1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Where we are now: The site is back up and running! The character set encoding issue has been fixed so old posts should now look ok. I am currently working on themes/skins etc and I will be deleting the temporary green skin very soon as it has many issues. I will do a very quick variation on the stock blue skin first just to get a light-grey background and san-serif font, and I will set this as default. Later this week I will hopefully add a professional third-party skin in pfm colours (life is way too short to do this crap myself, and I've found one I really like than needs next to no tweaking). We are getting there slowly...
    Dismiss Notice
  3. May I please request people check and update their email address if it is out if date. I ask as I’m getting countless bounce errors as the server fails to send notifications through etc. I’ll eventually figure out how to send these to a black hole somewhere, but it makes sense to address it at source as quite a few folk are obviously not getting the thread and conversations notifications they have set in their preferences.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Things you need to know about the new ‘Conversations’ PM system:

    a) DO NOT REPLY TO THE NOTIFICATION EMAIL! I get them, not the intended recipient. I get a lot of them and I do not want them! It is just a notification, log into the site and reply from there.

    b) To delete old conversations use the ‘Leave conversation’ option. This is just delete by another name.
    Dismiss Notice

Possible 'Fuel Strike' and the Police State

Discussion in 'off topic' started by Mullardman, Mar 28, 2012.

  1. nat8808

    nat8808 pfm Member

    I think you can see it that way if you choose and it suits and supports your already held opinions..

    Look at it another way; fuel is needed by many many insitutions and groups in order to prevent deaths and unnecessary destruction and danger.

    It is almost of a military importance that these services and industries are kept going - emergency services, food distribution, police (non-emergency), energy services etc etc.

    Whatever our views, surely we don't want people to die because ambulances have to economise on fuel, nor more riots because the streets are unpoliced, nor power stations shutting down because fuel can't be transported or nuclear power stations being unmanned because engineers can't get to work etc etc. The list could go on.

    There are many lines of work where the right to strike (which I would defend) could cause real death and destruction. I think it is then perfectly acceptable to then try to keep things going despite the strike.

    Still, you do not need an actual strike to cause disruption! All you need is rumour and talk of it and that will cause panic buying and its own disruption.

    That is already happening and, in part, even this thread puts thoughts of panic buying in peoples minds..

    Moreover, I think your reaction is an overreaction anyway - probably about 100 or a bit more MOD drivers to replace 2000+ striking drivers is NOT an attempt to bypass the right to strike!
     
  2. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    Contingency plans that include Service personnel is for civil emergencies only, extending the use of Service personnel for this action undermines the right to strike.

    You either support the principle that workers have at least some rights or you support the notion the employer is able to walk all over the worker...ie back to Victorian times. It's as simple.

    Which is it?

    This has nothing to do with personal inconvenience as that is small-minded at best.
     
  3. Steven Toy

    Steven Toy L3 Toy

    I support the basic right to withdraw labour. You can't force people to work as that would be slavery. However the government can make contingency plans as they see fit and in the national interest. Either that or the tanker drivers will be demanding salaries of 100+k per year.
     
  4. Bob McC

    Bob McC Living the life of Riley

  5. Bob McC

    Bob McC Living the life of Riley

    What "right" to strike? It doesn't exist in the UK
    http://labourlist.org/2011/06/what-is-the-right-to-strike/
     
  6. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Can you hear Talvin Singh?

    How does one distinguish between what is required and what is necessary?
     
  7. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    Well it should, otherwise it's back to the sweat shops and slave labour with employers taking advantage of the ordinary worker.

    If it doesn't it's because of people placing their own personal convenience first and being unable to see the big picture of where it all ends up.
     
  8. Brian

    Brian Eating fat, staying slim

    Absolute rubbish and a very, very weak argument there.

    There is no point in supporting the right to withdraw labour if you support contingency plans that ensure withdrawal of that labour has zero impact. I repeat, use of Service personnel in this instance is totally wrong.
     
  9. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    Here we are again, state institutions covering the failure of private enterprise.
     
  10. Michael L

    Michael L Banned

    Its not a failure of private enterprise, its strike action. Not the same thing, really.
     
  11. Steven Toy

    Steven Toy L3 Toy

    Why? Is there a law against it?
     
  12. Minstrel SE

    Minstrel SE These go to eleven

    They were queueing down the road today to fill up. The panic buying mentality of every man for himself so the pumps run dry even faster. If it wasnt so sad it would be funny.

    Perhaps we should all be striking over the high tax on everything we need

    They wont need to strike as every station will be bone dry pretty soon. The threat has done the job.
     
  13. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    The system of fuel distribution is being moved from the private sector to the state sector. I know you do not like the fact but it is a fact.
     
  14. russel

    russel ./_dazed_and_confused

    Well the years of competition have paid off, we now live in a dog eat dog society so people suffer more than if they co-operated. Three cheers for the free market dream!.
     
  15. Michael L

    Michael L Banned

    Its not a fact; the system is NOT being moved; as a temporary expedient, the RAF might get involved. Keeping the country running, which is a good idea, really.
     
  16. Cav

    Cav pfm Member

    I don't think they are on strike yet.
     
  17. Joe Hutch

    Joe Hutch Can you hear Talvin Singh?

    So we all get flown everywhere in Hercules transports?

    Say what you like about Maggie, she at least knew when to pick a fight with the coal miners; ie when coal stocks were high and the weather was getting warmer. In the current situation, fuel stocks are historically low, and a Cabinet minister has effectively triggered panic buying before the strike has been called, let alone started. Result!
     
  18. Steven Toy

    Steven Toy L3 Toy

    Brian wants the fuel tanker workers to win some kind of class struggle. We need balance - neither sweatshops on the one hand nor unions threatening the withdrawal of vital services to hold the country to ransom on the other. That balance is maintained by allowing them to strike but ensure the impact of their (in)action is limited.
     
  19. cooky1257

    cooky1257 pfm Member

  20. Michael L

    Michael L Banned

    OK Cooky, how much do the tanker drivers get paid? For the hard of thinking here, of course.
     

Share This Page