Council workers' pay deal still to be agreed (From Daily Echo)

Until Unison lodge a legal claim our dear civic representatives will dilly and dally. The issue needs to be forced.

If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Who's caving in?

A possible settlement to a dispute that has been going on for over a year is only positive for the people of Southampton, the possibility of saving £12,000,000 legal fee's is positive for the people of Southampton, the saving of redundancy payments is positive for the people of Southampton.

Royston Smith managed none of the above during the last year, it eventually led to his demise as leader of the council, his idea of industrial relations and valuing staff was to threaten them with the sack.

A negotiated settlement is neither caving in or showing true colours, it is exactly what it say's on the tin.

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Who's caving in?

A possible settlement to a dispute that has been going on for over a year is only positive for the people of Southampton, the possibility of saving £12,000,000 legal fee's is positive for the people of Southampton, the saving of redundancy payments is positive for the people of Southampton.

Royston Smith managed none of the above during the last year, it eventually led to his demise as leader of the council, his idea of industrial relations and valuing staff was to threaten them with the sack.

A negotiated settlement is neither caving in or showing true colours, it is exactly what it say's on the tin.

It was reported in this echo that a deal had been done by the Council & the unions to settle the dispute when the Tories were in control of the council.
Then Unite backed out of the agreement saying they couldn't stop or agree to stop individual claims against the council.
so please explain to me4 now how they can drop those same court cases now?
Isn't it up to the individual person?
what about all the money lost when they went on strike?
what about the back pay?
as surely this whole dispute was about a cut in pay?
To restore it fully then all wages lost to cuts should be repaid shouldn't it?
£2.5million isn't even half the amount to restore all the lost pay or pay cuts so who decides who get's their pay restored & who doesn't?
will they restore people's pay who's department's won't see job losses?
keeping say the refuse workers on the lower pay bracket so it won't cost to much when 1-10 lose their jobs?
I can't believe the Unions can come to an agreement when there's so many unanswered questions or will I & many others be proven right?
This was & is only a politically motivated Industrial action & the actually workers were just pawns & never really mattered but what mattered was getting a Labour council?

If Tucker and Woodland are real trade unionists then they should be backing industrial action against whichever political party poses any threat to the job security of their members; who pay their wages.

Otherwise they will only be confirming Tory accusations, that strikes were politically motivated, to be correct.

If that happens it will be a very sad day for Labour Movement.

loosehead wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Who's caving in?

A possible settlement to a dispute that has been going on for over a year is only positive for the people of Southampton, the possibility of saving £12,000,000 legal fee's is positive for the people of Southampton, the saving of redundancy payments is positive for the people of Southampton.

Royston Smith managed none of the above during the last year, it eventually led to his demise as leader of the council, his idea of industrial relations and valuing staff was to threaten them with the sack.

A negotiated settlement is neither caving in or showing true colours, it is exactly what it say's on the tin.

It was reported in this echo that a deal had been done by the Council & the unions to settle the dispute when the Tories were in control of the council.
Then Unite backed out of the agreement saying they couldn't stop or agree to stop individual claims against the council.
so please explain to me4 now how they can drop those same court cases now?
Isn't it up to the individual person?
what about all the money lost when they went on strike?
what about the back pay?
as surely this whole dispute was about a cut in pay?
To restore it fully then all wages lost to cuts should be repaid shouldn't it?
£2.5million isn't even half the amount to restore all the lost pay or pay cuts so who decides who get's their pay restored & who doesn't?
will they restore people's pay who's department's won't see job losses?
keeping say the refuse workers on the lower pay bracket so it won't cost to much when 1-10 lose their jobs?
I can't believe the Unions can come to an agreement when there's so many unanswered questions or will I & many others be proven right?
This was & is only a politically motivated Industrial action & the actually workers were just pawns & never really mattered but what mattered was getting a Labour council?

Unions can only recommend to their members a position or stance to take, for instance Mike Tucker cannot just call his members out on strike without a ballot of the said membership, Maggie saw to that way back when.

