Should All Emergency Services Be Banned From Striking?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/nov/24/nhs-workers-to-stage-four-hour-strike-as-pay-dispute-continues

[janbee]

If they received a decent living wage, they wouldn't need to strike.

[Old_Geezer]

Are emergencies being ignored ?

I'm loath to agree to banning, workers need rights or they get stomped on. But we need to know that there is a force able to temporarily take over for short periods if it comes to that.

[mikey4444]

No of course not. If they did the Managers would ride roughshod all over them. Unless they were Policemen of course.

[andy-hughes]

No.

It's unfair to remove a basic right to recind one's labour in protest based on the occupation of the individual.

You could argue against anyone striking for any reason - but for the majority of workers, it remains the only power they have to force management into talks to resolve difficulties.

[Baldric]

No, of course not, they have a right to publicise their grievances the same as everyone else!

[Gromit]

No of course not.

But Emergency staff are not going on strike. Health workers are going on strike, and only in England and Northern Ireland. The Scottish and Welsh Governments have agreed a deal, but the Coaltion haven't.

[youngmafbog]

It's easy to say, 'No of course not' and it is a sentiment I would tend to agree with.

But, given the scenario of all the emergency services withdrawing their labour at the same time, which would cause widespread panic and could even lead to anarchy perhaps the answer is 'No - under most circumstances'

[Gromit]

Ymb

Health workers are going on strike, not the emergency services. Emergency Ambulance calls will still get answered, but your ambulance journey for your chiropodist appointment may be delayed a few hours.

[youngmafbog]

I know that Gromit but the OP asked about Emergency Services so I was replying to that.

[Zeuhl]

The OP does exemplify the question with a link to a piece on the NHS dispute, implying that it is a strike by 'Emergency Services'.

The right to strike can only be surrendered, and the only situation that is likely is when an agreement is made in which ongoing terms and conditions are assured by an independent body.

[New Judge]

The right to strike should be absolute. As should the right to dismiss anybody taking part in one.

[Old_Geezer]

Just so long as there is also the right to picket any place indefinitely where it can be argued the management have provoked a strike in order to get rid of folk without compensation.

[anotheoldgit]

The Armed Forces do not have a right to strike, unlike the Police, The Emergency Services the NHS etc.

[Hypognosis]

If the thread concludes that they should NOT be allowed to strike then, before you quit the discussion, please try to suggest some other manner in which they could sanction their management, in order to assure fair treatment?

For example:-
It is perfectly possible to strike in a co-ordinated fashion, in small groups, such that the service remains undiminished but the management is left running around trying to cope with short-term absences to achieve the required level of service.
This will occupy a large percentage of their time, giving them little, if any, time for brown-nosing or doing all the various activities which get them their performance bonus.

The rule of thumb being that no-one gets paid bonuses for doing the most basic items on their job description. ;-)

[Hypognosis]

@NewJudge

>>The right to strike should be absolute. >As should the right to dismiss anybody taking part in one.

[Zeuhl]

/As should the right to dismiss anybody taking part in one./

As should the right to picket an establishment that has fired strikers in order to prevent anyone replacing those people

[Peter Pedant]

yeah

it is like - should be ban all old age pensioners from speaking as we all know Silence is golden ?

good one

[Peter Pedant]

I agree it does read as tho AOG is earnestly asking:

should we take away the people's right to do X because well they are exercising their right to do X ?

[New Judge]

The right to picket should also be curtailed. It was perhaps necessary when the only means of communication was two tin cans and a bit of string. It is not necessary now. There are all manner of methods of communication where the strikers can get their point across to others. Unless, of course, the aim is to physically intimidate others from entering their place of work or a place where they have to do business.

The answer for people who believe they are being underpaid or poorly treated is quite straightforward - take their labour elsewhere where they believe they will receive more pay or better conditions. Unless, of course, there are no such places in which case they don't have much of an argument.

[Old_Geezer]

The only reason the masses got a better deal was to reject the "like it or lump it or go find a better hole" philosophy. It is important for an equitable society that we get away from the idea that an individual is ok to do and use whatever or whoever they can to benefit themselves, and it's their own lookout to sort their own life out. And then deny them the right to exercise what little power they can bring in their own defence.