Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Union Strike Threat At Major Energy Sites


1929crash

Recommended Posts

0
HOLA441
Well if the power goes off then computer will be saying no all round the UK.

This is when all those Disaster Recovery planners will find out that the back up generators in the the Data Centres are essentially useless if all the end user devices such as PCs, ATMs. Tills etc plus all the intervening routers have no power.

The effect would be faster and much morer devastating than in the 1970s when so much of the world was literally hand cranked.

Better get the tinned food in now.

I was in a Sainsbury's once when the lights went out. They had a back up generator and guess what it powered? The tills only! We shopped in the dark but could still pay. I loved the cynicsm. ;)

It will be a nasty shock to today's till operators if they have to calculate the bills by hand like an old fashioned grocer. :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 80
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1
HOLA442
Such as decent wages and decent working conditions perhaps?

No i was talking about the taxes, which reduce employment and act to make working conditions worse

Or pay them more wages?

Simpler and more sustainable to remove the costs on workers that you inflict

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2
HOLA443
How the f*ck do manage to involve the public sector into this story.

None of the workers mentioned are employed by the state and have not been so since the 1980s.

Nor are Trade Unions public sector bodies. They are mutual organisations, paid for and run by their members.

In fact many have their origins in the 19th Century.

The only two tribes going to war here are Capital and Labour and its pretty clear which side you are on.

Socialism for the rich (bailouts for banks etc) and capitalism for the poor.

+1 Good post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3
HOLA444
4
HOLA445
Guest absolutezero
The government introduces extra costs to being productive.

Your definition of priductive and my definition differ somewhat,

I think a public sector doctor (makes people well enough to work) or teacher (teaches people to read and write etc) is productive.

You don't - not because of what they do, but because of who their employer is. Crazy.

No i was talking about the taxes, which reduce employment and act to make working conditions worse

How?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5
HOLA446
6
HOLA447
With what the banksters have got away with I find it difficult to criticise any person or group using their leverage to blackmail the population/employer/supplier of funds.

Precedent has been set on a scale, type and for a less deserving group than has ever been done before. There are going to be serious moral, social and financial ramifications for decades for what the banksters have done and everything else is pretty insignificant. If these crooks can get away with it why not everyone else?

well put.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7
HOLA448
Guest absolutezero
Alternatively the private sector could 'grow some balls' and just refuse to pay the fines the public sector inflict on it.

Problem solved

Please do feel free and see what happens.

Note. I have explained to you before what these "fines" are but you refuse to even pay attention to what I say, never mind read it and make any kind of logical argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8
HOLA449

A stirring image from the workers struggle!

Strike-at-Grangemouth-oil-001.jpg

Actually, these workers are being distracted into nationalistic posturing by the perfidy of the bourgeois owning class. They are being diverted from the correct analysis of their own situation. The energy workers should realise that the foreign workers are not their enemy, they are their allies. Once more, as usual, capital, having appealed to globalism and reaped its profitable rewards by way of globalisation, provokes nationalism to prevent the rise of global international consciousness within labour during a profitability crisis.

Capital 1, Labour nil.

What is to be done?

Edited by Tob the Blether
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9
HOLA4410
Note. I have explained to you before what these "fines" are but you refuse to even pay attention to what I say, never mind read it and make any kind of logical argument.

Your 'explanation' is that you find it convenient that people are compelled by force to put money in your pension

However, the easiest way to improve the net wages for workers is for you to stop fining them for working

Edited by Stars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10
HOLA4411
Guest absolutezero
Your 'explanation' is that you find it convenient that people are compelled by force to put money in your pension

However, the easiest way to improve the net wages for workers is for you to stop fining them for working

Can you have a debate without going on about pensions?

FYI. I was on the Prudential website yesterday.

It told me to get a similar value index linked pension to the teachers' scheme would only cost about £100 a month more than I am already paying in!

But that's beside the point.

Tax is your membership fee for living in the UK.

Business tax is the businesses contribution for being allowed to do business in the UK.

What the State does with the money once you have handed it over is not your concern. You do not pay for schools, the NHS or blasted pensions!