Of course a union cannot stop individual claims against the council, no organisation can stop someone taking their employers court.

Did the bin strike cost the council money? not accordingly to a Tory councillor at the time (now ex Tory councillor) he was actually gloating that it was saving the then administration money.

The question of pay and conditions plus the pay back situation I'm sure will be part of the negotiated settlement between to the council and the union, only then will the union either recommend accepting or declining, either way it's a darn sight better now than it was last year.

I don't care if it's politically motivated on behalf of the union, I'm sure it was politically motivated on behalf of Royston Smith, he took on unions and lost, I get my bins emptied, children are not being put at risk because social worker are working, isn't that better for the people of Southampton, better than the Tory alternative we had last year?

£9 million in unpaid council tax, I suppose that's Labour and the unions fault as well?

I'm not sure how this can be resolved so that everyone is happy. Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top.

Many workers are now expected all of the above.

Now, let's assume they get pay restored and partially backdated, they are also expecting compensation as promised by the Unions. Will all the members just suddenly say, ok forget the compensation, also where is the money going to come from without massive job losses and huge cuts to services?

I can't see any end to this in the near future.

IronLady2010 wrote:
I'm not sure how this can be resolved so that everyone is happy. Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top.

Many workers are now expected all of the above.

Now, let's assume they get pay restored and partially backdated, they are also expecting compensation as promised by the Unions. Will all the members just suddenly say, ok forget the compensation, also where is the money going to come from without massive job losses and huge cuts to services?

I can't see any end to this in the near future.

Stop adding on things wil you, there was no compensation on top, any compaensation was for those who did lose there jobs though Royston illegal action that even the City Legal team refuse to back.

The Union members are just waiting on the Labour Council to make the first move, if the council starts cutting jobs or wages then i can see this strike back on.

southy wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
I'm not sure how this can be resolved so that everyone is happy. Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top.

Many workers are now expected all of the above.

Now, let's assume they get pay restored and partially backdated, they are also expecting compensation as promised by the Unions. Will all the members just suddenly say, ok forget the compensation, also where is the money going to come from without massive job losses and huge cuts to services?

I can't see any end to this in the near future.

Stop adding on things wil you, there was no compensation on top, any compaensation was for those who did lose there jobs though Royston illegal action that even the City Legal team refuse to back.

I recall an amount of compensation, if I am incorrect it was not intended to mis-lead and I apologise if this is the case.

IronLady2010 wrote:
I'm not sure how this can be resolved so that everyone is happy. Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top.

Many workers are now expected all of the above.

Now, let's assume they get pay restored and partially backdated, they are also expecting compensation as promised by the Unions. Will all the members just suddenly say, ok forget the compensation, also where is the money going to come from without massive job losses and huge cuts to services?

I can't see any end to this in the near future.

"Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top."
.
No they didnt. Explain when the Unions did that if you think you know the truth.

southy wrote:
The Union members are just waiting on the Labour Council to make the first move, if the council starts cutting jobs or wages then i can see this strike back on.

At this moment in time as I see it they are still in 'strike mode' and are working to rule and have been for months!

Over the Edge wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Who's caving in?

A possible settlement to a dispute that has been going on for over a year is only positive for the people of Southampton, the possibility of saving £12,000,000 legal fee's is positive for the people of Southampton, the saving of redundancy payments is positive for the people of Southampton.

Royston Smith managed none of the above during the last year, it eventually led to his demise as leader of the council, his idea of industrial relations and valuing staff was to threaten them with the sack.

A negotiated settlement is neither caving in or showing true colours, it is exactly what it say's on the tin.

