Southampton Transit plant under threat of strike from Penske staff (From This is Hampshire)

Quote:-

"We are working alongside Ford workers only earning a fraction of what they get".

Unfortunatelty that is the drawback of being an Agency worker. You get the Agency rate and not the employer rates.

As regards the issue of striking over the pay etc, that may well be a very fool-hardy option to follow as they have only the employment rights of the Agency.

Therfore, as i undersatand it your arguement must be surely with the Agency and not Fords.Although their actions will effect Fords.

Under these circumstances i would suggest that they have every right to withdraw their labour as indeed Fords have every right to dismiss the Agency.

Unless of course i am wrong and i am sure someone will tell me

Very smart! Job's on the line so what do you do? Strike?
You might wake up tomorrow and find you no longer have that job!

Carry on Brothers.Who needs you anyway?.Certainly not Ford International.

huckit P wrote:
Very smart! Job's on the line so what do you do? Strike?
You might wake up tomorrow and find you no longer have that job!

That argument never seems to make sense to the malcontents at Ford, and making it tends to attract such well-thought-out responses as "How would you feel if it was your job on the line?" or the favourite "It's easy for all you office workers to sit on your backsides all day making comments it might be you one day think on that get a life zomg!". As if Ford workers in Swaythling were the only people in the history of the universe to ever face redundancy, and other such symptoms of victim syndrome.

In any case - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - isn't the point of contract workers, that the client - Ford, in this case - can simply terminate them at any point, with the minimum of fuss? I don't see that they have much room for industrial action at all

Yet another nail in the coffin of the Transit plant here in Southampton with people losing there jobs we are now seeing workers will to risk all on a strike that could end all jobs within the area, I understand that Fords have not renewed the contract for Penske so they have already lost there jobs as the new contractor will not employee anyone with a record of striking will they

quote:Randolph Ryerson: “We are in discussions with the union to secure a fair, competitive agreement that will enable us to continue providing excellent service to our customer.

“We understand our associates’ concerns and look forward to working towards a resolution.”

For a multi billion pound company it has to be said that they are full of empty promises and good pitches but that is it!

We expect nothing after being lied to constantly and have now come to the end of the road.

We agreed with Penske that our increment pay would be postponed untill first of April, we are now in July and have not seen any signs of them honering the agreement.

I would have to say that Penske have faild to be fair in any offer they have brought to the table and dont look to be budging.

The workers have tried to help matters but the multi billion pound company keeps saying they dont have the money!! (ARE THEY BANCKRUPT?)

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

Don't need a lot of the ol grey matter for this one folks...why would you contemplate striking in the height of a global recession, most unemployed decent folks would bite your arm off to have a job. If you dig your head out of the sand and look around you, you will not have failed to notice that a lot of people all over the country are taking pay cuts to secure their jobs and secure the future ( as dark as it may seem for now ) for their families, and all you lot wanna do is strike. Don't expect any sympathy when you lot loose your jobs.

Lone Ranger wrote:
Quote:-

"We are working alongside Ford workers only earning a fraction of what they get".

Unfortunatelty that is the drawback of being an Agency worker. You get the Agency rate and not the employer rates.

As regards the issue of striking over the pay etc, that may well be a very fool-hardy option to follow as they have only the employment rights of the Agency.

Therfore, as i undersatand it your arguement must be surely with the Agency and not Fords.Although their actions will effect Fords.

Under these circumstances i would suggest that they have every right to withdraw their labour as indeed Fords have every right to dismiss the Agency.

Unless of course i am wrong and i am sure someone will tell me

Yep, Lone Ranger is right, look at agency workers in hospitals say, they don't get the same rights and conditions as 'permanent' staff and the agency is the employer...

Same happened to car agency workers in Oxford. They were the first to go..... unfortunately in the current climate the employers usually hold the cards... tough but true.

fudez wrote:
quote:Randolph Ryerson: “We are in discussions with the union to secure a fair, competitive agreement that will enable us to continue providing excellent service to our customer. “We understand our associates’ concerns and look forward to working towards a resolution.” For a multi billion pound company it has to be said that they are full of empty promises and good pitches but that is it! We expect nothing after being lied to constantly and have now come to the end of the road. We agreed with Penske that our increment pay would be postponed untill first of April, we are now in July and have not seen any signs of them honering the agreement. I would have to say that Penske have faild to be fair in any offer they have brought to the table and dont look to be budging. The workers have tried to help matters but the multi billion pound company keeps saying they dont have the money!! (ARE THEY BANCKRUPT?) The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

Don't seem to be getting much support out here in the real world, do you mate...maybe that's because real people have woken up and smelt the coffee, and Southampton boy has hit the nail on the proverbial head if you do get a new employer..

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

look at it this way, all the work force at refinery at was sack, all got there jobs back, just though the threat off a strike.
and fords if they want there jobs to be safe then they aft to do the same, go on strike make mangerment think twice in the future. they have nothing to lose but fords have a lot to lose.

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

look at it this way, all the work force at refinery at was sack, all got there jobs back, just though the threat off a strike.
and fords if they want there jobs to be safe then they aft to do the same, go on strike make mangerment think twice in the future. they have nothing to lose but fords have a lot to lose.