It's like if my employer pays me then I run amok with a knife I've bought in Asda, my employer is not responsible for my knifing people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11
HOLA4412
How the f*ck do manage to involve the public sector into this story.

None of the workers mentioned are employed by the state and have not been so since the 1980s.

Nor are Trade Unions public sector bodies. They are mutual organisations, paid for and run by their members.

In fact many have their origins in the 19th Century.

The only two tribes going to war here are Capital and Labour and its pretty clear which side you are on.

Socialism for the rich (bailouts for banks etc) and capitalism for the poor.

Can quite easily apply the public sector to this issue – you will see this unfold next winter when the Conservatives go deficit slashing.

Meanwhile the poor bastards who work in the private sector pay the price for public sector workers indulging in stupefying pensions etc. Whilst the so called ‘workers’ of the UK run to trade unions to bounce they pay up.

While the poor bastards who happen to work in the non unionised private sector silently take wage freezes, pay cuts, redundancies. We are the poor buggers who should be protesting and hell maybe we bloody should but threatening our power supply in the current climes is ridiculous and going back to my initial post will lead to many rapidly losing patience with their ‘causes’.

Especially if it is some scouse red flagger banging on about glorified lorry drivers needing to earn £45k+.

Fook I would love a pay rise but I know it ain’t going to happen until my company is profitable again. Such is bloody life at the moment it shouldn’t mean that you threaten some old dears power or a company who are trying to meet a rush deadline only to have power cut by some trumped up Unionite who has long since forgotten the realities of running a profitable business that can continue to employ folk in the long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12
HOLA4413
Tax is your membership fee for living in the UK.

Business tax is the businesses contribution for being allowed to do business in the UK.

What the State does with the money once you have handed it over is not your concern. You do not pay for schools, the NHS or blasted pensions!

It's like if my employer pays me then I run amok with a knife I've bought in Asda, my employer is not responsible for my knifing people.

And again, you come up with an irrelevant 'explanation' which is really no different in nature to a mafia man's 'explanation' of his protection charges - "the charge is what you have to pay me, so i can have a pension"

And all this is completely irrelevant to my statement -

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13
HOLA4414
Guest absolutezero
And again, you come up with an irrelevant 'explanation' which is really no different in nature to a mafia man's 'explanation' of his protection charges - "the charge is what you have to pay me, so i can have a pension"

And all this is completely irrelevant to my statement -

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

1. Good to know you're ignoring my pension comments because they're inconvenient to you.

2. Also good to know you've not paid one jot of attention to what I said because once again, it's inconvenient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14
HOLA4415
1. Good to know you're ignoring my pension comments because they're inconvenient to you.

2. Also good to know you've not paid one jot of attention to what I said because once again, it's inconvenient.

None of it was relevant to my statement -

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

Edited by Stars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15
HOLA4416
Guest absolutezero
None of it was relevant to my statement -

That's right. You take your ball and skipping rope home and sulk.

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

As explained, not fined and a lot of public sector workers are productive.

You just don't listen, do you?

Edited by absolutezero
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16
HOLA4417

Are these power stations built yet, the ones where they are going on strike?

Edit:

The seven sites at risk are BP's Forties pipeline facility at Grangemouth, the Ineos refinery at Grangemouth, Sellafield, Shell's refinery at Stanlow, RWE's power plants at Staythorpe in Nottinghamshire and Aberthaw in South Glamorgan and Chevron's refinery in Pembroke.

Sellafield doesn't have a power station anymore, but they are building one, Staythorpe is not built yet, Aberthaw would be bad to take off line. Construction workers are going on strike I think.

In 1993, following full public consultation and a public inquiry, planning approval was granted for a gas-fired power station at Staythorpe. Construction began in 1998 but was put on hold two years later, as there was already sufficient generating capacity in the UK at that time.

RWE npower’s plans for a new 1650MW CCGT at Staythorpe mean that it will once again play a crucial role in UK power generation and the economic success of the area, well into the 21st century.

http://www.npower.com/powerstations/Stayth...story/index.htm

Aberthaw can generate 1,500 megawatts of electricity for the National Grid System. This is enough power to meet the needs of some 1.5 million people - equivalent to the total population of five cities the size of Cardiff.

https://www.rwe.com/web/cms/en/97594/rwe-np...ation/aberthaw/

Edited by Three Pint Princess 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17
HOLA4418
That's right. You take your ball and skipping rope home and sulk.

