Bob Crow's death leaves 'unfillable void' - Durham Miners' Association

Bob Crow speaking during the 129th Durham Miners' Gala in Durham City last year.

Dave Hopper - tribute

First published in News
Last updated

RAIL, Maritime and Transport union leader Bob Crow, who has died aged 52, leaves an "unfillable void", according to the secretary of the Durham Miners' Associaton.

The Rail, Maritime and Transport union made the announcement with the deepest regret.

A brief statement said: "It is with the deepest regret that RMT has to confirm that our general secretary Bob Crow sadly passed away in the early hours of this morning.

"RMT would request that all media respect the privacy of the friends and family of Bob Crow at this distressing time."

Mr Crow had spoken at several Durham Miners' Galas in recent years.

Last year he told the gathering that it was "fantastic" that former Tory Prime Minister Margaret had died and he called on other unions to leave the Labour Party, saying it no longer served the interests of working people.

His presence on the platform in 2009 caused Labour leader Ed Miliband to pull out of the Gala although he spoke at The Big Meeting in 2012.

Dave Hopper, secretary of the Durham Miners' Association, which holds the Gala, said Mr Crow's death at such a young age was a big loss to the trade union movement.

"He is going to be a massive miss. He has been a very good friend to the Durham miners all the time that I have been in office," he said.

"His word was his bond and whatever he said he was going to deliver he did.

"He is going to leave a terrific void , an unfillable void, in the trade union movement.

"He was a very good speaker and was very  popular at the Gala."

Former Mayor of London Ken Livingstone said Mr Crow fought for his members despite being demonised by the right wing press.

Speaking of his shock at the news, he said: "I assumed he would be at my funeral not me at his.

He told Sky News: "He fought really hard for his members. The only working-class people who still have well-paid jobs in London are his members."

He said Mr Crow was broadly right on most key issues and that if more people had fought for the conditions of the working classes this country would be a much better place.

"With the passage of time people will come to see that people like Bob Crow did a very good job," he said.

Tributes also came from the North-East.

Easington MP Grahame Morris said on Twitter: "Very sad news that Bob Crow has died. The working class and organised Labour have lost a great champion. RIP"

Mr Crow was one of the most high-profile, left-wing union leaders of his generation, sparking as much anger from passengers hit by rail and Tube strikes, as praise from his members for winning pay rises.

He was constantly involved in industrial disputes and campaigns and led a walkout by London Underground workers last month in a dispute over ticket office closures.

The straight-talking south Londoner was a passionate supporter of Millwall Football Club.

His death caused shockwaves in the trade union movement today.

Manuel Cortes, leader of the TSSA rail union, who stood on picket lines with Mr Crow during last month's Tube strike, said: "Bob Crow was admired by his members and feared by employers, which is exactly how he liked it.

"It was a privilege to campaign and fight alongside him because he never gave an inch."

In a statement, London Mayor Boris Johnson said: "I'm shocked. Bob Crow was a fighter and a man of character.

"Whatever our political differences, and there were many, this is tragic news.

"Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his members.
There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success.
It's a sad day."

Darlington-based entrepreneur and Dragons Den star, Duncan Bannatyne, also spoke of his shock.

Writing on Twitter he remarked: "WoW! Bob Crow died from heart attack aged 52. That is so young. RIP"

While Northern TUC tweeted: "Bob Crow fought for workers in our region. Totally supported RMT efforts to lift pay for Metro cleaners."

Comments (84)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:05am Tue 11 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

What a shock. I only wish he cared as much about other workers as he did about his union members.
What a shock. I only wish he cared as much about other workers as he did about his union members. David Lacey
  • Score: -6

12:07pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Lionel1 says...

fought tirelessly for his members, no wonder considering it was those members that were financing his expense account!
fought tirelessly for his members, no wonder considering it was those members that were financing his expense account! Lionel1
  • Score: 3

12:32pm Tue 11 Mar 14

loan_star says...

At least he got that £10k holiday out the way during the last tube strike.
At least he got that £10k holiday out the way during the last tube strike. loan_star
  • Score: 2

1:25pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Ally F says...

Didn't much care for the man or particularly like his sarcastic and patronising manner. He was a true dinosaur from the darkest days of British Industrial relations, balloting for a strike because the Management have changed the depot toilet paper from 4ply to 3ply quilted.

However, he has died before his time and my thoughts are with his family. Crow fought for principals he passionately believed in. That differentiates him from most of today's self-serving Westminster politicians who are bereft of any principals.
Didn't much care for the man or particularly like his sarcastic and patronising manner. He was a true dinosaur from the darkest days of British Industrial relations, balloting for a strike because the Management have changed the depot toilet paper from 4ply to 3ply quilted. However, he has died before his time and my thoughts are with his family. Crow fought for principals he passionately believed in. That differentiates him from most of today's self-serving Westminster politicians who are bereft of any principals. Ally F
  • Score: -2

1:42pm Tue 11 Mar 14

behonest says...

An absolute shock. I didn't share his politics but I always admired the way he fought as hard as he could for the interests of his members.

Other union leaders put their politics and their Labour Party connections before the interests of their members, whilst Bob Crow never did. He didn't care about upsetting New Labour, which is why the Labour Party severed links with Bob's Union. RIP Bob Crow.
An absolute shock. I didn't share his politics but I always admired the way he fought as hard as he could for the interests of his members. Other union leaders put their politics and their Labour Party connections before the interests of their members, whilst Bob Crow never did. He didn't care about upsetting New Labour, which is why the Labour Party severed links with Bob's Union. RIP Bob Crow. behonest
  • Score: 10

2:38pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Rasselas says...

We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher.
What goes around comes around.
We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher. What goes around comes around. Rasselas
  • Score: 8

2:39pm Tue 11 Mar 14

punkrocker says...

his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends.
his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends. punkrocker
  • Score: 10

5:04pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Voice-of-reality says...

I presume given its reaction to the tragic death of the Lady and its collective desire to wallow, that Easington will be holding a 'party wake' for a champion of socialism and that, therereafter, the self same residents will go back to life on benefits.
I presume given its reaction to the tragic death of the Lady and its collective desire to wallow, that Easington will be holding a 'party wake' for a champion of socialism and that, therereafter, the self same residents will go back to life on benefits. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 5

5:12pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Jackaranda says...

