Union stewards meet to discuss end to pay cuts action

Daily Echo: STRIKES: Overflowing bins in Southampton last summer STRIKES: Overflowing bins in Southampton last summer

UNION officials meet today to discuss proposals to end industrial action in Southampton that saw rotting rubbish litter the city streets last summer.

Unison and Unite shop stewards will consider the outcome negotiations with the Labour -run council over the restoration of staff pay and conditions that were cut by the Tories last July.

The pay cuts of between two per cent and 5.5 per cent, to make budget savings, provoked 12 weeks of rolling strikes, mass protest marches, and ongoing industrial action by unions.

The Labour administration, which took power in May, tabled a provisional offer to the unions last month.

Unison said negotiations with council chiefs were now reaching a conclusion.

Stewards will today discuss what proposals will be put to a ballot of 2,400 union members – who will have a final say over any deal – in September.

Labour has admitted dozens of job losses may be needed to fund the restoration of pay cuts over the next three or four years, costing £2.7m, depending on what other savings can be found and how many staff can be redeployed.

Another thorny issue has been a legal claim, worth up to £12m, that the council failed to properly consult about its plan to dismiss workers if they didn’t sign up to the pay cuts.

Separate unfair dismissal claims have been lodged on behalf of 1,000 union members.

Conservatives said the cuts to staff terms and conditions saved 400 jobs.

Comments (41)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:00am Wed 8 Aug 12

The Watcher says...

Good to see both sides talking again.
.
The macho posturing between the Councik & Unions in the past did great harm to our City.
.
Hopefully a resolution can be found that benefits everybody.
.
With regards the outstanding legal claim, then two thoughts on this one.
.
If it is frivolous then it should be dropped immediately. However, if individuals really do have a case then it is their right to pursue it.
.
And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co).
Good to see both sides talking again. . The macho posturing between the Councik & Unions in the past did great harm to our City. . Hopefully a resolution can be found that benefits everybody. . With regards the outstanding legal claim, then two thoughts on this one. . If it is frivolous then it should be dropped immediately. However, if individuals really do have a case then it is their right to pursue it. . And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co). The Watcher
  • Score: 0

11:08am Wed 8 Aug 12

Shoong says...

The Watcher wrote:
Good to see both sides talking again.
.
The macho posturing between the Councik & Unions in the past did great harm to our City.
.
Hopefully a resolution can be found that benefits everybody.
.
With regards the outstanding legal claim, then two thoughts on this one.
.
If it is frivolous then it should be dropped immediately. However, if individuals really do have a case then it is their right to pursue it.
.
And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co).
Agree with all this.

'And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co).'

As much as you may disagree with whatever decisions were taken somehow I don't think that's going to happen! Let's be realistic and at least try to go forward rather than looking back in anger. Sooner this is all put to bed with a solution that fits all parties the better. I just don't want the tax payer to be hit for this one, that is all.
[quote][p][bold]The Watcher[/bold] wrote: Good to see both sides talking again. . The macho posturing between the Councik & Unions in the past did great harm to our City. . Hopefully a resolution can be found that benefits everybody. . With regards the outstanding legal claim, then two thoughts on this one. . If it is frivolous then it should be dropped immediately. However, if individuals really do have a case then it is their right to pursue it. . And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co).[/p][/quote]Agree with all this. 'And if the individuals win, then rather make the Council and ultimately taxpayers cough up, I would look to personally charge those who were responsible within the Council at the time (Cllrs Smith & co).' As much as you may disagree with whatever decisions were taken somehow I don't think that's going to happen! Let's be realistic and at least try to go forward rather than looking back in anger. Sooner this is all put to bed with a solution that fits all parties the better. I just don't want the tax payer to be hit for this one, that is all. Shoong
  • Score: 0

12:33pm Wed 8 Aug 12

hulla baloo says...

Southy not awake yet? waiting for his rants on socialism, capitalism, how the leaders control the workers and waiting for Maggie to get the blame somewhere along the line.
Southy not awake yet? waiting for his rants on socialism, capitalism, how the leaders control the workers and waiting for Maggie to get the blame somewhere along the line. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

12:41pm Wed 8 Aug 12

mtdiablo says...

