Looks like they finally decided to be french for once and protect their workers.
>>1803746Imagine having to rely on mass transportation
>>1803746so what are their demands? I lived in Italy for a while and they would strike and slowdown work for piddly little reasons.I assume this is to negotiate a new collective bargaining union contract? if so, bravo
>>1803746I swear to God, there's a fucking curse on me. Every single time I try to do something positive in my life, something just comes out of the blue to fuck me over. I book the first holiday trip in 3 years, which involves travelling 200 miles by rail, and this happens. Why do I have such bad luck?
>>1803755pay rise to combat the rise in inflation (most people focus on this)trying to not get 2500 people fired/jobs removed (most people ignore this)>>1803756just hope your holiday doesn't fall on a strike day, or if it does just move pay the fee to move the tickets. think they need 8 weeks notice for a strike so just keep your eyes out
>>1803769>pay rise to combat the rise in inflation (most people focus on this)>trying to not get 2500 people fired/jobs removed (most people ignore this)The first seems reasonable, even a little low (usually they'll just ask for a 10% hike in the US union negotiations). As for the second I oppose any effort to reduce the amount of manpower used in things like railways, cargo, buses, trucking. These are skilled essential jobs and they help keep efficient countries running efficiently. So I guess I support this 100%.>>1803769>think they need 8 weeks notice for a strike so just keep your eyes outhow reasonable and british of them
>"pay us more to deal with inflation">ignores fundamental nature of fiat currency being inflationary>contributes to inflation even more, fucking up even MORE people that aren't in a union mafia>calls you a "schizo" when you tell them to buy silver bullion and precious metals instead, and rely on barteringI hate socialists / leftists / "worker's movements", and most of all, I hate wagies.
>>1803792>As for the second I oppose any effort to reduce the amount of manpower used in things like railways, cargo, buses, trucking. These are skilled essential jobs and they help keep efficient countries running efficiently. So I guess I support this 100%.I agree and disagree, in so much that if manpower can be reduced by some magic means the reduction should come in the for of less new hires when systems are expanded, or when staff retires.
>>1803746This is why I really don't support mass transit
>>1803831you ignore the fact that the government hasn't stopped companies putting prices up massively, hence the workers who make perhaps a little over minimum wage are suffering more from the increased prices. also fuck off back to /biz/ no normie is gonna buy gold.
>>1804002>you ignore the fact that the government hasn't stopped companies putting prices up massivelyThe government shouldn't be involved in anything relating to finance.Inflation only occurs when the government prints money, and the government just announced that they'll be printing more money to offset the cost of living crisis that they've caused. It's absurd.
I'm getting a train on Sunday so I hope it won't be then. Fucking cunts they're never happy.
>>1803831>>1804013That's not how inflation works. Some recommended reading https://economicsfromthetopdown.com/2021/11/24/the-truth-about-inflation/
>>1803831This is what bootlicking does to your brain. Silver, bitcoin, you can barter all you want it all doesn't fucking matter when rentseekers sniff out that the time is ripe for a big round of price gouging. Keep enjoying that corporate cock down your throat you idiot.
>>1804827>it doesn't work that way, read this crackpot who's rewriting all of economics
>>1803755>so what are their demands?the usual. pay (in line with inflation and industry), and conditions (job security).>>1803792>they'll just ask for a 10% hike in the US union negotiationsstandard practice. shoot for the moon and if you get it, happy days, if not, you let the other party counter-offer down to what you expected.>how reasonable and british of themit dates back to the thatcher years, when it was made illegal to hold strike action (thus losing legal protections etc) without e.g. a given % of union members voting, and of those members a given % voting for action, sticking to a timetable, putting 'vote THIS and THIS happens, vote THAT and THAT happens' on the ballot, etc.>>1804016silly, they don't just hand over the ballot outcome and then have everyone walk out straight after. the rail unions said to their members a while ago, 'these are the terms your employers are asking you to work under soon, do we accept them or do we not accept them, go cast your votes yes or no'. they have voted to not accept them, so the union stewards are now going to go back to the employers' reps and say 'the guys say no, so if we don't agree something else instead then we're not going to work'.and, well, an 89% 'we strike' vote, from a 71% turnout, is a pretty strong bargaining chip to have, and it's going to be hard to call their bluff. i suppose only time will tell what the outcome will be though.
Every /n/igger a petit Bukharin, as always. They should surrender the UK to you all so the rest of us can watch you try to plan its economy into your gay little gemütlich fantasies.
>finally decided to be frenchThe RMT are one of the most active unions in the UK. Consistently strikes and meets the threshold for strikes. Maybe when we have a general strike of the big unions (Unison, Unite CWU etc) we'll be French.
>>1803831show me the deed to the factory or shut the fuck up, sadly the benefits of such actions usually spillover to the entire workforce, so sadly people like you will benefit.
