Train Discussion Megathread - Etiquette / Strikes / Gripes

[Wahesh]

And why is this accident the fault of the union?

Everything is the fault of the union.

 

[Alan79]

So on the quiet carriages.... are you allowed to audibly fart?

Yes but the etiquette in this situation is that you ask first if anyone has any objections. If they do you are are then required to ask if you can borrow their thumb as a plug. You are encouraged not to call them sweetheart or endearing terms when you ask or it's harrassment.

Everything is the fault of the union.

From memory you work in HR don't you? And if you do this is a typical attitude from Human resources staff.

 

[Wahesh]

From memory you work in HR don't you? And if you do this is a typical attitude from Human resources staff.

Yes I work in HR, however while their attitude may be poor (who am I kidding, it IS poor), the union are a bunch of bullies. They are simply employed for the sake of saying they have a job to do, when in reality, they're a bunch of bureaucratic Karmichaels.

 

[Mr Invisible]

And why is this accident the fault of the union?

Because they ordered a strike of many of the union train drivers today.

As a result that would mean non union workers working, and possibly over tired from extended shifts.

 

[CroydonDog]

Because they ordered a strike of many of the union train drivers today.

As a result that would mean non union workers working, and possibly over tired from extended shifts.

IKR, exercising their right to strike.

This incident could have been caused by a number of factors.

Time will tell I s'pose. Hopefully everyone's injuries are minor.

 

[Alan79]

Yes I work in HR, however while their attitude may be poor (who am I kidding, it IS poor), the union are a bunch of bullies. They are simply employed for the sake of saying they have a job to do, when in reality, they're a bunch of bureaucratic Karmichaels.

Your experience with Unions differs vastly from mine. You've been in a position where thy are in an adversary role to you. They are a hindrance to you because the company isn't at liberty to treat employees like shit if the union is any good. I've experienced the tactics companies can use where there is no union in place. I understand the role HR plays in this and I can understand why you wouldn't like Unions.

I've been involved with unions as a member and a delegate. In situations where companies want to fuck over their workers and bully them there are few easy options for workers to get reasonable treatment. Good Unions will help members get the best possible results in most situations. Historically speaking Unions gave the working class a voice in government at a time when only the rich were in a position where they had the time and resources to be in politics. They played a huge part in ensuring that this country has minimum wage standards and things like holiday pay, weekend rates and maternity leave among other benefits. Union funded politicians of the past helped open up public funding for education at all levels. Unless you or your parents paid up front for your education you should be grateful that this happened or you'd probably be digging trenches for a plumber somewhere. It's easy to overlook many of these things, but a huge part of why Australia is considered the "lucky country" is because Unions and Union members fought hard to ensure the rich people of the world had to treat workers fairly. You may be a bit pissed off that they've played a part in organizing a strike for train drivers today, but if you were in a position where they were on your side rather than taking an adversarial role to you, you would sing a different song.

 

[Wahesh]

Your experience with Unions differs vastly from mine. You've been in a position where thy are in an adversary role to you. They are a hindrance to you because the company isn't at liberty to treat employees like shit if the union is any good. I've experienced the tactics companies can use where there is no union in place. I understand the role HR plays in this and I can understand why you wouldn't like Unions.

I've been involved with unions as a member and a delegate. In situations where companies want to fuck over their workers and bully them there are few easy options for workers to get reasonable treatment. Good Unions will help members get the best possible results in most situations. Historically speaking Unions gave the working class a voice in government at a time when only the rich were in a position where they had the time and resources to be in politics. They played a huge part in ensuring that this country has minimum wage standards and things like holiday pay, weekend rates and maternity leave among other benefits. Union funded politicians of the past helped open up public funding for education at all levels. Unless you or your parents paid up front for your education you should be grateful that this happened or you'd probably be digging trenches for a plumber somewhere. It's easy to overlook many of these things, but a huge part of why Australia is considered the "lucky country" is because Unions and Union members fought hard to ensure the rich people of the world had to treat workers fairly. You may be a bit pissed off that they've played a part in organizing a strike for train drivers today, but if you were in a position where they were on your side rather than taking an adversarial role to you, you would sing a different song.