It was reported in this echo that a deal had been done by the Council & the unions to settle the dispute when the Tories were in control of the council.
Then Unite backed out of the agreement saying they couldn't stop or agree to stop individual claims against the council.
so please explain to me4 now how they can drop those same court cases now?
Isn't it up to the individual person?
what about all the money lost when they went on strike?
what about the back pay?
as surely this whole dispute was about a cut in pay?
To restore it fully then all wages lost to cuts should be repaid shouldn't it?
£2.5million isn't even half the amount to restore all the lost pay or pay cuts so who decides who get's their pay restored & who doesn't?
will they restore people's pay who's department's won't see job losses?
keeping say the refuse workers on the lower pay bracket so it won't cost to much when 1-10 lose their jobs?
I can't believe the Unions can come to an agreement when there's so many unanswered questions or will I & many others be proven right?
This was & is only a politically motivated Industrial action & the actually workers were just pawns & never really mattered but what mattered was getting a Labour council?

Unions can only recommend to their members a position or stance to take, for instance Mike Tucker cannot just call his members out on strike without a ballot of the said membership, Maggie saw to that way back when.

Of course a union cannot stop individual claims against the council, no organisation can stop someone taking their employers court.

Did the bin strike cost the council money? not accordingly to a Tory councillor at the time (now ex Tory councillor) he was actually gloating that it was saving the then administration money.

The question of pay and conditions plus the pay back situation I'm sure will be part of the negotiated settlement between to the council and the union, only then will the union either recommend accepting or declining, either way it's a darn sight better now than it was last year.

I don't care if it's politically motivated on behalf of the union, I'm sure it was politically motivated on behalf of Royston Smith, he took on unions and lost, I get my bins emptied, children are not being put at risk because social worker are working, isn't that better for the people of Southampton, better than the Tory alternative we had last year?

£9 million in unpaid council tax, I suppose that's Labour and the unions fault as well?

You are wasting your time with Loserhead. He is well away with the Tory Fairies!!

Ant Smoking MP wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:

Shoong wrote:

Over the Edge wrote:
If the union membership decide to accept to deal and remove the threat of legal action, the Labour controlled council would have done more for industrial relations in a couple of months than Royston bully boy Smith managed in all of last year.

If caving in or showing the true colours is you're idea of improving industrial relations, then you're absolutely right.

Who's caving in?

A possible settlement to a dispute that has been going on for over a year is only positive for the people of Southampton, the possibility of saving £12,000,000 legal fee's is positive for the people of Southampton, the saving of redundancy payments is positive for the people of Southampton.

Royston Smith managed none of the above during the last year, it eventually led to his demise as leader of the council, his idea of industrial relations and valuing staff was to threaten them with the sack.

A negotiated settlement is neither caving in or showing true colours, it is exactly what it say's on the tin.

It was reported in this echo that a deal had been done by the Council & the unions to settle the dispute when the Tories were in control of the council.
Then Unite backed out of the agreement saying they couldn't stop or agree to stop individual claims against the council.
so please explain to me4 now how they can drop those same court cases now?
Isn't it up to the individual person?
what about all the money lost when they went on strike?
what about the back pay?
as surely this whole dispute was about a cut in pay?
To restore it fully then all wages lost to cuts should be repaid shouldn't it?
£2.5million isn't even half the amount to restore all the lost pay or pay cuts so who decides who get's their pay restored & who doesn't?
will they restore people's pay who's department's won't see job losses?
keeping say the refuse workers on the lower pay bracket so it won't cost to much when 1-10 lose their jobs?
I can't believe the Unions can come to an agreement when there's so many unanswered questions or will I & many others be proven right?
This was & is only a politically motivated Industrial action & the actually workers were just pawns & never really mattered but what mattered was getting a Labour council?

Unions can only recommend to their members a position or stance to take, for instance Mike Tucker cannot just call his members out on strike without a ballot of the said membership, Maggie saw to that way back when.

Of course a union cannot stop individual claims against the council, no organisation can stop someone taking their employers court.

Did the bin strike cost the council money? not accordingly to a Tory councillor at the time (now ex Tory councillor) he was actually gloating that it was saving the then administration money.

The question of pay and conditions plus the pay back situation I'm sure will be part of the negotiated settlement between to the council and the union, only then will the union either recommend accepting or declining, either way it's a darn sight better now than it was last year.

I don't care if it's politically motivated on behalf of the union, I'm sure it was politically motivated on behalf of Royston Smith, he took on unions and lost, I get my bins emptied, children are not being put at risk because social worker are working, isn't that better for the people of Southampton, better than the Tory alternative we had last year?

