Keir Starmer

[A Red]

5 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

That's not exactly how it works.  Private businesses will reduce safety standards to the point where the costs/risks of cutting standards outweigh the financial benefits of cutting standards.  So, for example, if de-staffing stations leads to an increase in HSE fines and compensation claims in the region of £3m a year, but reduces staff costs by £5m a year, then they'll definitely go for it. The business case is solid; it's tough shit on the people who suffer as a result. As Uncle Milt said "the business of business is business".

As above, if it impinges on safety then I totally back a Union to hold the employer to account and if necessary strike. 

 

I was making a more general point that progress/automation (where not effecting safety) will mean job losses. There was the the ridiculous situation in the 70's and 80's where unions blocked the introduction of such equipment. When the Unions did allow it, it was on the understanding that the staff who were really no longer required were re-assigned even though there were no jobs for them.

 

[Arniepie]

15 minutes ago, A Red said:

As above, if it impinges on safety then I totally back a Union to hold the employer to account and if necessary strike. 

 

I was making a more general point that progress/automation (where not effecting safety) will mean job losses. There was the the ridiculous situation in the 70's and 80's where unions blocked the introduction of such equipment. When the Unions did allow it, it was on the understanding that the staff who were really no longer required were re-assigned even though there were no jobs for them.

 

Maybe they were trying to fight people losing their jobs?

[Bjornebye]

23 minutes ago, A Red said:

I was talking in general but in this instance, hold on to your trousers, I agree with you.

Day. Ruined. 

[Strontium]

14 minutes ago, Arniepie said:

Maybe they were trying to fight people losing their jobs?

 

They probably ought to have spotted that the Lump of Labour Fallacy was debunked in the 19th century.

[Barrington Womble]

32 minutes ago, A Red said:

As above, if it impinges on safety then I totally back a Union to hold the employer to account and if necessary strike. 

 

I was making a more general point that progress/automation (where not effecting safety) will mean job losses. There was the the ridiculous situation in the 70's and 80's where unions blocked the introduction of such equipment. When the Unions did allow it, it was on the understanding that the staff who were really no longer required were re-assigned even though there were no jobs for them.

 

And herein lies the point I was making before. I don't think the RMT and labour are getting the message out there. Reading this thread I've learnt of unmanned ticket offices, but not seen anything on the news about it. And then there's what I mentioned before about the cameras checking the track and using ML to diagnose issues instead of people physically going to the track. Now I think for both of these things to happen we need to hear the side from the RMT why both of these things are bad for safety. I don't know, because I literally don't know. I do know using a tube station in London can be as frustrating as fuck if there's no staff and you need help though, just putting aside safety. 

[Nelly-Szoboszlai]

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Whether or not you agree with MPs visiting picket lines, it was always obvious that some MPs would visit them, so publicly telling them not to just makes him look weak.

[Strontium]

Seems that only two frontbench MPs have joined the strikes, not exactly a huge challenge to his leadership I would have thought.

 

Starmer has evidently decided that supporting the pro-Brexit RMT, which was disaffiliated from Labour after the union began donating to rival political parties, is not a hill he wishes to die upon.

[Gnasher]

 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

Two might not be a huge leadership challenge but it’s enough to make him look daft. Whole barrel of fucking up on this. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

3 minutes ago, Strontium said:

Seems that only two frontbench MPs have joined the strikes, not exactly a huge challenge to his leadership I would have thought.

 

Starmer has evidently decided that supporting the pro-Brexit RMT, which was disaffiliated from Labour after the union began donating to rival political parties, is not a hill he wishes to die upon.

He's made opposing them a hill to die on instead.  

 

Imagine any party leader instructing MPs not to do something and then a significant number - including two front-benchers - do it anyway. It's just ammo for Labour's opponents to say that the party's divided and the leader is weak (and in our fucked-up politics, being seen as strong is more important than being right).

[Gnasher]

Ouch;

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Arniepie]

Not sure what brexit has to do with it?

I'm presuming if the union had supported Labour in the past he would be front and centre on the picket line?

[Gnasher]

For once desperate is bang on the money. Its one fuvk up after another by Mr Forensic.

