Union problems for Millibland
Re: Number 6
Public sector employees the police investigating a union, can't understand how thats considered objective! Better leave it to the newspapers as they're. Not in anyone's pocket or control anybody..part from david
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Gentleman
Sorry but I can barely understand a word of that.
Could you please have another go at explaining what you are saying?
Could you please have another go at explaining what you are saying?
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Re: Gentleman
Then your views are totally worthless if you can't be bothered to respond to polite requests to explain what you are on about.
At least I have the guts to defend my views.
At least I have the guts to defend my views.
Re: Number 6
David Johnson wrote:
> 2. The idea that McCluskey stating that the trade unions
> supporting the Labour party is exactly what the media want to
> hear, is another concept for the chimps. Who would they
> support, if not Labour? The Tories with PR man Cameron
> slagging the unions off every 5 minutes from Lynton Crosbie's
> script? Err, I don't think so? Would they support Nick Clegg?
> Err, I don't think so. Would they support Nige Farage,
> ex-investment banker who is quite keen in destroying as many
> employment rights that those nasty people in the EU have
> brought in, as possible? Err, I don't think so.
>
And still unable to make a point without being gratuitously unpleasant. The reason it is because it gives certain sections of the media (apart from Kevin Maguire) a story that Ed is in the pocket of the unions. Obviously, the unions support and finance the Labour Party (as do I through my union levy) but there is the unwritten and wholly fallacious assumption that they don't interfere. Much like the big businessmen who give money to the Tories or the sandal-wearing, mung bean mucnhing vegetarians who give money to the Liberals and/or Greens. Or the press barons who don't tell their editors what to put in their newspapers...
> 2. The idea that McCluskey stating that the trade unions
> supporting the Labour party is exactly what the media want to
> hear, is another concept for the chimps. Who would they
> support, if not Labour? The Tories with PR man Cameron
> slagging the unions off every 5 minutes from Lynton Crosbie's
> script? Err, I don't think so? Would they support Nick Clegg?
> Err, I don't think so. Would they support Nige Farage,
> ex-investment banker who is quite keen in destroying as many
> employment rights that those nasty people in the EU have
> brought in, as possible? Err, I don't think so.
>
And still unable to make a point without being gratuitously unpleasant. The reason it is because it gives certain sections of the media (apart from Kevin Maguire) a story that Ed is in the pocket of the unions. Obviously, the unions support and finance the Labour Party (as do I through my union levy) but there is the unwritten and wholly fallacious assumption that they don't interfere. Much like the big businessmen who give money to the Tories or the sandal-wearing, mung bean mucnhing vegetarians who give money to the Liberals and/or Greens. Or the press barons who don't tell their editors what to put in their newspapers...
Re: Union problems for Millibland
At the moment Labour, like all others, are selecting those who they want to stand as MPs.
3 of the shortlisted candidates here didn't even bother to contact members to say why they wanted to be chosen but, 2 who did, weren't even chosen to be shortlisted.
I asked the Party how some can be selected for the shortlist without even contacting members and was told if they get a nomination from a union (who are affiliated to the Party) they don't have to seek being selected by 'ordinary' members, in the first round of selections.
Basically if they have enough union votes that's all that matters with the rider presumably being they still have to go in front of members to eventually be voted as the choice to stand as the potential MP.
IF the unions can get sufficient numbers voting for their candidate to be shortlisted there should be little shock that they get their members to the actual MP voting stage and ensure they are selected.
As the Party also uses AV (which most the nation rejected) to select MP's it's little wonder that a union MP, even if not a specific chosen one, still gets to be selected.
I don't do the crap about the Party not being on the side of working people but I do believe that just being a member of it, with the hope of influencing it properly, is absolutely pointless.
I also believe that the bollocks over the weekend by the lovely Harriet Harmon and Ed about it now seeking to bring fairness into its selection process is complete and utter crap when the Party still insists on all women shortlists, AV, etc.
Lots of noise is coming form union members who are getting just a sample of how ordinary members feel, especially when they were shit on in order for Ed to selected Leader but as the Party is a million miles away for were it should be this is just another nail in its coffin.
3 of the shortlisted candidates here didn't even bother to contact members to say why they wanted to be chosen but, 2 who did, weren't even chosen to be shortlisted.
I asked the Party how some can be selected for the shortlist without even contacting members and was told if they get a nomination from a union (who are affiliated to the Party) they don't have to seek being selected by 'ordinary' members, in the first round of selections.
