Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 23:55:00 +0000, gastec
wrote:


Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

The Outer Hebrides Gas Meter Reading Branch are a militant lot. Mess
with them and you are likely to find a haggis's head in your bed.

--

gastec wrote:
Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?


Is DIY becoming a closed shop? Do we all have to join?

On 8 Dec 2005 06:24:38 -0800, wrote:


gastec wrote:
Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?


Is DIY becoming a closed shop? Do we all have to join?

Don't give John Prescott ideas...

:-)
--
Frank Erskine

wrote in message
oups.com...

gastec wrote:
Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?


Is DIY becoming a closed shop? Do we all have to join?

Richard Cranium, Lord Hall, etc, are after everyone to join their uk.d-i-y
Lunatic Association. I want nothing to do with this, but reserve the right
for others to join.

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Doctor Drivel wrote:


Richard Cranium, Lord Hall, etc, are after everyone to join their
uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association. I want nothing to do with this

Well, being the founder member - and *sole* member for that matter - of the
Drivel Lunatic Association, you don't have to, do you?
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

"Set Square" wrote in message
...
In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Doctor Drivel wrote:


Richard Cranium, Lord Hall, etc, are after everyone to join their
uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association. I want nothing to do with this

Well, being the founder member - and *sole* member for that matter

You are not. Richard Cranium founded it. How are your yellow CA boots?

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

As with any union, a lot is likely to depend on the local reps. I`m
with the GMB (used to be with the EETPU (sp?), but changed quickly -
along with a lot of my colleagues - when two were wrongly accused of
theft. They were asked to attend a police station to give statements
and were both arrested on arrival.

One was left high and dry by their union ("its a civil matter, we're
not interested") - whereas the lad with the GMB got a lot of support /
access to the union solicitor etc.

--
Please add the word "newsgroup" in the subject line of personal emails
**** My email address includes "ngspamtrap" and " ****

In an earlier contribution to this discussion,
Doctor Drivel wrote:


Well, being the founder member - and *sole* member for that matter

You are not.

I never said I was! I was referring to *you* as the founder member of the
*Drivel* Lunatic Association - that's different in case you hadn't noticed.

I know nothing about yellow boots - do you?
--
Cheers,
Set Square
______
Please reply to newsgroup. Reply address is invalid.

On Wed, 7 Dec 2005 23:55:00 +0000, gastec
wrote:


Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?
Most unions are the same. If you are all in one at your place of work
and it is the same union then there is safety in numbers.



Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

http://www.no2id.org/

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

--
geoff

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?


Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.


--

..andy

In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
Richard Cranium, Lord Hall, etc, are after everyone to join their
uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association. I want nothing to do with this

Well, being the founder member - and *sole* member for that matter

You are not. Richard Cranium founded it. How are your yellow CA boots?

Hows your fuel pump driven speedo? Does it work as well as your magnetic
water softener? And your hacksaw for jointing plastic pipes?

I'll leave our dear readers to work out who is the lunatic on this group...

--
*Don't sweat the petty things and don't pet the sweaty things.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

Just not so. One of the companies I work for as a freelance was totally
disregarding the EU directive on working hours, etc, on the principle that
'if you don't want the work plenty others do' sort of thing. The union,
which they don't recognise, got involved and are balloting for
recognition. And surprise, surprise, most of the grievances were suddenly
resolved...

Now we get a break every 6 hours regardless. And a minimum overnight break
of 11 hours. And a maximum 48 hour week.

--
*Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 00:56:02 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

Just not so. One of the companies I work for as a freelance was totally
disregarding the EU directive on working hours, etc, on the principle that
'if you don't want the work plenty others do' sort of thing. The union,
which they don't recognise, got involved and are balloting for
recognition. And surprise, surprise, most of the grievances were suddenly
resolved...

Now we get a break every 6 hours regardless. And a minimum overnight break
of 11 hours. And a maximum 48 hour week.


Hmmm...

But surely if you are freelance, you are self employed and thus the
Working Time Regulations don't apply........

It seems to me also that this type of legislation is focussing on the
wrong thing - i.e. a fixed time for work rather than what is required
to get the job done and then payment for achieving that.

A "one size fits all" approach regardless of industry and the work
rate behaviour of an individual really doesn't seem to me to achieve
anything other than slowing down rates of achievement all the way
round. Some people take longer than others to achieve a given
objective, so operating it all by a stop watch doesn't ultimately
achieve a satisfactory outcome for anybody.