Read the story. They aren't Ford employees. They're agency - ie, temporary - workers. Like it or not, nobody is owed employment. The Ford plant is cutting jobs anyway, what exactly is it they have to lose here?

Be thankful you have a job with 2.6million now unemployed. Also every firm has had to make cuts recently. Staff at my employer have had all overtime cut and no pay increases for a year. You aren't the only ones going through issues so stop moaning and get on with your job, either that or leave and let someone more grateful of the work take your position.

quote""Read the story. They aren't Ford employees. They're agency - ie, temporary - workers. Like it or not, nobody is owed employment. The Ford plant is cutting jobs anyway, what exactly is it they have to lose here?""unquote

every one should have the right of employment, weather they are employed by the company or an angency. with fords in not just local any more its internationaly, what is needed is to get rid off the high up union member that are in the companys pockets, those guys have nothing to lose any way so striking is not going to hurt them now is it.

god lets hope hamtons do not take over their work,its the worst run company ever with micky mouse managers and no quality standerds.

The only reason you are leaving these coments is because you dont have a job,the person who has taken over your job was better than you now get down the job center and find a job!!!

They should be happy they got jobs..

southy wrote:
quote""Read the story. They aren't Ford employees. They're agency - ie, temporary - workers. Like it or not, nobody is owed employment. The Ford plant is cutting jobs anyway, what exactly is it they have to lose here?""unquote

every one should have the right of employment, weather they are employed by the company or an angency. with fords in not just local any more its internationaly, what is needed is to get rid off the high up union member that are in the companys pockets, those guys have nothing to lose any way so striking is not going to hurt them now is it.

No, Southy. Nobody has the right to employment. Don't be ludicrous

fudez wrote:
The only reason you are leaving these coments is because you dont have a job,the person who has taken over your job was better than you now get down the job center and find a job!!!

At whom is that aimed? Clarity, please!

yes georgem every one should, and only reason people think like that, the way your saying is because it makes way for cheap slave labour, just like the old well know saying off tory is the party for high unempolyment and the reason is for cheap labour.

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

look at it this way, all the work force at refinery at was sack, all got there jobs back, just though the threat off a strike. and fords if they want there jobs to be safe then they aft to do the same, go on strike make mangerment think twice in the future. they have nothing to lose but fords have a lot to lose.

Southy i think that you will find that 100 agency workers going on strike at Fords will not have the same impact as the 500 at the refinery.

The refinery needs them. Fords do not

LETS GET ONE THING CORRECT. THE ECHO ARTICLE IS WRONG.
THESE ARE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES WORKING FOR A CONTRACTOR. SOME OF THE STAFF HAVE WORKED THERE FOR MOST OF THEIR LIVES.
Glad to see the lazy keyboard warriors out in force this morning. These guys are standing up for themselves and not chickening out at the first whiff of gunshot like you do.You are happy to see rich bankers get bail outs but hard working car workers get redubdancy notices and sh*t pay.
These workers deserve to be failrly recompenced for working the extra shift.
Good luck to these workers.

Iw61 wrote:
LETS GET ONE THING CORRECT. THE ECHO ARTICLE IS WRONG. THESE ARE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES WORKING FOR A CONTRACTOR. SOME OF THE STAFF HAVE WORKED THERE FOR MOST OF THEIR LIVES. Glad to see the lazy keyboard warriors out in force this morning. These guys are standing up for themselves and not chickening out at the first whiff of gunshot like you do.You are happy to see rich bankers get bail outs but hard working car workers get redubdancy notices and sh*t pay. These workers deserve to be failrly recompenced for working the extra shift. Good luck to these workers.

Well said, I couldnt have put it better myself, just wish these layabouts actually knew the facts before tapping away on the keboard.

Lone Ranger wrote:

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

look at it this way, all the work force at refinery at was sack, all got there jobs back, just though the threat off a strike. and fords if they want there jobs to be safe then they aft to do the same, go on strike make mangerment think twice in the future. they have nothing to lose but fords have a lot to lose.

Southy i think that you will find that 100 agency workers going on strike at Fords will not have the same impact as the 500 at the refinery.

The refinery needs them. Fords do not

refinery dont employ 500. 99% off the work force in the refinery are contrators. and has with fords according to the echo are the same contractors so yes fords do need them just has much. with out them fords cant work.

My friend at penske has lost over £150 a month and all they want is a fair wage for a fair job done.

They all have families rent/mortgages and are struggling to live earning under a thousand pound a month who realistically can live with this wage, there for you should support these guys not slate them!!

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

do you wear a dust bin over your head?
its the same context as what brainless drivel you just submitted

Georgem wrote:

fudez wrote: The only reason you are leaving these coments is because you dont have a job,the person who has taken over your job was better than you now get down the job center and find a job!!!

At whom is that aimed? Clarity, please!

well clearly it is aimed at you, you moronic baffoon, its easy to mouth off behind a screen, you dont and never will work there because they only want workers not layabouts with nothing better to do than give useless drivel!!

No, Southy, I have to disagree with you there. What form does this "right to employment" take? There are billions of people, worldwide, who do not have any form of employment. Who do we approach about their "rights to employment", exactly? The world does not solely consist of the British working classes, you know. Bleating about "everyone has the right to employment" is incredibly naive.

fudez wrote:

Georgem wrote:

fudez wrote: The only reason you are leaving these coments is because you dont have a job,the person who has taken over your job was better than you now get down the job center and find a job!!!