If you don't want to hear from him don't try and provoke him? Shooting yourself in the foot really...
If you don't want to hear from him don't try and provoke him? Shooting yourself in the foot really... mtdiablo
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Wed 8 Aug 12

hulla baloo says...

mtdiablo wrote:
If you don't want to hear from him don't try and provoke him? Shooting yourself in the foot really...
Not at all, just waiting for the inevitable.
[quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: If you don't want to hear from him don't try and provoke him? Shooting yourself in the foot really...[/p][/quote]Not at all, just waiting for the inevitable. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

1:25pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Trade unions should be there to protect the interests of members. They should not be for providing preferred political set ups controlled by the buddies of union officials and apply same standards with all employers.

But while them dealing with Southampton Council they appear to be indulging in complete hypocrisy. Calling strikes when Tories were in power and now trying to encourage capitulation because NuLabourite mates in power are trying to do more of the same.

So hardly surprising that even many workers are starting to form poor opinion of trade unions.

Trade unionism should not be only about once a year laying flowers on the grave of martyrs in Tolepuddle and have plenty of booze in near by pubs, but about the principles for which those people suffered; decent wage for good days work in safe working conditions.
Trade unions should be there to protect the interests of members. They should not be for providing preferred political set ups controlled by the buddies of union officials and apply same standards with all employers. But while them dealing with Southampton Council they appear to be indulging in complete hypocrisy. Calling strikes when Tories were in power and now trying to encourage capitulation because NuLabourite mates in power are trying to do more of the same. So hardly surprising that even many workers are starting to form poor opinion of trade unions. Trade unionism should not be only about once a year laying flowers on the grave of martyrs in Tolepuddle and have plenty of booze in near by pubs, but about the principles for which those people suffered; decent wage for good days work in safe working conditions. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

1:32pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Trade unions should be there to protect the interests of members. They should not be for providing preferred political set ups controlled by the buddies of union officials and apply same standards with all employers.

But while them dealing with Southampton Council they appear to be indulging in complete hypocrisy. Calling strikes when Tories were in power and now trying to encourage capitulation because NuLabourite mates in power are trying to do more of the same.

So hardly surprising that even many workers are starting to form poor opinion of trade unions.

Trade unionism should not be only about once a year laying flowers on the grave of martyrs in Tolepuddle and have plenty of booze in near by pubs, but about the principles for which those people suffered; decent wage for good days work in safe working conditions.
Mistake in second line. Should be providing 'excuses for' political set ups
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: Trade unions should be there to protect the interests of members. They should not be for providing preferred political set ups controlled by the buddies of union officials and apply same standards with all employers. But while them dealing with Southampton Council they appear to be indulging in complete hypocrisy. Calling strikes when Tories were in power and now trying to encourage capitulation because NuLabourite mates in power are trying to do more of the same. So hardly surprising that even many workers are starting to form poor opinion of trade unions. Trade unionism should not be only about once a year laying flowers on the grave of martyrs in Tolepuddle and have plenty of booze in near by pubs, but about the principles for which those people suffered; decent wage for good days work in safe working conditions.[/p][/quote]Mistake in second line. Should be providing 'excuses for' political set ups Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

2:07pm Wed 8 Aug 12

mtdiablo says...

As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them. mtdiablo
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Wed 8 Aug 12

hulla baloo says...

mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
And why is labour offering to negotiate? may it be something to do with funding from the unions?
[quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]And why is labour offering to negotiate? may it be something to do with funding from the unions? hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

2:50pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
[quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool. southy
  • Score: 0

2:57pm Wed 8 Aug 12

hulla baloo says...

Conservative was cutting budgets for austerity purposes. Maybe labour are meeting with the unions as thats where they get their funding.
Conservative was cutting budgets for austerity purposes. Maybe labour are meeting with the unions as thats where they get their funding. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

3:06pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
Of course the 'told you so' line is very childish. That won't win you votes, even if the TUSC does try to claim any kind of credit.

If the Left are squabbling over the interpretation of an open letter rather than getting on with things, it doesn't bode well for them.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]Of course the 'told you so' line is very childish. That won't win you votes, even if the TUSC does try to claim any kind of credit. If the Left are squabbling over the interpretation of an open letter rather than getting on with things, it doesn't bode well for them. Shoong
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Wed 8 Aug 12

loosehead says...

