London bus workers vote for strike over £500 Olympic Games bonus

[alp227]

Source: The Guardian

London bus workers voted on Saturday to go on strike during the Olympics if they do not receive a £500 bonus.

Members of the Unite union supported industrial action by a ratio of more than nine to one, on a 38% turnout. The union is seeking the bonus, which will cost £14m, for the 20,000 bus workers it represents, claiming that all other transport workers are being paid a premium for working during the event. At least 800,000 extra passengers are predicted on buses during the Olympics.

Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jun/09/london-transport

---

Those workers should not be paid at fast food wages, but why should a strike that interferes with public services be legal?

[CreekDog]

1. then what's the point of having a union if you can't strike?

[cstanleytech]

7. The point of a union isnt for strikes its to try to get a fair deal for the workers

and if they are being asked to work extra hours without getting paid (which the article doest say) then of course they should fight for the money.

[Sherman A1]

2. Well,

First of all there is no strike at this time, this is simply a strike vote which is one tool in the negotiation process. Why should it be legal for public servants to strike? Well, how else are you going to get the attention of the powers that be to address your grievances, if they will not come to some agreement? A strike is an absolute last resort, nobody with any sense wants to go on strike, but sometimes they are necessary.

If all other transportation workers are receiving some premium for working this event, then perhaps you can explain why the London Bus workers should not receive a premium?

[Lenomsky]

4. Strike by all means ..

So the expected cost is £14 million but only 800,000 extra passengers and as I've not lived in London for a while let's assume at best £10 per head so that's £8 million .. bit of a shortfall!

If it's normal hours and normal shifts why should they be paid a bonus just because our government are happy to pay the billions to stage the Olympics.

I'm a socialist but this is blackmail especially with a turnout of 38%. Only £17 a day extra ... that's 1.5 hrs work for a normal driver as they are not low paid as a firm rule.

[Sherman A1]

8. I believe

the point is that other transportation workers are being paid a premium, so why should this group be treated differently? One thing that a Union is about, is fairness.

[Anarcho-Socialist]

3. I hope the bosses listen. The workers are just asking to be treated the same as others

I was inconvenienced this past Thursday by a strike on our local light rail system (the Tyne and Wear Metro), but I supported the necessity of the strike as some workers were being treated like crap.

One day's inconvenience for me meant the fight for the jobs of many people.

[Posteritatis]

11. I supported a six-week transit strike in town that certainly inconvenienced me

The workers more or less 'lost' the thing given that the union more or less gave up the PR battle on day one and peoples' IQs tend to drop about twenty points whenever there's a transit strike, but I still think they were in the right with what they went through.

Was irritating enough as far as the reactions I got for merely being someone who used transit, though. Got a lot of crap from coworkers over it and I simply ride the bus instead of driving one, and it got downright hostile when they finally reached a deal to end the action.

[muriel_volestrangler]

12. The extra work is less on the buses than the tube

The buses' normal load is 6 million journeys per day; the tube's 3 million (1,107 million per year).

There are 800,000 extra journeys anticipated on the buses each day; one million for the tube. So the load on the buses will go up 13%; on the tube, 33%. I think the point made that "70% of local bus services are not affected by the Olympic Games" is pretty relevant. The article (and others) seem to say the union wants a flat £500 bonus, whether or not each worker is doing anything extra. The load on the buses would seem to indicate that bonuses sholud go to those bus employees whose work is affected significantly.

[dipsydoodle]

16. I certainly don't begrudge the extra dosh

but by all accounts they're more likely to just be sitting in heavy traffic.

[Blue_Tires]

5. well, they are certainly using the timing of the games to their advantage...

smart...

[LeftyMom]

6. Anybody else miss the days when the left supported labor?

Are you seriously questioning whether a union ought to be able to strike if it might actually inconvenience somebody? That's kind of the point of a strike.

[Posteritatis]

10. Yeah. That the question's even being raised is incredible. (nt)

[alp227]

14. Inconvenience? That word is too light in some situations.

What about the city folk who rely on public transit to go to work or buy food? Especially if they cannot afford a car! What if the police went on strike? It is far beyond mere inconvenience when people's LIVES are at stake.

[Posteritatis]

18. If a trade or industry is that important then they must be treated as such. It's not complex. (nt)

[LeftyMom]

19. I'm not going to argue with somebody who lumps together bus drivers and cops.

My tolerance of ridiculous nonsense is high, but it's not THAT high.

[alp227]

21. But they usually are both in unions and help operate society.

Did I miss something? Then I apologize.

[Posteritatis]

9. Love how people support unions/etc until the moment they're potentially inconvenienced

There's an increasing move towards a whitelist of professions which are allowed to strike, which boils down to "nothing that affects anyone in the public directly or indirectly." Fuck that.

[MichaelMcGuire]

13. A man who can't withdraw his labour is a slave (nt)

[JNelson6563]

15. +1

[freshwest]

20. Good point.

[harmonicon]

22. +1 (nt)

[Brigid]

17. Seems to me . . .

That without the abilty to call a strike, a union is toothless.