Rasselas wrote:
We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher.
What goes around comes around.
Yes, I wretched at the sink after hearing Boris Johnson's inane tribute, but with Bob Crow you got his no nonsense opinions whether the recipient liked it or not. And his £10k jolly, which has been mentioned by someone else, was not paid for by the taxpayer!!
[quote][p][bold]Rasselas[/bold] wrote: We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher. What goes around comes around.[/p][/quote]Yes, I wretched at the sink after hearing Boris Johnson's inane tribute, but with Bob Crow you got his no nonsense opinions whether the recipient liked it or not. And his £10k jolly, which has been mentioned by someone else, was not paid for by the taxpayer!! Jackaranda
  • Score: 0

5:52pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Voice-of-reality says...

However, his council house is/was paid for by others and no doubt his wife will continue to live in it - despite the pension pot.
However, his council house is/was paid for by others and no doubt his wife will continue to live in it - despite the pension pot. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 4

5:56pm Tue 11 Mar 14

IanfromCrook says...

RIP sympathies to his family. Not as wily and deft as his predecessor but did his best and seemed completely straightforward. Would like politicians to have such convictions (even those I dislike).
RIP sympathies to his family. Not as wily and deft as his predecessor but did his best and seemed completely straightforward. Would like politicians to have such convictions (even those I dislike). IanfromCrook
  • Score: 3

6:15pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Lionel1 says...

The bloke wreaked of hypocracy! On one hand campaigning for the working class as he was 'one of them' with their interests at heart but on the other living the high life with his £650 lunches and lavishes (worked related) trips all at his members expense!!!
The bloke wreaked of hypocracy! On one hand campaigning for the working class as he was 'one of them' with their interests at heart but on the other living the high life with his £650 lunches and lavishes (worked related) trips all at his members expense!!! Lionel1
  • Score: 5

9:27pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Got Ya says...

Rasselas wrote:
We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher.
What goes around comes around.
Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake.
[quote][p][bold]Rasselas[/bold] wrote: We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher. What goes around comes around.[/p][/quote]Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake. Got Ya
  • Score: -11

11:15pm Tue 11 Mar 14

Voice-of-reality says...

Oh do grow up - you nauseatingly common person.
Oh do grow up - you nauseatingly common person. Voice-of-reality
  • Score: 2

11:02pm Wed 12 Mar 14

Longbowman666 says...

Never agreed with the man's beliefs and ways of doing things as I believed he was a dinosaur from the old 'do or die' union eras, but 52 is no age to die, not in this day and age.

Thoughts to his family, who, after all have the hardest job of all, as they have to pick up the pieces and carry on.
Never agreed with the man's beliefs and ways of doing things as I believed he was a dinosaur from the old 'do or die' union eras, but 52 is no age to die, not in this day and age. Thoughts to his family, who, after all have the hardest job of all, as they have to pick up the pieces and carry on. Longbowman666
  • Score: 3

12:43pm Thu 13 Mar 14

MSG says...

Got Ya wrote:
Rasselas wrote:
We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher.
What goes around comes around.
Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake.
You got the wrong person, its the Labour party war mongerer Tony Blair who will be burned at the stake should he ever touch down in the wrong country !
[quote][p][bold]Got Ya[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rasselas[/bold] wrote: We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher. What goes around comes around.[/p][/quote]Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake.[/p][/quote]You got the wrong person, its the Labour party war mongerer Tony Blair who will be burned at the stake should he ever touch down in the wrong country ! MSG
  • Score: 10

8:21pm Thu 13 Mar 14

johnny_p says...

"Bob Crow's death leaves an unfillable void"?

Eh? I would have thought you could look in any "Working" Man's Club in the North East to find plenty of people with the same kind of archaic, backwards, thoughtless and unprogressive mentalities. There must be plenty of people around who'd take £150,000 a year, holidaying in the Bahamas with his girlfriend whilst the Tube Drivers are striking.

Still let's not celebrate his death the way he did when our Maggie passed away.
"Bob Crow's death leaves an unfillable void"? Eh? I would have thought you could look in any "Working" Man's Club in the North East to find plenty of people with the same kind of archaic, backwards, thoughtless and unprogressive mentalities. There must be plenty of people around who'd take £150,000 a year, holidaying in the Bahamas with his girlfriend whilst the Tube Drivers are striking. Still let's not celebrate his death the way he did when our Maggie passed away. johnny_p
  • Score: 2

10:34pm Thu 13 Mar 14

spragger says...

But why did he hate the London travelling public?
But why did he hate the London travelling public? spragger
  • Score: 2

8:32am Fri 14 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

Got Ya wrote:
Rasselas wrote:
We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher.
What goes around comes around.
Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake.
Ah, always good to hear something from our rather backwards mining community reps!!

Perhaps there is a link between the fact that appear to have been left behind and their complete inability to move on!!

ITs no good waiting for the mines to be reopened, it will never happen. If they are that profitable why hasn't it been done already??
[quote][p][bold]Got Ya[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rasselas[/bold] wrote: We have already seen and heard fawning tributes from the professional politicians. Let us consider carefully what Mr Crowe said on the death of Baroness Thatcher. What goes around comes around.[/p][/quote]Yes but she deserved to die......in fact she should have been burned at the stake.[/p][/quote]Ah, always good to hear something from our rather backwards mining community reps!! Perhaps there is a link between the fact that appear to have been left behind and their complete inability to move on!! ITs no good waiting for the mines to be reopened, it will never happen. If they are that profitable why hasn't it been done already?? laboursfoe
  • Score: 2

8:58am Fri 14 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

Very sad, 52 is far to young.

I'm sure that his family will take comfort that he was true to himself, was not swayed by the usual political spin that other Union Leader were and was a great leader for his members.

He also worked very hard and was a family man.
Very sad, 52 is far to young. I'm sure that his family will take comfort that he was true to himself, was not swayed by the usual political spin that other Union Leader were and was a great leader for his members. He also worked very hard and was a family man. laboursfoe
  • Score: 3

9:09am Fri 14 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Now Tony Benn has cocked his toes. The dinosaurs are dying out again!
Now Tony Benn has cocked his toes. The dinosaurs are dying out again! David Lacey
  • Score: -4

4:26pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

behonest wrote:
An absolute shock. I didn't share his politics but I always admired the way he fought as hard as he could for the interests of his members.

