Vow by unions to strike until autumn over pay

This Is Wiltshire: UNISON members protesting UNISON members protesting

UNIONS representing 1.3 million local government workers – GMB, UNISON and Unite – have agreed to escalate their pay dispute with a campaign running into the autumn.

The unions agreed their members will run a co-ordinated strike by their local government and school members in England, Wales and Northern Ireland on Tuesday, October 14.

The strike will be just a few days before the TUC-organised national demonstration on October 18 calling for ‘decent’ pay.

Local government workers’ pay has been frozen for three years. They have now been offered one per cent. They say their pay has reduced in value by 20 per cent since 2010 and this resulted in a one day strike on July 10.

No further talks have taken place since that date, despite the unions offering to go to the Government’s arbitration and conciliation service.

Brian Strutton, GMB National Secretary for Public Services, said: “Our members in GMB, UNISON and Unite expect us to maximise our joint effectiveness and that’s why we are announcing the next strike together.

“Our members deserve a fair pay deal... council leaders should reconsider.”

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:46am Fri 1 Aug 14

StillPav says...

I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises.

I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.
I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that. StillPav
  • Score: -3

10:15am Fri 1 Aug 14

South Stand says...

StillPav wrote:
I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises.

I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.
Listen to the news.
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.[/p][/quote]Listen to the news. South Stand
  • Score: 3

10:22am Fri 1 Aug 14

trolley dolley says...

The savings the council should make with not paying strikers should be substantial.

Is it possible to get them to strike for a little longer, we will not notice any reduction of services
The savings the council should make with not paying strikers should be substantial. Is it possible to get them to strike for a little longer, we will not notice any reduction of services trolley dolley
  • Score: 8

10:25am Fri 1 Aug 14

house on the hill says...

StillPav wrote:
I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises.

I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.
I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot.

They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security.

But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work.
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.[/p][/quote]I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot. They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security. But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work. house on the hill
  • Score: 3

12:12pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Sandor Clegane says...

Strike, don't strike - nobody notices.

It'll be interesting to learn how much the government has saved on public sector wages this year thanks to the strikes.
Strike, don't strike - nobody notices. It'll be interesting to learn how much the government has saved on public sector wages this year thanks to the strikes. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 7

12:15pm Fri 1 Aug 14

South Stand says...

house on the hill wrote:
StillPav wrote:
I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises.

I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.
I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot.

They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security.

But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work.
Normally I agree with the majority of your posts but to bring diabetes into it is absolutely ridiculous. What about people with cancer, arthritis, dementia, depression, stroke and heart disease and many others. To a greater or lesser extent many of these conditions may have been partially self inflicted. Should we stop spending money on them too?
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.[/p][/quote]I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot. They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security. But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work.[/p][/quote]Normally I agree with the majority of your posts but to bring diabetes into it is absolutely ridiculous. What about people with cancer, arthritis, dementia, depression, stroke and heart disease and many others. To a greater or lesser extent many of these conditions may have been partially self inflicted. Should we stop spending money on them too? South Stand
  • Score: -6

12:16pm Fri 1 Aug 14

StillPav says...

house on the hill wrote:
StillPav wrote: I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.
I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot. They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security. But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work.
@house on the hill: "always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security."

I'm sorry, but that is whataboutery of the highest order. Just because people in the private sector are suffering (for numerous reasons we won't do into here) doesn't mean the public sector shouldn't get at least inflation equally payrises.

My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job.
[quote][p][bold]house on the hill[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: I do actually have a bit of sympathy with these workers. A 1% pay rise is pretty derogatory after three years of no pay rises. I appreciate the Government needs to but spending, but there are billions of pounds to be saved in benefits and welfare. Cut some of that.[/p][/quote]I don't think many would disagree that there are £billions being spent on welfare and benefits that shouldn't be, but that is no excuse for demanding a pay rise. You could argue that the £billions being spent treating obesity or type 2 diabetes that could have been avoided or better controlled by less selfish and lazy lifestyles should be stopped too (and most would) but it is still no excuse for public sector workers to constantly moan about their lot. They still have the best pensions and "flexible" working conditions and sickness schemes as well as the lowest levels of compulsory redundancies and always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security. But why care about anyone else in today's double standards world. Sorry no sympathy whatsoever, you are lucky to have what you have and get back to work.[/p][/quote]@house on the hill: "always conveniently forget the millions of private sector workers with little or no pay rises, no final salary pension schemes that they originally signed up to, far higher output expectation and far less job security." I'm sorry, but that is whataboutery of the highest order. Just because people in the private sector are suffering (for numerous reasons we won't do into here) doesn't mean the public sector shouldn't get at least inflation equally payrises. My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job. StillPav
  • Score: -9

12:39pm Fri 1 Aug 14

trolley dolley says...

StillPav says...

"My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job".

How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer. trolley dolley
  • Score: 7

12:50pm Fri 1 Aug 14

StillPav says...

trolley dolley wrote:
StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
[quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise. StillPav
  • Score: 3

2:42pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Sandor Clegane says...

