What is happening to the Labour Party?

[DaveO]

Another problem with many Lefties. They don't understand that nothing is free.

You are just being pedantic. I am sure Whelly understands his taxes / NI pay for the NHS. And that it is free at the point of use not free as in of no cost. Which means of course if you require serious surgery you don't end up bankrupt or just dead (!) as you might in the USA. Collectively contributing via our taxes to the NHS results in a system superior to theirs.

As for the "I'm alright Jack" comment. You have absolutely no idea about my situation, so kindly refrain from such inflammatory supposition.

Well you clearly view the world from your own situation which is what I took that to mean.

You suggest we don't need unions because if you don't like the job, pay and conditions you just leave it.

Either you are in an industry or profession such that you are position to do so or have money behind you so you can do this or you are just being very naive.

The vast majority of people need to keep their job and can't just leave for another. As such they need protection from exploitation in that job. TU's provide that because despite labour laws companies ignore them and exploit people.

Given what has gone on recently at Sports Direct why you don't think TU's are needed I do not know. You think those being exploited there would rather not vote with their feet and leave? They stay because despite being treated like cattle they need the money.

As to fears about powerful trade unions holding you to ransom, why on earth do you have a problem with that? It is surely the ultimate expression of the free market.

By this I mean what is the difference between a train driver through his union getting a big pay packet to a stock exchange trader or an investment banker getting paid a fortune? We are told we must pay the "market rate" for the latter or the top talent will leave. Well you seem in favour of that if pay and conditions are not up to snuff so why do we not have to pay well for jobs like train drivers? If they can negotiate a top pay packet the market has spoken.

Or does the market only apply to others?

[Owd Codger]

Another problem with many Lefties. They don't understand that nothing is free.

You are just being pedantic. I am sure Whelly understands his taxes / NI pay for the NHS. And that it is free at the point of use not free as in of no cost. Which means of course if you require serious surgery you don't end up bankrupt or just dead (!) as you might in the USA. Collectively contributing via our taxes to the NHS results in a system superior to theirs.

As for the "I'm alright Jack" comment. You have absolutely no idea about my situation, so kindly refrain from such inflammatory supposition.

Well you clearly view the world from your own situation which is what I took that to mean.

You suggest we don't need unions because if you don't like the job, pay and conditions you just leave it.

Either you are in an industry or profession such that you are position to do so or have money behind you so you can do this or you are just being very naive.

The vast majority of people need to keep their job and can't just leave for another. As such they need protection from exploitation in that job. TU's provide that because despite labour laws companies ignore them and exploit people.

Given what has gone on recently at Sports Direct why you don't think TU's are needed I do not know. You think those being exploited there would rather not vote with their feet and leave? They stay because despite being treated like cattle they need the money.

As to fears about powerful trade unions holding you to ransom, why on earth do you have a problem with that? It is surely the ultimate expression of the free market.

By this I mean what is the difference between a train driver through his union getting a big pay packet to a stock exchange trader or an investment banker getting paid a fortune? We are told we must pay the "market rate" for the latter or the top talent will leave. Well you seem in favour of that if pay and conditions are not up to snuff so why do we not have to pay well for jobs like train drivers? If they can negotiate a top pay packet the market has spoken.

Or does the market only apply to others?

Well put, Dave O.

Bet he also supports the 10% increase by Executives while those at the bottom of the pile are seeing their pay either remaining stagnant with little or no pay increase or given a new contract with pay reduced to that of the minimum wage.

[Owd Codger]

Anderson was unpopular with Labour Party members in Liverpool and Merseyside in general. He made sure he had a higher profile than the City or the region.

As for TU calling strikes.
Why wouldn't a Rail Union call a strike over Southern Rail and its owner Govia Thameslink?
GT are awful.
The London/Brighton service hasn't had one train on time in the last twelve months.
They have massive staff vacancies as staff have left, some to other Rail Companies others out of the indutry.
They have had their sickness levels double in 12 months which tells of low staff morale.
Three weeks ago they cancelled 341 services a day.
That prompted the then Rail Minister Claire Perry to resign as Minister.
The Governement blames all that on the Unions and their dispute over Driver Only Operation.

