JordyCarter
Member
Registered: 14th Mar 10
User status: Offline
|
Well from what i heard from ineos employees is that the grangemouth sites employees wouldnt agree to cuts (Freezes or whatever) so the boss (I forget his name sorry) said hes closing the plant. They then decided they agree to the new proposed stuff so he opened it.
Its vague what i know tbh but its what ive heard when mooching through the admin offices
[Edited on 25-10-2013 by JordyCarter]
|
djgritt
Premium Member
Registered: 1st Nov 07
Location: Dorset Drives: Focus ST / Hyundai i20N
User status: Offline
|
You've likely been on the Seal Sands site then I would assume?
What you've heard in the offices is the same as has been widely broadcast & published across the media, nothing that sounds like inside information...
The owner (Ineos) quite rightfully decided to shut the place down on Unites fuck up and resistance to compromise; as they are losing millions, can't run the plant at 100% capacity which further affects losses, and have a small group trying to make them keep spending the money that isn't coming in (through the Pension and no Pay Freezes)
I'm glad they called the Unions bluff and gave them a healthy reality check by the short lived Closure plan. It shows them that they should learn to be more realistic and accepting of changing conditions and that some compromise will keep their member base employed for the long term rather than out of a job.
[Edited on 25-10-2013 by djgritt]
|
Liam
Member
Registered: 19th Jan 06
Location: Stafford
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by LiVe LeE
We're having huge issues with a single employee who is in a union now and I feel well versed enough to make the judgement that they are an archaic throwback to the days of the Victorian era and the Industrial Revolution, when we didn't have worker's rights and employment law, free advice from the likes of CAB and legal aid. We didn't have the internet or social media to find information for ourselves and the general worker needed a representative to look after their interests. Nowadays, it is simply not needed in any way, shape or form.
IIRC you work for a small[ish] company don't you? Where I imagine they are quite happy to look after the workforce? I work for a company that is more versed with using the current economic climate to their benefit massively and doesn't care one iota about the job satisfaction of the employees, it's a mute point either way as the union at work are less than useless, so the only reason I stay in, is for piece of mind should I need some advice during disciplinary procedures 
|
Gary
Premium Member
Registered: 22nd Nov 06
Location: West Yorkshire
User status: Offline
|
If you need a union you need to do one of two things;
A) be a better emplyee
B) fuck off and find another job if you don't like the one you have.
|
Liam
Member
Registered: 19th Jan 06
Location: Stafford
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Gary
If you need a union you need to do one of two things;
A) be a better emplyee
B) fuck off and find another job if you don't like the one you have.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Moot point, I would have sacked you on the spot for that.
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
Unite are our union as well. And they are fucking useless, pointless cunts. I actually got my job in the first place because Unite decided on an overtime ban to get a payrise, so my company just brought more people in to accommodate the shifts
I've never been a part of the union, and never will.
|
Bart
Member
Registered: 19th Aug 02
Location: Midsomer Norton, Bristol Avon
User status: Offline
|
All this striking and union business really grinds my gears, particulary the recent teacher strikes.
Striking because you have a tough job, because you want higher pension contributions, because your having to work longer before retiring, they need to open their eyes and wake up to the real world and like all the non public sector workers, everyone else is in the same boat.
Its no good complaining your having to work longer hours for no extra money, we all do ffs.
[Edited on 26-10-2013 by Bart]
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
I like how the majority of people complaining about the use of unions sound like they've never been in one and they're just being used as the puppets that the press/ government want them to be.
Hammer, where is the 10mil loss per month coming from exactly? As in, how have they worked this figure out? If you knew this piece of information you might not be singing the same tune. It turns out that Ineos, unlike any other business in this industry/ division actually use the initial investment in the plant as 'money owed'. This kind of makes sense, but that fact is that there are many other similar places in the same sort of industry who would also be able to claim ailing profits and a failing business by using these sorts of twisted figures. An independent accountant actually went through the books and found them to be (words to the effect of) 'highly irregular'. But it doesn't matter how much Unite claim the company are twisting figures, people like yourself have already been convinced by catchy headlines and buzz words.