At whom is that aimed? Clarity, please!

well clearly it is aimed at you, you moronic baffoon, its easy to mouth off behind a screen, you dont and never will work there because they only want workers not layabouts with nothing better to do than give useless drivel!!

Blah blah blah. Yeh, insulting me will make a difference. Calling a random stranger names will, by magic, save your job. I do work, I can pretty much guarantee I earn more than you do, and have much greater job security than you do, and if you think I'm jobless simply because I don't agree with you, I suspect that that is the root of your problem: magickal thinking, not logical thinking.

Worst. Logic. Ever. "You must be unemployed because I disagree with what you said".

fudez wrote:

Iw61 wrote:
LETS GET ONE THING CORRECT. THE ECHO ARTICLE IS WRONG. THESE ARE FULL TIME EMPLOYEES WORKING FOR A CONTRACTOR. SOME OF THE STAFF HAVE WORKED THERE FOR MOST OF THEIR LIVES. Glad to see the lazy keyboard warriors out in force this morning. These guys are standing up for themselves and not chickening out at the first whiff of gunshot like you do.You are happy to see rich bankers get bail outs but hard working car workers get redubdancy notices and sh*t pay. These workers deserve to be failrly recompenced for working the extra shift. Good luck to these workers.

Well said, I couldnt have put it better myself, just wish these layabouts actually knew the facts before tapping away on the keboard.

Why is everyone who isn't you, a layabout? I'm not on strike. I'm at work. Earning a wage. Doing what I'm paid for, not whining about it. And if you're about to say "you're not working, you're commenting on the website" I have this for you:

http://xkcd.com/303/


You can translate that into a whine about "that's not real work! wah!" if you like, but the fact is, it is, and I'm paid to do it, and I'm employed, and productive, and my taxes will be paying your benefits when you're unemployed. You're welcome

Southy, I'm afraid that there is no such thing as a 'right to employment'.

As an agency worker I enjoy earning far more than direct employees. I don't get involved in the purile office politics & if the management annoy me I just leave. These Penske people are acting as if they are labourers & can't get a job anywhere else!

fudez wrote:

Georgem wrote:

The only thing they have left there workers to do is take industrial action against the company, this has been forced upon there employees due to lack of coperation to agree a fair offer

This smacks of the same logic as the psycho who beats his wife up and says "now look what you've made me do!" when she burns his dinner. You do have another option: seek alternative employment.

do you wear a dust bin over your head?
its the same context as what brainless drivel you just submitted

Ok, please explain to me the exact steps in which you were left with no alternative but to take industrial action? Go on. Amaze me, genius

Big Boy wrote:
Southy, I'm afraid that there is no such thing as a 'right to employment'.

As an agency worker I enjoy earning far more than direct employees. I don't get involved in the purile office politics & if the management annoy me I just leave. These Penske people are acting as if they are labourers & can't get a job anywhere else!

Excellent post! This "right to employment" vision is ridiculous. It's usually perpetrated by the same people who despise commerce of any sort, whilst failing to see that it is commerce which provides employment. It's like they think "jobs" will magically be granted by The Job Pixies or something. Southy hates capitalism, but also demands full labour for all. He hasn't yet reconciled that the two go hand-in-hand

it dont matter where you are in the world, every one has the right of work. think about your self what if you could not get any work. and with this captilist system that day is coming, and what about your kids and your grand kids. its a capitlist way off thinking kept unemployment high to make those at the top richer and stuff every one else. do you think the man at the top of the company that you work for really cares about you, if could he have you working for peanuts, and when the day comes that he can replace you to in that nice cosy office with a machine he will. and he will be more happier, more money for him, dont think that will never happen it will, and who will fight for your job, no one because every office in the world will be replace by a machine, get your head screw on right georgem i mean that in a nice way to.

Georgem wrote:

Big Boy wrote:
Southy, I'm afraid that there is no such thing as a 'right to employment'.

As an agency worker I enjoy earning far more than direct employees. I don't get involved in the purile office politics & if the management annoy me I just leave. These Penske people are acting as if they are labourers & can't get a job anywhere else!

Excellent post! This "right to employment" vision is ridiculous. It's usually perpetrated by the same people who despise commerce of any sort, whilst failing to see that it is commerce which provides employment. It's like they think "jobs" will magically be granted by The Job Pixies or something. Southy hates capitalism, but also demands full labour for all. He hasn't yet reconciled that the two go hand-in-hand

not bad post, but he forgetting working for an agency means he working if and when needed, and so or later he will be replace to

Here's a controversial view for you, Southy. One that I can already predict several horrified responses to, and the attendant hatred I'll attract as a result. But if you can clear your mind and think objectively, rather than look for things to be offended by, you'll see the logic:

Nobody has any rights whatsoever. None at all.

The typical response to that is "Oh, so you won't mind if I come round and kill you since you don't have the right not to be killed and have your big telly nicked and blah blah blah! ROFLOMGZMESOCLEVERHA
HAHAHA!". Problem is, ultimately, a "right" has to be enforced and granted by some other party. On a smaller scale, in the UK, we have the "right" to health care, for better or worse. But only because, as a society, we club together and come up with what seems like a good arrangement (NI) to allow that to happen. Of course, it hasn't quite worked out as hoped, but it's still pretty good, globally speaking. But is it really a "right"? If it is, then why is the rest of humanity not afforded it? To whom can they complain about this? Nobody, that's who. We're in charge of our own destiny.

