Workers Going on Strike - Is This Acceptable?

aboogee on 28/05/2024 - 17:43
Last edited 28/05/2024 - 17:45

Title says it all - what do ozb community think about workers going on strike just because they cant reach a deal with the gov on pay rise?

While I understand the employer doing whatever it takes to keep expenses down, but for employees to then say I don't like it and therefore going on strike for me is just silly.
I mean if employees don't like the pay and benefits, then what's stopping them from looking elsewhere?
I don't think I am fairly compensated, but the reality check brings me back down to earth in that there is no better alternative, otherwise I would've gone for the better alternative.
Going on strike is effectively blackmail… and the gov should figure out a longer term solution to get out from this position.

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/news/sydney-lightra…

Financial

Comments

    • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 08:32
      +178

      Enjoy your weekends off, mate? How's the public holidays? Do you like working a 40hr week? Don't like public holiday rates?

        • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 11:01
          +117

          Is …. is that a brag? Seriously?

            • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 11:37
              +64

              @spackbace:

              not everyone works 40hrs/week over 5 days, though they do get paid accordingly.

              You think they're paid accordingly because of the kindness of their employers heart, m8?

                • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 11:41
                  +44

                  @spackbace: Your legs must hurt with that drastic change of the goalposts.

                    • GrueHunter on 30/05/2024 - 21:27
                      +3

                      @spackbace: Glad one of you had an argument and a point

                      Spoiler: it wasn't you

                • mattyman on 29/05/2024 - 15:56
                  +37

                  @spackbace: Unions also ensure that backsliding of our rights doesn't happen. If there were no unions, how long do you think it would be until we were all working 80 hour weeks for half the pay?

                  • BLAIL on 29/05/2024 - 17:28
                    +1

                    @mattyman: We would be like france rioting if they dare pull that crap

                    • Jackson on 29/05/2024 - 22:11
                      +15

                      @BLAIL: The only thing standing in the way of protests being made illegal at the moment are unions

                    • BluebirdV on 31/05/2024 - 15:57
                      +1

                      @BLAIL: Do the French work 80 hour weeks for half of our Aussie wages?

                    • mattyman on 04/06/2024 - 09:37

                      @BLAIL: With the help of our unions, yes.

                  • Chandler on 30/05/2024 - 10:57
                    +3

                    @mattyman: And part of the reason why unions make seemingly excessive demands is for the negotiation process. Much easier to make excessive demands that you can then reduce or make concessions on during negotiation than to only demand what you actually want and then need to negotiate from there.

                    Personally I think the fact that this is needed is (profanity), but it is what it is.

              • R4 on 30/05/2024 - 19:38
                -3

                @ThithLord: The market decides what you get paid, not the employer, not the employee.

            • lonewolf on 30/05/2024 - 12:26
              +3

              @spackbace: What about the other benefits? paid parental leave. Long service Leave. Annual Leave. Sick Leave etc etc. I mean its seriously silly how people forget .

        • RolandWaites on 29/05/2024 - 14:15
          +25

          Works more than 40hrs a week
          In an industry that isn't unionised

          Checks out.

        • MessyG on 29/05/2024 - 18:58
          +8

          …and you're proud of this?

        • smartazz104 on 29/05/2024 - 21:35
          +3

          Because, you mean because it doesn't have a union.

        • Boioioioi on 30/05/2024 - 19:28
          +1

          If only you had a union lol

      • MELso on 29/05/2024 - 10:19
        +19

        These things wouldn't have occurred without strikes of course (along with OHS laws, workers compensation, unfair dismissal laws and a range of other protections that date back to when unions had considerably more clout than they do now)…

      • ddilrat on 29/05/2024 - 12:14

        Which union are you a member of?

        • pharkurnell on 29/05/2024 - 12:55

          OBBHU

        • RTX9090Ti on 29/05/2024 - 13:33
          +10

          OZBUNION

          • Miss B on 29/05/2024 - 14:14
            +21

            @RTX9090Ti: Is that a union for podiatrists?

            • Chandler on 30/05/2024 - 10:59

              @Miss B: Their site is "under construction" according to my search results. Did one of you crazy people decide to buy a domain?

        • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 14:32

          The Services Union

        • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 14:36
          +47

          Just because you're happy to work for poor compensation doesn't mean everyone else should be.

