Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

No i missed it. Hes damed good for a youngster

How old was he ?

Hays good post above but for every Public School Boy in 5,000 theirs going to be one from humble beginnings whos going to be better.

Look at Harold Wilson.

John Major.


Rachel Reeves

PM elect.


Fact is Harold and Rachel remain the highest scorers in the London School of Ecomics exam history.

Cyners your totaly wrong,

Mick Portillio for primeminster....... any day.

In my opinion hes miles in front of Camoron or Osbourne hes only problem is his own sexuality ie, hes wrote he doesnt know.

Cyners your totaly wrong,

Mick Portillio for primeminster....... any day.

In my opinion hes miles in front of Camoron or Osbourne hes only problem is his own sexuality ie, hes wrote he doesnt know.

GF.

Do you mean the show where one of the participants paid the stable bill out of expenses, paid for by the taxpayers?

I wonder what would have happened to one of the immigrant scroungers who over claimed?

--------

You are getting old. That boy, Owen Jones is 29 years old and knows his facts. Very able and fluent.

I think Neil should shut up sometimes and listen to the answers, even if they don't suit his pitch.

Surprised how out of touch Portillo was. Usually, he is quite rational.

Agreed Fred.

Owen Jones...................can never remember his name.


Fred for PM.

sticky - i said i didn't think he really wanted the job

gf
The 'kid' you were talking about is Owen Jones. He writes for the Independent and the Guardian. He is no kid, he is 30. His grandfather was involved with the Communist Party and his parents met as members of a Trotskyist group, the Militant tendency. He used to be a lobbyist for the trade union movement.

I thought he spouted the usual working class nonsense about the trade unions and ignored Portillo's comments about the harm unions have done to Britain.

GF.

No!


I am to old.


Prefer playing chess with 70 year olds.

Cunning bs, who know all the openings and talk when its their opponent's move!


8-)

This is a b. of a market!

gf
There are plenty of working class kids at public school, either because of scholarships, bursaries or parents going without to afford it. You would be surprised how many taxi drivers have kids a private schools.

Hays have you ever been a Union Member?

Haze.

It must be in his genes.

Bloody bolshie lower class, they will be ruling the world unless you are careful!

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

When I read you posts you remind me of the expression "airs and graces" who knows everybody of "importance".

(But are not known by them!)

No. Never would having seen the effects of unions at close range.

Hays........so as a non Union member how on earth can you give a logical account of them??????

Your as bad as Cynic........... just news paper headlines.

make your mind up you silly old bugger!
it's as silly a comment as saying you can't have a clue on how to bring up children unless you've had your own

for myself, i too would never willingly join a union - and fortunately never had to
i completely accept why unions certainly were needed, but i do not believe that they any longer have as top priority their individual members' best interests

i've assuredly seen the malign influence of unions when it comes to sacking poor teachers - a nightmare for the governors

i'm even old enough to remember the union of boilermakers calling out their members over who should draw a chalk line on a steel plate

Manuel.

Didn't your parents duck their parental responsibilities and pack you off to an institution to be house trained.

Think what you would have been without that early experience.

========

Also, you are thinking with your favourite part of you body again.

The unions can are generally a good and sensible party in negotiations between Management and Employees.

They should be on the same sides, but each bringing their skill and knowledge to the table for the benefit of all.

Also, and more importantly they have the financial strength and knowledge of the abuses of some employers practice and also to sometimes restrain their own members from being "stupid" .

They have played their part in major social, health and educational reforms of the UK over the last 100 years and will continue to do so.

I would suggest you look back over the actions and responsibilities and changes as a result of the Unions and consider all not just their faults.

gf
I have worked at places that had a high degree of union membership several times from 1967. They had a terrible effect on the businesses due to the closed shop, collective bargaining and strikes and general stoppages.

I nearly forgot demarcation where one person was not allowed to do any tasks that belonged to someone else. This meant that to put up a no smoking sign, it took about six men from different trades to cut, drill, paint, fit etc the sign. If the company bought a ready made no smoking sign there would be a strike.

Then we had the print workers who added fictitious people to the payroll and split the extra wages. The unions ruined a number of good businesses and in the end worked against their members' interests.

Hays you make some good points. and points i want to discuss with you having been a Union subscriber and also being a lfe member.


I hope to reply later this weekend.

Im in the middle of a business deal.

See Chart Attack Thread.

Cheers lads and always remeber this I may not like your point of view but I always learn and respect it.

fossy - i just need to look back at the pre-thatcher days to remember how the unions all but brought this country to its knees, which of course was the aim of the likes of scargill

do you remember the port strikes against the introduction of containerisation?
what about the assorted demarcation disputes?
weren't flying militant pickets a spiffing idea too?

was management anywhere near as good as it should have been?
assuredly not, but whatever the shortcomings, at least it didn't want to wreck the country

do you remember how many of thatcher's anti-union measures labour subsequently dismantled?
perhaps you'ld like to answer that one, though it's a certainty you won't

I remember the UK being called the sick man of Europe in those days. Our cars were rubbish in terms of build quality. No one regarded the UK being capable of making anything of quality. I also remember most countries and the whole of Europe in particular being envious that we had a leader like Thatcher. There was a complete transformation of business attitude after a few years of Maggie. The number of days lost due to strikes came right down. As cynic says, there has never been any attempt to repeal the union laws. That is because they are the laws that Labour wanted, but were too scared to enact.