So the Unions are happy with Job losses to restore higher paid peoples pay ?
Labour has admitted dozens of job losses may be needed to fund the restoration of pay cuts over the next three or four years, costing £2.7m, depending on what other savings can be found and how many staff can be redeployed.
would they have accepted job losses under a tory council?
If they accept this try telling me all of this wasn't just a politically motivated industrial dispute by the Unions to get in a Labour Council.
How can they mention the Pool closure when they're consulting with the public about it or is that another lie?
So the Unions are happy with Job losses to restore higher paid peoples pay ? Labour has admitted dozens of job losses may be needed to fund the restoration of pay cuts over the next three or four years, costing £2.7m, depending on what other savings can be found and how many staff can be redeployed. would they have accepted job losses under a tory council? If they accept this try telling me all of this wasn't just a politically motivated industrial dispute by the Unions to get in a Labour Council. How can they mention the Pool closure when they're consulting with the public about it or is that another lie? loosehead
  • Score: 0

4:00pm Wed 8 Aug 12

mtdiablo says...

It's amazing how many unconfirmed rumours and speculation you guys seem to spout off to prove points. It's not worth asking southy for proof of his comments because it's been proven that it just leads to pointless arguments, but the rest of you really should know better.

Of course the dispute was politically motivated - that's the very nature of strikes. I don't think it was part of some overwhelming conspiracy to remove the Tories and close down Oakland swimming pool because that's ridiculous. The Union was not getting anywhere with talks with the Tories, so they striked and the Tories were replaced with a party that's willing to negotiate rather than slash budgets.
It's amazing how many unconfirmed rumours and speculation you guys seem to spout off to prove points. It's not worth asking southy for proof of his comments because it's been proven that it just leads to pointless arguments, but the rest of you really should know better. Of course the dispute was politically motivated - that's the very nature of strikes. I don't think it was part of some overwhelming conspiracy to remove the Tories and close down Oakland swimming pool because that's ridiculous. The Union was not getting anywhere with talks with the Tories, so they striked and the Tories were replaced with a party that's willing to negotiate rather than slash budgets. mtdiablo
  • Score: 0

4:59pm Wed 8 Aug 12

SaintM says...

don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN
don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN SaintM
  • Score: 0

5:33pm Wed 8 Aug 12

OSPREYSAINT says...

SaintM wrote:
don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN
May be it's because there are not enough workers left to do the job. I suggest you stop creating rubbish.
[quote][p][bold]SaintM[/bold] wrote: don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN[/p][/quote]May be it's because there are not enough workers left to do the job. I suggest you stop creating rubbish. OSPREYSAINT
  • Score: 0

5:50pm Wed 8 Aug 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
.. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that.

Unfortunately your idiotic abacas-wielding economics will not solve this nation’s financial problems.

They would only make matters much worse, and for the poor in particular.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote].. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that. Unfortunately your idiotic abacas-wielding economics will not solve this nation’s financial problems. They would only make matters much worse, and for the poor in particular. freefinker
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Scrutinizer says...

I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously...
I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously... Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

7:34pm Wed 8 Aug 12

shirley-bill says...

MERCHANTS QUARTER Briton St Southampton .... recycling waste not picked up for 5 weeks now , action line phoned 12 times , told it will be cleared with in 24 hours , told this 12 times so far. 08/08/12 still not cleared. GREAT COUNCIL WE HAVE.....NOT... BRING IN TJ WASTE like the council did last year.
MERCHANTS QUARTER Briton St Southampton .... recycling waste not picked up for 5 weeks now , action line phoned 12 times , told it will be cleared with in 24 hours , told this 12 times so far. 08/08/12 still not cleared. GREAT COUNCIL WE HAVE.....NOT... BRING IN TJ WASTE like the council did last year. shirley-bill
  • Score: 0

7:55pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
.. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that.

Unfortunately your idiotic abacas-wielding economics will not solve this nation’s financial problems.

They would only make matters much worse, and for the poor in particular.
"Workable economic policies" is strange definition, subjective stuff depending upon depends upon political convenience of everybody right, centre or left.

Concern should be the hypocrisy of three main parties especially NuLabour, which keep on kicking its core supporters in their teeth.

Apologist of all main parties keep on justifying all cuts, most of which can be avoided if national government gets its priorities right, and provide sufficient resources to local councils.

How come government is never short of money when it comes to helping the super rich and their financial institutions, run by questionable characters? Strangely even apologist on this site tend to stay silent on these shameless scams, but become over active when it comes to those who are trying to save something simple like swimming pool or service for old or disabled.