Basically if they have enough union votes that's all that matters with the rider presumably being they still have to go in front of members to eventually be voted as the choice to stand as the potential MP.
IF the unions can get sufficient numbers voting for their candidate to be shortlisted there should be little shock that they get their members to the actual MP voting stage and ensure they are selected.
As the Party also uses AV (which most the nation rejected) to select MP's it's little wonder that a union MP, even if not a specific chosen one, still gets to be selected.
I don't do the crap about the Party not being on the side of working people but I do believe that just being a member of it, with the hope of influencing it properly, is absolutely pointless.
I also believe that the bollocks over the weekend by the lovely Harriet Harmon and Ed about it now seeking to bring fairness into its selection process is complete and utter crap when the Party still insists on all women shortlists, AV, etc.
Lots of noise is coming form union members who are getting just a sample of how ordinary members feel, especially when they were shit on in order for Ed to selected Leader but as the Party is a million miles away for were it should be this is just another nail in its coffin.
-
max_tranmere
- Posts: 4734
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Len McCluskey
I saw online that he earns ?2,575 a week. I believe this works out at about ?133,900 annually. He also has a huge pension to come, which will be a nice sideline while he earns fortunes doing public speaking and becoming a director of numerous corporations. I was also not surprised to learn that he writes for The Guardian. All the left-wingers on here might be interested in his writings. It will help pass the time whilst you are sitting in your mansion, quaffing Bollinger, and sending the butler out to get the Range Rover cleaned:
Re: Len McCluskey
But f he was considered to be in charge of a large corporation it would be considered appropriate and hs also funded by members whereas corporate boss from profits made at customers expance
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Randyandy
As far as I know trade union members (affiliates) vote for themselves. It's not as if the union leaders decide who their votes are going to be for.
And setting aside the affiliate votes it was really close between the Milibands anyway. In the final round which was a head to head between them, it was 2% in favour for David amongst MPs and MEPs, 3% in favour of David amongst Labour party members and 6% in favour of Ed amongst affiliates.
And as I have said so far, if the trade unions are trying to get left wing policies brought in by the Labour party they have failed miserably.
I don't think I have seen any real socialist, left wing policies in the Labour Party for 30 years.
And setting aside the affiliate votes it was really close between the Milibands anyway. In the final round which was a head to head between them, it was 2% in favour for David amongst MPs and MEPs, 3% in favour of David amongst Labour party members and 6% in favour of Ed amongst affiliates.
And as I have said so far, if the trade unions are trying to get left wing policies brought in by the Labour party they have failed miserably.
I don't think I have seen any real socialist, left wing policies in the Labour Party for 30 years.
-
David Johnson
- Posts: 7844
- Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 2:40 am
Max
"He also has a huge pension to come, which will be a nice sideline while he earns fortunes doing public speaking and becoming a director of numerous corporations."
Yeah I could never work out how McCluskey was in charge of Unite and also ran Goldman Sachs at the same time. !wink!
" was also not surprised to learn that he writes for The Guardian. All the left-wingers on here might be interested in his writings. It will help pass the time whilst you are sitting in your mansion, quaffing Bollinger, and sending the butler out to get the Range Rover cleaned".
Yes, Johnson Towers and its marble mansion built in the shape of the Taj Mahal is gleaming in the afternoon sun as we speak. Err, it's Pimms on a day like this, Maximillian, not Bolly. And as for the butler he's cleaning the 1950's Jag. Silver job, Max, work of art!
Oh and by the way, what Gentleman states is absolutely correct. If he was working in a private sector job running an organisation with 1.5 million members, he would get a helluva lot more.
Yeah I could never work out how McCluskey was in charge of Unite and also ran Goldman Sachs at the same time. !wink!
" was also not surprised to learn that he writes for The Guardian. All the left-wingers on here might be interested in his writings. It will help pass the time whilst you are sitting in your mansion, quaffing Bollinger, and sending the butler out to get the Range Rover cleaned".
Yes, Johnson Towers and its marble mansion built in the shape of the Taj Mahal is gleaming in the afternoon sun as we speak. Err, it's Pimms on a day like this, Maximillian, not Bolly. And as for the butler he's cleaning the 1950's Jag. Silver job, Max, work of art!
Oh and by the way, what Gentleman states is absolutely correct. If he was working in a private sector job running an organisation with 1.5 million members, he would get a helluva lot more.