I don't see the need for an external organisation to be required to
agree payment and working conditions with an employer. That should be
a matter between the individual and the employer.

--

..andy

Someone way up the thread asked..

What is the GMB like?

'king brilliant!

I am not generally Bolshi, or pro Union (having given up on Unison some
years ago because they seemed to be more interested in minorities and
overseas workers (all worthy causes in their way) than their own
members problems).

However, I felt that my employers were angling to get rid of me, or
else alter my conditions of employment to my detriment.

I joined the GMB quick, and when push came to shove, instead of going
into a metting with my manager and the HR manager either on my own, or
with an interested but non expert friend, I wnt in with someone who
knew the law better than they did, and who very cleverly "won my case",
but in such a way that the management still cant work out what
happened!

If I had gone in there without him, I think we would quickly have come
to blows, and I would probably have told them to stuff the job.

As it was he did a fair impression of Columbo "I just don't understand
why you would ask someone to give up some of their salary? I mean why
would he want to??"

They have learnt that

1. I'm not friendless.

2. They can't sack me, reduce my salary without negotiation, or push me
around.

3. And they don't realise they've been taught this as they still can't
figure out what went on in the meeting :=)) (or so they say).

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Now we get a break every 6 hours regardless. And a minimum overnight break
of 11 hours. And a maximum 48 hour week.


Hmmm...

But surely if you are freelance, you are self employed and thus the
Working Time Regulations don't apply........

If we could decide when we 'arrived at work and left', yes. But we don't.

Easier regarded as temporary employees.

It seems to me also that this type of legislation is focussing on the
wrong thing - i.e. a fixed time for work rather than what is required
to get the job done and then payment for achieving that.

That's indeed what the bosses would love - with total disregard to the H&S
of those in their 'employ'.

A "one size fits all" approach regardless of industry and the work
rate behaviour of an individual really doesn't seem to me to achieve
anything other than slowing down rates of achievement all the way
round. Some people take longer than others to achieve a given
objective, so operating it all by a stop watch doesn't ultimately
achieve a satisfactory outcome for anybody.

In a team or crew - as in my work - everyone has to work to a common
schedule.

I don't see the need for an external organisation to be required to
agree payment and working conditions with an employer. That should be
a matter between the individual and the employer.

Fine in theory. But in practice it was a take it or leave it situation
with no negotiation possible by an individual, since that individual was
easily replaced. Not so the entire workforce.

--
*Some days we are the flies; some days we are the windscreen.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

Richard Cranium, Lord Hall, etc, are after everyone to join their
uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association. I want nothing to do with this

Well, being the founder member - and *sole* member for that matter

You are not. Richard Cranium founded it.
How are your yellow CAT boots?

Hows your fuel pump driven speedo?

A graphical display of the psyche of the uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association by its
founder.

** snip senility **

wrote in message
oups.com...
Someone way up the thread asked..

What is the GMB like?

'king brilliant!

I am not generally Bolshi, or pro Union (having given up on Unison some
years ago because they seemed to be more interested in minorities and
overseas workers (all worthy causes in their way) than their own
members problems).

However, I felt that my employers were angling to get rid of me, or
else alter my conditions of employment to my detriment.

I joined the GMB quick, and when push came to shove, instead of going
into a metting with my manager and the HR manager either on my own, or
with an interested but non expert friend, I wnt in with someone who
knew the law better than they did, and who very cleverly "won my case",
but in such a way that the management still cant work out what
happened!

If I had gone in there without him, I think we would quickly have come
to blows, and I would probably have told them to stuff the job.

As it was he did a fair impression of Columbo "I just don't understand
why you would ask someone to give up some of their salary? I mean why
would he want to??"

They have learnt that

1. I'm not friendless.

2. They can't sack me, reduce my salary without negotiation, or push me
around.

3. And they don't realise they've been taught this as they still can't
figure out what went on in the meeting :=)) (or so they say).

Unions are essential, people need representation. The management I have
come across in my time has been. 10% good to excellent. The other 90%
split 50-50 to totally near useless and utter idiots. Good management
communicates well, looks ahead, values its people, impartial and creative.
Most management in the UK has little training of any description. When
making decisions all aspects must be taken in to account. Most disregard
the personnel side.

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness of Middle England raises its head.

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.

--
John Cartmell john@ followed by finnybank.com 0845 006 8822
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
You are not. Richard Cranium founded it.
How are your yellow CAT boots?

Hows your fuel pump driven speedo?

