Sir Keir Starmer’s Barmy Army

Discussion in 'Politics 2.0' started by Moose, Sep 29, 2021.

  1. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    It also banks on the Tory Party and its voters having a sense of shame. Good luck with that.
     
  2. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    I’ll be clearer than my previous post too.

    I’m simply asking for the organisations that formed and fund the Labour Party, the unions and their constituency, the working people of the UK, to have, at least, a seat at the table and a chance of the leadership.

    There is both the Tory and Lib Dems to represent the liberal economic and social views of the middle classes. You can’t simply co-opt the Labour Party because these parties can’t govern competently or fairly or because liberal economics and its values have failed spectacularly.

    This is why I’m very clear. Anti Trade Union views and centrist economic policies are not welcome in the Labour Party. They do not represent the views of the working class and have been an electoral disaster for Labour.

    You admit yourself that Labour is perceived as a party of the elite. How on Earth would it win on that basis when it cannot win in the shires, must therefore win in the towns and cities?
     
  3. domthehornet

    domthehornet Moderator Staff Member

    He seems a good enough bloke but I don't find him strong enough as a leader, the past couple of years we have needed an opposition which is something, in my honest opinion, he hasn't done enough.
     
    dynamo380 and sydney_horn like this.
  4. Arakel

    Arakel First Team

    Problem with that is sometimes you can't win no matter how you act. If he had gone off hard in the middle of a global pandemic, picking BSJ apart at every turn, people would call him opportunistic and say he should have been helping the UK deal with the challenges instead of undermining things and attempting to score political points.

    It's a fine line at times.
     
    domthehornet likes this.
  5. domthehornet

    domthehornet Moderator Staff Member

    Very good point, it was a matter of picking the right battles.
     
    Arakel likes this.
  6. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    Interesting that the frontrunners to replace Keir are starting to publicly come out in favour of unions/ strikes.

    I'm sure it's good for their nomination attempts as the next leader, but doubt it's even close to the mood of the public.
     
    hornmeister likes this.
  7. sydney_horn

    sydney_horn Squad Player

    I think that this is going to be a real danger for Labour.

    Without doubt certain sectors will be pushing double digit pay rises in the coming months and, on paper, they deserve them.

    But many workers, will not get anywhere near those kind of rises and, I suspect, will not be sympathetic to strikes that inconvenience them.

    If Labour support the strikes they will lose the middle class and those workers that aren't getting decent pay rises. If they don't support the strikes they will lose the workers in those sectors, as well as the unions in general.

    It's a lot easier for the Tories on this issue!
     
    Lloyd and miked2006 like this.
  8. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    Absolutely. I read somewhere that the average rail salary was £44k whereas the average UK salary was £26k. The general public seem to be fairly peed off with the unions.

    When the country has raised Nurses & carers, salaries to something acceptable, paid off the national debt, sorted out social & mental care and invested enough for the country to be carbon neutral with superast internet availability for all, then we can start offering above inflation pay rises, maybe.
     
  9. reg_varney

    reg_varney Squad Player

    Good old supply and demand.

    I work in an area of scientists and developers (computer programmers). Most of the scientists, like myself, are more highly educated than the developers, most of us have higher degrees, usually PhDs, are more experienced, and provide the knowledge and scientific information that is needed to populate the databases built by the developers and mined using their tools.

    However, if the programmers try to generate the info without human expert input, it's a great example of sh1te in = sh1te out. However, since the developers can go and work in a variety of industries that pay significantly more than what scientific based institutes can afford to pay, this results in programmers who are generally less experienced than their scientific counterparts, often newly graduated who, just to attract and keep vaguely competent people, are paid significantly more than the scientists whose input turn their resources into something genuinely useful rather than the meaningless number gibberish which would exist without it.

    The highly skilled rail workers, such as drivers and signallers, are in significant demand, without them the rail system would grind to a complete halt. I read somewhere that there are still numerous vacancies for drivers which will keep their wages at a high level. The poor old nurses are working for a public institution that has significant long term real term cost reductions which means there is bugger all money to pay them what they are genuinely worth. The same situation exists for the carers.