StillPav wrote:
trolley dolley wrote:
StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'.

There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations.

In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year.

It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase.

By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.[/p][/quote]And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 9

3:04pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Isthisthebestswindon cando says...

StillPav wrote:
trolley dolley wrote:
StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
For me this is the core issue. A less than the rate of inflation pay rise means that by definition the workers are actually having a pay reduction against the cost of living. In my opinion that is insulting to the workers, irrespective of the sector in which they work.

The situation has been inflamed exponentially by the forthcoming 11% rise for MPs. Perhaps they should lead by example by all rejecting their rise?
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.[/p][/quote]For me this is the core issue. A less than the rate of inflation pay rise means that by definition the workers are actually having a pay reduction against the cost of living. In my opinion that is insulting to the workers, irrespective of the sector in which they work. The situation has been inflamed exponentially by the forthcoming 11% rise for MPs. Perhaps they should lead by example by all rejecting their rise? Isthisthebestswindon cando
  • Score: 2

4:13pm Fri 1 Aug 14

StillPav says...

Sandor Clegane wrote:
StillPav wrote:
trolley dolley wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.
@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits?

That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded.
[quote][p][bold]Sandor Clegane[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.[/p][/quote]And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.[/p][/quote]@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits? That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded. StillPav
  • Score: 1

4:30pm Fri 1 Aug 14

beach1e says...

A lot of people in this country choose to not pay tax, that means the money from those that work hard and pay theirs has to go even further. A lot of public employees are supposed to be protecting the public purse, but cant be bothered, yet moan when their pay rises arent brilliant. If you or someone you know scrounges when they shouldnt, choose to fiddle their taxes or are an incompetent public employee...blame them for the shortfall in public funding.
A lot of people in this country choose to not pay tax, that means the money from those that work hard and pay theirs has to go even further. A lot of public employees are supposed to be protecting the public purse, but cant be bothered, yet moan when their pay rises arent brilliant. If you or someone you know scrounges when they shouldnt, choose to fiddle their taxes or are an incompetent public employee...blame them for the shortfall in public funding. beach1e
  • Score: 2

4:35pm Fri 1 Aug 14

South Stand says...

StillPav wrote:
Sandor Clegane wrote:
StillPav wrote:
trolley dolley wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.
@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits?

That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded.
You really, really, do need to listen to the news. Where have you been for the past four years?
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sandor Clegane[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.[/p][/quote]And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.[/p][/quote]@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits? That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded.[/p][/quote]You really, really, do need to listen to the news. Where have you been for the past four years? South Stand
  • Score: 0

6:31pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Sandor Clegane says...

StillPav wrote:
Sandor Clegane wrote:
StillPav wrote:
trolley dolley wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.
Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.
And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.
@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits?

That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded.
Will never happen. Certainly not when Labour win the next election.

Remember, those in receipt of benefits enjoy c.5%pa increases.

How many employees, whether public or private sector, have seen those levels of pay rise in the last few years?
[quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sandor Clegane[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]StillPav[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]trolley dolley[/bold] wrote: StillPav says... "My advice for people in private sector jobs with poor terms and conditions is if you don't like it, go and find a better paying job". How about saying that to these public workers, or does it not apply if you are paid by the tax payer.[/p][/quote]Absolutely, but it still doesn't stop me having sympathy for people who haven't had a proper pay rise in four years while at the same time MPs are voting themselve an 11% rise.[/p][/quote]And to think, you were the one who mentioned 'whataboutery'. There are about 600 MPs and they are already some of the lowest paid in terms of comparable nations. In comparison, there are now almost 6 million public sector workers. Even if they all got just a £10 a month pay rise, that'd cost the tax payer £720 Million per year, every year. It would take the entire annual tax contributions of 225,000 private sector workers just to fund that tiny increase. By the way, if you're thinking the money could be made by doing away with all MPs, if you took every penny paid to all MPs in a year and dished it out equally to all public sector employees, they'd each receive... £7 a year pay increase. 13p per week.[/p][/quote]@Sandor Clegane - how about cutting some of the billions paid out in welfare and benefits? That way people who actually work for a living can be rewarded.[/p][/quote]Will never happen. Certainly not when Labour win the next election. Remember, those in receipt of benefits enjoy c.5%pa increases. How many employees, whether public or private sector, have seen those levels of pay rise in the last few years? Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 4

8:19pm Fri 1 Aug 14

Davey Gravey says...

Pay them fairly. They basically have had wage cuts if you take inflation into account.Final salary pensions are a thing of the past too. Many public sector workers get paid a pittance. Good on them for fighting for more.
Stop giving away publicly owned profit making business for starters. Tax multi billion pound companies more by closing the loopholes. Stop lining Tory pals fat cats pockets with our money. End senseless wars that we will never win. Send home immigrants that are a burden on the country. Put certain criminals to sleep instead of funding the huge cost of keeping them in prison. Sterilize the underclass- crooks and cut benefits.
Pay them fairly. They basically have had wage cuts if you take inflation into account.Final salary pensions are a thing of the past too. Many public sector workers get paid a pittance. Good on them for fighting for more. Stop giving away publicly owned profit making business for starters. Tax multi billion pound companies more by closing the loopholes. Stop lining Tory pals fat cats pockets with our money. End senseless wars that we will never win. Send home immigrants that are a burden on the country. Put certain criminals to sleep instead of funding the huge cost of keeping them in prison. Sterilize the underclass- crooks and cut benefits. Davey Gravey
  • Score: -6

9:25am Sat 2 Aug 14

messyits says...

