|
Perhaps the GMB has found customers to buy the ships they want to continue building? Oh wait, that's a stupid idea...
|
>> How can this fail?
>>
>> www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/defence/union-will-oppose-each-and-every-job-loss-in-portsmouth-1-5656205
>>
>>
>> Idiots.
So what should the union do? Roll over and touch its collective forelock?
Position is that a redundancy programme has been announced. A process then has to be followed where people are advised that their individual jobs are at risk and ultimately the criteria that will be used to select people for redundancy. There is also likley to be an option to take voluntary redundancy and maybe to seek redeployment to other sites/areas within Portsmouth Dockyard - there's still (AIUI) a significant amount of ship maitenance and repair continuing.
There will be s statutory consultation period durung which the Union, no doubt reflecting the opinion of t'membership, are quite entitled to take the line of opposing all losses and put forward alternative solutions.
The rub will be extent to which, once the real and inevitable numbers are sorted, the union goes into 'help' mode to alllow those facing compulsory change, whether redundancy or a new role, to get the best deal. My experience with PCS in that function is not good. The officers are too out of touch with what goes on on 'shopfloor' (one has been on union business for at least 10 years) and too engaged with the politics of getting one over on ministers or the management.
|
.>>Roll over and touch its collective forelock?
Don't be daft.
However, exactly what do you believe statements beginning "If the government wants their second aircraft carrier...." are likely to achieve?
What do you think "We will fight every...." achieves.
What do you think would happen if the company said "Fine, we'll do exactly what the union wants and keep everyone, even though they don't have the money to pay them".
How could that possibly result in more jobs rather than less?
And I know exactly how the redundancy process progresses, I have run many, many of them. I have made thousands of people redundant and its not pleasant. It is not something one does for fun. I also know a great deal more than most how they can be mis-run, whether on purpose, through ignorance or with the involvement of unions.
Once ever have I seen a union sit down and actually improve a situation.
Equally, every penny that an uncooperative approach costs the company will be recovered either from the MOD (tax) or by more redundancies.
The best redundancy programs start with people talking, not gobbing off to some newspaper desperate to try and impress their mates down the pub and achieve 30 seconds of fame and self-importance.
If the unions really want to reduce redundancy then they would sit down, ask what needs to be achieved and then help achieve it. But they are not there to achieve the best possible results in the real world for their members, they are there to be important and tell the world how to live whilst costing everybody more.
How much money did Scargill lose in the miner's strike? How much did Robinson lose in Leyland strikes? Not a damned penny. So what do they care?
This who Union vs the nasty rich barons, they're out to get the worker, fighting the evil commercial world etc. stuff is old, crass and silly.
If I was running that redundancy process and it looked like someone was going to hold a threat to my head, it'd happen faster, more brutally and permanently to remove that potential threat from my company as quickly as I could manage.
Nobody makes redundancies if they can be more successful by not doing so.
Last edited by: VxFan on Tue 3 Dec 13 at 12:59
|
>>Nobody makes redundancies if they can be more successful by not doing so.
Logically, no. But you could equally say that no rational union leaders would threaten management if they could be more successful etc.
And, just as union people can have egos and personal agendas, so can management - somewhat of a trait among captains of industry.
Taking a strong line, publicly, early on is a fairly common negotiating tactic. Not always appropriate, or the best way, but it's where they go from there that will matter. It's difficult to negotiate anything if you can't credibly offer any either any sanctions or any additional benefits for the other party. The union is of course also trying to draw the government in to the dispute, so they are flying that kite.
I think that's the problem really - the union has no good cards to play, so they're playing a bad one. They would in my opinion be better to acknowledge and share the problem here, but there's nothing to stop them changing tactics as long as they haven't burnt their ships in the meantime..
|
>>>Nobody makes redundancies if they can be more successful by not doing so.
>
>Logically, no. But you could equally say that no rational union leaders would threaten
>management if they could be more successful etc
Absolutely. And there would be appropriate if the goal was to mitigate the horrible situation and that this was the best way of approaching it.
However, it would appear to me that this is not the case and the motivation is self-aggrandizement on the behalf of some of the Union individuals.
Stating the obvious, one always need to understand the motivations of those one relies upon, and be very smart and careful if their motivation is incompatible with one's own.
One needs to understand *their* definition of "successful".
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 8 Nov 13 at 13:45
|
|
Time spent working out what matters to the "other side" is never wasted.
|
|
Why is it that every year we have these job losses in the wintertime? Steelworks in Scunthorpe loads of jobs to go.
|
|
I'm sure the Clyde looks forward to the Portsmouth unions shooting themselves in the foot.
|
>> I'm sure the Clyde looks forward to the Portsmouth unions shooting themselves in the foot.
>>
But the English politicians are saying you can't have the next gig if you vote with we'eck for independence.