You have the right not to be murdered in your bed, apparently. How? Who's enforcing that? We are, ourselves. It's not magically granted by nature, we've consciously decided that murdering each other while we sleep is detrimental to our species. It isn't a "right". We're not, from birth, automatically entitled to it. We subscribe to a social contract that says, in effect, "I pretty much promise not to kill you in your sleep, if you afford me the same promise". A murderer isn't denying someone their rights, he's breaking a social contract. Claiming these things as "rights" is effectively absolving oneself of any personal responsibility of these matters. Think about it. Same goes for the "right" to employment. Those of us who have jobs in the private sector, ultimately, you have your job, not because of some abstract right, but because someone else, at some point, was enterprising enough to take a risk and a gamble, and invest their own capital, to create that job for you. For the public sector, similar processes exist, only more long-winded and historical. None of us have the "right" to employment, or food, or water, or security, anything else. If you disagree, try thinking who the ultimate power is that you'll complain to about your "rights" being violated, in the end. Whatever "rights" you feel are being violated, think them through to the end, exhaust all avenues of complaint, and eventually, you'll be left with some "right" that exists without anyone there to enforce it. And what use will that be?

Cue inevitable backlash

get your head screw on right georgem i mean that in a nice way

Don't worry, Southy, I know you're not a malicious person! But my head is screwed on. I don't expect anything from anyone else, I don't feel entitled to a thing, I don't feel the world owes me anything. And I feel all the more secure knowing that, thanks.

Oh, sure, I've come to depend on employers paying my wages to allow me to live, but should the whole shebang ever collapse, I won't waste too much time whining and worrying about my "rights", I'll be out catching something to eat thankyouverymuch!

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

Big Boy wrote:
Southy, I'm afraid that there is no such thing as a 'right to employment'.

As an agency worker I enjoy earning far more than direct employees. I don't get involved in the purile office politics & if the management annoy me I just leave. These Penske people are acting as if they are labourers & can't get a job anywhere else!

Excellent post! This "right to employment" vision is ridiculous. It's usually perpetrated by the same people who despise commerce of any sort, whilst failing to see that it is commerce which provides employment. It's like they think "jobs" will magically be granted by The Job Pixies or something. Southy hates capitalism, but also demands full labour for all. He hasn't yet reconciled that the two go hand-in-hand

not bad post, but he forgetting working for an agency means he working if and when needed, and so or later he will be replace to

Yeh. And he knows it. Me, I'm currently a permnanent employee. It makes sense to me, in the current climate. When the economy stabilises a bit, I'll be off, self-employed, contract working. Fully aware that it could all be pulled away from under me at any moment. Nothing ventured, nothing gained!

georgem look at what you said the right when a society clubs together and this is what is happening at fords they are going to enforce it has a society and its not just here in the uk where this is happening its happening world wide, people are getting feed up with a multi fail system, captalistum dont work it keeps letting people down, your coming to that stage where the choice will have to be made and you will have 2 ways to go, a nice quiet social change over or a bloody revolution, every one knows people will only go so far and if that change is not made then they will enforce it, and people defending and supporting the captilist system will be the first to go. now i know whitch one i would like to see, the nice quiet one.
its got to happen sooner or later, you cant give the masses nothing and not expect a kick back from it. and cant rely on the arm forces to enforce a captilist order they will turn on there officers, some thing like what happen in russia in 1918, stop thinking short term and thinking i all jack, start thinking long term and lets get there has quickly has possable and quietly has possable, because the world have nots has got to that stage that they have nothing to lose.

Georgem wrote:

get your head screw on right georgem i mean that in a nice way

Don't worry, Southy, I know you're not a malicious person! But my head is screwed on. I don't expect anything from anyone else, I don't feel entitled to a thing, I don't feel the world owes me anything. And I feel all the more secure knowing that, thanks.

Oh, sure, I've come to depend on employers paying my wages to allow me to live, but should the whole shebang ever collapse, I won't waste too much time whining and worrying about my "rights", I'll be out catching something to eat thankyouverymuch!

that last part georgem, you be more likey to be trying to catch some thing, if its not there then theres nothing to catch.
remember what i said in a past post. its not this reccession to worry about, its the next one because the next one is not going to be a reccession its going to be a full blown depression worse than the one in the 20's

southy wrote:
georgem look at what you said the right when a society clubs together and this is what is happening at fords they are going to enforce it has a society and its not just here in the uk where this is happening its happening world wide, people are getting feed up with a multi fail system, captalistum dont work it keeps letting people down, your coming to that stage where the choice will have to be made and you will have 2 ways to go, a nice quiet social change over or a bloody revolution, every one knows people will only go so far and if that change is not made then they will enforce it, and people defending and supporting the captilist system will be the first to go. now i know whitch one i would like to see, the nice quiet one.
its got to happen sooner or later, you cant give the masses nothing and not expect a kick back from it. and cant rely on the arm forces to enforce a captilist order they will turn on there officers, some thing like what happen in russia in 1918, stop thinking short term and thinking i all jack, start thinking long term and lets get there has quickly has possable and quietly has possable, because the world have nots has got to that stage that they have nothing to lose.