    Good old supply and demand.
     
    iamofwfc and sydney_horn like this.
  10. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    It’s supply and demand, but it’s a highly manipulated market. The supply is curtailed by unions, who ensure posts are only advertised to people already working as trainees within the industry, for whom again the number of roles is curtailed.

    If you advertised a training scheme to the wider public where a clear route to becoming a train driver was offered upon qualification, there would be a much higher supply of drivers and salaries would naturally have not risen in the way they have (you'd probably triple the supply). The training isn’t even that rigorous anymore (as train drivers get a lot more technological assistance these days), and it only takes a couple of years to qualify. The amount of training is far less skilled than that for nurses, or even bus drivers, and pretty much anyone has the ability to become a train driver (which isn't true of most professions).

    The main reason a train driver’s salary is so high, is because they have a monopolistic position, strong unions and the ability to hold the country to ransom by causing billions of pounds damage to the economy if they don’t get their own way. They aren’t doing the important, innovative part of the economy that drives living standards higher, but they are more like the middlemen that move those people to where they need to be, as otherwise they previously had no option of getting to work.

    Luckily, the transition to working from home and greater technological developments that should lead to improvements on the railway (albeit heavily contested by the unions) should reduce the damage caused when train drivers want greater pay rises than the rest of the country. But it’s still damaging for the poorest, for key workers and for those industries like tourism, all of whom were hardest hit by Covid and are now continuing to suffer due to union-led greed and protectionism.

    As per the union mantra: We're all in it together, but the minority will benefit to the majority's detriment.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2022
    lm_wfc and hornmeister like this.
  11. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    Another bizarre anti-union rant. Fact is, salaries are not low elsewhere because of strong unions on the railways. This is an utterly bizarre take given the salaries on offer in industries wholly reliant on the work of others, like finance and insurance and given the obvious lavish wealth enjoyed by the 2% property and shareholding elite with their thousands of acres and multiple dwellings.

    If the unions did not stick to their guns railway workers would be paid less to the benefit of no one but shareholders. That’s why I support unions.

    And let’s have some proper analysis of skills, anti-social hours, risk etc when it comes to the railways and the multiple different roles required before you suggest someone driving a train with 1000 passengers onboard is overpaid compared to someone selling financial products.
     
  12. HenryHooter

    HenryHooter Reservist

    Seems like a step in the right direction in terms of re-engaging with their traditional support. There will be stumbles on the way, not least because of the complete disconnect since the 90s, but it is at least a start.

    Could be the start of a genuine third way some long way in the future. It will take time, it will seem to get worse before it gets better, but that is what happens when you suddenly realise that you have been treating your traditional target voters with contempt for so long.

    But good luck to them. Finding a ballance will not be easy, and they must resist the temptation to over compensate. Or to simply pay lip service.
     
    iamofwfc likes this.
  13. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    Some financial middlemen are certainly pointless, and leech off others (often rich individuals). But this is reducing with technology, as people can more easily invest in tracker funds and are less reliant on agents. Other people in finance provide a huge amount of tax, which would otherwise be paid in other big cities, and increase the value of pensions, which is making everyone richer.

    And insurance is one of the most important ‘inventions’ of all time and is basically the cornerstone of modern society. Preventing people from losing everything after an accidental house fire, or a business break in is key in enabling money lending and business loans.

    But as most insurance/ financial products are privately funded and optional, this isn’t really an important point. Obviously, if I were paying the salary of a financial planner I didn’t use on a day to day basis I’d be annoyed.

    The trains are however largely taxpayer and commuter funded, so we are directly paying for any rise in cost.

    It’s therefore a bizarre take to suggest that rising salaries won’t impact ordinary people. The government pay the railway companies to perform a service each year for a set cost. An increase in wages will be passed on to train users, and the subsequent increase in pension contributions will be passed on to taxpayers.