The current gov are quite happy for our trains, water, leccy etc to be owned by nationalised corporations in Europe. Our fliers are trained in aeroplanes designed in Brasil and we rent our 'independent' nuclear deterrent from the septics.
Yet it would be impossible for warships to be built in the only foreign country with which GB has a land border and which, post independence would likley still be in some sort of loose federation under the Crown
Yaahh Right........
Steve Bell on Wed was brilliant
tinyurl.com/oub92l3 (link to Guardian)
|
But the English politicians are saying you can't have the next gig if you vote with we'eck for independence.
Do you mean the next lot of shipbuilding for the navy?
The current gov are quite happy for our trains, water, leccy etc to be owned by nationalised corporations in Europe.
That one is quite odd I'd agree.
we rent our 'independent' nuclear deterrent from the septics.
Do we?
|
>>would likley still be in some sort of loose federation under the Crown
I read that as "would Ilkley still be in some sort of loose federation under the crown"
|
>> >>would likley still be in some sort of loose federation under the Crown
>>
>> I read that as "would Ilkley still be in some sort of loose federation under
>> the crown"
>>
>>
BAht 'at !!!
|
Two reasons;
Firstly, its time for budget planning and that always gets out into the public domain.
Secondly;
Here's a thing that is always a struggle;
Do you let someone enjoy their Christmas with their family, without worries, and then spring it on them in the New Year - when perhaps they've incurred debts.
If leaving it until the New Year was without a downside, then perhaps that would be best. But the thought of all that additional expenditure and then suddenly a doubt as to whether it can be afforded would worry me.
Or do you spring in on them before Christmas, which may screw up their, and their family's, Christmas but will avoid additional debt, and give them time off in a supportive environment?
I've always done it before Christmas for no better reason than that's what *I* would want if someone was doing it to me, but its always been a doubt.
Now, if one is going to do it before Christmas, then presumably you should give people time to avoid expense and "cut their Christmas cloth" accordingly.
Which would be about now.
|
Mods - MD posted a reply which I read briefly. I've come back to read it more carefully and its gone.
Any idea why?
MD, do you know?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Fri 8 Nov 13 at 14:39
|
|
It may have been edited - less than complimentary about one of the Union protagonists.
|
In 1946 took ship, aged nearly 8, from Glasgow in a ship sailing for the Colombo via Port Said, Suez Canal, Port Suez and Aden. We were civilian passengers but the ship was essentially a troop ship. To reach the open sea the ship steamed, or was pulled by tugs, down a length of the Clyde estuary which at that time was lined (to my child's eye) with clamorous working shipyards.
The troops on the lower decks cheered and whistled at the shipyard workers on shore, who replied in kind. I so enjoyed the racket that having recently learned to whistle, I whistled piercingly until an irritable army officer came out of his cabin behind me on the promenade deck and uttered a gruff complaint.
I was terribly abashed and regarded the old colonel or whatever he was with terror until Port Said or Aden, when he obtained a huge watermelon from the boatloads of hawkers who surrounded the ship when it anchored and gave pieces to all the children aboard. I didn't like the watermelon that much, but recognised that it was the thought that counted.
|
This was discussed on question time last night. The thrust of the question was, is the actual location of the majority of cuts a sop to keep the Scots "on-side" for the independence referendum.
Opinion seemed divided!
Last edited by: Roger on Fri 8 Nov 13 at 15:18
|
|
So the Scots want to build our ships but don't want to have our subs at Faslane?
|
>> The troops on the lower decks cheered and whistled at the shipyard workers on shore, who replied in kind.
Sorry to be a bore, and it was a long time ago, but I remember the shipyard workers, many thousands over a mile or so of bank, as having left work to cheer, wave and whistle. Perhaps it was their lunch hour. Part of the exciting clamour was an occasional blast from the ship's siren, and perhaps other vessels' sirens. Was the presence of troops, and the quite recent World War, the reason for the genial proletarian fuss? I couldn't say.
But it seems that in those days a ship leaving port was an occasion, an event, in a way that it isn't now. Of course nearly all ships now are cargo ships or ferries. People pack themselves into air taxis and depart without fanfare. Half way round the globe doesn't even take 24 hours. Travel has lost its glamour.
|
>>Half way round the globe doesn't even take 24 hours.
>>
Does.
|
>> Does.
Perhaps it does usually, but it doesn't have to... Thank you for pointing out one of my many inaccuracies and exaggerations Duncan. I always enjoy that, and it may put the young on guard against believing anything I say.
|
>> Mods - MD posted a reply and its gone.
>> Any idea why?
No idea. I'm bound to get the blame though.
|
>>I'm bound to get the blame though.
Conceptually I can see no issue with that. However, I notice that occasionally posts just leave and yet everybody maintains they did nothing.