Other union leaders put their politics and their Labour Party connections before the interests of their members, whilst Bob Crow never did. He didn't care about upsetting New Labour, which is why the Labour Party severed links with Bob's Union. RIP Bob Crow.
Labour didn't sever connections with the RMT union, the union severed their links with Labour, moreover, Crow urged other unions to do the same. A position I wholeheartedly endorse.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: An absolute shock. I didn't share his politics but I always admired the way he fought as hard as he could for the interests of his members. Other union leaders put their politics and their Labour Party connections before the interests of their members, whilst Bob Crow never did. He didn't care about upsetting New Labour, which is why the Labour Party severed links with Bob's Union. RIP Bob Crow.[/p][/quote]Labour didn't sever connections with the RMT union, the union severed their links with Labour, moreover, Crow urged other unions to do the same. A position I wholeheartedly endorse. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 4

4:34pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
I presume given its reaction to the tragic death of the Lady and its collective desire to wallow, that Easington will be holding a 'party wake' for a champion of socialism and that, therereafter, the self same residents will go back to life on benefits.
Your name belies your foul words. You lie, yes LIE when you say the residents of Easington will go back to their life on benefits. So that's what you think of your fellow workers? Many people are employed in Easington, or are seeking employment, which the anarchy of the Capitalist market place denies them. So keep your foul, lying diatribe, to yourself.
As for Bob Crow, he did exceptionally well for the members of the union he led but as for being a Socialist/Communist, I think not and so would you if you bothered to learn about the subject!
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: I presume given its reaction to the tragic death of the Lady and its collective desire to wallow, that Easington will be holding a 'party wake' for a champion of socialism and that, therereafter, the self same residents will go back to life on benefits.[/p][/quote]Your name belies your foul words. You lie, yes LIE when you say the residents of Easington will go back to their life on benefits. So that's what you think of your fellow workers? Many people are employed in Easington, or are seeking employment, which the anarchy of the Capitalist market place denies them. So keep your foul, lying diatribe, to yourself. As for Bob Crow, he did exceptionally well for the members of the union he led but as for being a Socialist/Communist, I think not and so would you if you bothered to learn about the subject! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

4:38pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
However, his council house is/was paid for by others and no doubt his wife will continue to live in it - despite the pension pot.
His council house, you misnamed fool, the rent was paid by himself, not by others, unless you are claiming he illegally claimed housing benefit! are you?
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: However, his council house is/was paid for by others and no doubt his wife will continue to live in it - despite the pension pot.[/p][/quote]His council house, you misnamed fool, the rent was paid by himself, not by others, unless you are claiming he illegally claimed housing benefit! are you? tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 0

4:40pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Do you think someone on a pension should not live in a Council House? By your words, it appears you do. If that is the case, I'm sure many pensioners who read the N Echo would totally disagree!
Do you think someone on a pension should not live in a Council House? By your words, it appears you do. If that is the case, I'm sure many pensioners who read the N Echo would totally disagree! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

4:52pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Lionel1 wrote:
The bloke wreaked of hypocracy! On one hand campaigning for the working class as he was 'one of them' with their interests at heart but on the other living the high life with his £650 lunches and lavishes (worked related) trips all at his members expense!!!
What do you people want? He lives in a council house and you are not satisfied! If he lived in a "big house" you would accuse him of not being "one of us", of flaunting his wages. You lot slaver on about a holiday to Brazil, and if he had holidayed in Bognor Regis, you lot would have accused him of "pretending" to be one of us!
As far as I'm concerned, he was a member of the working class. I disagreed vehemently with his politics and with his claim to be a Socialist/Communist, he was neither, but as a workers representative in the field of Industrial relations, he was exceptional, ask his members. So RIP fellow worker.
[quote][p][bold]Lionel1[/bold] wrote: The bloke wreaked of hypocracy! On one hand campaigning for the working class as he was 'one of them' with their interests at heart but on the other living the high life with his £650 lunches and lavishes (worked related) trips all at his members expense!!![/p][/quote]What do you people want? He lives in a council house and you are not satisfied! If he lived in a "big house" you would accuse him of not being "one of us", of flaunting his wages. You lot slaver on about a holiday to Brazil, and if he had holidayed in Bognor Regis, you lot would have accused him of "pretending" to be one of us! As far as I'm concerned, he was a member of the working class. I disagreed vehemently with his politics and with his claim to be a Socialist/Communist, he was neither, but as a workers representative in the field of Industrial relations, he was exceptional, ask his members. So RIP fellow worker. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

5:05pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Voice-of-reality wrote:
Oh do grow up - you nauseatingly common person.
In your case Voice of unreality, I would add infantile, mentally challenged, dim-witted, and someone who fawns to his betters, you sad little pleb! Oh, did I go overboard there? I think not. Go doff your cap, if you can afford one, if not, tug your forelock.
[quote][p][bold]Voice-of-reality[/bold] wrote: Oh do grow up - you nauseatingly common person.[/p][/quote]In your case Voice of unreality, I would add infantile, mentally challenged, dim-witted, and someone who fawns to his betters, you sad little pleb! Oh, did I go overboard there? I think not. Go doff your cap, if you can afford one, if not, tug your forelock. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: -2

5:09pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

johnny_p wrote:
"Bob Crow's death leaves an unfillable void"?

Eh? I would have thought you could look in any "Working" Man's Club in the North East to find plenty of people with the same kind of archaic, backwards, thoughtless and unprogressive mentalities. There must be plenty of people around who'd take £150,000 a year, holidaying in the Bahamas with his girlfriend whilst the Tube Drivers are striking.

Still let's not celebrate his death the way he did when our Maggie passed away.
Must be where you drink then johnny_p, as all the invectives you mention, most assuredly apply to you, more than anyone else!
[quote][p][bold]johnny_p[/bold] wrote: "Bob Crow's death leaves an unfillable void"? Eh? I would have thought you could look in any "Working" Man's Club in the North East to find plenty of people with the same kind of archaic, backwards, thoughtless and unprogressive mentalities. There must be plenty of people around who'd take £150,000 a year, holidaying in the Bahamas with his girlfriend whilst the Tube Drivers are striking. Still let's not celebrate his death the way he did when our Maggie passed away.[/p][/quote]Must be where you drink then johnny_p, as all the invectives you mention, most assuredly apply to you, more than anyone else! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: -1

5:11pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

spragger wrote:
But why did he hate the London travelling public?
He did not hate the London travelling public, you dunderhead, he was defending the rights and interests of his members. Which you would know and understand if you were not such a narrow minded, egoistic, bigot!
[quote][p][bold]spragger[/bold] wrote: But why did he hate the London travelling public?[/p][/quote]He did not hate the London travelling public, you dunderhead, he was defending the rights and interests of his members. Which you would know and understand if you were not such a narrow minded, egoistic, bigot! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

5:15pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

laboursfoe wrote:
Very sad, 52 is far to young.

I'm sure that his family will take comfort that he was true to himself, was not swayed by the usual political spin that other Union Leader were and was a great leader for his members.