    If the supply of train drivers wasn’t artificially curtailed, and strikes weren’t forced upon commuters, then everyone would pay less of their salary on trains, there would be fewer delays caused by a lack of drivers/ signalmen and therefore less packed trains and the poorest and key workers wouldn’t be disproportionately affected by strike action.

    Money taken for train drivers is less in the pot for money going to nurses, or on roads, or on reducing the deficit and therefore future interest payments that take even more money away. Perhaps train drivers should be paid more, I don’t know, but many other public sector workers deserve much more significant and pressing pay rises.

    Unlike most insurance/ financial products, the union leeches are unavoidable for most working individuals and have a greater detriment to the poorer general public.
     
    iamofwfc and hornmeister like this.
  14. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    Never wise to spoil a good rant with any facts or data and you haven’t.
     
  15. Lloyd

    Lloyd Squad Player

    I've no idea if the railway workers' demands are fair or not but as soon as I see Mick Lynch of the RMT on the evening news I am overwhelmed by an urge to shout f**k off at the television
     
    iamofwfc and miked2006 like this.
  16. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    “Lalalala I’m not listening, unions are always good” - Moose, isn’t really a valid source, so I find the irony pretty hilarious.

    What do you want a source on?

    That more people are turning away from financial planners and turning to tracker funds?
    That finance provides significant tax income?
    That insurance is really important?
    That increasing train staff costs is correlated with greater costs for the consumer or the government?
    That increasing the supply of staff wouldn’t decrease cost for the consumer or government, relative to keeping supply artificially low?
    That poorer staff and key workers aren’t more likely to not be able to work from home?
    That governments don’t try to keep spending within a certain range as to retain confidence in its ability to pay back debt and reduce interest payments?
    That other publicly funded jobs such as key workers don’t better-deserve pay rises ahead of train drivers?
    That increased train costs hits consumer spending?

    I would have thought that all of those points were common sense, but happy to provide sources if you can’t grasp them.
     
    iamofwfc likes this.
  17. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    No, I want you to look at the actual wages, to think about them and analyse them. Not just recycle the Government inspired headline.

    While some people may find the wages for drivers high, like I say, some people may also appreciate that the responsibility for a 1,000 seat high speed train is quite a big one and maybe just as worthy of good pay as finance, sales, middle management or academia. Whose salary would you peg it against?

    Beyond that, the wages for conductors, station staff and track maintenance crew are really rather modest given the unsocial hours, poor weather and rowdy public. That we don’t pay other key staff enough is not a good argument.

    There’s a breakdown of pay here. Knock yourself out.

    https://www.nationalworld.com/lifes...n-average-trainee-jobs-pay-rmt-strike-3724502
     
  18. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    I love the way union leaders boil conservative Britain’s piss. It’s like revenge for Boris, Farage, Julia Hartley Brewer, Kelvin McKenzie and all the other hundred Horsemen of the Apocalypse inflicted on me daily.
     
  19. Lloyd

    Lloyd Squad Player

    You must have to look hard to find anything fresh from those three to keep you seething.
     
  20. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    If it helps, I also hate all of them.
     
  21. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    You’ll appreciate the good work of trade unions then.

    No comment on the actual pay of railway workers though? #297
     
  22. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    iamofwfc likes this.
  23. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

  24. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    The union has done a good job for their members, by holding the public hostage with strikes. But it's to the detriment of the transport service and ultimately everyone else who has to deal with the disruption and the inflated costs.
     
  25. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    FFY.

    Most of the wages on the railways (see link I posted) are perfectly fine. Some driver wages are high, but I ask again, what job do you pin driving a 1000 seat high speed train against for comparison?
     
  26. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    In your opinion maybe. In mine not.

    I'm a firm believer that if the job you do doesn't pay enough, ask for more, if that is not forthcoming get another job. Striking for more pay in a closed shop is out of order.
    Again that's an opinion I won't change youer mind you won't change mine.