The real problem IMO is that DfT awarded the franchise to the wrong Rail Company (GT) and so it has proved.

The strikes are the least of GT and the Gov't problems over Southern rail!

That's all very well but you haven't answered the question.

If the workers don't like it, no-one is forcing them to stay. If enough workers leave then the rail company would have to increase the available salaries to attract staff, or cease to exist as a business.

I still haven't had the logic explained to me.

"I want to work and here are the T&C's I want".

Utterly ridiculous.

Govia Thameslink have even been criticised by some of the Tories for their bad industrial relations and poor service.

Like Wiganer Ted Has said, franchise given to a wrong and bad company and if there was ever a case for the Government to take over and run it like thy did on the East Coast main line, the time has come for that to happen on the Southern Region.

[Wintergreen]

Another problem with many Lefties. They don't understand that nothing is free.

You are just being pedantic. I am sure Whelly understands his taxes / NI pay for the NHS. And that it is free at the point of use not free as in of no cost. Which means of course if you require serious surgery you don't end up bankrupt or just dead (!) as you might in the USA. Collectively contributing via our taxes to the NHS results in a system superior to theirs.

As for the "I'm alright Jack" comment. You have absolutely no idea about my situation, so kindly refrain from such inflammatory supposition.

Well you clearly view the world from your own situation which is what I took that to mean.

You suggest we don't need unions because if you don't like the job, pay and conditions you just leave it.

Either you are in an industry or profession such that you are position to do so or have money behind you so you can do this or you are just being very naive.

The vast majority of people need to keep their job and can't just leave for another. As such they need protection from exploitation in that job. TU's provide that because despite labour laws companies ignore them and exploit people.

Given what has gone on recently at Sports Direct why you don't think TU's are needed I do not know. You think those being exploited there would rather not vote with their feet and leave? They stay because despite being treated like cattle they need the money.

As to fears about powerful trade unions holding you to ransom, why on earth do you have a problem with that? It is surely the ultimate expression of the free market.

By this I mean what is the difference between a train driver through his union getting a big pay packet to a stock exchange trader or an investment banker getting paid a fortune? We are told we must pay the "market rate" for the latter or the top talent will leave. Well you seem in favour of that if pay and conditions are not up to snuff so why do we not have to pay well for jobs like train drivers? If they can negotiate a top pay packet the market has spoken.

Or does the market only apply to others?

Isn't it obvious that this analogy is flawed? Do I REALLY need to spell it out to you?

I will give you a chance to withdraw the comment before I post with just how silly your post is in this respect!

[Wandering Warrior]

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the Southern Rail driver only dispute not a customer safety issue?
How can a driver in his cab see what's going on on the platform?
On the minimal occasions I use trains, usually from Bolton to Manc or Wigan, I observe how the guard is the vital cog in ensuring that rail users safely embark and disembark off trains.
Get rid of guards and not only do you get rid of salaries and employees but you lose customer safety. Now is that simplistic?

[Wintergreen]

Another problem with many Lefties. They don't understand that nothing is free.

You are just being pedantic. I am sure Whelly understands his taxes / NI pay for the NHS. And that it is free at the point of use not free as in of no cost. Which means of course if you require serious surgery you don't end up bankrupt or just dead (!) as you might in the USA. Collectively contributing via our taxes to the NHS results in a system superior to theirs.

As for the "I'm alright Jack" comment. You have absolutely no idea about my situation, so kindly refrain from such inflammatory supposition.

Well you clearly view the world from your own situation which is what I took that to mean.

You suggest we don't need unions because if you don't like the job, pay and conditions you just leave it.

Either you are in an industry or profession such that you are position to do so or have money behind you so you can do this or you are just being very naive.

The vast majority of people need to keep their job and can't just leave for another. As such they need protection from exploitation in that job. TU's provide that because despite labour laws companies ignore them and exploit people.

Given what has gone on recently at Sports Direct why you don't think TU's are needed I do not know. You think those being exploited there would rather not vote with their feet and leave? They stay because despite being treated like cattle they need the money.

As to fears about powerful trade unions holding you to ransom, why on earth do you have a problem with that? It is surely the ultimate expression of the free market.