Yes with changing nature of society type of services required will need adopting, but making ordinary people suffer for mess created by others in my opinion is immoral and most unfair. In the absence of main parties standing up for ordinary people blaming organisation like TUSC is unfair.

Yes many supporters of TUSC are SP members, but what is stopping others joining them? I have said it often that decent people who are still stranded in lousy NuLabour should get together with all small left groups and reasonable Greens to campaign against unnecessary cuts. Yes I am also mindful that for a long time mine could remain a minority view, so I am supporting TUSC because there is nothing else bar ego driven sharks.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote].. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that. Unfortunately your idiotic abacas-wielding economics will not solve this nation’s financial problems. They would only make matters much worse, and for the poor in particular.[/p][/quote]"Workable economic policies" is strange definition, subjective stuff depending upon depends upon political convenience of everybody right, centre or left. Concern should be the hypocrisy of three main parties especially NuLabour, which keep on kicking its core supporters in their teeth. Apologist of all main parties keep on justifying all cuts, most of which can be avoided if national government gets its priorities right, and provide sufficient resources to local councils. How come government is never short of money when it comes to helping the super rich and their financial institutions, run by questionable characters? Strangely even apologist on this site tend to stay silent on these shameless scams, but become over active when it comes to those who are trying to save something simple like swimming pool or service for old or disabled. Yes with changing nature of society type of services required will need adopting, but making ordinary people suffer for mess created by others in my opinion is immoral and most unfair. In the absence of main parties standing up for ordinary people blaming organisation like TUSC is unfair. Yes many supporters of TUSC are SP members, but what is stopping others joining them? I have said it often that decent people who are still stranded in lousy NuLabour should get together with all small left groups and reasonable Greens to campaign against unnecessary cuts. Yes I am also mindful that for a long time mine could remain a minority view, so I am supporting TUSC because there is nothing else bar ego driven sharks. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:20pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker.
Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.[/p][/quote]Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker. Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC. southy
  • Score: 0

8:22pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
So the Unions are happy with Job losses to restore higher paid peoples pay ?
Labour has admitted dozens of job losses may be needed to fund the restoration of pay cuts over the next three or four years, costing £2.7m, depending on what other savings can be found and how many staff can be redeployed.
would they have accepted job losses under a tory council?
If they accept this try telling me all of this wasn't just a politically motivated industrial dispute by the Unions to get in a Labour Council.
How can they mention the Pool closure when they're consulting with the public about it or is that another lie?
They was force into the consultation, it was not a choice.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So the Unions are happy with Job losses to restore higher paid peoples pay ? Labour has admitted dozens of job losses may be needed to fund the restoration of pay cuts over the next three or four years, costing £2.7m, depending on what other savings can be found and how many staff can be redeployed. would they have accepted job losses under a tory council? If they accept this try telling me all of this wasn't just a politically motivated industrial dispute by the Unions to get in a Labour Council. How can they mention the Pool closure when they're consulting with the public about it or is that another lie?[/p][/quote]They was force into the consultation, it was not a choice. southy
  • Score: 0

8:31pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens. southy
  • Score: 0

8:39pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

Scrutinizer wrote:
I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously...
Don't know many Unison Stewards know a few to talk to. But Tucker I was willing to give a chance to the benefit of doubt as to say, but that open letter on Facebook surprise me, and says a lot.
[quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously...[/p][/quote]Don't know many Unison Stewards know a few to talk to. But Tucker I was willing to give a chance to the benefit of doubt as to say, but that open letter on Facebook surprise me, and says a lot. southy
  • Score: 0

9:06pm Wed 8 Aug 12

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker.
Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.
Southy you seem to forget it's also the same as the tory parties stance on the Pool
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.[/p][/quote]Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker. Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.[/p][/quote]Southy you seem to forget it's also the same as the tory parties stance on the Pool loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:10pm Wed 8 Aug 12

loosehead says...

OSPREYSAINT wrote:
SaintM wrote:
don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN
May be it's because there are not enough workers left to do the job. I suggest you stop creating rubbish.
Do you mean after the 1-10 refuse workers go to allow the money from the closure of this pool to restore the higher paid council workers pay?
Surely Osprey even though you were/are very Anti tory on this subject even you can't agree with Unions agreeing to job cuts to restore the top & middle earners pay at the loss of moderate earners livelihoods
can you?
[quote][p][bold]OSPREYSAINT[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SaintM[/bold] wrote: don/t pay them anything its 5pm and my rubbish has not been collected today AGAIN[/p][/quote]May be it's because there are not enough workers left to do the job. I suggest you stop creating rubbish.[/p][/quote]Do you mean after the 1-10 refuse workers go to allow the money from the closure of this pool to restore the higher paid council workers pay? Surely Osprey even though you were/are very Anti tory on this subject even you can't agree with Unions agreeing to job cuts to restore the top & middle earners pay at the loss of moderate earners livelihoods can you? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:21pm Wed 8 Aug 12

loosehead says...

