Shell drivers...

[arfurdaley]

Unite just on TV saying their whole intention of this strike was to 'run the petrol pumps dry to make their point'.

 

Nice. Why is this man not taken outside and flogged in the street like he deserves ?

 

These drivers do a 'very difficult and dangerous job'......

 

Aye right then. It is a monkey job and deserves to be paid as so. They get too much as it is already.

 

What does this mean?

[BlackJAC?]

Just like in the 70's (pre thatcher) the Trade Unions are running the country.

 

Someone needs to stand up to them. This is not about if the driver's work hard as I am sure we all agree on the fact they do.

 

but here is the thing, most of us work hard and let's be honest most of us are underpaid. We simply can't just down tools at the expense of the economy.

 

When they became truck drievrs they knew what the pay rate etc was. It isn't the hardest job (albeit it's important) im sure.

 

Feck them - they are asking for almost 50% increases if the figures in the OP are to be believed.

 

It is time for the UK and it's gov't to stop being slaves to these unreasonable greedy selfish ******* that are the Unions.

 

now that is my 2 cents worth i'm away to argue with Toggie on the Unionist thread:)

 

For being so anti union, i bet you still enjoy the many benefits that the unions and their members have fought so hard to get, aye? Of Course this is assuming that you're not self employed.

 

The 4 week annual leave quota that most Britons enjoy, the pay rises, most modern capability polices, H&S polices, your right not to be discriminated against, employment regulations and so on weren't given to us by our lovely caring employers, they were fought for by the unions for their members. And here's the best part, even non members reap the rewards.

 

I'm not saying unions are perfect, far from it, but any negative impact unions may have had has been offset by the positives most of us in Briton enjoy.

[coppercrutch]

What does this mean?

 

Pretty self explanatory...........

 

It is a job you could train a well behaved monkey to do. Lots of these jobs out there !!

[Super T]

Pretty self explanatory...........

 

It is a job you could train a well behaved monkey to do. Lots of these jobs out there !!

 

Do you not think that?s a bit condescending?

I don't know what you do for a living but i'm more than positive a well trained monkey could do that also.

 

Do you not understand the dangers of transporting high volumes of highly flammable liquids!

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

Do you not think that?s a bit condescending?

I don't know what you do for a living but i'm more than positive a well trained monkey could do that also.

 

Do you not understand the dangers of transporting high volumes of highly flammable liquids!

 

A Learn To Drive

B Try not to crash

 

Yup, that covers it.

[The Comedian]

Do you not think that?s a bit condescending?

I don't know what you do for a living but i'm more than positive a well trained monkey could do that also.

 

Do you not understand the dangers of transporting high volumes of highly flammable liquids!

 

The BOC delivery driver's don't earn anywhere near 30K a year and their cargo is just a dangerous. They deliver gas cylinders to fabshops and so on.

 

These Shell drivers need to get back to work and thank their lucky stars they make as much as they do because they sure as fek ain't worth it...

[brownkg]

Bring back Mrs T, she would sort them out.

 

Yeah we could use all that spare petrol to good effect on a witch:sterb032:

[Guest S.U.S.S.]

Yeah we could use all that spare petrol to good effect on a witch:sterb032:

 

Took you a while to come up with that bud!

[brellierlegend]

There are plenty of people in the UK who actually want to work and would bite an employer's hand off for what they currently earn, never mind ?36k. The greedy self-obsessed tanker drivers should be fired immediately and replaced with people who are willing to graft.

 

 

I fecking hate UNIONS!

[Therapist]

Just filled the car up at the Shell station at Comely Bank. No diesel, no unleaded, but no problem with the V-power stuff that my car prefers.

[brownkg]

Took you a while to come up with that bud!

That's what happens when JKB isn't the only thing going on in your life!

[coppercrutch]

(A)Do you not think that’s a bit condescending?

I don't know what you do for a living but i'm more than positive a well trained monkey could do that also.

 

(B)Do you not understand the dangers of transporting high volumes of highly flammable liquids!

 

(A)Nope. I have done many monkey jobs in my life and no doubt will do many more. I don't have a problem with it. The only people who find it 'condescending' are those who have a chip on their shoulder.....