A graphical display of the psyche of the uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association by
its founder.

What? Telling it as it is when you talk ****e?

BTW, how is the treatment for the feet fetish going?

--
*If at first you don't succeed, then skydiving definitely isn't for you *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

You are not. Richard Cranium founded it.
How are your yellow CAT boots?

Hows your fuel pump driven speedo?

A graphical display of the psyche of
the uk.d-i-y Lunatic Association by
its founder.

What?

Yes, that is correct, a graphical display of the psyche of the uk.d-i-y
Lunatic Association by its founder.

"John Cartmell" wrote in message
...
In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness
of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for
British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.

More gross incompetence. In many instances I have found that the criteria
for management was what accent you had, with some idiots being in positions
that they were totally unsuited. No wonder we dive bombed out of sight.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 09:40:22 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Now we get a break every 6 hours regardless. And a minimum overnight break
of 11 hours. And a maximum 48 hour week.


Hmmm...

But surely if you are freelance, you are self employed and thus the
Working Time Regulations don't apply........

If we could decide when we 'arrived at work and left', yes. But we don't.

Easier regarded as temporary employees.

But if you are self employed, you are free to work for various clients
and customers surely.....

If that is the case, then the working time legislation doesn't apply
AIUI.


It seems to me also that this type of legislation is focussing on the
wrong thing - i.e. a fixed time for work rather than what is required
to get the job done and then payment for achieving that.

That's indeed what the bosses would love - with total disregard to the H&S
of those in their 'employ'.

Surely that should be agreed at the start of a job with payment based
on time or an objective or a combination of the two.


A "one size fits all" approach regardless of industry and the work
rate behaviour of an individual really doesn't seem to me to achieve
anything other than slowing down rates of achievement all the way
round. Some people take longer than others to achieve a given
objective, so operating it all by a stop watch doesn't ultimately
achieve a satisfactory outcome for anybody.

In a team or crew - as in my work - everyone has to work to a common
schedule.

Meaning all present at the same time? I can understand the need for
that. However, shouldn't there then be a time based or an objective
based remuneration?



I don't see the need for an external organisation to be required to
agree payment and working conditions with an employer. That should be
a matter between the individual and the employer.

Fine in theory. But in practice it was a take it or leave it situation
with no negotiation possible by an individual, since that individual was
easily replaced. Not so the entire workforce.

OK, so crew goes to customer and this is agreed. It still doesn't
require an external union.


--

..andy

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:44:10 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.


That is a stupid and inaccurate comment.

First of all, I see myself very much as an individual and make no
apologies for that. I would rather sort things out for myself rather
than expect other people and especially the state to do so for me.
Therefore the notion of "type" does not, by definition, apply.

Secondly, I look at all issues over their appropriate timescales, be
they short, medium or long.

Thirdly, being individually minded as opposed to collectivist in
outlook does not imply disregarding the needs and aspirations of
others. However, I do firmly believe that the correct way to make
that happen is to show, encourage and help people to achieve them for
themselves rather than to expect to be reliant on others and again,
expecially the state, unions or any other collective organisation.


--

..andy

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:44:10 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness
of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for
British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.

That is a stupid and inaccurate comment.

Matt, that is one of the best comments I have read for a long time.

** snip Mattness ***

On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 18:59:16 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:44:10 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness
of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for
British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.

That is a stupid and inaccurate comment.

Matt, that is one of the best comments I have read for a long time.

That I can believe......


--

..andy

In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
In many instances I have found that the criteria for management was what
accent you had, with some idiots being in positions that they were
totally unsuited.

So you got sacked?

--
*I feel like I'm diagonally parked in a parallel universe.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Fine in theory. But in practice it was a take it or leave it situation
with no negotiation possible by an individual, since that individual was
easily replaced. Not so the entire workforce.

OK, so crew goes to customer and this is agreed.

That *is* a union. One for all and all for one.

It still doesn't require an external union.

Much easier to have a pro to argue the case. No problems with
victimisation afterwards.

I take it you've never had any dealings with industrial relations?

--
*Happiness is seeing your mother-in-law on a milk carton

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 18:59:16 -0000, "Doctor Drivel"
wrote:


"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 10:44:10 +0000 (GMT), John Cartmell
wrote:

In article ws.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

"Andy Hall" aka Matt wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?

Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

The idiocy and narrow-mindedness
of Middle England raises its head.

His type produced the management for
British industry in the 50s and 60s.
Short-term me-ism.