Why do you think working people should be fined £100 month to put in your pension?

As explained, not fined and a lot of public sector worlers are productive.

You just don't listen, do you?

I did listen, you just refuse to use reason when your point is rebuffed

I have already explained that the charge for being here is already made separately by the owners of real estate and so either the taxes you describe as charges for the same services must be extortion or the charges made by the owners of real estate must be extortion - They can't both charge for the same service. So choose.

Again - it's irrelevant to my statement in any case.

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18
HOLA4419
Guest absolutezero
Why do you think working people should be fined £100 month to put in your pension?

Explained that it's not but you choose not to listen.

I did listen, you just refuse to use reason when your point is rebuffed

:lol:

Priceless!

I have already explained that the charge for being here is already made separately by the owners of real estate and so either the taxes you describe as charges for the same services must be extortion or the charges made by the owners of real estate must be extortion - They can't both charge for the same service. So choose.

I've explained to you numerous times. If your landlord pays a property tax for owning the place, where is YOUR contribution (i.e. tax) for living there?

Again - it's irrelevant to my statement in any case.

So the fact I've blown a hole in your "unaffordable" public sector pensions claptrap is very upsetting for you. That's fine.

The easiest way to improve the lot of workers is for you to stop fining them for being productive

Already explained this to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19
HOLA4420

<posturing, indignant detritus deleted>

I've explained to you numerous times. If your landlord pays a property tax for owning the place, where is YOUR contribution (i.e. tax) for living there?

You already pay it to the landlord in the market rents he can charge you for being there. That's the point - the charge for being there is already made by the landlord

<posturing, indignant detritus deleted>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20
HOLA4421
You are totally out of touch matey,these people fear for their lively hoods and are fed up same as a large percentage of the country with the shortage of employment due to uncontrolled immigration.

I suspect a lot of people will support them.

It is not immigration, it is sympatatic of a nation whose workforce are paying too much to live and as a result cost more, the majority of which this lot would all be in favour of their house going up in value no doubt.

To blame it simply on some ‘bloody foreigner’ (sic) stealing their job is in itself completely out of touch.

When folks lights and power goes out along with petrol shortages there will be no sympathy, especially in light of the fact this is about……….them being paid more not Manuel being able to do the job cheaper. Now how out of touch is that with the current climate.

Edited by Brave New World
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21
HOLA4422
Guest absolutezero
<posturing, indignant detritus deleted>

You already pay it to the landlord in the market rents he can charge you for being there. That's the point - the charge for being there is already made by the landlord

<posturing, indignant detritus deleted>

Glad to see you'e being adult about your misunderstanding of tax.

Wrong. As explained before.

The landlord has paid his contribution. The fact you gave him the money to do it is irrelevant. It ceases to be your money.

I repeat, where is YOUR contribution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22
HOLA4423

I think my post was lost amongst the arguments, but the power stations two of which are not built yet and the third is just the contruction workers are going on strike ?

So power cuts are unlikely from that side, but the media are reporting it as if the power stations exist and are shutting down.

Edited by Three Pint Princess 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23
HOLA4424
The landlord has paid his contribution.

Correct he has paid the money to the government for the service of being there. Further, his ownership gives him the right to charge others for the right to be there (the government bestowes on him the legal right to charge others for its services)

The fact you gave him the money to do it is irrelevant.

Wrong - because the tenant is paying the landlord the market price for the right to be there. As I explained, you can only ask for that this service be paid for once without one of the charges becoming extortion...so choose

Edited by Stars
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24
HOLA4425
Guest absolutezero
Correct he has paid the money to the government for the service of being there. Further, his ownership gives him the right to charge others for the right to be there (the government bestowes on him the legal right to charge others for its services)

Wrong. It's his contribution for owning the place. Now where's yours?

Wrong - because the tenant is paying the landlord the market price for the right to be there. As I explained, you can only ask for that this service be paid for once without one of the charges becoming extortion...so choose

You're not listening again, are you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information