          The Sydney Railworkers are literally going out to bat for their counterparts in other parts of the city, forgoing their own pay to do so, yet here you are denigrating them.

          A statement from the RTBU states that “over 98 per cent of the workforce voted to take protected industrial action over pay issues”.

          Amazing result.

        • MessyG on 29/05/2024 - 18:59
          +9

          People don't strike because they have to work more than 40 hours per week. They strike because they have to work more than 40 hours per week and don't get paid, but also told by Barnaby Joyce to go live in the regions and be expected to commute 2 hours to work every day for the privilege.

        • Jamie007 on 30/05/2024 - 01:46
          +15

          And how exactly are workers supposed to "negotiate" without the power to strike, in which case the employer has all the power and the workers would have none? By asking nicely?

        • Eeples on 31/05/2024 - 00:57
          +1

          Funnily enough if you had read the article the western suburbs light rail workers are striking because they have been offered $5/hr less than other non western suburb light rail workers.

          Why shouldn’t they be paid the same?

      • Herbse on 29/05/2024 - 17:58
        +13

        Those damn corrupt union thugs. How dare they force businesses to give people these things.

        • pizzip on 30/05/2024 - 12:45
          +6

          Aye, those pesky workers should be grateful we aren't living in the industrial revolution… ah, bring back the good ole days of child labour and company towns!

        • WhyAmICommenting on 31/05/2024 - 07:32
          +8

          Yeah, nah.

        • ThithLord on 31/05/2024 - 08:21
          +6

          What a pitiful response. We're literally IN a thread discussing the successful actions of a union and here we have is lil old you declaring unions have no use anymore.

          Labor is made up of union members, mate.

          Look at what the Coalition had planned, it's been published in the Australian so hopefully it is publicated elsewhere with no paywall https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/industrial-…

          • R4 on 31/05/2024 - 09:16
            -5

            @ThithLord: Details. The vast majority of workers have decided that they don't need a union - the numbers speak for themselves. Democracy at work.

            Australian workers, largely, have it pretty good.

            • ThithLord on 31/05/2024 - 09:50
              +4

              @R4: "I shall remain ignorant" you do you, m80

              • R4 on 31/05/2024 - 10:09
                -5

                @ThithLord: Reality 2024 style.

                The people are speaking.

        • Crow K on 31/05/2024 - 09:04
          +11

          "the unions made the business owners honest, so they aren't needed any more"

          Kind of like how the firefighters quit their jobs when they put out all the fires, right? And that's why we don't have firefighters any more?

      • Cobalt_ on 01/06/2024 - 20:13

        Henry Ford, a hardcore union buster introduced the 5 day 40-hour working week, not the unions.

        • ThithLord on 02/06/2024 - 17:06
          +1

          I live in Australia. I couldn't give a fruit about the Americans.

          https://awu.net.au/weekends/

          It wasn’t until 1939 that union campaigning led to a standard 44-hour week across all industries. So, in 1941, working five days a week and half of Saturday was a short working week.

          Throughout World War II, workers put a lid on claims for better pay and conditions, as everyone rolled up their sleeves for the war effort.

          But when the war ended, workers who had sacrificed so much had had enough, and sought to gain the better conditions they deserved. This included a big push for a 40-hour week and the time off that would provide.

          Just as in earlier times, bosses and conservative politicians absolutely insisted it would be devastating for business if workers only worked for 40 hours a week.

          But in 1947 the Arbitration Court decided in favour of the 40-hour week.

          The unions had won, and the weekend was born

          • Cobalt_ on 03/06/2024 - 21:12

            @ThithLord: I live in Australia and don't give a flog what the unions think about things. They didn't invent the 40 hour work week nor were they responsible for it.
            Also try using a source that isn't union self back patting propaganda.

            • ThithLord on 04/06/2024 - 09:14

              @Cobalt_: Carry on with the delusion and copium, cobalt.

  • shaybisc on 28/05/2024 - 17:54
    +33

    "This comes after the union claims Transdev refuses to pay workers in Parramatta the same pay and conditions as workers in Sydney, despite months of negotiations and are left with “no option” but to strike."

    Why not?

    • Mechz on 28/05/2024 - 17:57
      +61

      Fair call to strike I say.

      • bargaino on 28/05/2024 - 22:10
        -1

        Why should Parramatta get the same pay as Sydney?