Well my particular company has had their fair share of assholes in the union to deal with. I prefer to deal with the fair work ombo if I believe there is a case to be heard because those guys are fair - at least for a Government organisation.

As for the union... this is one situation my colleagues told me that burns brightly in my mind.

So there was an issue with a staff member and she got a union guy in to meet with her and the HR rep. The union guy was tall, and had a beard. Quite an imposing figure.

Now during the conversation, on a very serious manner, the lady who was at the centre of the issue sort of smirked at a comment that was made. The HR rep looked at her and said "Is there something funny?" - and this was a serious question, not a smartass comment, as the is was serious. When she said that, the union guy, keeping in mind he's tall and imposing stood up, he put both of his arms on the table, leaned over and said to the HR lady "DON'T YOU DARE GUT MY MEMBER"

This nearly reduced the HR lady to tears.

If that **** said that to me, I would've said...
(A) I asked a fair question about a serious issue
(B) That was not a gut, this is (punches the **** in the gut)

I wouldn't have cared what the repercussions were, I would've walked out of that meeting very satisfied.

 

[Alan79]

Well my particular company has had their fair share of assholes in the union to deal with. I prefer to deal with the fair work ombo if I believe there is a case to be heard because those guys are fair - at least for a Government organisation.

As for the union... this is one situation my colleagues told me that burns brightly in my mind.

So there was an issue with a staff member and she got a union guy in to meet with her and the HR rep. The union guy was tall, and had a beard. Quite an imposing figure.

Now during the conversation, on a very serious manner, the lady who was at the centre of the issue sort of smirked at a comment that was made. The HR rep looked at her and said "Is there something funny?" - and this was a serious question, not a smartass comment, as the is was serious. When she said that, the union guy, keeping in mind he's tall and imposing stood up, he put both of his arms on the table, leaned over and said to the HR lady "DON'T YOU DARE GUT MY MEMBER"

This nearly reduced the HR lady to tears.

If that **** said that to me, I would've said...
(A) I asked a fair question about a serious issue
(B) That was not a gut, this is (punches the **** in the gut)

I wouldn't have cared what the repercussions were, I would've walked out of that meeting very satisfied.

Prior to being involved with the union I had an issue I tried to sort out which basically followed a format of the HR rep asking a question 17 times worded slightly differently and not getting the answer they wanted to hear. They then wrote up the answer they wanted to hear on the incident sheet which they tried to get me to sign. I refused and shortly after sought legal advice. Around 6 months later a Union began at the workplace which I promptly joined and nominated myself as a delegate to help people sort out the shit that i heard was regularly happening. Mostly with the company elevating complete cocks into supervising roles who regularly tried bullying people who had issues with anything. I heard from multiple people that this was the way they dealt with things and my issue was along the same lines. Where the 20 repeated questions thing doesn't work their next strategy was for the company to bring in their general manager who was also quite imposing and he had threatened peoples jobs. I spoke to four people who had been dealt with in this manner.

The lesson I learned in all of this is that people in a situation where they want a company to treat the issue in a responsible way should arrange for someone with experience in having matters dealt with fairly to be present. It sounds like this union rep may have been a bit of a dick. But you only got one side of the story second hand and people can exaggerate these things.

 

[CaptainJackson]

Well my particular company has had their fair share of assholes in the union to deal with. I prefer to deal with the fair work ombo if I believe there is a case to be heard because those guys are fair - at least for a Government organisation.

As for the union... this is one situation my colleagues told me that burns brightly in my mind.

So there was an issue with a staff member and she got a union guy in to meet with her and the HR rep. The union guy was tall, and had a beard. Quite an imposing figure.