The government have succeeded in twisting everyone's perception of unions as a way of strangling companies for all they're worth - I work in heavy engineering at shop floor level and can tell you right now from my 8yrs experience I'd much rather be in a union. Anywhere I've been without a union, you might have 80 guys doing the same sort of job but they're all on 5 different pay levels. When you don't have a union it means there's not a specialist who knows all the rules and regulations. It's all very well and good saying there's a whole world of internet but it's applying it to everyday occurrences that becomes a challenge.
The places I've worked with a union, everyone in the same job is paid the same, general conditions are much better and everyone gets on better because no-one's bitter about someone doing the exact same job being paid more. Because the management know there's more than individuals to speak out it also means they treat the workers with more respect.
I'd be interested to know how many people have worked in a large workforce with a union, tthen I'd quite happily take their opinion on. All these delicate office types coming on here after reading the Daily Mail online need to get off their high horses and stop taking shite about something they know nothing about.
[Edited on 26-10-2013 by alan-g-w]
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
So, for decades, the unions being the driving force behind lots of places ending up closed down is the governments fault?
The unions arguing for pay rises and better pensions when the rest of the world has had to take reality check, a lot of people actually taking pay cuts to still have a job. That's good?
Closing down vital services because of some delicate office type union guy sitting arguing with management over sandwiches and coming to a stale mate because of .005% over 10 years?
Are any of those points incorrect?
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
Alan, I work in a fairly large workforce where the conditions are exactly as you described. Everyone on shop floor level are on the same pay, and it fucking stinks.
Those who are lazy and refuse to even consider cross training on to another job get paid the same as those like myself who can run a multitude of machines? I'd rather we had pay levels because it means those who just want to lounge about wouldn't be in the same catagory as myself.
The union were considering action earlier in the year because the offer of 2.5% payrise was deemed unacceptable; to some. The industry is currently struggling due to what's going on in Spain, Greece and Italy, yet those in the union expected more So they considered another overtime ban, that was suggested by the cunts who never do overtime in the first place so their pockets wouldn't be hit. Yet when they were told to fuck off and if action was required, it would be a strike, they all backed down through fear of losing money
It seems it's only those that are actually in the union that are convinced we deserve more money. And I am in no doubt that Unite are a large part of the reasoning.
|
gazza808
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 08
Location: Peterborough
User status: Offline
|
I've been to many many places engineering wise,
And tbh I find them unbelievable,
Most of them have brain washed the employes.
One example,
One place I go to still has alot of manual machines,
But they are upgrading to new cnc machines due to the old ones not being viable to rebuild,
Cnc machine can do the job of 4 machines in a third of the time,
Yet the union etc have them purposefully taking as long as it'd take on the manual machines,
In turn the works going to be moved abroad and all of them will loose theirs jobs. Odd guy on the shop floor has their heads screwed on and ignore it but its too late for them cause every other fucker has ruined it.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
I'm talking about unions and their part in the Ineos dispute that's that's going on just now. At no point have I claimed that unions are faultless, at no point have I claimed that they did not have a hand in the closure of companies. In my own experience of working in places of the same nature with and without a union, it is advantageous to have a union. I don't care how many people who don't have any experience of being in the position of being a union member are opposed, this shit with Grangemouth will be the first time that half of them even find out what a working union does. It just so happens that, I believe, the Tory government we have in just now are using this as a way to make the unions look like diddies on a mass scale, turning everyone against them. Let's look at what's happened, to the best of my knowledge :
Big petrochemical company (Ineos) fiddle their books to make it look like the business is running at a loss.
Ineos say to the workers that they will need to take pay/ pension cuts to save the company money (when they actually don't)
Ineos say to the government that they need a bail out - Scottish government put up £9mil and UK have put up something like £125mil. That's £134mil of our cash that, some experts believe, the company has fiddled the government out of by being creative with accounts.
Unions rightly tell workers to knock the offer back since the company can actually afford to be paying the same rate.
Ineos throw the rattle out the pram and give the ultimatum that they're shutting.
Unions, realising that the company are getting away with it recommends the members to accept the crap offer on the table.
