Loz

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, if I'd > never left my job, and someone announced they were > changing my pension conditions, I'd be pissed off. > Whether or not the pensions are "fair" is not > really the point. The fact is, you go for a job > based on the salary, pension package, leave > entitlemen, and so on. If you apply in good faith, > based on a set of terms & conditions, why > shouldn't you complain if suddenly it's all going > to change? It happens in the private sector. In our company people were weaned off the final salary scheme and onto the money purchase scheme.

Dougal Mulldoon Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You obviously blindly support bully boy bastard > management without considering things from the > other side don't you? And you obviously blindly support bully boy bastard unionism without considering things from the other side don't you? This strike action is unjustifiable. You can't dress it up in any way - it is just the RMT trying to bully LU. They have done it before and I'm please LU management have finally grown a pair. Bring on the RMT strikes - it's just one more step closer to more restrictive strike laws.

Don't forget a shaved pussy... http://whyevolutionistrue.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/shaved-cat-2.jpg

But why strike at all?? LU are doing what the tribunal told them to do. The RMT are demanding something they have no right to demand. Anyway, if the mandate runs out on the 20 June, how come they have called strike dates on: * Between 2101 BST on 19 June and 0300 BST on 20 June * Between 2101 BST on 27 June and 1159 BST on 28 June * Between 1200 BST on 29 June and 1159 BST on 30 June * Between 1200 BST and 2100 BST on 1 July

ianr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > "Moreover, we do not need to wait for this > Tribunal's decision, because we already have a > Tribunal decision! Back in January, the Employment > Tribunal awarded Arwyn 'interim relief', ruling > that LU had sacked him unfairly, unlawfully and > because of his trade union activities." > http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/node/2245 But LU have fully complied with that tribunal's orders. And that reading of the judgement is wrong anyway - the tribunal ruled that his appeal was 'likely to succeed', which is why the appeal is going ahead. Why can't the RMT wait the two weeks for the appeal to be concluded? Because Bib Crow is a spoilt brat used to getting his own way.

Laddy Muck Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > As I well know!!!!!????? > > Hmmmmmmmm.... > > > > *covers up* Is one blue? Definitely time to cover up then.

Ladygooner Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Football fixtures for next season out at 9am tomorrow Apparently Ryan Giggs is meeting Jordan in December. Allegedly.

Sometimes nature is not so beautiful... http://notesfromtheconsultantsjungle.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/happy_moose.jpg MOOSE!

Tarot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Take for example the freeview x-rated porno > sites,fed into every home. Do you mean the phone line channels? X-rated? Good grief. Google 'x-rated' and I suspect you'll find a couple of websites that'll make your false teeth fall out. And the porn/rape link theory was trashed years ago.

Fox News

There are many things to worry about in this world. A bunch of quasi-religious loonies is a long way from the top of the list. Personally, I think most druggies would take their money and take their tablets. Then sell the tablets. http://riekelt.com/barbrady.png

From the website... "Project Prevention UK will not be paying for sterilization procedures. The BMA just makes that too difficult." Sounds like we have the right safeguards in place.

mmmmm.... Π Yum.

Salsaboy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How on earth do you smoke a mackeral? Dunno, but smoke me a kipper - I'll be back for breakfast.

Those are EDF beach huts, maxxi. http://www.premierluxuryloos.co.uk/images/portaloos.jpg These are WDF beach huts.

Drxyster Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > would you recommend that she was > sterilised or had an abortion? What does my recommendation have to do with it? I thought this was about forced sterilisation and eugenics?

Lucky you'd didn't get grabbed by the fuzz...

Hardly examples of eugenics. Seems you are trying to whip up a debate where there is none.

Choppers were just out again near the station.

Well, the Greens have one MP. Just another 325 more needed for a majority.

Thanks, Chippy. I've only had a quick skim through the findings of the report, but whilst there are definitely some positives of unions in regards of wage markup and lower wage differentials, the wider macroeconomic picture is a bit more cloudy. Union density per se has a very weak association, or perhaps no association, with economic performance indicators such as the unemployment rate, inflation, the employment rate, real compensation growth, labor supply, adjustment speed to wage shocks, real wage flexibility, and labor and total factor productivity. There is, however, one significant exception: union density correlates negatively with labor earnings inequality and wage dispersion. Interestingly, the report concludes that the best wage outcomes occur with two pairings of governments and unions: - left wing governments and strong unions - right wing governments and weak unions. Seems that the opposite combinations just don't give strong wage outcomes. So, if you union type would like to go away and come back when we have a left-wing government (note I didn't say a Labour government :)) ) then it looks like you'd be doing the economy a real service!

Not wanting to turn this into a gender debate, but I get a similar unease when I see comments like, "don't tell women how to dress - tell men to stop raping". That's a bit too close to Dworkin territory for comfort. "Tell the very, very small percentage of men who rape women to stop it" would be more accurate, but not nearly so headline grabbing.

Chippy Minton Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > However, the benefits aren't just enjoyed by > individuals because countries fare better > economically if large numbers of workers belong to > trade unions. Specifically, high union density > rates are associated with lower unemployment and > inflation, higher productivity, and speedier > adjustments to economic shocks. That's a big claim, Chippy, especially the "higher productivity and speedier adjustments to economic shocks" bit. Have you got any links to where this info came from? Not saying you are wrong or right - I just that I can't see why the existence of unions would have such an effect. And, if there is a connection, is it cause or correlation?

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes we need 7 Indian Restaurants 1 for each day. I think we have that already and a couple of spares.

hand?some/ˈhan(d)səm/Adjective 1. (of a man) Good-looking. 2. (of a woman) Striking and imposing in good looks rather than conventionally pretty.