He also worked very hard and was a family man.
Sentiments I wholeheartedly endorse LF
[quote][p][bold]laboursfoe[/bold] wrote: Very sad, 52 is far to young. I'm sure that his family will take comfort that he was true to himself, was not swayed by the usual political spin that other Union Leader were and was a great leader for his members. He also worked very hard and was a family man.[/p][/quote]Sentiments I wholeheartedly endorse LF tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

5:18pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

David Lacey wrote:
Now Tony Benn has cocked his toes. The dinosaurs are dying out again!
Neither were Socialists, but both adhered to principles that were unwavering. Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!
[quote][p][bold]David Lacey[/bold] wrote: Now Tony Benn has cocked his toes. The dinosaurs are dying out again![/p][/quote]Neither were Socialists, but both adhered to principles that were unwavering. Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 5

6:32pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Read what Boris Johnson said about Bob Crowe.
" ""Whatever our political differences, and there were many, this is tragic news.
"Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his member".
There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success.
It's a sad day."
"he played a big part in the success of the Tube" hardly a tribute paid to a wrecker, is it?
Read what Boris Johnson said about Bob Crowe. " ""Whatever our political differences, and there were many, this is tragic news. "Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his member". There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success. It's a sad day." "he played a big part in the success of the Tube" hardly a tribute paid to a wrecker, is it? tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 0

6:57pm Fri 14 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Read what Boris Johnson said about Bob Crowe.
" ""Whatever our political differences, and there were many, this is tragic news.
"Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his member".
There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success.
It's a sad day."
"he played a big part in the success of the Tube" hardly a tribute paid to a wrecker, is it?
Along with other Union Leaders.

I doubt the commuters would recognise/comment on infrastructure or operational changes. They would only see the delays and massive disruption that was caused when strikes were called.

They are paying customers, they see Transport for London as the business owners and they saw Bob Crow as the antagonist that was causing disruption and uncertainty.
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Read what Boris Johnson said about Bob Crowe. " ""Whatever our political differences, and there were many, this is tragic news. "Bob fought tirelessly for his beliefs and for his member". There can be absolutely no doubt that he played a big part in the success of the Tube, and he shared my goal to make transport in London an even greater success. It's a sad day." "he played a big part in the success of the Tube" hardly a tribute paid to a wrecker, is it?[/p][/quote]Along with other Union Leaders. I doubt the commuters would recognise/comment on infrastructure or operational changes. They would only see the delays and massive disruption that was caused when strikes were called. They are paying customers, they see Transport for London as the business owners and they saw Bob Crow as the antagonist that was causing disruption and uncertainty. laboursfoe
  • Score: -2

8:38pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

So once again, you ignore the truth to push, what agenda! anti union? When you read the words from the horses mouth, good old Boris in this instance, you still will not accept the truth, will you? It's your way, or no way!
Fares have risen massively, on both the underground and the rail network in general, as have profits. The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that? I'll tell you, nothing. If you are jealous because the RMT have managed to gain a little of the cake their members created and you have not been so fortunate, tough. Get unionised and if you are and your union is not cutting the mustard, get someone in who will, otherwise, shut your jealous, moaning hole.
The bosses are organised in the CBI, attack them, not your own kind!
So once again, you ignore the truth to push, what agenda! anti union? When you read the words from the horses mouth, good old Boris in this instance, you still will not accept the truth, will you? It's your way, or no way! Fares have risen massively, on both the underground and the rail network in general, as have profits. The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that? I'll tell you, nothing. If you are jealous because the RMT have managed to gain a little of the cake their members created and you have not been so fortunate, tough. Get unionised and if you are and your union is not cutting the mustard, get someone in who will, otherwise, shut your jealous, moaning hole. The bosses are organised in the CBI, attack them, not your own kind! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

9:21pm Fri 14 Mar 14

spragger says...

Looks like Louise has blown a fuse .. !
Looks like Louise has blown a fuse .. ! spragger
  • Score: -1

9:43pm Fri 14 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
So once again, you ignore the truth to push, what agenda! anti union? When you read the words from the horses mouth, good old Boris in this instance, you still will not accept the truth, will you? It's your way, or no way!
Fares have risen massively, on both the underground and the rail network in general, as have profits. The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that? I'll tell you, nothing. If you are jealous because the RMT have managed to gain a little of the cake their members created and you have not been so fortunate, tough. Get unionised and if you are and your union is not cutting the mustard, get someone in who will, otherwise, shut your jealous, moaning hole.
The bosses are organised in the CBI, attack them, not your own kind!
Hang on, where did this latest bile come from??

I'm not 'anti-union' but neither am I pro-union. I am fortunate enough to have operated on both sides of the infrastructure fence, Poacher turned Gamekeeper if you will.

All I did was point out that customers (in your analogy pay for the ingredients and pay the bakers wages) don't always recognise operational changes that add improvements, but they certainly do when services/goods are withdrawn.
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: So once again, you ignore the truth to push, what agenda! anti union? When you read the words from the horses mouth, good old Boris in this instance, you still will not accept the truth, will you? It's your way, or no way! Fares have risen massively, on both the underground and the rail network in general, as have profits. The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that? I'll tell you, nothing. If you are jealous because the RMT have managed to gain a little of the cake their members created and you have not been so fortunate, tough. Get unionised and if you are and your union is not cutting the mustard, get someone in who will, otherwise, shut your jealous, moaning hole. The bosses are organised in the CBI, attack them, not your own kind![/p][/quote]Hang on, where did this latest bile come from?? I'm not 'anti-union' but neither am I pro-union. I am fortunate enough to have operated on both sides of the infrastructure fence, Poacher turned Gamekeeper if you will. All I did was point out that customers (in your analogy pay for the ingredients and pay the bakers wages) don't always recognise operational changes that add improvements, but they certainly do when services/goods are withdrawn. laboursfoe
  • Score: 0

10:19pm Fri 14 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

The tube operators and the railways in general have, for the past few years, tried to screw passengers and workforce to the floor, whilst reaping ever increasing profits. The RMT have said "no", we do the grind and want recompense for the same. Passengers should rebel at the disgusting levels of fare rises too. It's not even as if the increased fares are leading to a better service, as always claimed by train operators, it isn't true! But the travelling public are easy prey to these shysters, as they have no choice, other than to shut up and cough up. So you reckon up who the bad guys are!
The tube operators and the railways in general have, for the past few years, tried to screw passengers and workforce to the floor, whilst reaping ever increasing profits. The RMT have said "no", we do the grind and want recompense for the same. Passengers should rebel at the disgusting levels of fare rises too. It's not even as if the increased fares are leading to a better service, as always claimed by train operators, it isn't true! But the travelling public are easy prey to these shysters, as they have no choice, other than to shut up and cough up. So you reckon up who the bad guys are! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

12:33am Sat 15 Mar 14

settheworldonfire says...

