Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#1
A lot has been put on here regarding the miners dispute which out of respect of the ladies funeral I declined to comment at that time.
We do now move on but some observations should be addressed or they look like they are correct.
Without doubt no one on here that posted(from either side) were saying the unions needed looking at on how they operate.
The Conservative govt at the time decided it was going to go into battle with the N.U.M. at the time,(but later to be found that they also ship on there supporting miners of the conservative govt, by shutting there pits to!!!!)
A lot was at stake for the Conservative govt, they wanted to show that by smashing the N.U.M everyone would fall into line.
Of course this would never be the case, as London underground today shows.
At the time of the disputes Scargill made comments that were far reaching
he was told he was wrong when he spoke about the number of pits the govt was to close, and the press and the govt went out of there way to discredit him in saying he was wrong.
He was on that issue correct, they closed even more than even he said they would.
He stated the govt/police were working together to smash all trade unions/people
again he was right from what we see coming out of the South yorkshire police findings on the hilsborough disaster
But there were issues where maybe he didn't quite get there,
with stockpiles of coal the govt over time wasn't going tom lose this dispute, they put everything into defeating the mining communities.
Whilst we would all condemn the extremists from both sides(well i do) and that the unions maybe needed looking at how they operate, the govt chose a route of confrontation, maybe not the best route, if we are saying we have feelings for the future of mining communities, and the communty as a whole.
When faced with talks as a union that were going no where and people like mc gregor coming over with an agenda to smash the union with govt backing, it became clear they were on collission course.
If you are faced in reality that pits were to close, the union smashed, communities ripped apart, sometimes this can make you feel you need to do something and so we entered the dispute.
Remember that a lot of talking had gone on prior to all this without agreement.
For the dispute to be allowed to go on so long showed the determination from both sides, but to watch mining communities come together many even were conservative supporters(up until then) was interesting.
The police and there role at times is questionable which wasnt ever addressesed.
Moving on to unions in general
I have always fought my own union the RMT never to get into an all out strike with no room for manouver
And although the conservative govt went to far in trying to smash unions there was a need to address union ballots
my union at the time addresses this, and all ballots no longer by show of hands as in the past and done by ballot
some within the union resisted this, but i found it a better way, the bigger problem was when the employers used the legislation whilst still in discussion with the union to take them to court through the union members being balloted
which although nowt to do with the employer was a way of stopping a dispute, but not one that helped with relationships between the two.
Iv been a life long union member of Unison, n.u.r(a s it was) then RMT, USDAW, and held many positions, and often on the national negotiating committee
The unions(like the employer) have a role to play, and there needs to be an even playing field if we want this to work,
Barry's view on restrictive practices, realy means lower pay, poor working conditions, cutting corners.
We are heading slowly back that way, but should resist it.
There are many responsible unions out there who continue to support there members many working with the employers.
Im probably seen as a moderniser within the union movement, I dont agree with the 70's and how unions got out of control, but nor do i agree with the way unions/communities were smashed and attempts to silence unions, that is also wrong.
The debate will go on, and we will see extremists from both sides9if we recognise there are 2 sides)
The next one will be london underground where we see militant union(RMT) taking on Boris and the Govt
more moves towards driverless trains, and the RMT resisting and heading towards a dispute
Already Boris(if hes still there) is set to take on the RMT and Bob Crow the General Secretary ready to take on the govt/Boris
There will be no winners, but many losers.
If we honestly believe in employers/unions working in harmony for the best interest of the company/employee's
then we need to even up the playing field, and get both parties working together.