 

If someone is happy doing a monkey job for their entire life good on them.

 

I just don't want to hear them bleating that it is in some way dangerous or skilled and they 'deserve' more money for it. Because that is 100% complete nonsense.

 

( Yes I do. I drive my car every day. That is full of at least 60 litres of highly flammable liquids and could turn into a fireball in a matter of seconds.

[deesidejambo]

Unions have outlived their usefulness. They were formed in a time when there was no choice who to work for, and no ability to move to another location to get work. This allowed employers to call the tune about pay and conditions.

 

Nowadays things are different. The advantage is with the workers. Both you and I can choose who to work for, and where. We can even work overseas if we prefer. We can transfer our pensions and we can take career breaks. We can take employers to industrial tribunals. But most of all, we can quit our jobs if we want and work somewhere else or even be retrained. 150 years ago all of that was not possible so Unions were required. But now they are not.

 

This case is a simple one of a Union trying to get what is not fair. The pay for tanker drivers is in general significantly out of sync with many other professions - they get paid too much already. This is just a case of a Union being greedy and it is clear that drivers are currently not underpaid.

 

The impact of a pay-rise would be a similar claim by other tanker drivers (Shell only has 10% of the market) which would immediately be passed on to the consumer i.e. the petrol pump-price would rise again, with the money this time going straight to the drivers.

 

Their tactics are underhand and sneaky - the drivers are not employed by Shell but the companies they are employed by have the Shell contract so the Unions are playing the Shell card to lever more money. I hope Shell just terminate the contract and give it to another haulage company. Then these money-grabbing **** can go and find someone else to work for. There are plenty jobs available.

 

Unions - gtf.

[coppercrutch]

Unions have outlived their usefulness. They were formed in a time when there was no choice who to work for, and no ability to move to another location to get work. This allowed employers to call the tune about pay and conditions.

 

Nowadays things are different. The advantage is with the workers. Both you and I can choose who to work for, and where. We can even work overseas if we prefer. We can transfer our pensions and we can take career breaks. We can take employers to industrial tribunals. But most of all, we can quit our jobs if we want and work somewhere else or even be retrained. 150 years ago all of that was not possible so Unions were required. But now they are not.

 

This case is a simple one of a Union trying to get what is not fair. The pay for tanker drivers is in general significantly out of sync with many other professions - they get paid too much already. This is just a case of a Union being greedy and it is clear that drivers are currently not underpaid.

 

The impact of a pay-rise would be a similar claim by other tanker drivers (Shell only has 10% of the market) which would immediately be passed on to the consumer i.e. the petrol pump-price would rise again, with the money this time going straight to the drivers.

 

Their tactics are underhand and sneaky - the drivers are not employed by Shell but the companies they are employed by have the Shell contract so the Unions are playing the Shell card to lever more money. I hope Shell just terminate the contract and give it to another haulage company. Then these money-grabbing **** can go and find someone else to work for. There are plenty jobs available.

 

Unions - gtf.

 

I have no doubt they are probably in the process already. Hopefully it goes through and these lazy drivers can look forward to real hardship by being unemployed for a while. Good. They deserve it.

[bighusref]

I hope Shell just terminate the contract and give it to another haulage company.

 

I hope you don't mind me cherry picking your post for the pertinent point.

 

Not so long ago, the Communications Union went on strike as posties (yeah, a man that carries a bag of letters on his shoulder, some even have vans) were underpaid. I found it farcical that a Union allegedly there to look after their employees best interests would do something so perilous to their continued employment. The Royal Mail is an endangered species, letters are not being posted, they are being emailed. Looking for more money short term before the extra you get puts your job in danger?

 

It seems the same here. Those striking will get a little more than they were originally offered, that is for sure. They won't get the number they want though, and as you so rightly point out, in the long term, they will most probably lose the contract and be jobless.

 

As for Shell being a target, I find it bizarre that in a nation that scores over 50% of all of the money paid on petrol we see the provider of petrol getting it in the neck.

