Thatcher, history will show...

I don't think that there is anyone who works, believes that they would prefer strike action. Strike action is and should be used as a last resort.
if we did not have strike action, four year old boys would still be working down the pit (well they would if there was any open), and climbing up chimneys.
Today's terms and working conditions have been fought for generations by my parents and there parents. It may seem a bit nostalgic saying that but if they had not chipped away over the years improving said conditions through mediation by unions and sometimes strike action. Then issues like Zero hour contracts and the like would be more common place.
I am sure that Junior doctors would prefer not to strike, but through talking to there employers ( the government ) they feel they are getting no where.
There are many problems that Joe public Feels is wrong in the NHS. junior Doctors terms and conditions is not one of them. So why change? The government says it will improve services, the Drs says it won't. The Drs say it is about saving money and changing working hours, the government say it is not. After all the consultation or lack of, the Junior doctors feel they have no other option but to strike.
Well said.
 
There are many rights that workers now enjoy that have been gained through strike action. Yes some people just do it to be deliberately awkward or are on a power trip, but to say that people should never strike is ignoring, and probably a bit insulting, to courageous workers in the past that have fought for rights many now have.

I totally agree. If it was not for the Dagenham ladies, for example. Women would still have no where near equal pay.

plus going further back in history the London matchgirls at Bryant and May were working in appalling conditions with no regard for their health working with toxic chemicals. They had no option but to strike as the company bosses would not do anything.
 
Why should I and others have to suffer when others are having issues at work. I don't go inflicting any inconvenience on others if things are going pear shaped at my place of work
 
Why should I and others have to suffer when others are having issues at work. I don't go inflicting any inconvenience on others if things are going pear shaped at my place of work

Fair point. How dare people strike to say get equal pay or against intolerable working conditions if you personally get a bit inconvenienced. I agree they should just suck it up and be grateful they have a job. I don't know what they were thinking the yogurt eating yurt wearing fascist communists....
 
Last edited:
Fair point. How dare people strike to say get equal pay or against intolerable working conditions if you personally get a bit inconvenienced. I agree they should just suck it up and be grateful they have a job. I don't know what they were thinking the yogurt eating yurt wearing fascist communists....
Or get another job
 
Or get another job

I know, I know, they are just being utterly selfish and thinking of themselves by having some principals and standing up against exploitation in the workplace. Instead of just sucking it up or getting another job, as it is well known that the types of people generally exploited in the workplace can easily move between jobs. OK, that may mean that others will suffer and be exploited in the future as well if nothing is done about it. But think of the big picture. You are being slightly inconvenienced!. Some people hey, it's all me me me....
 
Or get another job

Yeah, right!

Junior Doctors are in an ideal position to do that......Not!

As are Teachers, Firemen, Police, Nurses and anyone else in such 'specialist' occupations (which are normally within public service)! Even Train/Underground Drivers for that matter! Actually, come to think of it, that's the reason there's a shortage of Nurses and Teachers - the stress of the jobs is not warranted by the compensation! And there's certainly an argument that the military could be similarly affected too - though happens to be aligned with the aims of the employer!

@Hacker..

It's principles btw. Though in the case of teachers, maybe both! :whistle:
 
Last edited:
Yeah, right!

Junior Doctors are in an ideal position to do that......Not!

As are Teachers, Firemen, Police, Nurses and anyone else in such 'specialist' occupations (which are normally within public service)! Even Train/Underground Drivers for that matter! Actually, come to think of it, that's the reason there's a shortage of Nurses and Teachers - the stress of the jobs is not warranted by the compensation! And there's certainly an argument that the military could be similarly affected too - though happens to be aligned with the aims of the employer!

@Hacker..

It's principles btw. Though in the case of teachers, maybe both!
:whistle:

spelling.jpg
;)
 
Yeah, right!

Junior Doctors are in an ideal position to do that......Not!

As are Teachers, Firemen, Police, Nurses and anyone else in such 'specialist' occupations (which are normally within public service)! Even Train/Underground Drivers for that matter! Actually, come to think of it, that's the reason there's a shortage of Nurses and Teachers - the stress of the jobs is not warranted by the compensation! And there's certainly an argument that the military could be similarly affected too - though happens to be aligned with the aims of the employer!

@Hacker..

It's principles btw. Though in the case of teachers, maybe both! :whistle:

Some of the professions you mention can't go on strike, therefore, there options are stick with it or get another job
 
Some of the professions you mention can't go on strike, therefore, there options are stick with it or get another job
Are you for real? Are you honestly saying workers should do exactly what they are told or leave? No rights what so ever?
 
Are you for real? Are you honestly saying workers should do exactly what they are told or leave? No rights what so ever?

Of course thy should have rights and a contract of employment, you've got people banging on that employers should have the option to strike which is a pain in the backside for innocent parties all I'm saying is that some professions don't have the option to go on strike so they either go down the employment law route, get on with it or leave
 
Of course thy should have rights and a contract of employment, you've got people banging on that employers should have the option to strike which is a pain in the backside for innocent parties all I'm saying is that some professions don't have the option to go on strike so they either go down the employment law route, get on with it or leave

So your argument is that as a few professions do not have the right to strike and also that you get a little inconvenienced then no one should ever strike?
 
Ha! :rofl:

Wouldn't normally correct spelling (these days), but that one was too contextual to resist!

Oh and Ross61's reference to Bryant and May and Strikes appealed to my sense of humour too! :whistle:

I live to amuse.:D

It was accidental, but I did realise just after writing it. I thought no one will pick up on it...... Should have known better!
 
Of course thy should have rights and a contract of employment, you've got people banging on that employers should have the option to strike which is a pain in the backside for innocent parties all I'm saying is that some professions don't have the option to go on strike so they either go down the employment law route, get on with it or leave

Them particular professions normally enjoy good wages or pensions, so less reason for them all to strike.

Do you think sickness provision, a maximum working week, overtime, holiday pay, equal pay would have been given freely if people hadnt have fought for them for over 100 years.

Your either on the wind up, or particularly thick.
 
Top