On Sat, 13 Jun 2015 16:01:51 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

And automation requires investment...

So now we get back to the fact the unions prevent that investment
because they insisted on keeping the same number of jobs even though
there was no work to do.

All it required was sensible negotiations between the workforce and
employer.

Something you union haters wouldn't approve of.

There's sensible negotiations, and there's pointless negotiations.

If the unions approached the negotiations with a red line through
reducing the number of staff, then the latter is fairly inevitable.

See also: Wapping.

The main print unions were just plain stupid. But management having
allowed them to get away with all sorts of dodgy practices in the past
- and having plenty themselves - can't escape a share of the blame.

But I'd point you at the union I belonged to where new equipment and
working practices came thick and fast. In broadcast.
Grab any new technology and make it work so it becomes essential. Then
negotiate a settlement - if needed - afterwards.

What's needed is an agreement negotiated by both sides. As happens in
the likes of Germany. Not the macho posturing that was so common in the
UK - and heavily encouraged by both the press and some governments.

Glad we're in agreement on all of that.