LOUNGE all new asksnapzu ideasforsnapzu newtribes interesting pics videos funny technology science technews gaming health history worldnews business web research entertainment food living internet socialmedia mobile space sports photography nature animals movies culture travel television finance music celebrities gadgets environment usa crime politics law money justice psychology security cars wtf art google books lifetips bigbrother women apple kids recipes whoa military privacy education facebook medicine computing wildlife design war drugs middleeast diet toplists economy fail violence humor africa microsoft parenting dogs canada neuroscience architecture religion advertising infographics sex journalism disaster software aviation relationships energy booze life japan ukraine newmovies nsa cannabis name Name of the tribe humanrights nasa cute weather gifs discoveries cops futurism football earth dataviz pets guns entrepreneurship fitness android extremeweather fashion insects india northamerica
+14 14 0
Published 3 years ago with 9 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • NotWearingPants
    +1

    Nice way to frame the argument, as a "right" being taken away. Because it's so difficult t o set up an an automatic payment from a bank account that most people just won't be able to figure it out.

    making it easier for them to choose whether or not to pay subscriptions and which union to join.

    This is the real problem they have with it. It ends the cash stream from forced deductions.

    • stitches
      +2

      It is a right, why take away the ease of being able to join a union and stand up for your working rights all of a sudden?
      It's just another way of the government trying to quash the unions, leave them with even less power then they currently have and impact on the amount of support (funding and otherwise) they give to Labour.
      I'm not entirely sure what you mean by forced deductions....

      • NotWearingPants
        +1

        Do you auto-pay your phone, cable, utilities, or any other bill? It is trivial to set up, no harder than getting your paycheck direct deposited. It does not impact union funding from people who want to pay dues. Anyone who cant or wont take the minute "extra effort" to put in an account number and sign a form that the union rep has already filled out for you probably doesn't want to contribute.

        • stitches
          +1

          People don't have to join the union though do they? Plus knowing that you get your union fee taken off before tax is a small comfort to some. The amount of administration it would take to change the system now would cost the unions millions. I don't believe for a second that the government isn't trying to hit the unions in their pocket.

          • NotWearingPants
            +2

            Millions? Hardly. Did it cost employers millions in administration fees to auto-withdraw and deposit to union accounts?

            What does it cost you to set up a recurring payment from a checking or savings account? Nothing bu minimal time and effort. All they have to do provide members an account number to transfer the money to. Or print an authorization form with their account info, you put in your account info and sign. Not hard, not complex, not expensive.

            • stitches
              +4

              There are 1.3 million members in Unison alone. I'm not taking about the amount of time it would take union members personally to set up their accounts, I'm talking about the transition time and administration it would take to switch all of those (and other members - e.g. the largest Unite has 1.4 million members) over to a new system.
              It wont be a case of just sending out a mass email.....I'm taking about new systems that would need to be put in place, getting the message out that everyone would have to switch, the consequential follow up to ensure that members who wanted to would be switching.
              There are 6.4 million UK members in unions according to government stats from last year, so say it's not going to cost anything to make the change is ridiculous, even in printing costs to send the info out, or as you put it to print/post a form for a member to sign it would come in at over a million.

            • NotWearingPants
              +2
              @stitches -

              For far too long here in the States, neither side at the bargaining table has really had too much concern about what things cost, short term or long term, because "management" could always just raise taxes. So a lot of costs are glossed over. In return for union support to pols that favor them. I guess your pols have turned at least part of that on it's head...they can always raise dues.

              Where you believe the costs of administration properly lie probably depends on how you feel about public sector unions. I don't think it will be as dire as you suggest, but I'll agree with you there there will be some, possibly significant costs

            • stitches
              +2
              @NotWearingPants -

              I don't know the first thing about Unions in the States so I couldn't possibly comment.
              As you will have probably gathered from the above posts, I'm a Union member (as well as having a North astern family who were directly involved and affected in the miner's strikes) so I'm going to feel strongly about this.
              This is all part of the new Trade Union Bill the conservative government is trying to push through which will be devastating for UK workers rights - for all - not just those in the Union.

            • NotWearingPants
              +2
              @stitches -

              I hope it works out for you.

Here are some other snaps you may like...