Please point me toward an economic model that has proven to work on a large scale

You be more likey to be trying to catch some thing, if its not there then theres nothing to catch.

Then so be it. My point is, I won't be bleating about any rights violations

The car industry is facing a crisis due to the fall in demand but why should workers have to pay for a crisis they are not responsible for. The treatment handed out by Penske/Ford bosses is a threat hanging over all workers. In the face of this we should stand by the motto, "An injury to one is an injury to all." Southampton workers, trade unionists and socialists must rally support to Penske workers. Solidarity forever, Victory to Penske workers. Decent Pay for All.

Georgem wrote:
Here's a controversial view for you, Southy. One that I can already predict several horrified responses to, and the attendant hatred I'll attract as a result. But if you can clear your mind and think objectively, rather than look for things to be offended by, you'll see the logic:

Nobody has any rights whatsoever. None at all.

The typical response to that is "Oh, so you won't mind if I come round and kill you since you don't have the right not to be killed and have your big telly nicked and blah blah blah! ROFLOMGZMESOCLEVERHA

HAHAHA!". Problem is, ultimately, a "right" has to be enforced and granted by some other party. On a smaller scale, in the UK, we have the "right" to health care, for better or worse. But only because, as a society, we club together and come up with what seems like a good arrangement (NI) to allow that to happen. Of course, it hasn't quite worked out as hoped, but it's still pretty good, globally speaking. But is it really a "right"? If it is, then why is the rest of humanity not afforded it? To whom can they complain about this? Nobody, that's who. We're in charge of our own destiny.

You have the right not to be murdered in your bed, apparently. How? Who's enforcing that? We are, ourselves. It's not magically granted by nature, we've consciously decided that murdering each other while we sleep is detrimental to our species. It isn't a "right". We're not, from birth, automatically entitled to it. We subscribe to a social contract that says, in effect, "I pretty much promise not to kill you in your sleep, if you afford me the same promise". A murderer isn't denying someone their rights, he's breaking a social contract. Claiming these things as "rights" is effectively absolving oneself of any personal responsibility of these matters. Think about it. Same goes for the "right" to employment. Those of us who have jobs in the private sector, ultimately, you have your job, not because of some abstract right, but because someone else, at some point, was enterprising enough to take a risk and a gamble, and invest their own capital, to create that job for you. For the public sector, similar processes exist, only more long-winded and historical. None of us have the "right" to employment, or food, or water, or security, anything else. If you disagree, try thinking who the ultimate power is that you'll complain to about your "rights" being violated, in the end. Whatever "rights" you feel are being violated, think them through to the end, exhaust all avenues of complaint, and eventually, you'll be left with some "right" that exists without anyone there to enforce it. And what use will that be?

Cue inevitable backlash

I think you don not seem to understand that every one has a right, weather human rights or the right to remain silent it is still a right so your logic gives me proof that either you are under some kind of illusion you live on another planet to the rest of us either way I would think you may need to be sectioned as you might be a danger to society, no rights indeed what an insult.

why should workers have to pay for a crisis they are not responsible for.

Because that's how commerce works. When there's a demand for a product, it sells, and people are paid to build it. When demand falls, production drops, ergo, those carrying out the production are surplus. Simple economics, and crying "but it's not fair" won't change that. Ford doesn't employ them out of some charity. The money comes (came) from sales. Now that those sales are no longer there, the money isn't, either. I don't see how people miss this fundamental truth. It's not exclusive to capitalism, either. No economic model can simply magic a living for everyone out of nowhere.

socailistum has worked and work very well, utopia will work to. utopia is the one system that the whole world will end up at, maybe in a few hundred years time.
the world will get to that stage where machines will do most off the work, and what work is left will be shared out, every one will work the same amount and get the same, then it left up to each person to get what they want in life. but we will need to go though the stages to get there, and socialist is just one part of that journey off getting there, captilistum was the first part, its now out dated and any one tiring to hang on to it is just greedy, the sort off people who can see what the world is heading into, and dont want change or are to scared of making that change. in the end there will be no choice it will happen, so we would be better to help it and stay in controll off it and guild it along in a smooth way than in a turmoil way, nationalize and co-op industrys are just part off it.
when we had a nationalized industry it was working for us, yes i know it had it minor problems but what should off happen was we should of improved it and made it even better. but some one came along and stared to brain wash people in thinking greed was good when its not its bad, and i dont think i need to say her name.

I think you don not seem to understand that every one has a right, weather human rights or the right to remain silent it is still a right so your logic gives me proof that either you are under some kind of illusion you live on another planet to the rest of us either way I would think you may need to be sectioned as you might be a danger to society, no rights indeed what an insult.

As predicted. Yawn. Re-read what I posted. Come back and tell me who this magical ghost protecting all your rights is.