punkrocker wrote:
his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends.
****...HE WAS A BULLY WHO ONLY LINED HIS OWN POCKETS OFF THE BACK OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
GLAD TO SEE HIM GONE. £160,000 A YEAR ROBBED OFF THOSE WHO PAID INTO THE UNION COFFERS.
[quote][p][bold]punkrocker[/bold] wrote: his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends.[/p][/quote]****...HE WAS A BULLY WHO ONLY LINED HIS OWN POCKETS OFF THE BACK OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE. GLAD TO SEE HIM GONE. £160,000 A YEAR ROBBED OFF THOSE WHO PAID INTO THE UNION COFFERS. settheworldonfire
  • Score: -1

12:46am Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

settheworldonfire wrote:
punkrocker wrote:
his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends.
****...HE WAS A BULLY WHO ONLY LINED HIS OWN POCKETS OFF THE BACK OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE.
GLAD TO SEE HIM GONE. £160,000 A YEAR ROBBED OFF THOSE WHO PAID INTO THE UNION COFFERS.
Another sad, ignorant troll. More than that, you do know that capitals are shouting, online, don't you drowninginyourownshi
ite?
He did what he was paid for, he got the best deal for the members of the union. To say you are glad he is "dead" says more about you, you sad little **** than it does about Bob Crow. I hope that one day, I bump into you wearing a big I'm settheworldonfire badge and I'll really show you what I think about you. You piece of filth!
[quote][p][bold]settheworldonfire[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]punkrocker[/bold] wrote: his job was to fight for his members and for that he is unrivalled in todays Britain. god bless and thoughts go to his family and many friends.[/p][/quote]****...HE WAS A BULLY WHO ONLY LINED HIS OWN POCKETS OFF THE BACK OF HARD WORKING PEOPLE. GLAD TO SEE HIM GONE. £160,000 A YEAR ROBBED OFF THOSE WHO PAID INTO THE UNION COFFERS.[/p][/quote]Another sad, ignorant troll. More than that, you do know that capitals are shouting, online, don't you drowninginyourownshi ite? He did what he was paid for, he got the best deal for the members of the union. To say you are glad he is "dead" says more about you, you sad little **** than it does about Bob Crow. I hope that one day, I bump into you wearing a big I'm settheworldonfire badge and I'll really show you what I think about you. You piece of filth! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 0

6:28am Sat 15 Mar 14

jd6620 says...

I'm sure the Thatcher family were popping a few champagne corks, and why not & why not everything comes to them that wait. As for Tony Benn or Sir Anthony Wedgewood Benn as he was titled, had it shortened so he sounded more like one of the lads. ditched the title but kept the estate typical Labour.
I'm sure the Thatcher family were popping a few champagne corks, and why not & why not everything comes to them that wait. As for Tony Benn or Sir Anthony Wedgewood Benn as he was titled, had it shortened so he sounded more like one of the lads. ditched the title but kept the estate typical Labour. jd6620
  • Score: -2

9:21am Sat 15 Mar 14

Red rose lad says...

Now then Ed's Poodle. I've read all of your foaming rants and you seem to be missing a few points. Bob's members are there to provide an essential service, one for which they are well paid. I personally believe that they shouldn't be allowed to strike - along with the Fire Brigade by the way. I had a lot of respect for the guy in that he absolutely fought for what he believed in - unlike the other toerags who spout rubbish to win votes. That goes for Tony Benn as well. It always brought a smile to my face when I listened to him. I may not have agreed with a thing he said but he made you listen and engage with politics. However it's great to be unwavering if you are steering a true course but Bob's ideology is dying out and he still ploughed on towards the iceberg. Whether he was a socialist or communist doesn't really matter. The bust of Lenin on his desk and his dog called Castro told me all I needed to know. Send his ashes to the Motherland which he greatly admired and let the real workers travel to work unhindered. Sympathy to his family and those who will miss him as 52 is far too young.
Now then Ed's Poodle. I've read all of your foaming rants and you seem to be missing a few points. Bob's members are there to provide an essential service, one for which they are well paid. I personally believe that they shouldn't be allowed to strike - along with the Fire Brigade by the way. I had a lot of respect for the guy in that he absolutely fought for what he believed in - unlike the other toerags who spout rubbish to win votes. That goes for Tony Benn as well. It always brought a smile to my face when I listened to him. I may not have agreed with a thing he said but he made you listen and engage with politics. However it's great to be unwavering if you are steering a true course but Bob's ideology is dying out and he still ploughed on towards the iceberg. Whether he was a socialist or communist doesn't really matter. The bust of Lenin on his desk and his dog called Castro told me all I needed to know. Send his ashes to the Motherland which he greatly admired and let the real workers travel to work unhindered. Sympathy to his family and those who will miss him as 52 is far too young. Red rose lad
  • Score: -3

9:35am Sat 15 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him?
.
You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!"
.
Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?
Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him? . You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!" . Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher? David Lacey
  • Score: -4

10:12am Sat 15 Mar 14

loan_star says...

David Lacey wrote:
Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him?
.
You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!"
.
Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?
Loopy been banned again?
[quote][p][bold]David Lacey[/bold] wrote: Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him? . You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!" . Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?[/p][/quote]Loopy been banned again? loan_star
  • Score: -3

11:34am Sat 15 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Looks like it. Or drowned in a pool of his own bile. I await an answer from Polly about respect.
Looks like it. Or drowned in a pool of his own bile. I await an answer from Polly about respect. David Lacey
  • Score: -5