[brownkg]

Unions have outlived their usefulness. They were formed in a time when there was no choice who to work for, and no ability to move to another location to get work. This allowed employers to call the tune about pay and conditions.

 

Nowadays things are different. The advantage is with the workers. Both you and I can choose who to work for, and where. We can even work overseas if we prefer. We can transfer our pensions and we can take career breaks. We can take employers to industrial tribunals. But most of all, we can quit our jobs if we want and work somewhere else or even be retrained. 150 years ago all of that was not possible so Unions were required. But now they are not.

........

 

Another selective quote but I need to ask how you think employers have lost the advantage they have had. Ever since the witch declared no more union power employers rights have gone up and up.

I will cite my own personal case as an example. despite 20 years service with only 2 weeks off sick ( when i had a burst ulcer and was slowly bleeding to death) prior to last May I have the following tale to tell. I contracted a chronic disease and was off sick for 9 months. After that time I was desperate to get back to work and, my doctor having agreed that work would help me (apparently only 45% of people off for more than 5 weeks return to work) i tried to follow a phased return to work programme that programme only lasts a maximum of 10 weeks and i was unable to return full time during that period. I was then informed by my cash strapped employer who made ?10 bn PROFIT last year that if I CHOSE not to work the full 35 contracted hours then they would legally only elect to pay me the hours I worked (so all the power with the worker there then) I am currently managing the 36 hours but it hugely affects my quality of life outwith the work and I can oly hope that I keep improving health wise. Incidentally my work would have no issue with paying a full wage if I was signed off sick.

Mr malingerer

[Cade]

It's a hard life for these drivers.

 

Drive from Grangemouth to 5 or 6 petrol stations then back again every day.

 

For ?32,000 a year.

 

My heart fecking bleeds.

 

Lazy greedy barstewards.

[I P Knightley]

One argument I heard last week was that they were complaining that their wages hadn't gone up in real terms.

 

Translated into normal speak, this means taht they are as well off now as they were when they chose the job.

 

So without contributing any more to their employers or the economy, they just want to be richer.

 

Well so do I and so do most people I know.

 

And guess what? It ain't going to happen.

 

I can't believe that nobody has yet mentioned that they are a bunch of greedy, lazy, selfish bar-stewards...

[The People's Chimp]

The UNions here are looking foolish, as they did with the Grangemouth workers. Pushing for exorbitant salaries for unskilled, unqualified workers to earn WAY over national average wage

NOthing to do with ocnditions at work or poverty

Purely about greed as far as I can see

Earning more than teachers, nurses, midwives etc for driving trucks

More than the police

Double that of soldiers

The values of the Unions are being destroyed by this

They are becoming increasingly capitalist themselves, and appear to only wnat to further thier members pay packets at the cost of Joe Public

If they were really socialist they would tell their members to STFU and think of the poor out there

they seemed to overlook the equation menial job = menial pay

 

I don't think anything else need be said on the matter.

 

This is nothing to do with conditions and everything to do with greed.

 

sickening.

[coppercrutch]

Another selective quote but I need to ask how you think employers have lost the advantage they have had. Ever since the witch declared no more union power employers rights have gone up and up.

I will cite my own personal case as an example. despite 20 years service with only 2 weeks off sick ( when i had a burst ulcer and was slowly bleeding to death) prior to last May I have the following tale to tell. I contracted a chronic disease and was off sick for 9 months. After that time I was desperate to get back to work and, my doctor having agreed that work would help me (apparently only 45% of people off for more than 5 weeks return to work) i tried to follow a phased return to work programme that programme only lasts a maximum of 10 weeks and i was unable to return full time during that period. I was then informed by my cash strapped employer who made ?10 bn PROFIT last year that if I CHOSE not to work the full 35 contracted hours then they would legally only elect to pay me the hours I worked (so all the power with the worker there then) I am currently managing the 36 hours but it hugely affects my quality of life outwith the work and I can oly hope that I keep improving health wise. Incidentally my work would have no issue with paying a full wage if I was signed off sick.

Mr malingerer

 

Well there are 2 sides to every story. I take it for the 9 months off you received full pay ? Wouldn't you say that is pretty good. 9 months of you doing nothing for that company and they pay you in full ?