By this I mean what is the difference between a train driver through his union getting a big pay packet to a stock exchange trader or an investment banker getting paid a fortune? We are told we must pay the "market rate" for the latter or the top talent will leave. Well you seem in favour of that if pay and conditions are not up to snuff so why do we not have to pay well for jobs like train drivers? If they can negotiate a top pay packet the market has spoken.

Or does the market only apply to others?

Isn't it obvious that this analogy is flawed? Do I REALLY need to spell it out to you?

I will give you a chance to withdraw the comment before I post with just how silly your post is in this respect!

No withdrawal? Ok then.

The banker is operating in a free market. If he doesn't get what he thinks is a fair pay packet, he has two choices. Put up with it or leave and be replaced by someone who (presumably) will do the job for less.

The train driver has both these options of course, but COMPLETELY CONTRARY to the free market decides to do neither. He goes on strike. In a truly free market the company would sack him. THE SITUATION IS THAT THERE IS NO FREE MARKET.

Quite possibly the worst argued case I have seen on these forums DaveO (and I've read Whelly's posts!)

[Wiganer Ted]

Labour's call to Nationalise Southern Rail certainly meets with the approval of their passengers as they've been calling for that for months.

Southern serve (sic) Surrey and Sussex and those passengers are hardly going to be fully paid up left wing Labour members. Very much the opposite and they want Southern Nationalised.

The Tories can hardly complain about Nationalising the Railways as it was George Osborne who Nationalised Network Rail.

Scot Rail is owned by Abelio who are a 100% subsidiary of Dutch National Railways. As are East Anglia Railways and a few more.
Northern are part owned by a subsidiary of the German National Rail company.

Seeing as most "Private Rail Compamies" are in fact subsidiaries of foreign national rail compamies then having our Railways owned by ourselves doesn't appear to bad a deal.

[Owd Codger]

Labour's call to Nationalise Southern Rail certainly meets with the approval of their passengers as they've been calling for that for months.

Southern serve (sic) Surrey and Sussex and those passengers are hardly going to be fully paid up left wing Labour members. Very much the opposite and they want Southern Nationalised.

The Tories can hardly complain about Nationalising the Railways as it was George Osborne who Nationalised Network Rail.

Scot Rail is owned by Abelio who are a 100% subsidiary of Dutch National Railways. As are East Anglia Railways and a few more.
Northern are part owned by a subsidiary of the German National Rail company.

Seeing as most "Private Rail Compamies" are in fact subsidiaries of foreign national rail compamies then having our Railways owned by ourselves doesn't appear to bad a deal.

Many on the passenger side are now owned or part owned by bus companies like Arivva and First while on the freight side, the biggest operator is owned by DB Cargo, a subsidiary of German State Railways.

In spite of the fact that 70% of the public here want our railways to be state owned like in other Western European countries, we have a farcical franchise system where most of the system is owned by bus companies and state railways of other countries like France, Germany, Holland etc.

Hardly surprising that unlike other European countries who have better run railways and low fares, we have poor service and high fares, plus a situation where it is costing a fortune in re-spraying the rolling stock, every time a franchise changes ownership which can be as little as five years.

We never learn!

[Wiganer Ted]

I've never liked the Franchise system my preference would have been licencing.

My interpretation would have been more than one main operator for each main line with say Virgin and First both running competing services on the same routes.
To ensure they are viable they would be given x number of services in busy periods and a given number in the not so busy periods.

Corbyn says he will only nationalise when the franchises run out. that could take years and years.
I think the Virgin/Stagecoach east Coast main line is a 15 year franchise from this year. So that would be nationalised in 2031.

[Fujiman]

I've never liked the Franchise system my preference would have been licencing.

My interpretation would have been more than one main operator for each main line with say Virgin and First both running competing services on the same routes.
To ensure they are viable they would be given x number of services in busy periods and a given number in the not so busy periods.

Corbyn says he will only nationalise when the franchises run out. that could take years and years.
I think the Virgin/Stagecoach east Coast main line is a 15 year franchise from this year. So that would be nationalised in 2031.

that'll probably be the year they get back in.