11:54am Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Red rose lad wrote:
Now then Ed's Poodle. I've read all of your foaming rants and you seem to be missing a few points. Bob's members are there to provide an essential service, one for which they are well paid. I personally believe that they shouldn't be allowed to strike - along with the Fire Brigade by the way. I had a lot of respect for the guy in that he absolutely fought for what he believed in - unlike the other toerags who spout rubbish to win votes. That goes for Tony Benn as well. It always brought a smile to my face when I listened to him. I may not have agreed with a thing he said but he made you listen and engage with politics. However it's great to be unwavering if you are steering a true course but Bob's ideology is dying out and he still ploughed on towards the iceberg. Whether he was a socialist or communist doesn't really matter. The bust of Lenin on his desk and his dog called Castro told me all I needed to know. Send his ashes to the Motherland which he greatly admired and let the real workers travel to work unhindered. Sympathy to his family and those who will miss him as 52 is far too young.
The members of the union Bob Crow led, were so relatively well paid, precisely because of the actions and negotiating skills of Bob. Unless you reckon the terms and conditions would have been forthcoming with workers going "cap in hand" and saying, like Oliver Twist, "please sir can I have some more"?
As an aside and if you had read my previous posts, I detest Labour as much, if not more, than I detest the Tories or Liberals, or the SWP for that matter. Moreover, Lenin and Castro may have been admired by Bob Crow, but not by me, chancers both.
Finally, workers are not "slaves", and they still have the "lawful" right to withdraw their Labour. If you believe the right to do this should be withdrawn and for fairness, I presume you will agree, that bosses should not be allowed to sack workers willy-nilly, fairs fair after all, is it not?
[quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Now then Ed's Poodle. I've read all of your foaming rants and you seem to be missing a few points. Bob's members are there to provide an essential service, one for which they are well paid. I personally believe that they shouldn't be allowed to strike - along with the Fire Brigade by the way. I had a lot of respect for the guy in that he absolutely fought for what he believed in - unlike the other toerags who spout rubbish to win votes. That goes for Tony Benn as well. It always brought a smile to my face when I listened to him. I may not have agreed with a thing he said but he made you listen and engage with politics. However it's great to be unwavering if you are steering a true course but Bob's ideology is dying out and he still ploughed on towards the iceberg. Whether he was a socialist or communist doesn't really matter. The bust of Lenin on his desk and his dog called Castro told me all I needed to know. Send his ashes to the Motherland which he greatly admired and let the real workers travel to work unhindered. Sympathy to his family and those who will miss him as 52 is far too young.[/p][/quote]The members of the union Bob Crow led, were so relatively well paid, precisely because of the actions and negotiating skills of Bob. Unless you reckon the terms and conditions would have been forthcoming with workers going "cap in hand" and saying, like Oliver Twist, "please sir can I have some more"? As an aside and if you had read my previous posts, I detest Labour as much, if not more, than I detest the Tories or Liberals, or the SWP for that matter. Moreover, Lenin and Castro may have been admired by Bob Crow, but not by me, chancers both. Finally, workers are not "slaves", and they still have the "lawful" right to withdraw their Labour. If you believe the right to do this should be withdrawn and for fairness, I presume you will agree, that bosses should not be allowed to sack workers willy-nilly, fairs fair after all, is it not? tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 4

12:01pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Point out one post, in which I disrespected Thatcher! She was doing for her class, what Bob Crow did for his, but oh didn't she do it with such enthusiasm.
By the way, as I've said on another thread, do not threaten me Mr Lacey, and desist from using the insulting reference "polly". Or calling me "ultra leftwing", I am neither!
Point out one post, in which I disrespected Thatcher! She was doing for her class, what Bob Crow did for his, but oh didn't she do it with such enthusiasm. By the way, as I've said on another thread, do not threaten me Mr Lacey, and desist from using the insulting reference "polly". Or calling me "ultra leftwing", I am neither! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 3

12:14pm Sat 15 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

I will refer to you as Polly. It is my choice. It is called freedom. Your comments about capitalism mark you out as ultra left wing. You have made your views in this respect quite clear. And calm down dear - no need for the aggression!
I will refer to you as Polly. It is my choice. It is called freedom. Your comments about capitalism mark you out as ultra left wing. You have made your views in this respect quite clear. And calm down dear - no need for the aggression! David Lacey
  • Score: -5

1:22pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Aggression Mr Lacey? I'm afraid you are mistaken! Furthermore, just because one disapproves of Capitalism, does not mean one is "ultra left wing".
It is indeed your choice, to refer to me as "polly". I merely asked you to desist, as I find the usage, insulting. You have informed me you will continue, so be it! It tells more about you, than anything else. You are prepared to use language you "know", upsets others, way to go.
Aggression Mr Lacey? I'm afraid you are mistaken! Furthermore, just because one disapproves of Capitalism, does not mean one is "ultra left wing". It is indeed your choice, to refer to me as "polly". I merely asked you to desist, as I find the usage, insulting. You have informed me you will continue, so be it! It tells more about you, than anything else. You are prepared to use language you "know", upsets others, way to go. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 4

1:25pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

By the way Mr Lacey, you have yet to point out 1 post where I disrespected Thatcher.
By the way Mr Lacey, you have yet to point out 1 post where I disrespected Thatcher. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 3

2:34pm Sat 15 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Polly my luv I didn't say that YOU disrespected Thatcher. Read my message carefully. Plenty did as I'm sure you will agree. I was merely observing that your admirable sentiments about the dear departed should apply to all. We therefore agree - again. How delightful. At this rate we will be exchanging Christmas cards.
Polly my luv I didn't say that YOU disrespected Thatcher. Read my message carefully. Plenty did as I'm sure you will agree. I was merely observing that your admirable sentiments about the dear departed should apply to all. We therefore agree - again. How delightful. At this rate we will be exchanging Christmas cards. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

4:35pm Sat 15 Mar 14

K. Richardson says...

I've yet to hear of anybody achieving martyrdom by being a pompous windbag but hell, what do I know ?
Bob Crow did exactly what he was employed to do, by fair means or foul, but he didn't give a sh1t about the lives of the tax contributors he disrupted who were merely trying to go about their daily business.
I am sorry that he died so young but I shan't miss him.
I've yet to hear of anybody achieving martyrdom by being a pompous windbag but hell, what do I know ? Bob Crow did exactly what he was employed to do, by fair means or foul, but he didn't give a sh1t about the lives of the tax contributors he disrupted who were merely trying to go about their daily business. I am sorry that he died so young but I shan't miss him. K. Richardson
  • Score: -4

4:43pm Sat 15 Mar 14

K. Richardson says...

By the way, that first line was directed at you polly.
By the way, that first line was directed at you polly. K. Richardson
  • Score: -2

5:09pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

David Lacey wrote:
Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him?
.
You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!"
.
Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?
As you have said, that is exactly my sentiment. So from me, that sentiment did apply, so why even mention it? For reasons known only to thyself, obviously!
[quote][p][bold]David Lacey[/bold] wrote: Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him? . You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!" . Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?[/p][/quote]As you have said, that is exactly my sentiment. So from me, that sentiment did apply, so why even mention it? For reasons known only to thyself, obviously! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 3

5:18pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there.
And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to.
Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air!
Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there. And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to. Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

5:40pm Sat 15 Mar 14

spragger says...

The underground is a public monopoly & it is wrong to use the strike weapon against them that rely on that as their only means of viable transport

To make it fair the taxpayer should be able to withdraw its funding from those people, who wish to disrupt their lives & livelihood.