You don't have the "right" to remain silent. There simply does not exist a foolproof way to stop you being silent. Ok, let's assume a right to employment. You think you are granted this right by your current employer, say, Ford. Now, tomorrow, if Ford simply disappears, what good is that "right"? Will your landlord or mortgage company accept "right to employment" as payment? Will the supermarket exchange "employment rights" for food? Can you write cheques to utilities, drawn against a bank of rights? No, you can't. So then what? You have a "right" to be employed, but no employer to grant it. So it's a worthless right. Like the People's Front of Judea fighting for Stan (sorry, Loretta) and his right to have babies, even though he hasn't got anywhere for the foetus to gestate; it's meaningless when reality does not agree to back up those rights. Who will you ultimately file a grievance with, when your apparent "right" to employment is not fulfilled?

Blame me and moan all you want, but at the end of the day, your rights are an illusion.

"Utopia will work, too". Yeh, so would Nirvana, or Eden. Um. Dismissed, I think. Describing a fantasy endpoint doesn't constitute an economic policy

1) Utopia
2) ????
3) Profit!

Everybody seems to be missing out the bit where - and this is vital, people - nothing is going to just happen out of some cosmic sense of fairness. The world isn't going to give you a job, just because you feel you have the right to it!

when we had a nationalized industry it was working for us, yes i know it had it minor problems but what should off happen was we should of improved it and made it even better

I somewhat agree with this, Southy. Privatisation hasn't got a brilliant track record, has it? I say, there isn't an absolute rule about it. Sometimes it works - British Telecom leaps to mind, for instance - and other times it doesn't - the trains leaps similarly high, and that's acknowledged by the recent re-nationalising of at least one route, with more to come. There's no use saying "Privatise everything!" nor "Nationalise everything!" because nothing's ever that simple, sadly

I challenge our colleauge, fudez, to list me three absolute rights he thinks he, as a human being, has. And then to tell me what makes him think he has those rights. Not "why I think I should deserve those rights" but why you actually have them. See how many you can come up with, that do not simply exist because it's mutually convenient for human beings to say they exist.

ome one came along and stared to brain wash people in thinking greed was good when its not its bad,

As with most things, greed in moderation is good. It breeds competition, which is healthy. Competition is a natural phenomenon. The entire idea of life on Earth is based on competition, without it, we'd never have existed, there'd just be some primordial soup. But like most things, taken to excess, greed is destructive. You need to stop thinking in absolutes like this, Southy, they get in the way.

Georgem wrote:
I challenge our colleauge, fudez, to list me three absolute rights he thinks he, as a human being, has. And then to tell me what makes him think he has those rights. Not "why I think I should deserve those rights" but why you actually have them. See how many you can come up with, that do not simply exist because it's mutually convenient for human beings to say they exist.

Well, I would say we all have the right to an opinion we all have the right to disagree and we defiantly have the right to voice our opinion.
there are three basic rights and I could go on forever but as you seem to have such a vast open mind i wont bother wasting my time!!

fudez wrote:

Georgem wrote:
I challenge our colleauge, fudez, to list me three absolute rights he thinks he, as a human being, has. And then to tell me what makes him think he has those rights. Not "why I think I should deserve those rights" but why you actually have them. See how many you can come up with, that do not simply exist because it's mutually convenient for human beings to say they exist.

Well, I would say we all have the right to an opinion we all have the right to disagree and we defiantly have the right to voice our opinion.
there are three basic rights and I could go on forever but as you seem to have such a vast open mind i wont bother wasting my time!!

Please, you're mis-understanding my point here. What you've described there are three basic functionings of humans, that happen independently of anybody else. You don't have the "right" to an opinion, you simply cannot be prevented from having one. In order to exercise your right to have an opinion, all you have to do is have that opinion. There's ultimately no way of anyone stopping that from happening. It's like claiming to have the "right" to have a nose. You don't have a "right", you simply have a nose.

But compare that with your supposed "right" to employment. How do you exercise that "right"? Someone else has to grant it for you, don't they? So what if nobody does? What use is that "right" then? That's what I'm saying. It's all well and good demanding and shouting about the "right" to employment, but since the very existence of that "right" is dependent upon another party, it can be denied, ergo, it isn't a right. It's a privilege, or a favour, or a mutually-beneficial arrangement. Nobody is obliged to grant you it

Incidentally, the right to voice your opinion is an interesting one, because most constitutions guarantee it, in one form or another, but do not guarantee you an audience for that opinion. Again, it's inherently a "right" simply by dint of being unpreventable. But your right to say something doesn't help much if nobody listens, eh

Georgem wrote:

why should workers have to pay for a crisis they are not responsible for.

Because that's how commerce works. When there's a demand for a product, it sells, and people are paid to build it. When demand falls, production drops, ergo, those carrying out the production are surplus. Simple economics, and crying "but it's not fair" won't change that. Ford doesn't employ them out of some charity. The money comes (came) from sales. Now that those sales are no longer there, the money isn't, either. I don't see how people miss this fundamental truth. It's not exclusive to capitalism, either. No economic model can simply magic a living for everyone out of nowhere.

george have you ever heard of the venus project, thats basicly how the world will end up like.

and the type of commerce your on about will only fail us time after time again, it a captilist commerce and not socialist commerce, whitch is much smoother running. we are all only small goggs in a much bigger wheel, and the problem with captiist system is it has to many teeth missing in its goggs, and socialist system has much fewer teeth missing giving a much smoother ride, the time is ripe for change now, we must for get the captilist system and move forward onto the next system socialist, even socialist system one day will come to an end and will move onto the next stage toward a utopia world, the world population is growing and jobs are getting less, if we dont change and we stay has a captilist system then only one thing will happen, the world will go into self destruct then every one will lose

george have you ever heard of the venus project, thats basicly how the world will end up like.