It's a classic pincer move by a company who ultimately don't give a fuck. The plant is due for shutdown in 2017 just now and everyone knows that whenever a place like this shuts down, no matter how morally good the reasons, there's always going to be a backlash against the company. This would have been their get out clause - make a completely shit offer of revised pay conditions so bad that no one, never mind a union member, would accept. When the people don't accept the terrible revised terms, blame them for the plant having to close. Put pressure on the government to bail the plant out and ultimately get people to feel sorry for the billionaire bosses. Everyone has fallen for it hook, line and sinker
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Or, it is actually losing money (whether that be because they're moving it about or whatever other dodgy practice) and the guys who own it want to be able to run their supercars while petrol prices are increasing, so don't want more of their money going on wage rises and pensions for the minions? All of this irrelevant of unions who have managed to make themselves look like diddies with no help whatsoever.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
Minions? Had no idea you were so elitist John.
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Not elitist, just pragmatic. The guys higher up the chain don't care about wee Billy's pension, that's the way the world works. If you don't like not getting a massive pay rise, do something about it other than going on strike.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
It's not just not getting a pay rise though Mr Practical, it's a pay cut. I bet you wouldn't like it if someone came and asked you to do your job for less money. Assuming you're not unionised by your tone in this discussion I can only assume that if you didn't agree with the new terms you'd leave, correct? You're certainly not going to go in on your tod and change the management's mind anyway. Whereas if you were in a union you'd more clout and ultimately, a better bargaining position.
End of the day, in a unionised place the company can give you terms then the workers can all decide whether to take it or hold out for more. Un-unionised places, the management tell you what's happening and that's the end of it - how can this be better?
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
I'd either be good enough at my job to leave, or I'd have to deal with it, again, how it works in the real world.
'The management' tell you what's happening unless you are good enough that they can't. If you are replaceable, tough luck.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
So imagine you've worked in the same place for 15yr then the board decide they want to make more profit by cutting everyone's salary by 10%. The thing is though, everyone in the industry you work talks amongst themselves, so the other six companies who do the same thing as you're trained for decide they're going to do the same, at the same time. Then what happens?
|
John
Member
Registered: 30th Jun 03
User status: Offline
|
Tough. Unless what they are doing is actually illegal. Profit isn't and for the most part, even without a union, especially with the internet and media, stuff like that doesn't go by unnoticed.
Bit like accident management companies.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Businesses don't just cut salaries to 'make more profit' too. This is the simple mentality which unions work by and it's totally wrong, it's all us vs. them. Maybe the business needs to cut it's wage bill to remain competitive; if all the competition are doing the same thing then surely the hypothetical firm you work for will need to do the same.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Also, it's not called a jobs market for a laugh.
|
Hammer
Member
Registered: 11th Feb 04
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by alan-g-w
Hammer, where is the 10mil loss per month coming from exactly? As in, how have they worked this figure out? If you knew this piece of information you might not be singing the same tune. It turns out that Ineos, unlike any other business in this industry/ division actually use the initial investment in the plant as 'money owed'. This kind of makes sense, but that fact is that there are many other similar places in the same sort of industry who would also be able to claim ailing profits and a failing business by using these sorts of twisted figures. An independent accountant actually went through the books and found them to be (words to the effect of) 'highly irregular'. But it doesn't matter how much Unite claim the company are twisting figures, people like yourself have already been convinced by catchy headlines and buzz words.
Whether they are losing £10 million or £10 a month is not really the major issue. It is accepted that the petrochemical plant is losing money due to market competition, mainly due to the fact rivals are paying less for labour. At that point you either stem the flow or you shut the doors. It is not unreasonable for INEOS to ask for pay freezes and reconditioned pensions - proven by the distinct lack of public support for Unite after their stupidity last week.
'People like myself' live in the real world and make up our own minds based on facts. People like yourself will back the common man because it's your own personal leaning, or political influence, or because you know a guy that works there.
|
alan-g-w
Member
Registered: 9th Nov 07
Location: Glasgow
User status: Offline
|
John - the simple fact is, some people won't just fold like a house of cards over this sort of issue.
Ed - you're taking a hypothetical situation too far there, plus it was purely for more profit anyway in what I was saying
Hammer - well googled. I don't know anyone who works there.
|
ed
Member
Registered: 10th Sep 03
User status: Offline
|
Too far? Cutting a wage and pension bill to remain competitive is a situation which many businesses find themselves in. The economy may be on the up, but we're not in the good times yet.
|