This would have the added bonus of causing the quick decline of the public sector unions, who seem to hate the people who have no choice but to pay for them

Lets see Louise suck that one in . .
Like Eater of Sin she has quickly gone to the abuse phase
The underground is a public monopoly & it is wrong to use the strike weapon against them that rely on that as their only means of viable transport To make it fair the taxpayer should be able to withdraw its funding from those people, who wish to disrupt their lives & livelihood. This would have the added bonus of causing the quick decline of the public sector unions, who seem to hate the people who have no choice but to pay for them Lets see Louise suck that one in . . Like Eater of Sin she has quickly gone to the abuse phase spragger
  • Score: -2

6:04pm Sat 15 Mar 14

K. Richardson says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there.
And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to.
Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air!
That'll be 'taxpayers too' windy but what the hey.
People in the private sector contribute to the public purse. If you pay the public sector their net pay there is no difference. out of one vast maw and straight back in, comprende ?
Regards yourself, I don't believe you've ever left school . i.e. all theory and no practice.
I've carried hods, driven wagons, run companies and kept 300 people in work by selling what they produce, can you say the same ?
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there. And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to. Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air![/p][/quote]That'll be 'taxpayers too' windy but what the hey. People in the private sector contribute to the public purse. If you pay the public sector their net pay there is no difference. out of one vast maw and straight back in, comprende ? Regards yourself, I don't believe you've ever left school . i.e. all theory and no practice. I've carried hods, driven wagons, run companies and kept 300 people in work by selling what they produce, can you say the same ? K. Richardson
  • Score: -2

6:20pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

spragger wrote:
The underground is a public monopoly & it is wrong to use the strike weapon against them that rely on that as their only means of viable transport

To make it fair the taxpayer should be able to withdraw its funding from those people, who wish to disrupt their lives & livelihood.

This would have the added bonus of causing the quick decline of the public sector unions, who seem to hate the people who have no choice but to pay for them

Lets see Louise suck that one in . .
Like Eater of Sin she has quickly gone to the abuse phase
Once again you are incorrect. The vast majority of RMT members, work for private companies! Did you not realise the railways had been privatised? I realise you've only had a few years for it to filter through to your brain but it is, regretfully, a fact.
You spragger, are a fool, you incessantly use the name Louise, with no foundation, presumably as a barb to cause discord, however, it isn't working.
So lets reprise, you are wrong about the unions and wrong about misusing the name Louise. So 2 for 2. At least you are good at something, being wrong in this case.
[quote][p][bold]spragger[/bold] wrote: The underground is a public monopoly & it is wrong to use the strike weapon against them that rely on that as their only means of viable transport To make it fair the taxpayer should be able to withdraw its funding from those people, who wish to disrupt their lives & livelihood. This would have the added bonus of causing the quick decline of the public sector unions, who seem to hate the people who have no choice but to pay for them Lets see Louise suck that one in . . Like Eater of Sin she has quickly gone to the abuse phase[/p][/quote]Once again you are incorrect. The vast majority of RMT members, work for private companies! Did you not realise the railways had been privatised? I realise you've only had a few years for it to filter through to your brain but it is, regretfully, a fact. You spragger, are a fool, you incessantly use the name Louise, with no foundation, presumably as a barb to cause discord, however, it isn't working. So lets reprise, you are wrong about the unions and wrong about misusing the name Louise. So 2 for 2. At least you are good at something, being wrong in this case. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

6:26pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

K. Richardson wrote:
tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there.
And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to.
Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air!
That'll be 'taxpayers too' windy but what the hey.
People in the private sector contribute to the public purse. If you pay the public sector their net pay there is no difference. out of one vast maw and straight back in, comprende ?
Regards yourself, I don't believe you've ever left school . i.e. all theory and no practice.
I've carried hods, driven wagons, run companies and kept 300 people in work by selling what they produce, can you say the same ?
To, or too, getting a little picky there are you not! When one see's someone start correcting spelling the game is up! You have nothing else to offer so, goodbye. Go back to exploiting your workforce, for your own narrow, pecuniary interests.
[quote][p][bold]K. Richardson[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Another rude and impertinent child! Why do I call you "child"? because the last time I heard such infantile use of names, as an insult, was when I was at infant school. It appears some on here, should still be there. And Bob Crow did nothing by "foul" means, strikes are still legal, or are, at present. Lest we forget, or should I say, you ignore, Bob Crow and his members are taxpayers to. Talking about not missing someone, I could do with less of your mock umbrage and if you do not post again, shall not miss you either, you self-opinionated, self-absorbed, bag of hot air![/p][/quote]That'll be 'taxpayers too' windy but what the hey. People in the private sector contribute to the public purse. If you pay the public sector their net pay there is no difference. out of one vast maw and straight back in, comprende ? Regards yourself, I don't believe you've ever left school . i.e. all theory and no practice. I've carried hods, driven wagons, run companies and kept 300 people in work by selling what they produce, can you say the same ?[/p][/quote]To, or too, getting a little picky there are you not! When one see's someone start correcting spelling the game is up! You have nothing else to offer so, goodbye. Go back to exploiting your workforce, for your own narrow, pecuniary interests. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

6:54pm Sat 15 Mar 14

K. Richardson says...

Oh dear, you remind me of someone of my acquaintance. . I could present present him with 50 positives and one maybe construed as a negative and guess which one he picked up on ?
I ask again, what WORK have you done ?
Oh dear, you remind me of someone of my acquaintance. . I could present present him with 50 positives and one maybe construed as a negative and guess which one he picked up on ? I ask again, what WORK have you done ? K. Richardson
  • Score: -1

7:39pm Sat 15 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Hello Mr Richardson. It is delightful to make your acquaintance and to read your interesting opinions. With regard to your last comment I suspect we both know the answer. I too have run businesses and employed lots of people. The responsibility is onerous but satisfying when you build a good team of hard workers who know which side their bread is buttered. Unlike the lemming-like TfL "workers" who are hell bent on destroying their own jobs.
.
And to Polly - you can't just shut down threads when you feel like it. That's a tad childish - if you don't mind me saying so.
Hello Mr Richardson. It is delightful to make your acquaintance and to read your interesting opinions. With regard to your last comment I suspect we both know the answer. I too have run businesses and employed lots of people. The responsibility is onerous but satisfying when you build a good team of hard workers who know which side their bread is buttered. Unlike the lemming-like TfL "workers" who are hell bent on destroying their own jobs. . And to Polly - you can't just shut down threads when you feel like it. That's a tad childish - if you don't mind me saying so. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