So either the software is dodgy and loses stuff, or frequently someone doesn't own up to what they do.
|
>> Mods - MD posted a reply which I read briefly. I've come back to read
>> it more carefully and its gone.
>>
>> Any idea why?
>>
>> MD, do you know?
>>
Perhaps they don't believe me or maybe they have my best interests at heart (and I don't mean that sarcastically Mods). It is all completely true though. On the former, the union chap, if you knew his history it would make you weep. Small town, Smaller man (sic), BIG ideas. Leech on society.
I would like to add that after all this time being here and obviously being tolerated that if the mods decided to remove any post then a PM or email just briefly saying why, would be a good start.
Mark. I stand by your view. Absolutely correct.
|
|
Ah...I remember your comment now MD - and the comment that you knew someone high up on the Aerospace side of BAe...?
|
|
Are you taking the 'P' Rob?
|
No I wasn't.
Just mailed you.
Last edited by: R.P. on Fri 8 Nov 13 at 20:41
|
Well, re-read it and decide.
Can you tell Mark and I then why it was removed please Sir!
|
|
Sorry if I gave the wrong impression. I read your post - I didn't think there was anything amiss - to be honest when Mark bought the disappearance up, I was struggling to remember what was in it...(I was on the phone at the time !) - not deleted by me. Thought you knew me better than that :-)
|
>> the union chap, if you knew his history it would make you weep. Small town, Smaller man (sic), BIG ideas. Leech on society.
But the union members, and the local left politicos, have to be utter donkeys or corrupt mofos for the geezer to get away with it.
In my youth, doing manual work among people who sort of cared about this sort of thing, I started to see the flaws in the Left discourse, but was still too young and inarticulate (and too reactionary really, conservative with quite a big small c) to be able to formulate them.
Just as well probably. My mates wouldn't have liked it.
|
>> The rub will be extent to which, once the real and inevitable numbers are sorted,
>> the union goes into 'help' mode to alllow those facing compulsory change, whether redundancy or
>> a new role, to get the best deal. My experience with PCS in that function
>> is not good. The officers are too out of touch with what goes on on
>> 'shopfloor' (one has been on union business for at least 10 years) and too engaged
>> with the politics of getting one over on ministers or the management.
Redundancy goes like this. Company decides who and how many will go and on what terms, consultations take place, union postures bristling its feathers, then everyone originally fingered by the company gets the elbow.
Should the union roll over? Well put it like this. If they (the workers and the union) embargo or hinder those ships already being built, they (the workers) will never work in shipbuilding anywhere ever again.
|
|
It's gone Mark. It was there when I logged in earlier. Not me.
|
So, it just vanished of its own accord then, I guess.
On which subject, anybody want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge?
|
|
Doesn't the forum hide posts using self moderation depending on how we rate them? And if it did this, would the mods see the hidden posts? i.e. have many people rated it as offensive? I didn't see it myself.
Last edited by: rtj70 on Fri 8 Nov 13 at 18:02
|
I have had a few vanish (yes yes I know, I am talking ones that were not in the least controversial)
I choose to blame Dave. Guilty or not.
|
>> I choose to blame Dave. Guilty or not.
See, told you I'd get the blame.
I also got the blame when Shergar went missing.
|
>> >> I choose to blame Dave. Guilty or not.
>>
>> See, told you I'd get the blame.
>>
>> I also got the blame when Shergar went missing.
And the damn thing turned up in Tesco Burgers.
Your fault.
|
>> And the damn thing turned up in Tesco Burgers.
>> Your fault.
Had to get rid of the evidence somewhere. Every little helps.
|
SQ
>> Redundancy goes like this. Company decides who and how many will go and on what
>> terms, consultations take place, union postures bristling its feathers, then everyone originally fingered by the
>> company gets the elbow.
>>
>> Should the union roll over? Well put it like this. If they (the workers and
>> the union) embargo or hinder those ships already being built, they (the workers) will never
>> work in shipbuilding anywhere ever again.
>>
If it were most other situations I would agree but with the yard tied to the Navy and therefore the government. I wouldn't be so sure.
Last edited by: VxFan on Sat 9 Nov 13 at 17:38
|
BAe is a huge company, but even it cannot keep on hundreds of employees if there is little or no work after current contracts are completed.
However, it has always been regarded as a company that delivers exceptionally generous pension and redundancy payments - certainly this has been the case in the North West over many years.
As for unions, they have really had their day. United, for instance, is still light years behind the modern business and manufacturing environment, as its officials have proved so often whenever there have been cutbacks or closures. All the ranting in the world by union bosses has brought not one change, as far as I can recall, in any decisions made by various companies.
Last edited by: Stuartli on Sat 9 Nov 13 at 16:33
|
Portsmouth Shipbuilding - Robin O'Reliant