>>1803831>""""""""""""touch grass"""""""""" and buy shitcoinsplease stop watching luke smith videos, it's really done a number on your brain. It's probably too late for you but your comment can serve as a warning to others. unironically drink some water.
strike dates announcedTuesday 21 JuneThursday 23 JuneSaturday 25 June
>>1803831This.Abolish central banking. Greatest robbery of all times.
I feel the railways are going to get a lot worse in the coming years. Just where I live it's gone pretty downhill. Southern have just made permanent a big proportion of their covid related service cuts, got rid of all the class 455s without bringing in any replacements. More people are working from home so the London commuter cash cow is gone. Until the inflation stops these strikes are not going to go away
>>1813179I know it's getting Overground style nationalised soon but their's going to be no political will for any significant funding increases whoever wins the next election. Tories drive cars and Labour will spend the BR 2.0 funding painting pride flags on every train
>>1813180one party no trains, one party trains but the howling voices that live rent free inside my skull scream that now the trains will have pronouns. well,
>>1812224the bank of england is owned by the government and any revenue it earns is returned to the treasury. if the bank of england is raking in mad profits, those just wind up lowering the government deficit.
>>1803746Miss this little nigga like you wouldn't believe.
every day i wake up a little happier knowing that worms are eating her
>>1803746They're already overpaid as it is, and fucking over millions that aren't getting any pay rise at all. Jfc driverless trains can't come soon enough.Dickheads
>>1813894Name a British prime minister who actually did more for working people. All the screechers and retards who hate her also hate the industries she shut down and still live with their parents in the houses she allowed them to buy.
>be unions>threaten to go on strike>negotiations with employers/government>"we demand an 11% pay rise">"we can only afford to give you 10% currently">"not good enough. we want 11%">"well we can't do that.">"right then. we strike">kden.jpg>three days of strikes happen that workers (including those in other unions who can't work due to the effects) don't get paid for and piss everyone off>strikes end, everyone back to work having gained nothing>unions call more strikes>are legally required to give 8 weeks notice to strike, and must hold the ballot which also takes time>8 weeks+ the workers are still on the same wage when they could have had a 10% increase by now>rinse >repeatTrade Unions are also part of the problem. Those who lived through the 70s/80s know this all to well, but the millennial/gen z hipster bourgeois "socialists" will never even attempt to fathom this.
>>1814689What millennial belongs to a trade union you retard. They all have non jobs and can’t change a tyre
>>1804827Guess you've never heard of wage-price spirals then. Wages increase > costs go up > prices go up > and so on. The whole idea unionists hold of trying to outpace inflation through pay increase is exactly the reason they should never be allowed to run a country.
>>1814691The migrant ones.
>railways hemorrhaging money now that commuter paypigs can WFH>do everything you can to make the railways even less popular and reliable, causing the railways to lose even more money and inevitably have to make even more cutsDo the unions have any long term plans beyond "hope Labour get in 2024 and throw even more money at us"?
>>1815273>keep vital service running during a pandemic for key workers to travel, freight to run, etc>in return your employer:>savages the Railway Pension Scheme and the TFL scheme, cutting benefits, making staff work longer, and poorer in retirement, while paying increased contributions>cuts thousands of job across the rail networks>attacks terms, conditions and working practices in a form of internal fire and re-hire>cuts real pay for trade union members through lengthy pay freezes and below RPI inflation pay proposalsi mean, i'd be pissed off too. every worker in Britain deserves a pay rise that reflects the cost-of-living crises. all working people should have the benefit of good negotiated terms, conditions, working practices and occupational pensions that will ensure their living standards in retirement.
i mean,>Do the unions have any long term plans...doing what they're doing now, i.e. standing up for their members' interests, is the long and short of it. that's their purpose, after all. but you knew that, didn't you.
>why don't you want to take the train, anon?
>>1815279If we gave everyone a pay rise, that would fuel further inflation. You can’t outpace inflation with continual pay increases. I don’t understand why so many people are incapable of understanding this.
>>1815356'sorry lads, no pay rise this year because actually that would further inflation which is your responsibility to bear now. i'm sure you understand, my hands are tied, too bad so sad, well, ta-ta'
>>1815453More like “if we give everyone a pay rise you won’t be any better off in real terms and you’ll be asking for another pay rise to attempt to outpace inflation six months from now and this circle will continue again and again and again until you’re earning six figure salaries but a loath of bread now costs about £900”
>>1815471>RMT members are the entire British economyBlimey. Must be a bloody big responsibility.
If working on the railways is so terrible, and the people on strike are so highly trained and skilled, why don't they get a new job? There's plenty out there
>>1815473That’s not what I said retard.
>>1815473If the RMT get what they want by striking, the rest of the public sector will follow. If you don't think millions of people getting substantial pay rides will impact inflation you're clearly as dim as the average train guard
>>1815478There's inflation because oil prices are too high, simple as.