£9 million in unpaid council tax, I suppose that's Labour and the unions fault as well?

You are wasting your time with Loserhead. He is well away with the Tory Fairies!!

Instead of trying to slag me off & call me names why not answer the questions put forward on these posts?
When the Tories were in power it was admitted by the then opposition & the council that it would take £7million to restore the pay back to all council workers so how the hell is £2.5million going to restore all the pay?
Unison stuck by the agreement made with the council & Unite & didn't recommend a vote either way which I gave them credit for.
On the other hand Unite broke that agreement straight away using the legal as a reason to break the agreement.They also recommended their members to vote NO.
so come on Labour PUPPET did Morrell know of the pool closure & that's why he resigned from the cabinet?
Is Andrew Barnes telling the truth & there indeed will be 1-10 refuse jobs going?
Will the truth come out after the review on refuse collections has been done (smokescreen )?
You were quite good at attacking the last council but are you as I've suggested just a Labour puppet & a yes sir anything you say sir type of guy?
the more the public see how you're party is taking credit for Tory initiatives & the only ideas they can come up with are cuts to services to pay councillors more money & the chosen few council workers the more they'll turn on you Labour that is so Ant got a clue go & beg for scraps from your masters

Ant Smoking MP wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
I'm not sure how this can be resolved so that everyone is happy. Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top.

Many workers are now expected all of the above.

Now, let's assume they get pay restored and partially backdated, they are also expecting compensation as promised by the Unions. Will all the members just suddenly say, ok forget the compensation, also where is the money going to come from without massive job losses and huge cuts to services?

I can't see any end to this in the near future.

"Last year the Unions promised their members legal action to get the pay cuts restored and backdated with compensation on top."
.
No they didnt. Explain when the Unions did that if you think you know the truth.

ANT, my previous post has already apologised if I was incorrect. Perhaps you could enlighten us with the exact facts of what they are seeking at the tribunal hearing coming up soon.

I'm all ears.............

In any event, if pay is restored where is the money coming from? The new Council have already dipped into reserves.

Like I have said, this is going to be ongoing, I can see no workers agreeing to having pay restored but fear job loss.

The biggest issue is Labour have got themselves so far up the Unions back sides they can't smile without asking permission (look at Williams face).

I can imagine Union Leaders and Labour Leaders sitting in a room, thinking, how the hell do we get out of this mess we started.

But, let's wait and see...........

IronLady2010 wrote:
In any event, if pay is restored where is the money coming from? The new Council have already dipped into reserves. Like I have said, this is going to be ongoing, I can see no workers agreeing to having pay restored but fear job loss. The biggest issue is Labour have got themselves so far up the Unions back sides they can't smile without asking permission (look at Williams face). I can imagine Union Leaders and Labour Leaders sitting in a room, thinking, how the hell do we get out of this mess we started. But, let's wait and see...........

Far to cynical, let's hope for a fair and amicable settlement by all. No politics just common sense negotiation.

southy wrote:
The Union members are just waiting on the Labour Council to make the first move, if the council starts cutting jobs or wages then i can see this strike back on.

Source?

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

IronLady2010 wrote:
In any event, if pay is restored where is the money coming from? The new Council have already dipped into reserves. Like I have said, this is going to be ongoing, I can see no workers agreeing to having pay restored but fear job loss. The biggest issue is Labour have got themselves so far up the Unions back sides they can't smile without asking permission (look at Williams face). I can imagine Union Leaders and Labour Leaders sitting in a room, thinking, how the hell do we get out of this mess we started. But, let's wait and see...........

Far to cynical, let's hope for a fair and amicable settlement by all. No politics just common sense negotiation.

osprey surely that's what we had when all parties came to an agreement only for Unite to break that agreement once the talks had finished?

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

southy wrote:
The Union members are just waiting on the Labour Council to make the first move, if the council starts cutting jobs or wages then i can see this strike back on.

Source?

Don't be silly.