0
The recent polls that I posted a link to shows that his message is getting through "I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0