Now during the conversation, on a very serious manner, the lady who was at the centre of the issue sort of smirked at a comment that was made. The HR rep looked at her and said "Is there something funny?" - and this was a serious question, not a smartass comment, as the is was serious. When she said that, the union guy, keeping in mind he's tall and imposing stood up, he put both of his arms on the table, leaned over and said to the HR lady "DON'T YOU DARE GUT MY MEMBER"

This nearly reduced the HR lady to tears.

If that **** said that to me, I would've said...
(A) I asked a fair question about a serious issue
(B) That was not a gut, this is (punches the **** in the gut)

I wouldn't have cared what the repercussions were, I would've walked out of that meeting very satisfied.

As someone who is left leaning and someone who works as a manager, where I'm unlikely to have a union member oppose me, someone who has had fair work mediations, someone who's had to sit with HR to go through the right process in getting rid of someone, Etc etc etc

I've experienced quite a bit but have never come across a union rep, it just won't happen in my industry or rather the percentages of it happening are quite low.

I have stories of it going either way, you get your bad stories either way (anti employer or anti employee).

While I wouldn't call today's system perfect , both workers and employers are protected though I'd say that today's laws favour the worker.

But the difference is, your going to get the odd screw up worker, who's just an arse but sometimes they manage to snake their way to a settlement.

Whereas if you get the odd employer who is shit, they employ 100s or thousands of people and they screw over a lot of them.

That's just ratios

Then you add in the stress that people have in maintaining a steady income and if these people did not have unions or workplace laws to fall back on, they'd tend to accept any condition employers set for them.

Unions are a necessary evil. Some of the things they do I agree with and some of the things they do I completely oppose.

 

[CroydonDog]

Unions or HR?

That's a no brainer.

Now that I no longer have an employer, Mrs CD occasionally sends me emails she received from HR in her company so I can get a laugh, and feel included in the stupidity of office politics.

 

[Mr Invisible]

29th Jan ANOTHER strike.

I'm sure those employers whose workers will have issues getting to work and lost money/productivity as a result of this union strike will be really happy.

 

[Alan79]

29th Jan ANOTHER strike.

I'm sure those employers whose workers will have issues getting to work and lost money/productivity as a result of this union strike will be really happy.

Businesses only face strike actions from workers because the workers feel the employers are not negotiating EBA's fairly. So to completely blame the unions for a strike that workers feel is a necessity to be fairly treated in negotiations is a bit of a cop out. Without the union presence in negotiations employers can steamroll through negotiations against people who are largely unqualified in the legal aspects and not sure where their rights stand from a legal perspective. Having been a big part of building a Union at my last job I know that strike action is only considered as a last resort in cases where companies have planted their feet in the ground and refuse to give any ground. Strike action isn't taken on a whim, it's a result of the actions of the employer.

How does this impact your life
At this time in Australian history it's easy to see that inflation has exceeded wage growth for quite a while now. What many businesses fail to acknowledge is that when employees are forced to tighten their belts because their money does not go far, other businesses start to lose out because people will try to hoard their money. At first this impacts on small specialist businesses. The mega businesses like coles, K-mart etc can ride out these times and in many cases will benefit hugely since every specialist business run by small operators that closes allows them to take up a larger market share. I look at things like KMart's proud declaration that they've moved production to Indonesia to allow them to offer cheaper prices as a double edged sword. In part that has come about because wage growth has stalled in comparison to inflation. So it basically means that while a lot of people will benefit from paying a few dollars less for a shirt, it also means that a small clothes shop is forced closer to closing. Before they close they will lay off staff where they can, which will mean that for every person they lay off (lets say a $700/week worker) it means that the government is going to subsidize their income with welfare payments which will be substantially lower than the $700 per week. The big business wins because where somneone who used to buy a $70 jumper from a specialist store, is now in a position where they'll have to make do with a $15-$20 equivalent from KMart which means that the smaller store is another lost customer per week closer to either closing or laying off more workers.

Now when it comes to politicians. A small time clothing store owner can't afford to subsidize a political party compared to a mega business like KMart. So it becomes easier for large stores to manipulate economies by subsudizing the election campaigns of politicians who will push for a set of circumstances where people will be low on cash and more likely to rely on these large retail chains who have enough purchasing power to buy in bulk and sell at a proportionally lower profit margin.