        • aboogee on 29/05/2024 - 00:07
          +1

          it was the reverse in the past, where (at least where i worked ~10yrs ago) working near Parramatta was considered "regional" and people there got a slightly higher pay than us.

  • Hardlyworkin on 28/05/2024 - 17:54
    +62

    I think protected industrial action is acceptable: https://www.fwc.gov.au/issues-we-help/industrial-action/type….

    It's one small part of why Australia is a good place to work for employees - particularly lower income earners.

    • jolee3 on 28/05/2024 - 20:54
      +17

      I think part of the problem is that the most powerful unions who incite workers to strike are often not in industries who have lower income earners e.g. construction..

      • Hardlyworkin on 28/05/2024 - 22:46
        +5

        True, give others a bad name. Although I don't like a lot of what they do, those unions can have a positive impact on safety. Which could be argued has more importance than wages.

      • Parentheses on 29/05/2024 - 23:16
        +30

        It's BECAUSE they have a strong union that they don't end up with significantly lower incomes. How on earth are people this blind, it's the most obvious cause and effect that exists anywhere in economics. If that union stops striking, their wages turn to crap. If another union gets stronger, their wages go up. That's how collective bargaining works.

        A huge part of why hospo and retail have such shitty wages is because the SDA is a captured union that works against its members. That's not an argument against unions, that's an argument FOR unions. If you find a type of employment where people are usually treated terribly, dollars to doughnuts you have found a sector with a weak or nonexistent union.

        • jolee3 on 30/05/2024 - 00:42

          I don't know that I would consider wages as "turning to crap" for some of these industries where they are offered 5% increases per year on a base wage that works out already to be well into the 6 figures a year without overtime, plus RDOs. The union wants to strike because they want 8% per year and a bucket load of allowances.

          I understand that in the past they have been able to get to where they are because of a strong union, but some of them now are just bullies. They don't negotiate in good faith. You only have to look up CFMEU and their intimidation tactics and flagrant disregard for the law. They get fined but they are rich enough not to care.

          • Chandler on 30/05/2024 - 11:03
            +6

            @jolee3:

            The union wants to strike because they want 8% per year and a bucket load of allowances.

            Sometimes yes, but sometimes no. As per my comment above, sometimes the ridiculous demands (that also get really flouted by the media, mind you) are so they can more easily negotiate. Much easier to negotiate down than up!

          • Parentheses on 30/05/2024 - 18:36
            +11

            @jolee3: Think harder. Do you believe they would be offered 5% increases if they didn't know the union was going to come along asking for 8%?

            This sort of propaganda-swallowing ignorance honestly makes me sad inside to see. Unions are good for everybody who earns money from their labour, rather than being a rent-seeking parasite. This is simple unarguable fact.

            • jolee3 on 30/05/2024 - 23:58
              -1

              @Parentheses: Propaganda-swallowing is quite an assumption. I don't pay too much attention to what the media says about it.

              I base my experience on the fact that, as part of my job, I have seen unions being needlessly difficult for both the employer AND workers.

              Pushing back on technology that benefits workers. Inserting clauses that certain allowances can only be paid to union members…and when an employer does the right thing by the workers and pays the allowance to ALL employees, the union threatens court action for breach of EA.

              Small contractors literally kicked off site by the union because they dared to make a non-unionised agreement - and we wonder why so many construction companies are going broke. The demands are not sustainable.

              To be clear, I am not saying all unions are bad. I am saying that some are definitely self serving.

              On a side note, why do people here feel the need to be so personally condescending to others who have differing opinions because of different experiences? "Think harder". It that really necessary? It's like some badge of honour to be rude on these forums.

              • Parentheses on 31/05/2024 - 01:31
                +4

                @jolee3: I say think harder because it's not a case of differing opinions, your different experience isn't at all relevant. You aren't critically looking at the things you are experiencing and your conclusions are factually incorrect as a result. Worse, they are damaging - ignorant union bashing has a direct effect on the way people act and vote, and Australian governments have made a habit of leveraging people who say the things you are saying to make life worse for millions of people in favour of a few. Think harder is the NICE conclusion, the rude conclusion would be that you are doing this deliberately as a malicious actor, which I hope is not true.

