UK government could mitigate strike action with military to help keep public services running

[Scott]

The British government is looking into bringing in the military to mitigate industrial action and keep public services running, the chairman of the governing Conservative Party said Sunday, after a wave of strikes that were sparked by a cost-of-living crisis and an economy sliding into recession.

The action includes border control and state-run healthcare services, if key workers including nurses and ambulance drivers go on strike.

“Our message to the unions is to say, this is not a time to strike, this is time to try and negotiate.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/04/business/uk-government-strike-action-military-intl/index.html

[tgw]

cost of living will become increasingly distressing in the coming years. we haven't seen anything yet.

[Mac Mickmanus]

Will be disappointing for some when they go to a hospital and are expecting a Filipino nurse to attend to them and give them a vaccination and a 6 foot 7 Scots guard walks out with a syringe in his hand 

[Bluespunk]

Let’s hope they mutiny and side with the people. 
 

They won’t but one can hope. 

[thaibeachlovers]

British governments have run down the military so much in the past years that one wonders if they are capable of filling in for the thousands that may go on strike. Is the medical corps so flush with trained nurses that they would be able to staff hospitals?

 

I know the military have been used to cover for striking firefighters in the past, but that's not needing a lot of actual boots on the ground.

[RichardColeman]

I fully support the right of any union to strike.

 

I also fully support the right of individuals and train companies to sue unions for lost money and the cost of alternative transport (over the price of their ticket). Unions may feel different about striking if they were held financially responsible for everything their strike cost others

[Purdey]

So, in this case soldiers, with a private getting £21,424 a year, Lance Corporal: £28,351 a year. Corporal: £33,065 a year. Sergeant: £37,198 a year, are doing the work of people that the transport secretary, Grant Shapps, cited as an average salary of £44,000 for railway workers. Seems like the soldiers need a pay raise to do those jobs.. 

 

[placeholder]

29 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

I fully support the right of any union to strike.

 

I also fully support the right of individuals and train companies to sue unions for lost money and the cost of alternative transport (over the price of their ticket). Unions may feel different about striking if they were held financially responsible for everything their strike cost others

I got news for you. If exercising a right exposes one to legal liability, then it's not a right. What you support is a right wing dream of the permanent suppression of working people.

[goldenbrwn1]

Well the UK government have at least got their emergency military relief prioritised in these strikes. The Royal Navy will take over from the RNLI and Border force to safely land more Albanian men escaping the war torn country of Albania. 

[mrfill]

1 hour ago, Purdey said:

So, in this case soldiers, with a private getting £21,424 a year, Lance Corporal: £28,351 a year. Corporal: £33,065 a year. Sergeant: £37,198 a year, are doing the work of people that the transport secretary, Grant Shapps, cited as an average salary of £44,000 for railway workers. Seems like the soldiers need a pay raise to do those jobs.. 

 

Seems like it would be helpful if Shapps told the truth.

https://fullfact.org/economy/RMT-strike-salary/

[TKDfella]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

I got news for you. If exercising a right exposes one to legal liability, then it's not a right. What you support is a right wing dream of the permanent suppression of working people.

I don't think that you are quite right. There are many instances where one has the freedom to do something but not everyone is going to agree and therefore have the right respond. How many times have people written books but been sued for the content. Now, what happens in court is a different matter and it is there where all the details are considered and a decision on whether the response has grounds or not. I was an active Union council member (Technical) and saw several instances of an action and response. There has to be this 'right' on both sides because there have been situations where non-union 'institutions' have had the freedom to apply some rule (new or otherwise) and unions have had the freedom to challenge it. Sometimes one side won, sometimes the other.

[Smokey and the Bandit]

1 hour ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

Well the UK government have at least got their emergency military relief prioritised in these strikes. The Royal Navy will take over from the RNLI and Border force to safely land more Albanian men escaping the war torn country of Albania. 

"Albanian men escaping the war torn country of Albania."

 

I'm hoping that was sarcasm?????

[placeholder]

53 minutes ago, TKDfella said:

I don't think that you are quite right. There are many instances where one has the freedom to do something but not everyone is going to agree and therefore have the right respond. How many times have people written books but been sued for the content. Now, what happens in court is a different matter and it is there where all the details are considered and a decision on whether the response has grounds or not. I was an active Union council member (Technical) and saw several instances of an action and response. There has to be this 'right' on both sides because there have been situations where non-union 'institutions' have had the freedom to apply some rule (new or otherwise) and unions have had the freedom to challenge it. Sometimes one side won, sometimes the other.

Very few if any rights are absolute but in this case Richard Coleman proposes criteria that would effectively eliminate the right to strike. 

[mikeymike100]

1 hour ago, goldenbrwn1 said:

Well the UK government have at least got their emergency military relief prioritised in these strikes. The Royal Navy will take over from the RNLI and Border force to safely land more Albanian men escaping the war torn country of Albania. 

I was not aware that Albania was a war torn country?????

[hotchilli]

9 hours ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Will be disappointing for some when they go to a hospital and are expecting a Filipino nurse to attend to them and give them a vaccination and a 6 foot 7 Scots guard walks out with a syringe in his hand 

Ooooooh missus.

[roquefort]

7 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

I was not aware that Albania was a war torn country?????