>>1815478They’ll certainly try, but unlike the RMT the other unions don’t have the leverage in their respective industries to make anyone care about them. When the RMT strike they can bring the entire country to a halt. When the teachers go on strike the school kids get a couple of days off and nobody cares. It makes me laugh when the RMToids think their union is ‘special’ and better than the others but it’s just the unique position they are afforded because of how the railways work in this country.
>>1815480No, there’s inflation because the government borrowed/printed trillions of pounds to pay for the pandemic/lockdowns/furlough whilst the economy basically ceased to function. There’s continuing inflation because the entire Western economic system is based on credit and quantitative easing instead of avoiding deficits. The UK’s debt/GDP ratio has absolutely skyrocketed in the last two years.
>>1815487Brainlet take, money was being printed to hell and back for the entire 2010's and we were bordering deflation anyway.
>>1815488Yes but the amount of money printing went through the roof when Whitty and his pals told everyone to just stop working for several months and the government had to pay their wages instead using… money that they printed/borrowed. Are you not aware of the recent history of the world, brainlet?
>spends all day sending bourgeois political TV commentators to hellImagine if we actually had an opposition with a spine
>>1815487Check out Alan Greenspan over here with his Victorian economic theory.
>economy expands>don’t print money>societal collapseFor what purpose? Own the unions,
>>1815501False. The Victorians didn’t have inflationary fiat currency like we have now.
>>1815491Seems like money printing was not the culprit after all
>>1814689Unions were really useful for getting us the rights we now have as workers. But when large portion of those rights are now literally laws their usefulness has driven past them slightly. At least here their biggest benefit is having the legal machine of the union behind you in case your employer decides to do something illegal and not having to pay for lawyers.We recently had pretty big strikes in certain sectors and they literally achieved nothing. Literally had factories closed for half a year and after the workers finally bended to the employers will the employer pretty much publicly declared the end result as an absolute win.Also a lot of them can't see past fucking tomorrow. You were in a business that was lucrative decades ago and brought in tons of money. Now in a globalized world they can have factories literally everywhere in the world, so extorting the employer for more money doesn't work anymore. The only thing you're doing in case of blue collar factory workers is making sure they're not building a single new factory in your country. Just see the recent case with Danish actor/screenwriter/etc unions single handedly overnight killing all Danish productions for big streaming platforms.
>>1815525>money printing happens pre Covid >Covid happens>Government now has to print trillions more than it was before to pay millions of workers 80% of their wages to sit and do nothing for 18 months >inflation goes to highest levels in 40 yearsNope, definitely nothing to do with printing money.
>>1815283Is it in the best interest of their members if their actions make sure the company will not invest in their country anymore? Is it in their best long term interest if the company chooses that factory when they need to shut off a plant?
>>1815532Yeah it's unironically unrelated. Supply chain disruption and chronic shortages drive inflation. Money supply is largely irrelevant (money circulation is what matters).
>>1815529Same thing happened with our coal industry. People who love unions praise Arthur Scargill as some working class hero when he was perhaps the biggest part of the problems that killed the mining industry in Britain. >be miners unions>go on strike demanding more pay, more safety standards/equipment that costs money>demand workers work less hours for the same pay>price of coal extraction from British mines skyrockets due to all the union demands>state owned coal industry now unprofitable, costs more to dig coal up than what power stations/steel plants pay for it >Glasnost/Perestroika happens, Eastern Bloc countries start offering to sell dirt cheap coal to the West>UK coal consumers decide to buy that instead>government forced to privatise coal industry because it is a massive drain on the taxpayer>mines can’t afford to stay open under their own management and fail>unions blame literally everyone but themselves
>>1815540>Arthur Scargill collapsed the USSRAnti trade unionists are absolutely mental
>>1815542Are you literally reading anything before you say it? Because that’s not what I said at all you absolute retard.
>>1815536>money supply is largely irrelevant If everyone has a lot of money, no one has a lot of wealth>circulation is what mattersYes, that’s what matters for a healthy economy but separate from inflation >supply chain disruption/chronic shortagesThat’s a global issue right now.
>>1815515You're so close to understanding the point.
>>1815547>That’s a global issue right now.As is inflation. Oil is the foundation of our global economy, so when oil prices go up, all prices go up. It's that simple. Le printing money meme doesn't hold against empirical evidence.
What are the finances of rail operators in relation to all of this? Not making a point either way, just curious. Can they making significant profits / can they afford to give such a pay rise to worker.s
>>1815565Oil doesn’t feed furloughed workers though, does it? And if you remembered well enough you’d be aware that oil companies couldn’t even give away their oil when the prices tanked to negative values. How else did governments pay for the pandemic if not through borrowing?