                Enterprise agreements can't pay people differently based on being in a union, so I am flat out calling bs on that one. Scabs SHOULD be kicked off, though since Howard there is no legal ability to do so and so again I am leaning towards either complete bs, or someone very old thinking back to a situation that hasn't been relevant in decades - thankfully in most sectors EAs/EBAs are binding across the workforce, not just the union. The technology claim is so vague it could go either way, but unions don't randomly pick fights for no reason, and based on your other claims I'm not putting much weight on this one either.

                The clincher though is your completely incorrect and frankly ridiculous take on why construction companies are going bust. It has NOTHING to do with unsustainable labour costs, these businesses make money hand over fist. What happens though is they tie up their liquidity into pre-purchased development contracts for current MATERIAL costs, then when those materials costs temporarily shoot up (like when international shipping is disrupted by COVID and then cost of materials stay high due to COVID-related inflation) they go bust rather than pay, and the owners piss off to phoenix themselves. This is not just random spitballing, it is painfully obvious and well-documented. They would love to blame the unions I'm sure, and they would love to hear misguided people say it is the unions' fault like you are trying here……… but it isn't.

                So again, please think harder, for yourself, and for everyone else. It's important.

                • jolee3 on 31/05/2024 - 18:45
                  -1

                  @Parentheses:

                  Enterprise agreements can't pay people differently based on being in a union, so I am flat out calling bs on that one.

                  https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/workplace/join-us-or-pa…

                  "Industry insiders said they have never seen anything like the condition and have labelled it “compulsory unionism by another name”."

                  Whilst it is not directly ordering to paying people differently - the sentiment is certainly there.

                  You aren't critically looking at the things you are experiencing and your conclusions are factually incorrect as a result.

                  My conclusion that not all unions are great, and fair, and negotiate in good faith?

                  https://www.afr.com/work-and-careers/workplace/cfmeu-in-open…

                  Are we supposed to idolise these unions who have spent the last 25 years knowingly breaking the law?

                  I'll say it again. Now you read carefully. I'm not saying all unions are bad. My conclusion is that some are, and I don't know how you can keep blanket calling that factually incorrect.

                  • Parentheses on 01/06/2024 - 01:29
                    +1

                    @jolee3: So yes, your claim of paying people differently based on whether they were in the union or not was entirely wrong. And no, the scarebaiting by AFR about something unrelated doesn't count.

                    The CFMEU, even with breaking the largely bullshit laws Howard brought in to bust the Maritime Union, is still a massively positive force both for its members and the wider labour market. Legal does not equal moral.

                    You are and remain entirely incorrect.

                    • jolee3 on 01/06/2024 - 14:41
                      -1

                      @Parentheses: Have you actually read the EAs that the AFR is referencing, to understand why the clauses in question are completely self serving for the union? I am guessing not.

                      Do we really want to get started on the morals of the people who lead the CFMEU? Seriously??? If they're the people you model yourself after then I can see where the arrogance comes from. It's incredibly questionable to pick and choose what laws you feel are fine to ignore, but now I can see what kind of morals you keep I won't bother continuing.

                      I have no more to say on this.

                      • Parentheses on 01/06/2024 - 15:10
                        +1

                        @jolee3:

                        Have you actually read the EAs that the AFR is referencing

                        I have, actually - there's just the one, the NSW ETU's EA. And yes, it's self-serving, that is kind of the point? No shit the union is going to put in things that benefit the union and its members. If people not in a union wanted to be enriched by the agreement negotiated between the union and the employer, they are free to put in the time and effort to have their OWN views represented and to join those negotiations. That's how negotiations work, if you don't put in the time and effort to participate then you don't get to complain when the results aren't good for you. Children learn this, though apparently some don't.

                        This occurs in practice all the time - for instance, there are 2 main groups involved in the EA I fall under, the NTEU and the CPSU, both of which are involved in negotiations. Others are free to participate in those negotiations if they want to without needing to be in a union.

                        Can you point at something immoral the CFMEU have done as an organisation? Individual corrupt members enriching themselves absolutely exist, though I'm sure you don't claim a business is immoral because an executive does bad things. The actions the CFMEU takes to support its members, even when illegal like the right of entry breaches you linked, are a net benefit to their members at the expense of employers - and yes, I am 100% fine with that.

    • mrvaluepack on 29/05/2024 - 15:22
      +2

      I dont think rail workers are considered lower income earners. Same with tradies.