We heard they ( Labour) were closing the pool & losing 33 jobs to save enough money to restore council workers pay?
Now we hear that the Unions might accept pay restoration at the expense of jobs?
when are the council going to tell us the conclusion of the review of refuse services?
When are they going to show once & for all what a lying Party they really are?
Some one said they all lie to get into power?
The Tories put it on the table they could have promised the earth but didn't & got voted out for telling the truth.
Labour said fortnightly collections but then said they didn't say it?
They said 1-10 refuse jobs to go & up to & even over 1,500 job losses but then said they didn't say that?
Is the truth now coming out?> are they showing the total disrespect they hold the voters of this city in?
Unite refused to settle on a deal (reneged)which would have meant only those above £22,000 would take a pay cut as long as they stopped the legal actions.
How can they now consider job losses & stopping legal action that will only benefit those on £30,000 upwards?
Is this really a union(s) looking after all it's members?
We heard they ( Labour) were closing the pool & losing 33 jobs to save enough money to restore council workers pay? Now we hear that the Unions might accept pay restoration at the expense of jobs? when are the council going to tell us the conclusion of the review of refuse services? When are they going to show once & for all what a lying Party they really are? Some one said they all lie to get into power? The Tories put it on the table they could have promised the earth but didn't & got voted out for telling the truth. Labour said fortnightly collections but then said they didn't say it? They said 1-10 refuse jobs to go & up to & even over 1,500 job losses but then said they didn't say that? Is the truth now coming out?> are they showing the total disrespect they hold the voters of this city in? Unite refused to settle on a deal (reneged)which would have meant only those above £22,000 would take a pay cut as long as they stopped the legal actions. How can they now consider job losses & stopping legal action that will only benefit those on £30,000 upwards? Is this really a union(s) looking after all it's members? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:37pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition.

How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.[/p][/quote]Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition. How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan. Georgem
  • Score: 0

10:15pm Wed 8 Aug 12

freefinker says...

Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition.

How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.
.. indeed.

And as for Brighton, the council consists of: -
Green 23.
Tory 18.
New Labour 13.

Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control.

That means politicians have to behave as grown-ups and co-operate to get things done. Slogans have no place when you actually achieve electoral success to this extent.

I know this is a position you will never be in, but in the real world economic realities have to be faced and hard compromises made.

Still, I expect you will just come back with a Trotskyist analysis of the Brighton situation that, as usual, lacks economic and political reality; but that’s all you ever do – pump out obediently the propaganda your masters tell you to.

Your jealousy of the Green’s very limited electoral successes throughout the UK is most unbecoming. What your lot need to realise is that it is achieved through hard work, well thought out and practical policies and an increasing realisation of economic realities. Slogans and Trotsky dogma are no substitute.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.[/p][/quote]Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition. How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.[/p][/quote].. indeed. And as for Brighton, the council consists of: - Green 23. Tory 18. New Labour 13. Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control. That means politicians have to behave as grown-ups and co-operate to get things done. Slogans have no place when you actually achieve electoral success to this extent. I know this is a position you will never be in, but in the real world economic realities have to be faced and hard compromises made. Still, I expect you will just come back with a Trotskyist analysis of the Brighton situation that, as usual, lacks economic and political reality; but that’s all you ever do – pump out obediently the propaganda your masters tell you to. Your jealousy of the Green’s very limited electoral successes throughout the UK is most unbecoming. What your lot need to realise is that it is achieved through hard work, well thought out and practical policies and an increasing realisation of economic realities. Slogans and Trotsky dogma are no substitute. freefinker
  • Score: 0

10:35pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker.
Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.
Southy you seem to forget it's also the same as the tory parties stance on the Pool
Now it is, but it was ear mark for closure, The Council before the last election was in talks with Sainsbury's, to move on to that ground with a new store, and the old one would be lease out to a none compeditive company, and the developer wanted to build homes also.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.[/p][/quote]Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker. Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.[/p][/quote]Southy you seem to forget it's also the same as the tory parties stance on the Pool[/p][/quote]Now it is, but it was ear mark for closure, The Council before the last election was in talks with Sainsbury's, to move on to that ground with a new store, and the old one would be lease out to a none compeditive company, and the developer wanted to build homes also. southy
  • Score: 0

10:46pm Wed 8 Aug 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker.
Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.
Yes I have received copy of Facebook post of Tucker, he has gone out of his way to confirm what you are saying.