That is a stupid and inaccurate comment.

Matt, that is one of the best comments I have read for a long time.

That I can believe......

Matt, at last, last.

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 19:54:11 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

In article ,
Andy Hall wrote:
Fine in theory. But in practice it was a take it or leave it situation
with no negotiation possible by an individual, since that individual was
easily replaced. Not so the entire workforce.

OK, so crew goes to customer and this is agreed.

That *is* a union. One for all and all for one.

Hmmmm..... Oh dear...



It still doesn't require an external union.

Much easier to have a pro to argue the case. No problems with
victimisation afterwards.

I take it you've never had any dealings with industrial relations?

Of course. In one instance with an employer who did attempt to step
outside the law. It didn't require a union to resolve the issue,
however.



--

..andy

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ,
Andy Hall aka Matt wrote:

Fine in theory. But in practice it was a take it or leave it situation
with no negotiation possible by an individual, since that individual was
easily replaced. Not so the entire workforce.

OK, so crew goes to customer and this is agreed.

That *is* a union. One for all and all for one.

It still doesn't require an external union.

Much easier to have a pro to argue the case. No problems with
victimisation afterwards.

I take it you've never had any dealings with industrial relations?

No he hasn't, each time he had the dead sack and frog marched out.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

In many instances I have found that the criteria for management was what
accent you had, with some idiots being in positions that they were
totally unsuited.

So you got sacked?

Fraid I did the sacking. I would just simply have you committed.

In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

In many instances I have found that the criteria for management was
what accent you had, with some idiots being in positions that they
were totally unsuited.

So you got sacked?

Fraid I did the sacking.

So you were one of those idiots in postions they were totally unsuited for?

And did your driver's mate find another job?

--
*Marriage changes passion - suddenly you're in bed with a relative*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:
"Dave Plowman (News)" through a haze of senile
flatulence wrote in message ...
In article ews.net,
Doctor Drivel wrote:

In many instances I have found that the criteria for management was
what accent you had, with some idiots being in positions that they
were totally unsuited.

So you got sacked?

Fraid I did the sacking.

So

I would sack this one sight and have him committed.

** snip babbling senility **

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:41:09 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?


Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.
That very much depends on where your sitting. Many people in clerical
jobs or the various strata of management and the hallowed halls of
academia think that all that masty union stuff is to do with those low
grade manual workers and as people further up the economic and
intellectual chain, such things dont apply to them and are not to be
considered. Fact is that they need to consider them even more because
when the axe is wielded, it is often the mid sections that are cut
out!. Those on the front line i.e acutal production operatives ,are
still needed to keep companies going and to produce.



Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

http://www.no2id.org/

On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 07:11:57 +0000, Andy Hall
wrote:


I don't see the need for an external organisation to be required to
agree payment and working conditions with an employer. That should be
a matter between the individual and the employer.
Again it depends on situations. If a group of workers can organise and
act collectively thats fine. Often though, they cant, they fear
management,fear victimisation and simply dont know their rights or
perhaps dont have the intellect to articulate the collective view.



Remove antispam and add 670 after bra to email

http://www.no2id.org/

"tarquinlinbin" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 09 Dec 2005 07:11:57 +0000, Andy Hall akak Matt

wrote:

I don't see the need for an external organisation to be required to
agree payment and working conditions with an employer. That should be
a matter between the individual and the employer.

Again it depends on situations. If a group of workers can organise and
act collectively thats fine. Often though, they cant, they fear
management,fear victimisation and simply dont know their rights or
perhaps dont have the intellect to articulate the collective view.

That is clearly obvious, but not to Little Middle England Matt.

"tarquinlinbin" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 23:41:09 +0000, Andy Hall aka Matt
wrote:

On Thu, 08 Dec 2005 21:33:10 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , gastec
writes

Does anyone have views about the GMB union..
good or bad union?

Is that owt like a yorkshire fitting ?


Sort of. Both are unnecessary in the 21st century.

That very much depends on where your sitting. Many people in clerical
jobs or the various strata of management and the hallowed halls of
academia think that all that masty union stuff is to do with those low
grade manual workers and as people further up the economic and
intellectual chain, such things dont apply to them and are not to be
considered. Fact is that they need to consider them even more because
when the axe is wielded, it is often the mid sections that are cut
out!. Those on the front line i.e acutal production operatives ,are
still needed to keep companies going and to produce.

I love it when useless parasitical Little Middle Englanders are made
redundant.