Anyone Working in an Office in Public Sector

flash harry

Hi

Anyone on boards working in an office in the Public Sector?

Just wanted to know what the general feeling is regarding "is it right to strike when so many unemployed" etc? i.e. not the spiel we get from the union chiefs....

No judgement, just curious what the feeling on the floor is?

FH

Wishbone Ash

flash harry wrote: »

Just wanted to know what the general feeling is regarding "is it right to strike when so many unemployed" etc? i.e. not the spiel we get from the union chiefs

The Trade Union leaders can only take direction from their members. Industrial action can only proceed if a majority vote for it in a secret ballot. Presumably, as an overwhelming majority of PS employees, who are union members, voted in favour of industrial action up to and including strike action, one has to assume that the majority on the ground are in favour of this.

flash harry

anyone???

kippy

Its a pretty complex question to be honest.

I've found in the Public sector there are a number of sub groups.

1. Older people, who have never worked outside the Public Sector in their lives.
2. Younger people who have never worked outsde the sector in their lives.
3. Relatively new entrants almost straight from college.
4. Relatively new entrants having spend considerable time working in various private sector jobs.

1 and 2 dont realise how little most of the private sector actually "got" from the celtic tiger era and believe that they themselves were hard done by with the Celtic tiger passing them by. They have absolutely no issues striking.
3 and 4 would have a far more realistic view.

Personally, I dont particularly like striking, I dont think it really helps anyone and I had hoped as a nation we had better ways of dealing with these problems.
That said, people have gotten used to a certain standard of living in all sectors and seeing that eroded is tough to take, no matter what the circumstances. Taking pay/income cuts when you had factored in a stable income into any long term financial decisions can have a very negative effect on a persons well being, as all those on social welfare will tell you.
I personally think that a lot of the internet warriors on this site who are against the Public Service in general would, if in the exact same position strike also.
There are members of the public service who realise that things have to change and fast, however, its very hard to accept that this change has to start with you.

To be honest, and this completely off the top of my head, its a very very deep/wide circle the whole country was working in for the past 10 years. A very "me fein" short term outlook held by many including myself to an extent. All driven by money/greed.
The government looking at stimulating the hell out of an unsustainable economy.
The bankers looking at their very short term profits and bonsus'.
The Unions looking at the very short term picture and not looking out for the long term security of their members.
EVERYONE (at the time) gaining something in varying amounts from it, be it increased wages across almost all sectors, lower personal taxation, higher social welfare in all forms etc etc.
Now we are all paying for it and will continue to do so for a decade at the very least.

This boom bust cycles are in essence pointless. We would have been far better not having the boom to the extent it went to and just be happy with what we got. Canada for example seems to have stayed away from a lot of the dodgyness the rest of the world finds itself in. But that is not the nature of capitilism. Everyone wanting higher short term profits/incomes and no real outlook on the big picture.

Sorry, gone of on multiple tangents here but en essence there are some who really dont think striking is the right option, there are others however who want to look after their own pay and conditions which to be honest is what almost everyone else in the country would do given the chance to do so. The key is the government not pandering to it.

flash harry

well said kippy

Eoin

Wishbone Ash wrote: »

The Trade Union leaders can only take direction from their members. Industrial action can only proceed if a majority vote for it in a secret ballot. Presumably, as an overwhelming majority of PS employees, who are union members, voted in favour of industrial action up to and including strike action, one has to assume that the majority on the ground are in favour of this.

So union leaders don't many any recommendations at all? For instance, they would never have the authority to say something like "given the current climate, we don't think striking is appropriate"?

kippy

eoin wrote: »

So union leaders don't many any recommendations at all? For instance, they would never have the authority to say something like "given the current climate, we don't think striking is appropriate"?

They can give recommendations. Every time there is a ballot, members are given direction from the leaders on how to vote.
Ultimately however it is the members that decide what to do.

Eoin

kippy wrote: »

They can give recommendations. Every time there is a ballot, members are given direction from the leaders on how to vote.
Ultimately however it is the members that decide what to do.

Oh yeah, I understand there is a ballot and all that, but saying that it's totally driven by the members with no input or direction from the union leadership sounds rather disingenuous.

kippy

eoin wrote: »

Oh yeah, I understand there is a ballot and all that, but saying that it's totally driven by the members with no input or direction from the union leadership sounds rather disingenuous.

Indeed,
Union leadership do provide direction and input, they'd find it hard justifying their salaries otherwise. They're finding it hard to justify it as it is.