 

Now of course that all stems from the fact you have been a dedicated worker for a long time, and probably feel you deserve this after so many years. Fair enough, and you do deserve this, but there is only so much I think a company can do.

 

As you say the point about them having no problem with paying you in full if you were signed off sick must be a sickener. However all these companies have their rules and limits for different situations. You are clearly happy to work for this place and have agreed to these rules.

 

It seems, from my neutral point of view, that they have been fairly decent with you.

 

What people have to remember is big companies dont give a flying **** about their employees generally. They are all just numbers on a screen. They do what they have to do to stay within employment law and to try to attract/retain the best workers. I don't think what they have done with you sounds to be taking the mick by any means.

 

 

PS - Unless you have received no sick pay then that is a different matter !!

[coppercrutch]

As always the Daily mash get it spot on.

 

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/forty%11two-grand-%11-to-drive-a-****ing-truck-200806191032/

 

"FORTY-TWO GRAND - TO DRIVE A ****ING TRUCK"

[maroonlegions]

I hope you don't mind me cherry picking your post for the pertinent point.

 

Not so long ago, the Communications Union went on strike as posties (yeah, a man that carries a bag of letters on his shoulder, some even have vans) were underpaid. I found it farcical that a Union allegedly there to look after their employees best interests would do something so perilous to their continued employment. The Royal Mail is an endangered species, letters are not being posted, they are being emailed. Looking for more money short term before the extra you get puts your job in danger?

 

It seems the same here. Those striking will get a little more than they were originally offered, that is for sure. They won't get the number they want though, and as you so rightly point out, in the long term, they will most probably lose the contract and be jobless.

 

As for Shell being a target, I find it bizarre that in a nation that scores over 50% of all of the money paid on petrol we see the provider of petrol getting it in the neck.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dave Ward calls for Crozier to be sacked

 

Dave Ward, deputy general secretary, called for Adam Crozier and Royal Mail chairman Allan Leighton to be sacked at CWU conference this afternoon (Wednesday) and described their business plan as one of "managed decline.?

 

 

 

Addressing delegates from across the country, Dave argued: "One week the company is in crisis, then they announce there has been a fundamental turnaround, then they are in crisis again. It is unacceptable and Crozier has to go. The business needs a new vision to succeed.

 

 

 

"Royal Mail is doing the Oliver Twist thing by asking the Government for more money to pay for pensions and to transform the business.

 

"They want between ?8bn and ?9bn from the Government, which they know will not be given, so they will come out and say the only solution is privatisation.

 

"They are managing decline, and their business plan will not succeed, but we have these people on the run and I am convinced that if we carry on being united we will get rid of them and come up with solutions to secure our members' future."

 

 

 

Later in the day, delegates unanimously backed calls for a national industrial action ballot over pensions, post office closures and the threat to thousands of jobs.

 

A comprehensive, tough-talking resolution authorised the union's postal executive to begin the process of moving towards possible strikes, timetabled "to maximise pressure on the company and the government."

 

 

 

Hand-in hand with the industrial action, a high-profile demonstration outside the Labour Party's conference in Manchester in September is one of several options being considered by the CWU in order to open a second, political front in the struggle to defend workers' rights and services to the public.

 

 

 

CWU deputy general secretary Dave Ward explained: "With the right campaign now, both politically and industrially, we can find some of the right solutions."

 

 

 

Both parts of the union's twin-track strategy are equally crucial to the future of the sector, he insisted, pointing out: "There's no way we can win without an ultimate political solution."

 

 

 

Union leaders are set to meet Royal Mail chiefs after conference concludes at the end of this week, but, unless agreement is reached over the various issues at stake, strikes appear inevitable.

 

 

 

And Adam Crozier awarded himself a 3 MILLION POUNDS BONUS this year.

[I P Knightley]

And Adam Crozier was awarded a 3 MILLION POUNDS BONUS by the remuneration committee, representing the shareholders, who were satisfied that targets were met and performance was delivered which would benefit the future of the business this year.

 

Slight typo in your last line.

 

Now fixed.