>>1815566As I understand it one of the companies made just £6 million ish in profits last year. In an industry where the running costs run into the billions. I wouldn’t even bother for that little return on investment. This whole claim the unions make about rail bosses rolling in cash is largely baseless and completely falls apart when you politely remind them that many of the train operating companies, rolling stock owners etc. are now under state ownership anyway. Government was forced to partially renationalise the railways during the pandemic to stop them going under. Much of it is still under state control.
>>1815638>>1815566Addendum, it’s perhaps ironic that the railways are one of the few industries in this country where the fat cats are not rolling in stacks of cash, yet has the most militantly unionised workers.
>>1815606During the pandemic there was no inflation thanks to low oil prices, yes
>>1815641It's not ironic, the lower the unionization, the richer the bosses.
>>1815645Despite what people think though, the other non-transport unions are militant and do go on strike, but no one cares about it when they do. When teachers strike the kids get a day or two off school, parents have to take the day off work for childcare reasons and they all go on holiday. When binmen strike people have to just deal with their own rubbish or pile it up for a while but life goes on. When airlines strike a few boomers can’t go on their holidays for a few days or have to stay in Marbella a few extra days. When the railways go on strike, commuters can’t get to work or are forced to drive which blocks the roads up, not only that but railfreight doesn’t get delivered and supply issues for all industries occur, all the way up to power stations going offline because they aren’t getting coal/biomass delivered etc. It has a knock on effect that does not go unnoticed by those in power.
>>1815471So, for intellectual honesty's sake, have you refused a pay rise this year?
>>1815749I haven't even been offered one mate.
>>1815755That's too bad, and I say that sincerely and not as a sneer or anything. Would you take one if you were offered one?
Unions need outlawing
>>1815761More people need to be in unions desu
>>1815747>get few percent more money now>be out of job in 5 years with no new jobs unless you go do something completely different>in the best interest of anyone
>>1815860>get few percent more money now>be out of job in 5 years with no new jobsI don't see how your first point leads to your second. Are you against the idea of pay rises in general, or just in this specific example of railway workers?
>>1815758I mean who wouldn't want to better their own position?But if you asked me would I take one and then have my money devalued by more inflation? No, certainly not.
>>1815919So do pay rises lead to inflation or not?
>>1816050>wages go up>running costs go up>prices go upNow do this across an entire country and see what happens, then wait until the unions are demanding another set of payrises to cover the increasing inflation they helped to cause.
>>1815860This union has been around a lot longer than 5 years
>>1816157>money printing fallacyHaha
>>1816164I didn't say anything about printing money.
>>1816157Weird. So, for clarity, are you against the idea of pay rises in general? - or just in this specific example viz. the railway unions?
>>1815529The post war Labour government did most of that not striking
>>1816231I mean in winning Labour rights
>>1816231>actually did you know that internet communists in 2019 are responsible for workers rights not trade unions Damn how do labour keep losing elections and by ever increasing margins
>>1816233Atlee and Calahagn not the current mongs
>>1816234Cool what was their power base and by whose collective opinions were their views informed?
>>1816194I'm not against pay rises in general, no. But I recognise that giving the entire country an 11% pay rise will not solve the cost of living crisis. It would be a temporary solution that would last as long as whenever the cost increase impacts hit consumer prices and the unions are once again calling for more pay rises. I am not against, for example, the 60,000 NHS workers on £18k ish getting a pay rise. That's fair and wouldn't impact inflation.
>>1816265NHS workers are some of the most useless and lazy people in the UK. The NHS itself is an ungodly money hole that could take near infinite amounts of money without showing any improvement at all. I couldn’t think of a worse example of something that could do with pay rises.
>>1816271I have many issues with the NHS, in fact I would gladly do away with it in favour of a German-style system but £18k is a trugwdysly unliveable salary.
>>1816274Agreed but I simply don’t see the NHS getting even that measly amount of value from its current employees.
>>1816265>I am not against, for example, the 60,000 NHS workers on £18k ish getting a pay rise. That's fair and wouldn't impact inflation.I don't see how giving 50,000 railway staff a pay rise is bad (because it would cause inflation), but giving 60,000 NHS workers is good (as it would not affect inflation). Could you explain this?
>>1816353The NHS workers are on £18k vs railway staff whose salaries average £35k ish Giving 50,000 rail workers a pay rise won't directly affect inflation, no, but when the rest of the country smells the blood in the water and also wants a payrise because muh inflation, that certainly would.
>>1816364>when the rest of the country smells the blood in the water and also wants a payrise because muh inflation, that certainly would.Fair enough; pay rises for everyone are bad because they cause inflation, but NHS workers get a pay rise. Setting aside how we'd even enforce this, how did you settle on NHS workers as the sole recipients of an annual pay rise (and not, picking random examples, the fire brigade, the armed forces, binmen, etc) - and how much of a pay rise would you award them?