Back to the point
So the role that Unions have always played is to work towards seeing that their members take home a little more pay each week and get fair treatment. This in turn will flow on to small business having a bit more income which leads to more employment opportunities. Unions will continue to try and sponsor politicians who don't support disproven financial strategies like trickle down economics in favor of promoting wage growth and conditions where people have enough take home pay to support the economy. Sadly politicians are infinitely corruptible like all humans and even in parties which are supposed to operate in the best interests of the economy they can be convinced to support some ridiculous strategies when the price is right.

So in conclusion, while it may be inconvenient for many people that rail workers are striking, in my opinion it's a necessity that we have someone working at ensuring those of lower economic stations are seeing wage growth which is the rationale behind me supporting unions.

 

[CroydonDog]

Businesses only face strike actions from workers because the workers feel the employers are not negotiating EBA's fairly. So to completely blame the unions for a strike that workers feel is a necessity to be fairly treated in negotiations is a bit of a cop out. Without the union presence in negotiations employers can steamroll through negotiations against people who are largely unqualified in the legal aspects and not sure where their rights stand from a legal perspective. Having been a big part of building a Union at my last job I know that strike action is only considered as a last resort in cases where companies have planted their feet in the ground and refuse to give any ground. Strike action isn't taken on a whim, it's a result of the actions of the employer.

How does this impact your life
At this time in Australian history it's easy to see that inflation has exceeded wage growth for quite a while now. What many businesses fail to acknowledge is that when employees are forced to tighten their belts because their money does not go far, other businesses start to lose out because people will try to hoard their money. At first this impacts on small specialist businesses. The mega businesses like coles, K-mart etc can ride out these times and in many cases will benefit hugely since every specialist business run by small operators that closes allows them to take up a larger market share. I look at things like KMart's proud declaration that they've moved production to Indonesia to allow them to offer cheaper prices as a double edged sword. In part that has come about because wage growth has stalled in comparison to inflation. So it basically means that while a lot of people will benefit from paying a few dollars less for a shirt, it also means that a small clothes shop is forced closer to closing. Before they close they will lay off staff where they can, which will mean that for every person they lay off (lets say a $700/week worker) it means that the government is going to subsidize their income with welfare payments which will be substantially lower than the $700 per week. The big business wins because where somneone who used to buy a $70 jumper from a specialist store, is now in a position where they'll have to make do with a $15-$20 equivalent from KMart which means that the smaller store is another lost customer per week closer to either closing or laying off more workers.

Now when it comes to politicians. A small time clothing store owner can't afford to subsidize a political party compared to a mega business like KMart. So it becomes easier for large stores to manipulate economies by subsudizing the election campaigns of politicians who will push for a set of circumstances where people will be low on cash and more likely to rely on these large retail chains who have enough purchasing power to buy in bulk and sell at a proportionally lower profit margin.


Back to the point
So the role that Unions have always played is to work towards seeing that their members take home a little more pay each week and get fair treatment. This in turn will flow on to small business having a bit more income which leads to more employment opportunities. Unions will continue to try and sponsor politicians who don't support disproven financial strategies like trickle down economics in favor of promoting wage growth and conditions where people have enough take home pay to support the economy. Sadly politicians are infinitely corruptible like all humans and even in parties which are supposed to operate in the best interests of the economy they can be convinced to support some ridiculous strategies when the price is right.

So in conclusion, while it may be inconvenient for many people that rail workers are striking, in my opinion it's a necessity that we have someone working at ensuring those of lower economic stations are seeing wage growth which is the rationale behind me supporting unions.

Union bashing is an easy sport.

Nobody WANTS to strike. Why would you?

 

[Alan79]

Union bashing is an easy sport.

Nobody WANTS to strike. Why would you?

Very true. I've got relatives that work in both education and nursing that always feel bad when they strike because they know it will put pressure on others. But it is considered a last resort and it leads to union bashing by people who fail to see the bigger picture.

