In a nutshell, what are the strikes aiming to achieve?

--amadeus--

In most industrial disputes there is a clear grievance that leads through a clear path of dispute resolution that can ultimately end in a strike.

The grievance is normally pretty concrete - rejection of a new pay deal, opposition to a change in work practices and so on. Typically there will be rounds of discussion, frequently there will be minor protests (work to rule for example), attempts at arbitration and if all else fails strike action. Strikes are usually highly localised to one company or occasionally a sector.

However the current strike action seems to have few of the typical characteristics. There is a huge spread of sectors involved covering a diverse wage, skill and earnings base. The action seems to have been escalated rapidly and without the normal series of talks iterations. It is highlky atypical in that it is pre-emptive - they are striking over proposals that have not been seen in any detail. And they seem to have no clear resolution path - normally it's "give us a 5% pay increase and we stop striking" or whatever; something clear and concrete being requested. However the current dispute will go into a second day if "renewed talks fail to produce an agreed alternative to government plans for compulsory redundancies, changes to pensions and further public service pay cuts." (from INTO)

Am I reading this wrong or is this a highly unusual industrial action? And - in a simple words and a single, simple sentence - can anyone striking tell me exactly what will prevent these strikes? Obviously any answer has to be realistic, no dispute is resolved permanently without some give and take.

dvpower

--amadeus-- wrote: »

However the current dispute will go into a second day if "renewed talks fail to produce an agreed alternative to government plans for compulsory redundancies, changes to pensions and further public service pay cuts."

That's pretty clear. Guarantees of no compulsory redundancies, no changes to pensions and no further public service pay cuts.

It only seems wooly because they have no hope whatsoever of gaining these concessions. But the strikers who ask for 5% will usually settle for less. So to will the public servants. (Prepare for the upcoming paycuts to be rebranded as 'emergency temporary adjustments').

irish_bob

a continuation of their boom time wages in a time of rescession regardless of the cost to everyone else

sceptre

Foot-stamping.

And I don't mean that in either a positive or negative way (the OP didn't ask for an editorial view, though I'm sure some people will insist on offering one regardless) - that's what I see the strikes aiming for. Letting the government know that they're annoyed, mad as hell, all that jazz.

--amadeus--

Yea - I suppose that we know what they are asking for but what do they *want*? Or expect? A highly unusual strike must have highly unusual objectives.

Foot stamping sounds like as good an objective as any other, to date!