What would you do about strikes?

[pErvinalia]

This is the kind of thing I'm on about :

“Our members have made their message clear. Unless ITV can come back with a better offer, they will be taking strike action next week.”

An ITV spokesperson said only 232 union members had voted to strike out of workforce of 3,000, and that the channel had contingency plans in place to ensure broadcasts would not be affected.

The spokesperson added: “We are fully prepared to maintain an open dialogue with union representatives following the ballot result today, which has seen 232 union members voting to strike out of a UK workforce of 3,000 employees.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/ ... -pay-offer

What's the problem?

Well, it certainly would have been easier to justify if voted for by most members...

The thing is, most employees are scabs and are more than happy to get the benefits of union action without making any financial contributions to the effort.

[Brian Peacock]

This is the kind of thing I'm on about :

“Our members have made their message clear. Unless ITV can come back with a better offer, they will be taking strike action next week.”

An ITV spokesperson said only 232 union members had voted to strike out of workforce of 3,000, and that the channel had contingency plans in place to ensure broadcasts would not be affected.

The spokesperson added: “We are fully prepared to maintain an open dialogue with union representatives following the ballot result today, which has seen 232 union members voting to strike out of a UK workforce of 3,000 employees.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/ ... -pay-offer

What's the problem?

Well, it certainly would have been easier to justify if voted for by most members...

Not all members of the workforce are journalists represented by the NUJ, which acted on behalf of its members only, not the workforce as a whole.

[JimC]

Certainly we have that sort of issue at school. Well over half the staff are union members; our union does a pretty fair job of negotiating pay deals and conditions, which the non-union members get without lifting a finger. However, if they as individuals were in dispute with the Principal, they would not have the back-up of union representation...

[Brian Peacock]

Nobody hankers after the closed shop these days - at least not outside the old school tie network.

[Hermit]

This is the kind of thing I'm on about :

“Our members have made their message clear. Unless ITV can come back with a better offer, they will be taking strike action next week.”

An ITV spokesperson said only 232 union members had voted to strike out of workforce of 3,000, and that the channel had contingency plans in place to ensure broadcasts would not be affected.

The spokesperson added: “We are fully prepared to maintain an open dialogue with union representatives following the ballot result today, which has seen 232 union members voting to strike out of a UK workforce of 3,000 employees.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/ ... -pay-offer

What's the problem?

Well, it certainly would have been easier to justify if voted for by most members...

Most union members did vote: "In a high turn out, 85% of National Union of Journalists’ members at the broadcaster voted in favour of a strike ballot, as did 86% of those affiliated with Bectu and 78% of Unite’s ITV membership."

Also, keep in mind that ITV's initial offer was a 1.75%. The next one proposed 2.0%, an improvement, yes, but in real terms still an actual pay cut. Inflation stood at 2.4% for the year. At the same time the company's bottom line looked extremely good, its EBIT being just over 16% of revenue. It's CEO was rewarded with a £900,000 salary plus a bonus amounting to 200% of that salary and an incentive payment of somewhere between 225% and 350% of salary. Altogether he received £8.4 million for a year's work, and the increase over the previous year was significantly higher than inflation. Oh, and did I mention the £3.95 million golden hello he was given before he had even put a single day's work in for ITV?

[mistermack]

The employers make their first offer low, not because they expect it to be accepted, but because they know that WHATEVER they offer, the fucking union is going to dispute it, fight it, organise a strike, and generally try to justify their own existence.

If ITV knew that there would be guaranteed no resistance, they would probably have offered 2.2 in the first place.
It's a vicious circle. The shop stewards have to try to make themselves look important. To keep their members happy and try to recruit new ones.

O.2 % extra. What a fucking victory. NOT.

[Hermit]

The employers make their first offer low, not because they expect it to be accepted, but because they know that WHATEVER they offer, the fucking union is going to dispute it, fight it, organise a strike, and generally try to justify their own existence.

It's called an "ambit offer". Unions do the exact same. They make an "ambit claim", not because they expect it to be accepted, but because they know that WHATEVER they offer, the fucking bosses are going to dispute it, fight it, organise a scare campaign, and generally try to justify their own existence to the shareholders. It's been forever thus.

If ITV knew that there would be guaranteed no resistance, they would probably have offered 2.2 in the first place.

Which is still a pay cut when adjusted for inflation. Compared with the increase the CEO got, it reveals them to be a bunch of greedy, hypocritical, uncaring cunts. Same old, same old.

[Brian Peacock]

No no no. Surely the CEO is rewarded for his talent while it's the NUJ members who were just being greedy.

[Hermit]

No no no. Surely the CEO is rewarded for his talent while it's the NUJ members who were just being greedy.

Yup. Gotta love the double standard. It is mirrored by regarding top executives primarily as assets and the rest of the workforce primarily as costs, when both are equally both.