So barryw, the situation isn't exhausted these are just a few observations
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 687- Registered: 2 Jun 2009
- Posts: 513
#2
Keith like you I am a great believer in unions and would also encourage people to join an appropriate one and I also agree that negotiation not confrontation is the better way forward, but and it is a big but you neglected to mention that Scargill never had the mandate of the miners to call a strike as he and is executive did it off their own backs. The whole terrible consequences of the strike were the result of a clash of personalities of two loathsome people neither of which were capable of understanding the point of view of anyone except themselves. Both of these protagonists have ended or are ending their days in quite comfortable surroundings whilst those communities destroyed in the 'conflict' are in most instances still struggling to recover.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#3
Ken
I could have gone on for some time, but need to get into town lol
There does have to be a point where in disagreement it can be resolved, we still dont have that at the moment
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
#4
I agree with Keith that the unions were out of control in the 70's and something needed to be done to even the balance.
The Tories mounted a war-like strategy, to smash the trade unions and used the miners to achieve this goal.
I was told that we were "outflanked & out-manoeuvred" which I had to admit, was true. But the truth is that the majority of ordinary miner's, only wanted to keep their pit's open, not bring down a government and in no way, did he/they deserve to be called or treated as "the enemy within"
Many people, some on here, have repeatedly blamed Scargill and the miners for not having a National Ballot and that Scargill had no mandate to strike in 84/85.
All areas, unanimously agreed to this industrial action. In 1983 all areas held area ballots and unanimously called for industrial action if the Coal Board tried to close any viable pit. That legally gave Scargill the mandate he needed.
However Kent and some other's did not wait for Scargill, they implemented their own members mandate and immediately took industrial action
For the true storey, 1978 is a good starting place.
The validity of a National Ballot.
In 1978, Gormley and our NEC, tried to alter our national bonus agreement, this was under a Labour Government and I can remember sitting in the welfare club having a chat with some of the lads and none of us could understand why this new bonus scheme was being imposed on us. Basically it would mean that every miner would receive the same amount per tonnage removed from their pit throughout the UK.
To the outside world it looked a sensible and fair scheme and was touted in the press as such.
But it was far from fair.
In Kent our average coal seam was 3ft and the coal was much harder to win. In Nottingham and some other area's, their coal seams were as much as 14ft thick and much easy to win.
This meant that if it was implemented, Notts, Derby, Leicester areas would recieve massive bonus's, leaving the rest of the UK miners, struggling for a decent wage.
It did not take much imagination to realise what was going on and that there was a much big hidden agenda going on here.
It is said that Gormley was in the pay of state security forces at that time(allegedly) this was forged by the way he turned heaven and hell to get this scheme in place.
He defied a National Conference decision that rejected his scheme by demanding a National Ballot, thinking that he had enough members in the areas that would financially be much better off, that would vote in his favour.
However, he did not know his members that well and they rejected his scheme by 55% at this National Ballot.
This did not deter him at all though, he then decided that the scheme would go ahead anyway.
He ignored his National Conference and his National Ballot and for that reason, several areas took this to court, including Kent.
Mr Justice Watkins ruled that the result of a National Ballot that had been conducted, is Not Binding, upon the National Executive Committee" allowing Gormley to go ahead with this scheme.
This decision invalidated any future National Ballots, in fact in 84/85 many banners saying "Bo—ocks to the Ballots" was seen been carried mostly by Notts striking miners.
The schemes were then steam rolled through and started about creating divisions in wages and terms and making fish of one the flesh of another.
All the areas like Notts did not just enjoy the fruits of this divisive scheme, they enjoyed years of harmonious relations with their employers, enjoying an easy life, whilst being lured into thinking their collieries would be rock solid safe, until they were exhausted.
Some could see that they were just being used and would live to regret it but it was greed not loyalty that won the day.
That was the start of the military style, plans of destruction, of our Coal Mining Industry.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
i must admit i smiled to myself when the nottinghamshire miners got their just desserts, ratting on their workmates was unforgiveable.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
not to forget some became conservative candidates
Your correct of course Gary, We can all lay blame on a poor strategy by scargill
but all this realy bears into insignificance when you see how the govt and police acted
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#7
It will only all be clear when all the information is out in the open. This will not happen until all those with a personal axe to grind (on both sides) are dead and unable to sue.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