Pure projection

the type of commerce your on about will only fail us time after time again, it a captilist commerce and not socialist commerce, whitch is much smoother running

Circular reasoning. "My way is better, because it's the better way"

Socialism hasn't worked so far. Show me where it has. Until we can do something about the corrupting nature of power, it's doomed. You're right, in theory - see the recent case of the mega-colony of ants that have taken over a large amount of the world - but then, ants aren't human, and aren't subject to human nature. So the problem seems to be sentience, self-awareness, independent thought. How comfortable are you with removing that from people?

Georgem wrote:

ome one came along and stared to brain wash people in thinking greed was good when its not its bad,

As with most things, greed in moderation is good. It breeds competition, which is healthy. Competition is a natural phenomenon. The entire idea of life on Earth is based on competition, without it, we'd never have existed, there'd just be some primordial soup. But like most things, taken to excess, greed is destructive. You need to stop thinking in absolutes like this, Southy, they get in the way.

no georgem evolution would still have happen even with out competition, advancement will happen you cant stop it, and advancement will work much faster with out competition.

southy wrote:

Georgem wrote:

ome one came along and stared to brain wash people in thinking greed was good when its not its bad,

As with most things, greed in moderation is good. It breeds competition, which is healthy. Competition is a natural phenomenon. The entire idea of life on Earth is based on competition, without it, we'd never have existed, there'd just be some primordial soup. But like most things, taken to excess, greed is destructive. You need to stop thinking in absolutes like this, Southy, they get in the way.

no georgem evolution would still have happen even with out competition, advancement will happen you cant stop it, and advancement will work much faster with out competition.

No it wouldn't. Pretty much by definition. Compare: "survival of the fittest"

Ok, this is getting rather bizarre. Southy now claims to have an alternative, PC, socialism-based theory of evolution. Let's see the papers, then, mate, let's read all about how Darwin got it wrong

Come on, Southy, I'm dying to read all about how evolution without any competitive element works. Why are there any similarities whatsoever now between any two living organisms? Why have some traits survived and others not, if not through competition?

quote""Socialism hasn't worked so far. Show me where it has. Until we can do something about the corrupting nature of power, it's doomed. You're right, in theory - see the recent case of the mega-colony of ants that have taken over a large amount of the world - but then, ants aren't human, and aren't subject to human nature. So the problem seems to be sentience, self-awareness, independent thought. How comfortable are you with removing that from people?"" unquote
socialism is an infant and is in its very early days, and has all ready proved to be a better system, than the old out dated captilist system, only got to look back to 1979, we was in a semi state off socialism. with only a small part being nationalized, but that small part keep unemployment down to just below the 1 million mark, and we was coming out of that recession, and look what happen when it was turned back into a captilist system unemployment sky rocketed, we got push back into the recession and went deeper into it, inflation when though the roof, crime went out off controll, corruption became like a norm, all for what a few people greed who fooled a lot off people.

I'm more interested in this new groundbreaking theory of non-competitive evolution, to be honest

Georgem wrote:
Come on, Southy, I'm dying to read all about how evolution without any competitive element works. Why are there any similarities whatsoever now between any two living organisms? Why have some traits survived and others not, if not through competition?

the only reason why we are here today is because there was no competition at the beging, at the start it was a blend a mixture trials and errors, this bit darwin did not know about, and the bit where darwin talk about competition he was more on about the adaptation to suit the needs to the suroundings, not competition where one will eat or kill another just to survive, the book that he wrote base on the life that was on those islands had no preditors and no competition.
and this is what humans have got to do adapt move forward to the next stage, and the next stage for us is socialism, we cant afford to be stuck on capitalism it will destroy us in the end if we stay stuck, nature will do the same

Why threaten to go on strike? Because it tend to work.
You have only got to look at the Lindsey oil refinery workers to see that or the swansea visteon workers who have just got their sacked convenor reinstated after threatening strike action.
If it wasn't for Dagenham Ford workers walking out and threatening a national strike, Ford workers at Southampton wouldn't have got their recent 5% pay rise.
You have nothing to lose except a job that pays little more than the minimum wage and you can get that anywhere - but more particualry you can get more than twice that at Rolls Royce, Chichester who are looking to recruit experienced logistics personnel with auto manufacturing experience and are willing to pay a premium for it.
So if Penski are saying to you 'if you dont't like our pay then **** off' do it!

Georgem wrote:
I'm more interested in this new groundbreaking theory of non-competitive evolution, to be honest

its not ground breaking, the the back ground off venus project came about back in the early 60's by a bunch off new zeal landers and ozzys. the name venus project is the new part and the people who name it. what they done was to look at this idea from the 60's and brought it up to date, its politics is base on tect advancement and is one kind off utopian, the basic idea is IE:- world pop is 1000 people but there is only enough work for every one to work 10 hours in ther whole life time, then every one do there 10 hours how they wish and when and where. factorys that make stuff would only make enough off one item that the world needs with a small amount off extras once it got to that limit it could swap over and make some thing else. every thing that you need in life is supplyed free with plenty off different choices to match one own taste, this would give you lots off leisure time for you to do has you chose, like reading inventing thing or improving things, if you had an idea you could go to see some one tell them what you need, and you be issued the stuff free, things like this could go towards your work time, there be all sorts off thing you could do with your spare time. the whole world having one set off rules and there be no religion, thats just a rough out line.