    Here's some comparisons which are fact.
    Average UK nurse salary £33 -35K https://www.nurses.co.uk/blog/a-quick-overview-of-nurses--salaries-in-the-uk-in-2022.
    Average base Police salary £29,353 rising to £41K with OT & bonuses https://www.payscale.com/research/UK/Job=Police_Officer/Salary
    Army Officer £42K
    FireOfficer £24K up to £45K managing a whole station.

    A pilot's starting salary is circa £54K.
    I'd argue flying a plane is slightly more responsible and technical requiring more training(often at their own expense).
     
  27. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    You need to compare apples with apples. Like I say, most salaries on the railways are moderate. Drivers salaries are high, but comparison against the average nurse is debatable. Whereas there are senior nurses and prescribers earning at least 50k.

    And what about jobs with far less responsibility but brain power? You could work in commissioning or project management in the public or private sector and earn well in excess of what the top train driver earns. It’s disappointing the focus is always on jobs like train driving and not excessive white collar pay.

    Better wages all round, not depress those who manage to get a decent deal.
     
  28. hornmeister

    hornmeister Tired

    But the better deal is at everyones expense. So you agree they have a better deal? if so how can you agree with a strike to improve that better deal further? Transport make a loss so it will be at the expense of the general public's purse, money which could be used to bump up the salaries of people paid less that do a more critical job.

    Private sector salaries (transport being subsidised I consider public sector) are based on generated proffit and what needs to be paid to someone to do the job. They are often educated and trained out of their own pocket to qualify. There's competition for places, if they strike they get fired.

    Comparing the private sector to a pretty much closed shop system where training is part of the job and at least part of the salary is subsidised because it's a loss leading industry, is a little unfair in my opinion. This is all before we look at pensions, benefits etc.

    Better wages all round, I couldn't agree more, but let's bring those underpaid up to the correct level and balance the books before inflating the salaries of those paid over the national average.
     
  29. Moose

    Moose First Team Captain

    I don’t agree the better deal is at everyone else’s expense. And your ideas about private sector salaries, where much of the sector relies on public money, is pure fantasy. They are often excessive. So if project managers can get £50k+ why not a train driver?
     
  30. sydney_horn

    sydney_horn Squad Player

    I'm not sure I really get the argument that one sector is paid **** so those paid well should stfu.

    It's capitalism at it's finest. If a market is willing to pay a premium for a skillset then that's what it will pay. If those with that skillset believe they deserve even more then they can use whatever bargaining tools, including strike action, to achieve it.

    The market will ultimately decide who is the winner.

    Or we could try communism where workers are paid a set amount and that's it?
     
  31. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    But even that was a 'myth' as the more senior (in a job, management or party membership - which actually went hand-in-hand with climbing any greasy career pole) you were gained you access to 'better' shops which meant a far better range of products at far lower prices than the lumpen proletariat paid. My mother in law, as a director of an electronics factory got access to both dollar shops AND senior managements shops (open later and required ID for entry).
     
  32. sydney_horn

    sydney_horn Squad Player

    Yes, but "Soviet communism" was never really communism in the truest sense. There were still elites who prospered at the expense of the workers. As George Orwell put it in Animal Farm....

    "The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”
     
  33. Bwood_Horn

    Bwood_Horn Squad Player

    Stop right there. I had flashbacks at being an undergrad in the late 80's again.
     
    hornmeister and sydney_horn like this.
  34. sydney_horn

    sydney_horn Squad Player

    Just for the record, I don't think any communism would work. Ultimately human nature and greed overcomes any good intentions that it may have.
     
    hornmeister likes this.
  35. miked2006

    miked2006 Premiership Prediction League Proprietor

    I take the point that not everyone is on an above average wage. Some of the railway maintenance staff are overworked, underpaid and would be difficult to replace.

    The vast majority on the list though are on extremely average salaries and their pay offer was also higher than those in other public sector roles.

    Many NHS salaries for support staff for equivalent roles are lower than those listed for tougher roles, especially over the last two years.

    I'd personally take public sector pay out of short term govt hands and reduce the power of the unions, except in emergency situations, as both seem incapable at thinking about the long term impact on staff numbers and value for customers.
     

Share This Page