Sarcasm alert.

[mikeymike100]

1 minute ago, roquefort said:

Sarcasm alert.

Yes indeed! Hence the laughing emoji!

[billd766]

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

British governments have run down the military so much in the past years that one wonders if they are capable of filling in for the thousands that may go on strike. Is the medical corps so flush with trained nurses that they would be able to staff hospitals?

 

I know the military have been used to cover for striking firefighters in the past, but that's not needing a lot of actual boots on the ground.

Actually it did require a lot of boots on the ground as did the petrol tanker drivers strike. However that was in the past when the Army, Navy and RAF had a lot more men and women power.

 

Nowadays the military are stretch more tightly as government have cut back deeply, that there are hardly enough to go around for the current commitments without calling up the reserves.

 

No one political party is to blame, but the Tories have been in power longer.

[Doctor Tom]

Typical of the UK.  Turn to the Military when things go wrong and you need someone to pull you out of your political trouble, then when its over, ignore them.   Send the squaddies back to their sub standard accommodation. their lack of proper, long term health care, their lack of modern equipment to fight the wars you start.  Good one UK.  

[superal]

 

Not only nurses . Chart below shows the UK dilemma .

 

[James105]

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

Very few if any rights are absolute but in this case Richard Coleman proposes criteria that would effectively eliminate the right to strike. 

The military do not have the right to strike.   I see no reason that this same policy should not also be applied to other essential services such as nurses, teachers and transport.    Postal workers can strike if they want, although I am not sure anyone would actually notice.   

[placeholder]

5 minutes ago, James105 said:

The military do not have the right to strike.   I see no reason that this same policy should not also be applied to other essential services such as nurses, teachers and transport.    Postal workers can strike if they want, although I am not sure anyone would actually notice.   

Given your political stances. it's not surprising that you support this kind of suppression of workers' rights.

[ozimoron]

This is a throw back reaction from the Tories who want to return to the glorious middle ages when the knights used the military to control the serfs.

[TKDfella]

5 hours ago, placeholder said:

Very few if any rights are absolute but in this case Richard Coleman proposes criteria that would effectively eliminate the right to strike. 

In the 1970's there was a great deal of discontent not only with gov. vs unions but unions vs unions. I attended conferences where some unions wanted the Transport Unions criminalised because their strike action would always get the high profile treatment. I can tell you there were a great many undercurrents that never got publicised about inter union restrictions which, had they been acted upon, would have been every bit as damaging as the gov. trying ti infringe on union movements. This was made worse by conspiracy theories that some union sections were Conservative Infiltrates, while others claimed communist involvement, but I never saw any evidence to support this. I suspect that a lot of this still goes on today but generally never reaches the media. In my opinion the right to strike will not banned because this would create more problems than it solves.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 12/5/2022 at 8:29 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

British governments have run down the military so much in the past years that one wonders if they are capable of filling in for the thousands that may go on strike. Is the medical corps so flush with trained nurses that they would be able to staff hospitals?

 

I know the military have been used to cover for striking firefighters in the past, but that's not needing a lot of actual boots on the ground.

Latest I saw on the subject said it was only referring to firefighters and ambulance drivers. That would make sense.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 12/5/2022 at 7:55 PM, James105 said:

The military do not have the right to strike.   I see no reason that this same policy should not also be applied to other essential services such as nurses, teachers and transport.    Postal workers can strike if they want, although I am not sure anyone would actually notice.   

As a nurse I scorn your contention that I could have been forced to work against my will. Paying nurses what they deserve will remove any desire to strike.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 12/5/2022 at 1:22 PM, RichardColeman said:

I fully support the right of any union to strike.

 

I also fully support the right of individuals and train companies to sue unions for lost money and the cost of alternative transport (over the price of their ticket). Unions may feel different about striking if they were held financially responsible for everything their strike cost others

You'd have to change the law then. It's lawful for unions to call strikes.

[thaibeachlovers]

On 12/5/2022 at 4:50 PM, mikeymike100 said:

I was not aware that Albania was a war torn country?????

Look up sarcasm.

[James105]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

As a nurse I scorn your contention that I could have been forced to work against my will. Paying nurses what they deserve will remove any desire to strike.

I had no idea that nurses were forced to work against their will and had no right to seek out alternative employment that offers better pay and conditions.   On that basis I would support the right of nurses to strike until they gained the right to be able to leave their jobs and look for alternative employment as that does sound unfair to me.   Even private sector workers who have had and will continue to have pay freezes over the last few years have the freedom to look for other jobs.  

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, James105 said:

I had no idea that nurses were forced to work against their will and had no right to seek out alternative employment that offers better pay and conditions.   On that basis I would support the right of nurses to strike until they gained the right to be able to leave their jobs and look for alternative employment as that does sound unfair to me.   Even private sector workers who have had and will continue to have pay freezes over the last few years have the freedom to look for other jobs.  

This is obviously a way to give management the upper hand by not allowing strikes. Individual workers have little power against management. Sure, they could wait over time until enough leave to compel management to raise wages. (Although the UK can draw on overseas workers willing to work for less) But what do they do in the meantime? This is why laws were passed to allow strikes in the first place. To counter the massive power of management.