      • Hardlyworkin on 29/05/2024 - 16:11
        +1

        Not in Australia anyway

  • DashCam AKA Rolts on 28/05/2024 - 17:55
    +81

    A strike is an employee tactic that is deployed when negotiations break down. An employee is selling their labour to the employer. The rate of renumeration needs to change periodically to account for inflation and changing work practices.
    If an employer is not negotiating in good faith, withdrawing labour is the employee's last resort.
    Historically, it was through strikes that the 8 hour day was implemented, and OHS became a key focus.

    • Elwes on 28/05/2024 - 22:05
      +53

      You should always have the right to withhold your labour, otherwise it's slavery.

        • Jugganautx on 29/05/2024 - 16:52
          +9

          They can… It's called workplace abandonment…

      • infinite on 29/05/2024 - 16:52
        -8

        All employees already have that right.

        Just as employers have the right to make those employees redundant due to their raising salary and associated tax costs rendering them too costly for the business to keep.

        Unions have traditionally done a great job ensuring and enabling workers rights. Unfortunately though, it's been the exact opposite for many decades now and all they currently do is sell out workers entitlements and employment opportunities for their own personal agendas and ideologies.

        • Chandler on 30/05/2024 - 11:05
          +8

          Just as employers have the right to make those employees redundant due to their raising salary and associated tax costs rendering them too costly for the business to keep.

          That's not redundancy. Redundancy is that their labour is no longer required, not that it is too expensive.

      • CommuterPolluter on 29/05/2024 - 17:00
        -8

        People should be allowed to strike but that’s very trite. Is it slavery to prevent racial discrimination in the provision of goods and services?

        • us3rnam3tak3n on 29/05/2024 - 17:47
          +13

          Seems unnecessary to bring race into this, or did I miss something?

  • TheRealCher on 28/05/2024 - 18:00
    +32

    Until the dental plan goes back in:
    Well march day and night
    By the big cooling tower
    They have the plant
    But we have the power

    And if you want to be a thug for J H Blair, you go for it. I know which side I'm on….

    • SBOB on 28/05/2024 - 18:05
      +23

      Lisa needs braces…..

      • mapax on 28/05/2024 - 18:55
        +10

        Dental plan

        • Sammy2000 on 28/05/2024 - 19:35
          +11

          Lisa needs braces…..

          • mapax on 28/05/2024 - 19:36
            +8

            @Sammy2000: Dental plan

            • SBOB on 28/05/2024 - 19:50
              +15

              @mapax: Thanks a lot Carl, now I've lost my train of thought…..

  • TheRealCher on 28/05/2024 - 18:07
    +27

    Serious answer: strikes are usually last resort. They're a pita for everyone, they cost money and membership and time and labour and the gains are hard fought and can be overturned if your prime Minister's name is Bob Hawke and he calls in the air force to prop up his mates with scab….
    And no, not everyone's gonna agree, but I don't often hear of people giving their benefits back to the company after the union has won all the workers the improved conditions. And yes, unions can be a bunch of C U next Tuesday's , even to their members….anyone wanna talk about being a retail worker in the 80s and 90s?

  • Tambani on 28/05/2024 - 18:07
    +8

    I for one welcome our corporate overlords.

  • try2bhelpful on 28/05/2024 - 18:09
    +46

    Better a strike than mass resignations. Imagine if all the nurses in a hospital decided to resign, en masse, and go work elsewhere. For some companies they don't get serious about the negotiations until they are threatened with a strike.

    Funny how there never seems to be a problem with providing more money for management renumeration.

    • donga100 on 28/05/2024 - 21:58
      +20

      Exactly this. Strikes are actually the employees being generous and courteous to the employer by giving them a second chance to reconsider before all the employees resign and cause chaos and damage to the company.

  • Jimothy Wongingtons on 28/05/2024 - 18:15
    +30

    Lisa, if you're unhappy with your job you don't strike. You just go in there every day, and do it really half-assed. That's the American way.

    • Fobsessive on 30/05/2024 - 00:32

      Hard to do when you have billable hours and timesheets

    • EightImmortals on 29/05/2024 - 07:00
      +26

      So how many plantations do you own?

    • ThithLord on 29/05/2024 - 08:35
      +20

      Born between 1946-1964, mate?

    • Crow K on 29/05/2024 - 09:24
      +13

      "they should just stop working there forever not stop working there for a bit, because that's blackmail"

      Might be a good time to look up what the word blackmail means

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join