Proves Tucker is very complex or confused chap, tends to tie himself in knots.

But then it is up to UNISON Branch members to sort him out. Somehow he keeps on securing his position.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.[/p][/quote]Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker. Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.[/p][/quote]Yes I have received copy of Facebook post of Tucker, he has gone out of his way to confirm what you are saying. Proves Tucker is very complex or confused chap, tends to tie himself in knots. But then it is up to UNISON Branch members to sort him out. Somehow he keeps on securing his position. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:47pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition.

How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.
As the TUSC was the only party offering a totally different way to cuts, its then don't become propaganda.

If you keep the jobs and keep the wages, then they are able to carry on spending there hard earn money in the Local economy, giving the local economy the boost or sustain levels that are on par that is needed.
Making cuts will result in one thing, less money being spent in the economy, and with that the local economy will slump even more resulting in more jobs losses, and because less money will be colletted in council tax and rents, the following year will mean a reduction in how much council tax and rent money the city will get back from the government.
And its all been explain to freefinker before.
To substain a same level or more in returns from Government, then you must give more to the Government, to get back the same amount or more.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.[/p][/quote]Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition. How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.[/p][/quote]As the TUSC was the only party offering a totally different way to cuts, its then don't become propaganda. If you keep the jobs and keep the wages, then they are able to carry on spending there hard earn money in the Local economy, giving the local economy the boost or sustain levels that are on par that is needed. Making cuts will result in one thing, less money being spent in the economy, and with that the local economy will slump even more resulting in more jobs losses, and because less money will be colletted in council tax and rents, the following year will mean a reduction in how much council tax and rent money the city will get back from the government. And its all been explain to freefinker before. To substain a same level or more in returns from Government, then you must give more to the Government, to get back the same amount or more. southy
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
mtdiablo wrote:
As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.
This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen.
Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming.
Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say.
At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.
This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials.

If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.
Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker.
Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.
Yes I have received copy of Facebook post of Tucker, he has gone out of his way to confirm what you are saying.

Proves Tucker is very complex or confused chap, tends to tie himself in knots.

But then it is up to UNISON Branch members to sort him out. Somehow he keeps on securing his position.
That he do, he like an eel you put on its back but will not go to sleep.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mtdiablo[/bold] wrote: As far as I see it the Union is protecting the interests of the members. They striked while the Conservative council was cutting budgets, now that Labour are offering to negotiate the Union is meeting with them.[/p][/quote]This will be a classic case of the TUSC told you so, in the next 3 years there will be £60 millions worth of cuts, and theres going to be the same amount of Job losses in the end as the Torys would of implented, Labour is hoping that enough people will leave before the real heavy job losses happen. Oaklands swimming pool is just the thin edge in what is coming. Talking to Union members just after the last election, they are just waiting to see what the Council says and do, and what M. Tucker and I. Woodland do and say. At the moment a number of Unison Union do not agree on what Tucker said in an open letter, about Oaklands Swimming pool, there members not only support Don and Keith over the matter of the pool they all so support the TUSC stance on the pool.[/p][/quote]This is unconfirmed info, so please check it out before taking it seriously. Unite union's officer conveniently found some supposedly important appointment to attend, as excuse for not going with Coxford's councillors to meeting with nasty whips/officials. If that is true then union is letting down councillors like Don and Keith who stood with union members.[/p][/quote]Not to sure what happened there with Unite union stance with Don and Keith, But Unison M. Tucker certainly let his voice been known, his open letter is on facebook, Unison members did come and talk to us on the stalls and do not agree with Tucker. Which is easy to under stand as Don and Keith stance on the Pool is the same as the TUSC, so how can you support Don and Keith and not support the TUSC.[/p][/quote]Yes I have received copy of Facebook post of Tucker, he has gone out of his way to confirm what you are saying. Proves Tucker is very complex or confused chap, tends to tie himself in knots. But then it is up to UNISON Branch members to sort him out. Somehow he keeps on securing his position.[/p][/quote]That he do, he like an eel you put on its back but will not go to sleep. southy
  • Score: 0

10:55pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition.