 

[BELMORE]

29th Jan ANOTHER strike.

I'm sure those employers whose workers will have issues getting to work and lost money/productivity as a result of this union strike will be really happy.

29th was the original date.

Anyways, Fuck HR as a department. They are wannabe’s. Ive been in small, mid and large organisations across multiple industries, and HR stinks at all of them. They think they are really tight in with the company, but they are so far out it’s not funny.

My guess is that the education at Uni to become a HR person is shite. Do they teach them to send stupid comic images in their emails?

 

[Wahesh]

Ok so Mondays strike has been canceled HOWEVER... trains tomorrow will run on WEEKEND timetables FFS. That's going be another headache for us!

 

[Bob dog]

The State Government had disaster after disaster, give the railway four percent and get on with it.
Its ok to spend millions on tearing up Hunter street on a dumb ass tram in place of a perfectly good track up a transport corridor.
The State Government has over spent on fantasy projects, pay up.

 

[Mr Invisible]

Ok so Mondays strike has been canceled HOWEVER... trains tomorrow will run on WEEKEND timetables FFS. That's going be another headache for us!

From what I've read the strike will be from tomorrow (Thursday) ALL THE WAY THROUGH till Monday 29th.

So:
Thurs 25th
Fri 26th
Sat 27th
Sun 28th
Mon 29th

Because they failed to come to an agreement (Unions and government/Sydney Trains).

Funny thing is.. if anyone else in a job simply failed to turn up, they'd be warned and/or sacked. What Sydney Trains should do issay "fine... you can strike, but each day you are off comes from your holiday allowance, and if you don't have any left, you don't get paid."

 

[Alan79]

From what I've read the strike will be from tomorrow (Thursday) ALL THE WAY THROUGH till Monday 29th.

So:
Thurs 25th
Fri 26th
Sat 27th
Sun 28th
Mon 29th

Because they failed to come to an agreement (Unions and government/Sydney Trains).

Funny thing is.. if anyone else in a job simply failed to turn up, they'd be warned and/or sacked. What Sydney Trains should do issay "fine... you can strike, but each day you are off comes from your holiday allowance, and if you don't have any left, you don't get paid."

That would result in a massive class action suit against the government/Sydney trains

If you haven't been part of an enterprise bargaining agreement , here is how it works.

Step 1.
Employees sign a majority support petition and lodge this to signal to the employer that they want to negotiate.
Step 2.
Union representatives and employee nominated reps will then meet up a number of times and try to negotiate a deal based on the improvements to the contract that they want. Will usually include a payrise as well as other things (in this case a lot of it apparently comes down to train drivers not being satisfied with being rostered for long hours which is a safety issue for plenty of people if fatigue causes an accident).
step 3.
The company makes an offer and every employee that will be working under the proposed contract amendments votes yes or no.
2 possibilities
(a) The majority of employees vote no, then repeat step 2 and 3.
(b) The majority of employees vote yes, the deal goes to the fair work commission who decide if the deal is in the best interests of the workers, they can decline the deal if they see that employees are losing out in which case they will encourage both the union representatives involved and the employers to make amendments on the spot, or go back to step 2.

Step 4
In cases where the employer repeatedly put out offers where no votes result, they are faced with strike action. Anyone whos contract will be changed by the EBA votes yes or no on whether to strike. This leads back to step 3.

Part of the laws that surround enterprise bargaining agreements are that the company is not legally allowed to take punitive action against the employees such as your suggested docking of holiday entitlements, threatening their jobs or a reduction in hours in any way. Things have evolved this way in part to protect employee rights and also to prevent situations where the company can face things like physical violence from their employees for acting unscrupulously.

 

[Wahesh]

I left early today to catch the early train.

Big mistake. It was pack AF. Lucky it was an AC train otherwise I wouldn't have bothered.

I wonder what the following ones were like. Not nice to think what it will be like this afternoon. I might just catch a cab if it's bad come to think of it.