Scabs?

red ears

Anyone who spends 40 hours of their time working deserves a living wage.

eeguy

Havockk wrote: »

Yes the middle class is indeed shrinking.

Guess I'll just have to take your word for it so. Despite everything else pointing to the contrary:rolleyes:

red ears wrote: »

Anyone who spends 40 hours of their time working deserves a living wage.

Don't know how relevant that is considering they're earning more than the living wage.

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Jaysus some post above.

Nothing worse than a person who has a degree - thinks they can be a manager just because they drank fat frogs for 4 years in a pumped up IT or poorly ranked Irish university.

Doing a retail job correctly is skilled - staff with experience and the right skill set make shopping far more enjoyable for the customer. What is wrong with people dedicated and invested in a big successful company like Tesco.

You see young people in "starter jobs" in retail all they time - many / most - are useless - ignore you, are on their phone and can hardly make eye contact - they will be the great managers of the future when they get their exams {after the few repeats} - if you do not have the skill set and personality in a "starter job" - you will be feck all use as a manager.

Wow, I can't even begin to remove the huge chip on your shoulder.
People who have degrees are useless, young people are useless? Considering Tescos have the lowest customer satisfaction in the UK, I doubt these gleaming paragons of customer service you idealise are actually working for Tesco.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Oh, of course not. However that's far from an argument for privatised education isn't it Just you hang on in there and watch in amazement what DeVos does to education in the US.

I love the one Mark Blyth tells his Hedge fund friends, "The Hamptons is not a defensible position, eventually people will come for you."

Havockk

eeguy wrote: »

Guess I'll just have to take your word for it so. Despite everything else pointing to the contrary:rolleyes:

Not keeping you in the dark intentionally friend. This trend has been apparent and it's been reported widely for many years.

http://oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/3660/A_hollowing_middle_class.html

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

If it comes to that you'd be as well to keep toilet paper under the mattress and use the fiat currency to wipe your arse

eeguy

Havockk wrote: »

If it comes to that you'd be as well to keep toilet paper under the mattress and use the fiat currency to wipe your arse

Solidarity comrade.

Viva la revolution!

222233

andekwarhola wrote: »

Have to lol a bit at people trotting out the gotta feed the family line. As if your shopping boils down to a stark choice between strolling to Tesco or an week long trek across the Gobi desert to find a trading outpost.

I think it's a logical argument, not everyone in the country has to agree with every strike, if people want to do their shopping they are entitled to do so wherever they like even if that is Tesco.

Havockk

eeguy wrote: »

Solidarity comrade.

Viva la revolution!

The point is that if inequality is not addressed, and there is no signs that the notion is even being taken seriously, (beyond lip service) then history shows us what the response is.

ThisRegard

red ears wrote: »

Anyone who spends 40 hours of their time working deserves a living wage.

Who claimed the contrary?

Junkyard Tom

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

This idea that everyone can upskill is magical thinking. Also, it's not just low-skilled 'mechanical' jobs that are for the machines/bots.

A computer that dispenses expert radiology advice is just one example of how jobs currently done by highly trained white-collar workers can be automated, thanks to the advance of deep learning and other forms of artificial intelligence.

The Economist: Jun 25th 2016

The most important issues in the future will be how aggregate demand will be generated and who controls the machines/bots. The latter becomes a deadly serious matter if the former isn't taken care of.

Arghus

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

To be honest when I was referring to a "long fight" earlier I wasn't humming The Internationale or thinking in generalities about the future potential war between the proletariat and the capitalist classes. I was using metaphor to illustrate how the current pay and conditions dispute at Tesco specifically has been rumbling for a while and will in all likelihood continue to rumble on for a bit yet.

P_1

Glenster wrote: »

I walked past the line in bray.

If you went in there you saw that all the people working were the young lads and lasses who do the actual work in the shop anyway.

I didn't see any of the 'legacy' staff going on strike when they brought in young lads on lower pay.

As someone under 30 I feel as though the unions would never go on strike to improve my conditions, only to protect the conditions of lazier and more entitled older staff, that is why I don't have a problem crossing the picket line.

And the reason the Bray car park was empty is because some slimy prick dressed up as a lollipop man was walking out in front of cars trying to get in and not letting them in.

This is it in a nutshell for me. The older generation would (and have) throw you under the bus without a heartbeat's consideration. They do tap all in work, leaving you to pick up their slack. Remind me again why we should go out of our way to help them?

evolving_doors

Delacent wrote: »

"Win" - It was negotiated for over 2 years. It went to Labour Court. Labour court made a recomendation. Tesco accepted it. 700 out of just over 1000 took the redundancy.

Now that there are just 300 left, the union puts the package to the member affected - but excluded those who took redundancy.

