NACRO

The real point 'UK Dave' is that all HGV drivers are deserving of a significant pay rise when you consider what they do. They should be glad that someone in their industry has the power and ***** to take a stand.

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

You forget however these people are driving gods! a step down from a impreza to a fully laden 30000 litre fuel tanker is nothing.

Lisawrx

iTrader: (1)

What make me laugh a bit here, is some people are all for 'the general public' protesting over rising fuel costs, and when not blaming the government, turning on the suppliers, saying they could reduce costs to help us out, because they are making x amount profit. Yet when workers take that stand, there is so much negativity. OK, they may not work directly for Shell, but they do deliver their fuel, so if Shell pay more to the companies the drivers work for, the drivers get more pay, simple. This is no more unreasonable, than someone on 30 odd thousand a year expecting fuel companies/government to drop prices so they don't have to suffer.

It's all well and good, sitting in judgement on the level of skill of a job, but I could do the same (as could others), and say that someone getting some inflated salary for working with computers, and complaining they hadn't had a payrise for so long is out of order, they're paid enough already. I would be bang out of order for doing that, but that is a job which has an aquired skill, as does a tanker driver.

I'm losing my train of thought now, and I'm a little shocked that I have read and agreed with Nacro for once. (no offence Nacro)

Leslie

Yes you are quite right of course, that was the chap. And the economy was badly served by his and others' antics at the time.

I agree with you indeed over Red Ken!

You must be at least as old as me if you remember those days so well.

Les

NACRO

I doubt I'm as old as you unless you've misrepresented yourself here. My excellent knowledge of that particular part of history is by dint of having an extensive education. One of the reasons I'm able to see his part in it more clearly than your good self.

DCI Gene Hunt

........

J4CKO

iTrader: (1)

Leslie

Neither you or I know each other's age of course, and is that really important anyway? You were the one to bring it up in the first place which makes me suspect that you were unsure of your argument and were trying a bit of "obfuscation!" I was lucky enough to get a good education too. By courtesy of the Labour party as a matter of fact. That would be "Old Labour" of course!

The fact that I made a freudian slip over the chap's name does not affect the discussion of course. Why do you think he was called "Red" Robbo. He had a vast organisation in his union throughout BL and was instrumental in instigating so many strikes that is was obvious that he was destroying the British car industry by his actions. Everyone was able to see his part in all that, no one needed a superior education to realise what was going on! There were unions forbidding carpenters to drill a hole on a piece of wood because it had a thin metal facing for goodness sake. How do you feel about restrictive practices then?

Your support of the present strikes and your suggestion that even more strikes are needed puts you pretty well in the same court as him in my book. Do you really think that is what this country needs in its present parlous economic state?

As a matter of interest, what does "E&P" mean. It was not covered at my school!

By the way, when it comes to sarcasm, you are just wasting your time old chap-it just rolls off my back.

Les

Devildog

The tanker drivers involved are already amongst the highest paid HGV drivers in the country.


Whilst I'm all for the hard done by getting a decent deal, they are not "hard done by" in any scheme of things and are now, bluntly, taking the ****.

As this has now become a union tactic, there is no question that another logistics company will get the contract next time round and many of these guys will be out on their collective *****. Of course, the very union that will ultimately have signed off their future loss of employment by its current actions will then look to blame everyone but themselves, as they always do.

Even the quotes by a Unite official are laughable - he talks about Shell being greedy. They don't work for shell, therefore Shell's profits are irrelevant. Apparently, the union can't understand that.

And in the short term? Fuel distribution costs will go up due to increased wage costs and you and I in the UK will have to pay even more for fuel.

The unions and their strike policies have most certainly played a major part in destroying many British industry sectors over the years.

Nacro, you are an intelligent guy and you post more sense than most on here. But this time, in my opinion, you are off the mark.

In a sense I feel for the drivers as they will undoubtably be heavily influenced in their decisions by the union which will have promsed them this , that and the next thing.

Its a shame that they cannot see through the facade, however, and continue to believe that the union is trying to help them, as opposed to doing what unions do playing games that they cannot ultimately win.

Lets just hope that their driving ability far outweighs their commercial sense.

lozgti

Just makes me smile that we are having so many strikes just lately.With the oil problem I feel like I just need flares and I would be back in the 70's

NACRO

In my opinion you couldn't be more wrong DD.

The facts as I see them are simple

The tanker drivers have had an effective pay freeze, an increase in hours and a worsening of conditions since Shell contracted out.

When you consider the stand still they've experienced a substantial and fair settlement doesn't seem unreasonable.

Ultimately the poblem does lie with Shell it's their business that's being affected and largely because they decided to wash their hands of an important part of their logistics chain in order to save money.

Let me tell you something- Shell are the masters of sharp practice in my experience.

BTW Les, E&P stands for 'Exploration and Production', I've worked for many companies in the sector as a consultant, Royal Dutch Shell and it's subsidiaries amongst them!

Also your analysis of the situation re: Red Robbo is exactly the sort of superficial viewpoint I was talking about.

lozgti

Can't they just terminate the contract and get a new contractor to deliver?

If they are masters of sharp practice I would have thought they would have had a nice get out clause?

Devildog

Which surely is an issue they should be raising with their employer specifically?

We shall agree to differ - perhaps my experience of unions and their effects on business prosperity differs from yours

Devildog

I would suspect the failure of the contractor to deliver fuel would constitute breach of contract, although one would have to be aware of the actual terms to comment further.

At the very least it would be normal for the contractor to have to compensate the employer for losses sustained as a result.

I've seen businesses fail for similar reasons.

Leslie

Thanks for the explanation, could not work it out!

Well the situation and the effect on BL and the ensuing job losses was certainly not superficial at the time believe me. It was also of course at the peak of the Cold War!

Les