 

 

 

 

 

[Gnasher]

Starmer has a bad habit of boxing himself into a corner when no need. He did it with Corbyn he's done it here. 

 

 

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

13 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

Starmer has a bad habit of boxing himself into a corner when no need. He did it with Corbyn he's done it here. 

 

 

 

 

He should have got rid of Corbyn and his acolytes much sooner, with a sharper knife. This, however, is a clear case of needlessly backing himself in a corner.

[Strontium]

36 minutes ago, AngryOfTuebrook said:

Imagine any party leader instructing MPs not to do something and then a significant number - including two front-benchers - do it anyway.

 

Not something we really need to imagine, is it.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/29/jeremy-corbyn-sacks-three-frontbenchers-after-single-market-vote

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/abour-mps-resign-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-eu-withdrawal-bill-a8397741.html

 

https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/five-labour-frontbenchers-quit-after-defying-jeremy-corbyn-over-second-eu-referendum

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

2 hours ago, Gnasher said:

Ouch;

 

 

 

 

 

 

I just saw his full interview, and I agree with Mick Lynch on this. 
 

He was asked, ‘where do you think Labour are on this class struggle’, to which he replied ‘I don’t know where Labour are; if somebody can tel me I’d be very happy to hear it. I think they are triangulating between what they think is public opinion in the likes of the Daily Mail and the commentariat in this country, but what they’ve got to do and what I want them to do - and I want Keir Starmer to be successful and I want him to be our next Prime Minister - is to get back in contact with working people. Working people are suffering; there’s really poor employment practices in this country, and many people are in vulnerable jobs with low pay and he has to come up with a programme that identifies himself and the Labour Party directly with those working people so they can get behind him and the trade union movement can get fully behind him’. 
 

Of course he does need to do that, but he also needs to win votes from elsewhere, from people who think different things. It’s quite the balancing act, and to achieve it he needs to do more than just get in contact with working people. We don’t have the same type of working class that we’ve always had and it requires something different. Or, at least, something additional. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Strontium said:

 

Not something we really need to imagine, is it.
 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/29/jeremy-corbyn-sacks-three-frontbenchers-after-single-market-vote

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/abour-mps-resign-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-eu-withdrawal-bill-a8397741.html

 

https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/five-labour-frontbenchers-quit-after-defying-jeremy-corbyn-over-second-eu-referendum

 

And I'm sure your response at the time was entirely consistent with your post today.

 

But, yeah, I didn't mention Corbyn by name (because I get bored of being wrongly accused of being obsessed with the bloke) but I'm obviously aware that there were plenty of occasions when he developed a reputation as a weak leader of a divided party. That ended the way it was bound to end; I don't want a repeat of that.

[Creator Supreme]

Out of interest, what have the leaders of the other parties said about the strike? Anybody know.

 

I know Caroline Lucas is backing the strikers but she's not GP leader anymore.

[Numero Veinticinco]

7 minutes ago, Creator Supreme said:

Out of interest, what have the leaders of the other parties said about the strike? Anybody know.

 

I know Caroline Lucas is backing the strikers but she's not GP leader anymore.

Lib Dems are against the strikes and putting the boot in to the Tories over it. A very similar position to Labour. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/21/johnson-shapps-rail-strike-transport-

[Creator Supreme]

4 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Lib Dems are against the strikes and putting the boot in to the Tories over it. A very similar position to Labour. 
 

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/jun/21/johnson-shapps-rail-strike-transport-

Interesting read, cheers.

[Section_31]

I wish Dan Hodges would get a job.

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 minute ago, Section_31 said:

I wish Dan Hodges would get a job on Mars.

Fixed.

[Duff Man]

10 hours ago, Section_31 said:

I've come to the rather depressing conclusion that Britain is a conquered country. if you look (not very hard) you'll find evidence of the USA, Russia, Chinese and any other number of foreign powers meddling in our politics with the complicity of media barrons. from Brexit to elections and setting narratives. 

 

The country isn't run in the ordinary people of Britain's interests, and anyone who tries to change that will be destroyed.

Irrefutable at this point. It's one of the cornerstones of British politics.