How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.
.. indeed.

And as for Brighton, the council consists of: -
Green 23.
Tory 18.
New Labour 13.

Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control.

That means politicians have to behave as grown-ups and co-operate to get things done. Slogans have no place when you actually achieve electoral success to this extent.

I know this is a position you will never be in, but in the real world economic realities have to be faced and hard compromises made.

Still, I expect you will just come back with a Trotskyist analysis of the Brighton situation that, as usual, lacks economic and political reality; but that’s all you ever do – pump out obediently the propaganda your masters tell you to.

Your jealousy of the Green’s very limited electoral successes throughout the UK is most unbecoming. What your lot need to realise is that it is achieved through hard work, well thought out and practical policies and an increasing realisation of economic realities. Slogans and Trotsky dogma are no substitute.
Not jealouse at all i was please to hear that they done it, but done it for what to turn out that they put up the same type budget policy as the Torys and Labour.
It just shows that the Greens do not offer any thing different they are the same, and became very meaningless to vote Green you might as well vote Labour or Torys, it was sad to see them go the same way.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.[/p][/quote]Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition. How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.[/p][/quote].. indeed. And as for Brighton, the council consists of: - Green 23. Tory 18. New Labour 13. Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control. That means politicians have to behave as grown-ups and co-operate to get things done. Slogans have no place when you actually achieve electoral success to this extent. I know this is a position you will never be in, but in the real world economic realities have to be faced and hard compromises made. Still, I expect you will just come back with a Trotskyist analysis of the Brighton situation that, as usual, lacks economic and political reality; but that’s all you ever do – pump out obediently the propaganda your masters tell you to. Your jealousy of the Green’s very limited electoral successes throughout the UK is most unbecoming. What your lot need to realise is that it is achieved through hard work, well thought out and practical policies and an increasing realisation of economic realities. Slogans and Trotsky dogma are no substitute.[/p][/quote]Not jealouse at all i was please to hear that they done it, but done it for what to turn out that they put up the same type budget policy as the Torys and Labour. It just shows that the Greens do not offer any thing different they are the same, and became very meaningless to vote Green you might as well vote Labour or Torys, it was sad to see them go the same way. southy
  • Score: 0

11:01pm Wed 8 Aug 12

southy says...

And as for Brighton, the council consists of: -
Green 23.
Tory 18.
New Labour 13.

Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control.

But it still stands that the Greens Budget of cuts, was voted on and pass. they could of done some thing totally different for a budget for the council to vote on.
And as for Brighton, the council consists of: - Green 23. Tory 18. New Labour 13. Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control. But it still stands that the Greens Budget of cuts, was voted on and pass. they could of done some thing totally different for a budget for the council to vote on. southy
  • Score: 0

8:14am Thu 9 Aug 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
Georgem wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker said.
".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that."

Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.
Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition.

How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.
As the TUSC was the only party offering a totally different way to cuts, its then don't become propaganda.

If you keep the jobs and keep the wages, then they are able to carry on spending there hard earn money in the Local economy, giving the local economy the boost or sustain levels that are on par that is needed.
Making cuts will result in one thing, less money being spent in the economy, and with that the local economy will slump even more resulting in more jobs losses, and because less money will be colletted in council tax and rents, the following year will mean a reduction in how much council tax and rent money the city will get back from the government.
And its all been explain to freefinker before.
To substain a same level or more in returns from Government, then you must give more to the Government, to get back the same amount or more.
For the love of all that's holy, learn how words work. What other people are doing has no effect on whether this is propaganda or not. Your sentence makes about as much sense as "Since my neighbours have a pet Doberman then my car isn't blue after all".

The rest of your post can be summed up as "If I wish for something, really hard, and my heart is pure, magical things can happen".