Militant Ford Worker wrote:
Why threaten to go on strike? Because it tend to work.
You have only got to look at the Lindsey oil refinery workers to see that or the swansea visteon workers who have just got their sacked convenor reinstated after threatening strike action.
If it wasn't for Dagenham Ford workers walking out and threatening a national strike, Ford workers at Southampton wouldn't have got their recent 5% pay rise.
You have nothing to lose except a job that pays little more than the minimum wage and you can get that anywhere - but more particualry you can get more than twice that at Rolls Royce, Chichester who are looking to recruit experienced logistics personnel with auto manufacturing experience and are willing to pay a premium for it.
So if Penski are saying to you 'if you dont't like our pay then **** off' do it!

that is very true

This is funny. I have been having the same argument about everyone having the 'right' to work with someone on facebook. I would also argue with the right to express and opinion. You don't always have that opinion - for example the law against inciting religious hatred. Rightly too. If you look at the UN Declaration of Human Rights - everyone has these rights so far as they do not impact upon the rights of others.

Gave up reading southy's posts after the first few because of the lack of sense and grammar. I did think the thing about Utopia was interesting though. Do you mean Thomas Moore's Utopia - what you are describing sounds like Star Trek. When are we getting warp drive. Laughing about metallic outfits 70s style right now.

Georgem wrote:

fudez wrote:

Georgem wrote:
I challenge our colleauge, fudez, to list me three absolute rights he thinks he, as a human being, has. And then to tell me what makes him think he has those rights. Not "why I think I should deserve those rights" but why you actually have them. See how many you can come up with, that do not simply exist because it's mutually convenient for human beings to say they exist.

Well, I would say we all have the right to an opinion we all have the right to disagree and we defiantly have the right to voice our opinion.
there are three basic rights and I could go on forever but as you seem to have such a vast open mind i wont bother wasting my time!!

Please, you're mis-understanding my point here. What you've described there are three basic functionings of humans, that happen independently of anybody else. You don't have the "right" to an opinion, you simply cannot be prevented from having one. In order to exercise your right to have an opinion, all you have to do is have that opinion. There's ultimately no way of anyone stopping that from happening. It's like claiming to have the "right" to have a nose. You don't have a "right", you simply have a nose.

But compare that with your supposed "right" to employment. How do you exercise that "right"? Someone else has to grant it for you, don't they? So what if nobody does? What use is that "right" then? That's what I'm saying. It's all well and good demanding and shouting about the "right" to employment, but since the very existence of that "right" is dependent upon another party, it can be denied, ergo, it isn't a right. It's a privilege, or a favour, or a mutually-beneficial arrangement. Nobody is obliged to grant you it

were in the blue hell did I say anything about the right to employment?

Have you actually read anything that anyone has written?

We are discussing money not rights, if you could actually read you'd be able to give an intelligent answer.

southy wrote:

Militant Ford Worker wrote:
Why threaten to go on strike? Because it tend to work.
You have only got to look at the Lindsey oil refinery workers to see that or the swansea visteon workers who have just got their sacked convenor reinstated after threatening strike action.
If it wasn't for Dagenham Ford workers walking out and threatening a national strike, Ford workers at Southampton wouldn't have got their recent 5% pay rise.
You have nothing to lose except a job that pays little more than the minimum wage and you can get that anywhere - but more particualry you can get more than twice that at Rolls Royce, Chichester who are looking to recruit experienced logistics personnel with auto manufacturing experience and are willing to pay a premium for it.
So if Penski are saying to you 'if you dont't like our pay then **** off' do it!

that is very true

That was not organized and the employers were not informed making it a breach of contract, Penske have been informed of any actions taken by the employees.

They are therefore covered so please actually get your facts right!

Vconfused wrote:
This is funny. I have been having the same argument about everyone having the 'right' to work with someone on facebook. I would also argue with the right to express and opinion. You don't always have that opinion - for example the law against inciting religious hatred. Rightly too. If you look at the UN Declaration of Human Rights - everyone has these rights so far as they do not impact upon the rights of others.

Gave up reading southy's posts after the first few because of the lack of sense and grammar. I did think the thing about Utopia was interesting though. Do you mean Thomas Moore's Utopia - what you are describing sounds like Star Trek. When are we getting warp drive. Laughing about metallic outfits 70s style right now.

thomas moore utopia is just another kind, but they all head the same way, with the same basic ideas, the only thing is it needs to be kept up to date, and thats what the venus project is, an up to date version.
has for the contractors work force i wish all the best off luck and hope they get what they want, they have nothing to lose, but fords and Penske Logistics have a lot to lose.

You can always work for nothing...British Airways Boss suggests just that...he said he will not pay himself for one month on a salary of over £700k and expects staff to do the same...with average annual pay at about £11k...Question...d
o you have the right to expect payment for work done...are we now a Nation of slaves...and still overpaid...and why do issues such as keeping a roof over your head or putting food on the table attract so many idiots...