You don't hear of nursing staff going on strike--despite lack of increases and pension changes--they do the wise thing and go into private nursing or other professions--leaving it to Spanish/Portuguese/p
hilipines nurses.
Many of the doctors and consultants are highly paid agency staff and foreign.
More strikes in this country will see more and more immigrants filling vacancies in all sectors and sending the money to families as well as benefits for children in their own countries--who are the stupid ones?
You don't hear of nursing staff going on strike--despite lack of increases and pension changes--they do the wise thing and go into private nursing or other professions--leaving it to Spanish/Portuguese/p hilipines nurses. Many of the doctors and consultants are highly paid agency staff and foreign. More strikes in this country will see more and more immigrants filling vacancies in all sectors and sending the money to families as well as benefits for children in their own countries--who are the stupid ones? messyits
  • Score: -9

12:29pm Sat 2 Aug 14

Sandor Clegane says...

The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action.

Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments.

Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come.
The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action. Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments. Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 4

1:12am Sun 3 Aug 14

MrAngry says...

Having worked in the public sector for several years , I will make a prediction.

Council offers 1% pay rise.
Staff will strike for 5-6 days, losing 2% of salary.
Council will offer 1.5% pay rise.
Union will claim a victory.
Staff will be out of pocket.
Having worked in the public sector for several years , I will make a prediction. Council offers 1% pay rise. Staff will strike for 5-6 days, losing 2% of salary. Council will offer 1.5% pay rise. Union will claim a victory. Staff will be out of pocket. MrAngry
  • Score: 8

11:27am Sun 3 Aug 14

trolley dolley says...

5-6days on strike is not long enough.

Is it possible for the unions to arrange maybe two or three strikes spread over a couple of months.

Now that would be a real saving to the tax payer and lets be honest, would we really notice a difference in services.
5-6days on strike is not long enough. Is it possible for the unions to arrange maybe two or three strikes spread over a couple of months. Now that would be a real saving to the tax payer and lets be honest, would we really notice a difference in services. trolley dolley
  • Score: 4

12:23pm Sun 3 Aug 14

MrAngry says...

Note to journalist. The union has not vowed to strike UNTIL autumn. It has vowed to strike for ONE DAY in the autumn. 5/10 must try harder.
Note to journalist. The union has not vowed to strike UNTIL autumn. It has vowed to strike for ONE DAY in the autumn. 5/10 must try harder. MrAngry
  • Score: 3

12:40pm Sun 3 Aug 14

messyits says...

Sandor Clegane wrote:
The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action.

Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments.

Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come.
Time you checked your facts dear boy.
[quote][p][bold]Sandor Clegane[/bold] wrote: The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action. Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments. Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come.[/p][/quote]Time you checked your facts dear boy. messyits
  • Score: -1

8:39pm Sun 3 Aug 14

molly60 says...

MrAngry wrote:
Having worked in the public sector for several years , I will make a prediction.

Council offers 1% pay rise.
Staff will strike for 5-6 days, losing 2% of salary.
Council will offer 1.5% pay rise.
Union will claim a victory.
Staff will be out of pocket.
Quite right...............
...................U
nion members most used words............BAA
AAAAAA BAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAA
[quote][p][bold]MrAngry[/bold] wrote: Having worked in the public sector for several years , I will make a prediction. Council offers 1% pay rise. Staff will strike for 5-6 days, losing 2% of salary. Council will offer 1.5% pay rise. Union will claim a victory. Staff will be out of pocket.[/p][/quote]Quite right............... ...................U nion members most used words............BAA AAAAAA BAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAA molly60
  • Score: 0

8:42pm Sun 3 Aug 14

molly60 says...

Don't forget dear readers BAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAA
Don't forget dear readers BAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAAA BAAAAAAAAA molly60
  • Score: 1

9:50am Mon 4 Aug 14

Sandor Clegane says...

messyits wrote:
Sandor Clegane wrote:
The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action.

Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments.

Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come.
Time you checked your facts dear boy.
All checked, all correct... old chap.
[quote][p][bold]messyits[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Sandor Clegane[/bold] wrote: The GMB represent nurses and ancillary NHS staff. They will be taking their members out on strike in these waves of public sector strike action. Still, it's a one day public sector strike. Nobody will notice and it should save the government around £50m in wage payments. Shame that the union members themselves don't tend to realise it's all entirely political on the union leaders' part. These strikes will continue until Labour win the next general election, so at least another nine months of it to come.[/p][/quote]Time you checked your facts dear boy.[/p][/quote]All checked, all correct... old chap. Sandor Clegane
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

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

I agree