Way to persuade voters, southy. The TUSC would do well do distance themselves from you before you ruin everything for them.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: freefinker said. ".. well, as TUSC only has a slogan, No Cuts, instead of workable economic policies, you were bound to say that." Nice twist, but its just a slogan, even the greens have a slogan, but the TUSC has a workable economics and Political Policy that is different, unlike the Greens who just produce another Tory Cuts Program Budget in Brighton where they have the larger number of wards seats and are the ruling council, which got the Torys and Labour councillors voting with the Greens.[/p][/quote]Propaganda. When you use phrases like "unlike another party", when comparing it to your own party, THAT is propaganda. By definition. How do you know the TUSC has a viable economic policy? It's absolutely and utterly 100% impossible to know until you come to implement it. This has been brought up with you before. THAT is why freefinker calls it a slogan.[/p][/quote]As the TUSC was the only party offering a totally different way to cuts, its then don't become propaganda. If you keep the jobs and keep the wages, then they are able to carry on spending there hard earn money in the Local economy, giving the local economy the boost or sustain levels that are on par that is needed. Making cuts will result in one thing, less money being spent in the economy, and with that the local economy will slump even more resulting in more jobs losses, and because less money will be colletted in council tax and rents, the following year will mean a reduction in how much council tax and rent money the city will get back from the government. And its all been explain to freefinker before. To substain a same level or more in returns from Government, then you must give more to the Government, to get back the same amount or more.[/p][/quote]For the love of all that's holy, learn how words work. What other people are doing has no effect on whether this is propaganda or not. Your sentence makes about as much sense as "Since my neighbours have a pet Doberman then my car isn't blue after all". The rest of your post can be summed up as "If I wish for something, really hard, and my heart is pure, magical things can happen". Way to persuade voters, southy. The TUSC would do well do distance themselves from you before you ruin everything for them. Georgem
  • Score: 0

9:43am Thu 9 Aug 12

freefinker says...

.. oh thanks for that georgem.

Nearly had a heart attack laughing so much.
.. oh thanks for that georgem. Nearly had a heart attack laughing so much. freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:52am Thu 9 Aug 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
And as for Brighton, the council consists of: -
Green 23.
Tory 18.
New Labour 13.

Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control.

But it still stands that the Greens Budget of cuts, was voted on and pass. they could of done some thing totally different for a budget for the council to vote on.
.. yes southy, "they could of done some thing totally different".

But what's the point if it ain’t going to happen.

You see that's the difference between realistic political parties, who live in the economic reality of the real world, and fringe loonies who would rather keep their ideological purity and shout slogans than have any chance of obtaining electoral success.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: And as for Brighton, the council consists of: - Green 23. Tory 18. New Labour 13. Now I know from the past that statistics is not your forte, but even you may be able to deduce that any two of these can outvote the other – i.e. no overall control. But it still stands that the Greens Budget of cuts, was voted on and pass. they could of done some thing totally different for a budget for the council to vote on.[/p][/quote].. yes southy, "they could of done some thing totally different". But what's the point if it ain’t going to happen. You see that's the difference between realistic political parties, who live in the economic reality of the real world, and fringe loonies who would rather keep their ideological purity and shout slogans than have any chance of obtaining electoral success. freefinker
  • Score: 0

10:34am Thu 9 Aug 12

orderoutofchaos says...

I would like someone to point me to where Labour said it would cost dozen of jobs to restore pay?

Statements from Matt Smith are not considered evidence.
I would like someone to point me to where Labour said it would cost dozen of jobs to restore pay? Statements from Matt Smith are not considered evidence. orderoutofchaos
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Thu 9 Aug 12

Scrutinizer says...

southy wrote:
Scrutinizer wrote: I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously...
Don't know many Unison Stewards know a few to talk to. But Tucker I was willing to give a chance to the benefit of doubt as to say, but that open letter on Facebook surprise me, and says a lot.
Well I have personal experience of UNISON and Tucker and co. So I can tell you - whether you and anyone else believe it or not is up to you and them - that he and the stewards that were supposed to be responsible for representing me when my job was targeted for redundancy, were absolutely a complete waste of time - as they were space!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Scrutinizer[/bold] wrote: I've said it before, UNISON members, and I'll say it again - DON'T put your trust in Tucker and his self-serving, useless UNISON stewards! They'll only let YOU down, as they have MANY members previously...[/p][/quote]Don't know many Unison Stewards know a few to talk to. But Tucker I was willing to give a chance to the benefit of doubt as to say, but that open letter on Facebook surprise me, and says a lot.[/p][/quote]Well I have personal experience of UNISON and Tucker and co. So I can tell you - whether you and anyone else believe it or not is up to you and them - that he and the stewards that were supposed to be responsible for representing me when my job was targeted for redundancy, were absolutely a complete waste of time - as they were space! Scrutinizer
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree