750,000 British public sector workers to hold strike on 30 June
37 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-13772326[/url]
[list][*]Three unions, totaling 750,000 workers will hold a co-ordinated strike on 30 June, citing government "attacks" on public sector pensions.
[*]The walkout will include 400,000 teachers from the NUT and ATL unions, as well as the PCS union for civil servants.
[*]Business Secretary Vince Cable has threatened to change the strike law if strikes continue to "impose serious damage to our economic and social fabric." The government and the unions disagree over the average size of a public sector pension and accuse each other of misleading the public.[/list]
[quote=BBC News][b]Up to 750,000 public sector workers will hold a co-ordinated strike later this month after members of a third major union backed industrial action.[/b]
The PCS said its 290,000 members had to defend themselves against "attacks" on their pensions by the government.
But the government said the 32.4% turnout showed there was "extremely limited support" for the action.
The civil servants will walk out on 30 June - the same days as hundreds of thousands of teachers and lecturers.
The National Union of Teachers and the Association of Teachers and Lecturers have announced a nationwide walkout, affecting thousands of schools in England and Wales.
Alongside action from PCS members - who include court staff, immigration officers and air traffic controllers - it will be the biggest outbreak of industrial unrest in the public sector for many years.
[b]'Daylight robbery'[/b]
The PCS said 61.1% of those balloted voted in favour of strike action, while 83.6% backed action short of a strike.
General secretary Mark Serwotka said every person in the country would feel the effects of the strikes - and the month-long overtime ban that will follow.
"Schools will be shut, jobcentres will be closed, driving licences wont be issued, queues will form at ports and airports," he said.
Mr Serwotka said civil servants were being asked to work up to eight years longer and accept a three-fold rise in their contributions, while also seeing their eventual payments halved.
"It's absolute daylight robbery.
"I don't think it's surprising that people will want to defend themselves and if you're going to defend yourselves it obviously makes sense that you make common cause with council workers, health workers and teachers because we all face the same attacks."
Mr Serwotka accused Cabinet Secretary Francis Maude of "deliberately trying to mislead people" about the size of an average public sector pension.
Mr Maude said a worker on the median salary of £23,000 would have a pension pot of £500,000 - equivalent to about £15,000 a year - after 40 years' service.
But Mr Serwotka said the true average for low paid staff was £4,200 a year - "a poverty pension" - and Mr Maude's figures were based on an unreasonable life expectancy of 105 years.
Further talks between the government and union leaders are scheduled for 27 June, but Mr Serwotka said negotiations so far had been "a farce".
"There is no indication whatsoever that the government is having any second thoughts," he said. "What they've told us is at every meeting is that they will not compromise."
He said he believed this would be the first co-ordinated strike of many, with anything up to four million workers potentially walking out in October if nothing was done.
[b]Strike laws[/b]
An independent review of pensions by former Labour minister Lord Hutton put the average at between £5,600 and £7,800 a year.
However, that figure takes into account everyone to whom a pension is being paid, regardless of whether they have spent 40 years working in the public sector or just a few months.
Someone who spends their entire working life in the public sector could expect to retire on a pension of two-thirds their final salary.
Mr Maude said it was fair to ask public sector workers to pay "a bit more" for their pensions - with an average rise in contributions of 3% - given that life expectancies were increasing and taxpayers were feeling the squeeze elsewhere.
He said there had been "a great deal of progress" so far in the talks and there was "no justification for any civil servant going on strike while discussions are continuing".
"There was a very low turnout for this ballot and less than 20% of their members are supporting this unnecessary industrial action," he said.
"We continue to hope that industrial action will not take place, but in the unfortunate event that it does we can assure the public now that all services have highly developed and rigorous contingency plans."
London Mayor Boris Johnson and business organisation the CBI have suggested there should be a minimum turnout for union ballots in favour of strike action.
Earlier this month, Business Secretary Vince Cable said that while the case for changing the law was currently "not compelling", if there were co-ordinated and damaging strikes, "the pressure on us to act would ratchet up".
Mr Maude said he agreed with Mr Cable about the possibility of new legislation, adding: "We don't think the case is made at the moment, but we haven't ruled it out."
Mr Serwotka said the turnout would have been much higher if unions were allowed to use modern methods, such as online voting, to carry out their ballots and there were no calls from politicians for minimum thresholds in other kinds of election.
Following the PCS vote, Brendan Barber, leader of the TUC, told the BBC his members were "going to see what happens with the talks" that are ongoing with the government.
Lord Hutton's review rejected any suggestion that public sector pensions were "gold-plated", but said that in order to make them affordable for the future, millions of employees should work longer, receive less and have their pensions linked to career average earnings, rather than final salaries.[/quote]
Perfect place for a jihad
What pisses me off more is that the governments reaction to this was "Well, we should make it harder to legally strike!"
The UK isn't Wisconsin.
If school closes because of this, then I hate the strikers.
Wow, this will royally screw up traffic, wont it?
Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
Fire 400,000 odd teachers and not expect a riot.
k.
No college on that day woop.
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
Okay Ronald Reagan
Communists :colbert:
I can remember back in '10 David Cameron wouldn't stop talking about how he would "protect front-line services". I miss the days when I trusted politicians.
In response to anyone who does/will hate the strikers for this, I challenge you to find a public sector job that isn't an easy job to do. Loads of people give up on the route to becoming teachers for example because PGCE's at university are difficult things to do. Most public sector jobs aren't easy and they are performed for the sole purpose of benefiting you, United Kingdom citizens. On one hand it's good that they aren't all losing their jobs but they shouldn't be subject to this at the hands of the people who's fault it is in the first place.
Everybody has a right to protest against things that can seriously affect their lives and I will respect them and support them so that the government can actually see the strong opposition to their plans, even if it's an inconvenience to me. This is many, many times better than if no one did anything at all.
[QUOTE=theenemy;30478215]I can remember back in '10 David Cameron wouldn't stop talking about how he would "protect front-line services". I miss the days when I trusted politicians.
In response to anyone who does/will hate the strikers for this, I challenge you to find a public sector job that isn't an easy job to do. Loads of people give up on the route to becoming teachers for example because PGCE's at university are difficult things to do. Most public sector jobs aren't easy and they are performed for the sole purpose of benefiting you, United Kingdom citizens. On one hand it's good that they aren't all losing their jobs but they shouldn't be subject to this at the hands of the people who's fault it is in the first place.
Everybody has a right to protest against things that can seriously affect their lives and I will respect them and support them so that the government can actually see the strong opposition to their plans, even if it's an inconvenience to me. This is many, many times better than if no one did anything at all.[/QUOTE]
I always expect the politicans to do the exact oposite of what they say, so the BNP will probably start hugging the blacks and immigrants.
That is a lot of people.
Like damn
Shit, that's on me birthday and all. Maybe it'd be wise to celebrate at home, although my sleepy little town probably won't be too affected by these demonstrations.
Also, responding to strikes by making it legally-harder to go on strike is downright fascism if you ask me, even in a tough economic environment. ESPECIALLY in a tough economic environment.
I wish to study at school and not have some protesters meddle with it because they don't like their pensions being meddled with.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;30478789]I wish to study at school and not have some protesters meddle with it because they don't like their pensions being meddled with.[/QUOTE]
They don't work for free.
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
People expecting decent pay for their hard work? How absurd!
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
Good thing you're not in charge because you're an idiot.
Ctrl-F "TUC" - nothing. Gone are the days of solidarity strikes.
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
And this is why you're not in any position of power.
[QUOTE=The mouse;30474022]Wow, they should be thankful they even have jobs, I'd just fire the lot and make them come crawling back.[/QUOTE]
[img]http://www.tehrantimes.com/News/10822/05_THATCHER5.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=theenemy;30478844]They don't work for free.[/QUOTE]
They want more than can be actually paid, and pensions are meant to be something you had for the last few years of your life, not the last third of it.
[QUOTE=HubmaN;30478990][img]http://www.tehrantimes.com/News/10822/05_THATCHER5.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
That's one gross old lady, whom I'm sure is significant in some way. However shes p gross.
[QUOTE=Parakon;30479148]That's one gross old lady, whom I'm sure is significant in some way. However shes p gross.[/QUOTE]
It's Margaret Thatcher not "one gross old lady"
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;30479233]It's Margaret Thatcher not "one gross old lady"[/QUOTE]
I can't imagine a world where the two descriptions are mutually exclusive. Help me.
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;30479029]They want more than can be actually paid, and pensions are meant to be something you had for the last few years of your life, not the last third of it.[/QUOTE]
Ok they should just lie down and take it.
[QUOTE=theenemy;30480090]Ok they should just lie down and take it.[/QUOTE]
Why are they protesting for such trivial reasons. Pension age needs to be increased to keep in line with the average life expectancy.
[QUOTE=Parakon;30479148]That's one gross old lady, whom I'm sure is significant in some way. However shes p gross.[/QUOTE]
dude you like 10 y.o?
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;30479029]They want more than can be actually paid, and pensions are meant to be something you had for the last few years of your life, not the last third of it.[/QUOTE]
How dare those people not die when they´re 70, where do they get the balls.
We should all do as Sobotnik wishes and die when we hit pension age.
[QUOTE=Miskav;30480551]How dare those people not die when they´re 70, where do they get the balls.
We should all do as Sobotnik wishes and die when we hit pension age.[/QUOTE]
In the past people would retire, and then die after a few years. The case now is that people are living for 20 or more years after retirement and that is simply not possible to maintain with the growing lifespans and healthiness of people.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.