Same way ASTI allow retired teachers vote on anything happenign to current teachers (that's why asti always vote against everything)

As for those sayign Tesco are making a fortune - last year they made a profit of 0.71% of their sales value (yep, less than 1% of your shopping bill is their net profit)

Naw... retired teachers only get to vote if it impacts on them... such as the pension paycut under Haddington Road.

end of the road

P_1 wrote: »

This is it in a nutshell for me. The older generation would (and have) throw you under the bus without a heartbeat's consideration. They do tap all in work, leaving you to pick up their slack. Remind me again why we should go out of our way to help them?

none of the older staff are lazier then the younger staff. some lazy staff do exist of course, they do in every job. but they are across the spectrum.

P_1

end of the road wrote: »

none of the older staff are lazier then the younger staff. some lazy staff do exist of course, they do in every job. but they are across the spectrum.

Still doing nothing to address the fact that unions do nothing for the younger generation and the older generation will continue throwing the younger generation under the bus and demand their support while they do so. Not that I expected you to mind...

end of the road

P_1 wrote: »

Still doing nothing to address the fact that unions do nothing for the younger generation and the older generation will continue throwing the younger generation under the bus and demand their support while they do so. Not that I expected you to mind...

the union's job is to stand up for all members and it's the job of members who feel they aren't been stood up for to demand that they do. however, in this case the union can only do something for workers who are been effected by changes to their contract, other workers in the company aren't facing changes to their terms from the best of my knowledge.

eeguy

end of the road wrote: »

the union's job is to stand up for all members and it's the job of members who feel they aren't been stood up for to demand that they do. however, in this case the union can only do something for workers who are been effected by changes to their contract, other workers in the company aren't facing changes to their terms from the best of my knowledge.

If it's such an important issue then why aren't the rest of the staff out in solidarity?

red ears

ThisRegard wrote: »

Who claimed the contrary?

There are some on the libertarian side who don't believe in a min wage so they could end up working for an absolute pittance to compete with automation.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

end of the road

eeguy wrote: »

If it's such an important issue then why aren't the rest of the staff out in solidarity?

i don't know, i presume it is because they aren't effected so wouldn't have a mandate to strike.

__Alex__

tomwaterford wrote: »

I know people whove not spoken to some of their neighbours in nearly 30 years (longer than im alive) over 1 crossing a picket

And I think that is bullying nonsense and it would make me more determined to not give in, tbh.

I take each strike as it comes and decide whether I support it. I don't blindly support all strikes. I don't understand the mentality of "Never cross a picket" nor do I care for the mob mentality it seems to be inspire.

Also, I'm from a small town and that bare minimum of service thing... yeah, that wouldn't be long-term and anyone who would keep that up would just come across like an oddball. Rightfully.

red ears

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

When you are working the checkout in tesco's permabear and striking over your pay i won't walk past your picket line

Coffee Fulled Runner

https://youtu.be/yK0_6a_zF-Y

Coffee Fulled Runner

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yK0_6a_zF-Y

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Butters1979

Havockk wrote: »

The point is that if inequality is not addressed, and there is no signs that the notion is even being taken seriously, (beyond lip service) then history shows us what the response is.

If all the money in the country was evenly distributed across the population we would be back where we started within a generation. Wealth inequality is not some social conspiracy. It is the natural result in the difference of ability, hard work and application of people. Sure some are born into it. But why wouldn't parents pass wealth down.

Those who think inequality needs to be 'addresed' tend to be he ones incapable or unwilling to create their own wealth, and by pure chance if they ever did would change their tune very quickly.

History has shown us that when the poor rise up to steal and plunder what is rightfully not theirs, they destroy their nations economy for generations. You can have a society of various different levels of wealth where the worst off are subsidised through welfare or you can have a society where everyone has an even share and everybody is dirt poor.

Butters1979

end of the road wrote: »

i don't know, i presume it is because they aren't effected so wouldn't have a mandate to strike.

Or they're the ones who have to pick up the slack of the guys on 20 year old contracts who work less and get paid more than them and are not only not with the strikers but are actually complete against them.

Wanderer78

Butters1979 wrote:

If all the money in the country was evenly distributed across the population we would be back where we started within a generation. Wealth inequality is not some social conspiracy. It is the natural result in the difference of ability, hard work and application of people. Sure some are born into it. But why wouldn't parents pass wealth down.

Butters1979 wrote:

Those who think inequality needs to be 'addresed' tend to be he ones incapable or unwilling to create their own wealth, and by pure chance if they ever did would change their tune very quickly.

Butters1979 wrote:

History has shown us that when the poor rise up to steal and plunder what is rightfully not theirs, they destroy their nations economy for generations. You can have a society of various different levels of wealth where the worst off are subsidised through welfare or you can have a society where everyone has an even share and everybody is dirt poor.

What an absolute load of tripe!

Some say, there are those that gain wealth by 'unearned income', I'd have to agree.

You maybe reading the wrong history books, as history shows, when the wealthy 'rise up', many economies are wrecked for generations. We are currently experiencing this! The term 'class warfare' is coming to mind while reading your drivel

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

People are stupid and thus deserve to be poor. Jesus. Not sure Ive seen anything that drips with this much entitlement since Milton Friedman walked and talked.

If it's not obvious by now, even by your own standards there that something is very wrong with the capitalist system that would accept a statistic like you just quoted then there is no convincing you.