 

Nada

[maroonlegions]

Slight typo in your last line.

 

Now fixed.

 

Nada

 

 

 

changing the goal posts to suit ones own agenda and ignoring the facts , you would do well as Crozier"s tea boy eh.

[maroonlegions]

Slight typo in your last line.

 

Now fixed.(aye you chose the right word there eh).

 

 

Nada

 

 

 

and here we have another.

 

 

 

CWU warns BT: Consult the union or face strikes over pensions;)

 

CWU has today (Friday) fired a warning shot to BT making clear that changes to the pension scheme will have to be agreed with the union or the company will face strike action.

 

 

 

Jeannie Drake, deputy general secretary, addressing CWU conference in Liverpool, said: ?Changes to the pension scheme need to be agreed and a future defined benefits scheme is central to that.

 

 

 

?We not talking about shoring up pensions for people who are paid hundreds of thousands of pounds ? we?re talking about preserving the pension rights for the workers who make BT successful. BT workers want to know that they will be able to retire in comfort.

 

 

 

?Ian Livingstone needs to engage the CWU. BT talks of partnership, but without the CWU involved in the pensions changes he will face a disastrous first year.

 

 

 

?If BT moves unilaterally on this they will face strike action across the UK.?

 

 

playing with peoples futures is just gonna end in tears.

[doctor jambo]

COuple of points

1- these are not Shell drivers, they work for a small subcontractor- ie small business

2- Shell have not given financial help to the small haulier, as they are protected by a contract

3 The small haulier has to meet the settlement with the drivers themselves (14 % over two years) so will lose profitability and therefore the ability to compete effectively for other contracts

 

So really the Union has screwed a small business that relies on a big contract, whilst irritating the life out a multi national (Shell) who will, in all likelihood merely takle its business elsewhere instead of dealing with an unreliable firm in future, probably costing them their jobs in the end

And all the dressing it about as the wee guy vs big bad Shell is grossly misleading at best and bare faced lies at worst

Well done the Union

[I P Knightley]

changing the goal posts to suit ones own agenda and ignoring the facts , you would do well as Crozier"s tea boy eh.

 

I'm not the one with the agenda. Nor am I ignoring facts; if anything, I'm stating facts where they were missing or mis-stated.

 

No chief exec sits in his office with a big bag of cash deciding to give him or herself a large amount of it without there being any checks and balances.

 

Personally, I think that ?3m is obscene for one year's performance. Crozier could have refused to accept the full amount but the fault doesn't lie with him that that amount was made available.

[deesidejambo]

COuple of points

1- these are not Shell drivers, they work for a small subcontractor- ie small business

2- Shell have not given financial help to the small haulier, as they are protected by a contract

3 The small haulier has to meet the settlement with the drivers themselves (14 % over two years) so will lose profitability and therefore the ability to compete effectively for other contracts

 

So really the Union has screwed a small business that relies on a big contract, whilst irritating the life out a multi national (Shell) who will, in all likelihood merely takle its business elsewhere instead of dealing with an unreliable firm in future, probably costing them their jobs in the end

And all the dressing it about as the wee guy vs big bad Shell is grossly misleading at best and bare faced lies at worst

Well done the Union

 

Correct. This is a blatant example of Union opportunism dressed up as a "workers v's nasty employers" argument. The Gov't has called for restraint but this has fuelled the inflation risks in this sector. The end result will be increased fuel pump prices, again.

[Jambof3tornado]

Having served for 16 years in the RAF as an armourer I spent many a day and night transporting highly dangerous explosives around the country having received the same ADR/HAZchem course that the shell drivers get and whilst it isnt easy it isnt rocket science and you could teach anyone who has the ability to drive what to do in the event of an accident/incident.

 

These guys are overpaid and are not worth almost 2 staff nurses who work a damn sight harder in much worse conditions(the wife is a nurse).

 

Let them contract the work out to the foreign companies,half the drivers on our roads havent passed a UK driving test and are carrying dangerous cargo so why the hell not???

 

14%. My ambulance pay is going up 7.5%.....over 3 fekkin years.

 

Wonder if they want a swap of jobs???