By the way, it's an argument for a better education, free and for everyone.

eeguy

Havockk wrote: »

People are stupid and thus deserve to be poor. Jesus. Not sure Ive seen anything that drips with this much entitlement since Milton Friedman walked and talked.

If it's not obvious by now, even by your own standards there that something is very wrong with the capitalist system that would accept a statistic like you just quoted then there is no convincing you.

By the way, it's an argument for a better education, free and for everyone.

We have enough talk of nanny state, do you really want a system that stops people spending their money however they like?

Education is free in Ireland, and college is much cheaper than nearly all other countries. Or is it a conincidence that people who take the most advantage of this education are on average wealthier than those who don't.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Dial Hard

I work on a fully managed contract for a semi-state company, the direct employees of which are unionised and expected to vote for strike action over pensions in the coming weeks.

If I don't cross the picket line, I don't get paid. So, call me a scab all you like, I'll be coming to work. I can't afford not to be paid for a dispute that's not mine.

It's a horrible situation to be put in, tbh.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

That's a really nice fallacious argument you have got there, accusing me of defending something I absolutely have not. How very Miltonesque.

The education system needs serious reform.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

No bristling here friend

So, what exactly were you saying if not that? Why don't you take the opportunity to explain it for everyone?

Or is it another of those problems the invisible hand of the markets (LOL) would solve?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

noodler

__Alex__ wrote: »

And I think that is bullying nonsense and it would make me more determined to not give in, tbh.

I take each strike as it comes and decide whether I support it. I don't blindly support all strikes. I don't understand the mentality of "Never cross a picket" nor do I care for the mob mentality it seems to be inspire.

Also, I'm from a small town and that bare minimum of service thing... yeah, that wouldn't be long-term and anyone who would keep that up would just come across like an oddball. Rightfully.

This is a very good point.

Automatic support for every strike seems incredibly naive.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

You have just literally repeated the same thing over again. That just doesn't wash with me, I know exactly what you meant and I called you on it.

Shenshen

Havockk wrote: »

You have just literally repeated the same thing over again. That just doesn't wash with me, I know exactly what you meant and I called you on it.

Hang on, I just want to make sure I understand your position here : you don't believe that there are people who are more adept at earning, investing, and overall simply keeping money than others?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Havockk

Shenshen wrote: »

Hang on, I just want to make sure I understand your position here : you don't believe that there are people who are more adept at earning, investing, and overall simply keeping money than others?

I'm not saying that doesn't happen. I'm pointing the finger and asking why we are not talking about the root cause of such an issue and how we can change it. Let us not forget that response came in opposition to the question of wealth distribution.

The poster offered literally nothing other than to say 'it happens.' And given his ideological persuasions I'm not taking an insane leap of logic with the suggestion that a MORE laissez-faire approach with FEWER regulations is in any way going to help.

It is my sincere hope that this clears it up for you.

Havockk

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It's not that I blame you, it's your transparency I'm poking fun at.

knipex

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Not sure what schools you (or your kids) go to but doesn't sound anything like the school my kids go to.

Sure they study religion but in a far far broader sense than you appear to think. and yes they study Irish but they also study maths, English, geography, sciences, big focus ecology and environmental sciences, they do chess, social sciences etc..

I am far from a supported of compulsory Irish for the leaving cert (or even junior cert) but teaching Irish at primary level !! Not a problem. The more they are introduced to at an early age the happier I am.

ThisRegard

The strikers, so far, are't getting a lot of support from their colleagues. Out of 10 stores balloted on joining the strike, 6 voted against it, 4 voted for.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

Shenshen

Havockk wrote: »

I'm not saying that doesn't happen. I'm pointing the finger and asking why we are not talking about the root cause of such an issue and how we can change it. Let us not forget that response came in opposition to the question of wealth distribution.

The poster offered literally nothing other than to say 'it happens.' And given his ideological persuasions I'm not taking an insane leap of logic with the suggestion that a MORE laissez-faire approach with FEWER regulations is in any way going to help.

It is my sincere hope that this clears it up for you.

Maybe it would help if you could tell us what the root cause is, in your opinion?

red ears

Butters1979 wrote: »

If all the money in the country was evenly distributed across the population we would be back where we started within a generation. Wealth inequality is not some social conspiracy. It is the natural result in the difference of ability, hard work and application of people. Sure some are born into it. But why wouldn't parents pass wealth down.

Those who think inequality needs to be 'addresed' tend to be he ones incapable or unwilling to create their own wealth, and by pure chance if they ever did would change their tune very quickly.

History has shown us that when the poor rise up to steal and plunder what is rightfully not theirs, they destroy their nations economy for generations. You can have a society of various different levels of wealth where the worst off are subsidised through welfare or you can have a society where everyone has an even share and everybody is dirt poor.

I don't think many really want that. Most believe in a meritocracy. But we'd like contracts to be honoured and a fair wage paid. I don't think 14 euros per hour in our society it too much. You couldn't live on much less without state help. It's not the states job to supplement low paid employment.