8:37pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Oh not at all Mr Lacey, not at all, say away. However, if you had read my post correctly, I was shutting down nothing, nor attempting to.
I should warn you, that your new best friend, K Richardson seems to have a typing impediment. What with his "I could present present him" invocation and not even using a comma betwixt two "present" s.
Mr Richardson, don't you know it is considered shouting to use capitals on the Internet? It appears not, as you wrote WORK, quite ebulliently.
Moreover, my life is "my" business, you nosey dolt.
I am not one of your workers, for which I thank providence, so try not to "big yourself up" and do not try and talk down to me, you have neither the right, nor intelligence.
Oh not at all Mr Lacey, not at all, say away. However, if you had read my post correctly, I was shutting down nothing, nor attempting to. I should warn you, that your new best friend, K Richardson seems to have a typing impediment. What with his "I could present present him" invocation and not even using a comma betwixt two "present" s. Mr Richardson, don't you know it is considered shouting to use capitals on the Internet? It appears not, as you wrote WORK, quite ebulliently. Moreover, my life is "my" business, you nosey dolt. I am not one of your workers, for which I thank providence, so try not to "big yourself up" and do not try and talk down to me, you have neither the right, nor intelligence. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 3

8:40pm Sat 15 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

OOps, I defended myself, I suppose I am in for a warning from Mr Lacey. Well, can't have these uppity workers mouthing off, so I suppose I'll have to take my punishment with good graces : )
OOps, I defended myself, I suppose I am in for a warning from Mr Lacey. Well, can't have these uppity workers mouthing off, so I suppose I'll have to take my punishment with good graces : ) tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

9:38am Sun 16 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
OOps, I defended myself, I suppose I am in for a warning from Mr Lacey. Well, can't have these uppity workers mouthing off, so I suppose I'll have to take my punishment with good graces : )
You seem to have a real problem with employers.
What is it you detest so much about them?

Business owners have the right to protect profit margins,if there is not enough profit in it to pay the corporation tax and provide dividends then they may as well close and get PAYE role within a company.

Then more people suffer....
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: OOps, I defended myself, I suppose I am in for a warning from Mr Lacey. Well, can't have these uppity workers mouthing off, so I suppose I'll have to take my punishment with good graces : )[/p][/quote]You seem to have a real problem with employers. What is it you detest so much about them? Business owners have the right to protect profit margins,if there is not enough profit in it to pay the corporation tax and provide dividends then they may as well close and get PAYE role within a company. Then more people suffer.... laboursfoe
  • Score: -1

10:51am Sun 16 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Oh dear, Polly is in a strop again. My use of capitals is in lieu of bold, italic or underline as a means of emphasis. Not "shouting". If you have different rules, so be it. But they are not mine. Have a nice day.
Oh dear, Polly is in a strop again. My use of capitals is in lieu of bold, italic or underline as a means of emphasis. Not "shouting". If you have different rules, so be it. But they are not mine. Have a nice day. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

11:16am Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

There you go again Mr Lacey, making assumptions! No strop here, but it would appear your knickers are in a twist! Capitals used online, are accepted as "shouting", a fact I thought you, with your knowledge, would have been aware! It is in fact, a long standing convention.
As for you Laboursfoe, let us examine the obverse side of your pro boss argument. If there were no workers willing to be employed by a certain company, that company would most assuredly not last long. So it is a semi-symbiotic relationship, is it not? Both sides need each other, in this respect!
I will, moreover, throw another part of your argument back at you! You seem to have a real problem with workers. What is it, you detest so much about them?
You do realise that workers produce everything, from a pin to a satellite, do you not? They do this by using hand and brain. If it was not for "workers", nothing would be produced, nor any services provided. As workers produce everything, they also get it to it's destination, whether by road, rail, air, or sea.
So your fetish for bosses should include more respect for "workers", don't you think?
There you go again Mr Lacey, making assumptions! No strop here, but it would appear your knickers are in a twist! Capitals used online, are accepted as "shouting", a fact I thought you, with your knowledge, would have been aware! It is in fact, a long standing convention. As for you Laboursfoe, let us examine the obverse side of your pro boss argument. If there were no workers willing to be employed by a certain company, that company would most assuredly not last long. So it is a semi-symbiotic relationship, is it not? Both sides need each other, in this respect! I will, moreover, throw another part of your argument back at you! You seem to have a real problem with workers. What is it, you detest so much about them? You do realise that workers produce everything, from a pin to a satellite, do you not? They do this by using hand and brain. If it was not for "workers", nothing would be produced, nor any services provided. As workers produce everything, they also get it to it's destination, whether by road, rail, air, or sea. So your fetish for bosses should include more respect for "workers", don't you think? tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

11:56am Sun 16 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for.

There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis.

Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes.
I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for. There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis. Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes. laboursfoe
  • Score: -2

12:02pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

I see, even after I have informed you that I find your use of the term "Polly" offensive, you continue to use it! I know you say it is your choice to do so but after being informed the recipient does not like it, good manners alone, would tend you towards discontinuing to do so! I suppose age, does not necessarily lead to being good mannered, or it appears so in your case. So from now on, do not have the temerity to suggest I insult people, nor pull me up when you presume I have!
By the way, no strop or anything like it from me. Just quid pro quo.
I see, even after I have informed you that I find your use of the term "Polly" offensive, you continue to use it! I know you say it is your choice to do so but after being informed the recipient does not like it, good manners alone, would tend you towards discontinuing to do so! I suppose age, does not necessarily lead to being good mannered, or it appears so in your case. So from now on, do not have the temerity to suggest I insult people, nor pull me up when you presume I have! By the way, no strop or anything like it from me. Just quid pro quo. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

12:11pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

"Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation." They work hand in hand for the benefit of the owners and or shareholders profits, full stop.
Every time you talk of workers, you talk in a denigrating, disparaging way. With no sign of respect whatsoever!
"Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation." They work hand in hand for the benefit of the owners and or shareholders profits, full stop. Every time you talk of workers, you talk in a denigrating, disparaging way. With no sign of respect whatsoever! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 1

12:18pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

laboursfoe wrote:
I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for.

There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis.

Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes.
You mean you have the utmost respect for workers, when they do what they are told and moreover, know their place! What a throwback. I suppose you would make unions illegal, or have legislation in place, to so hamstring them, as to make them the bosses poodles!
Even if you deny this, your words tell the truth about your attitude, as much as mine do my attitude. And no, Mr Lacey, it is not ultra left wingerism, it is someone who wants a fair and equitable society. Which does not apply today!
[quote][p][bold]laboursfoe[/bold] wrote: I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for. There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis. Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes.[/p][/quote]You mean you have the utmost respect for workers, when they do what they are told and moreover, know their place! What a throwback. I suppose you would make unions illegal, or have legislation in place, to so hamstring them, as to make them the bosses poodles! Even if you deny this, your words tell the truth about your attitude, as much as mine do my attitude. And no, Mr Lacey, it is not ultra left wingerism, it is someone who wants a fair and equitable society. Which does not apply today! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 0

12:21pm Sun 16 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Wow!! A MEGASTROP!!!
.
Polly has really lost her cool.
Wow!! A MEGASTROP!!! . Polly has really lost her cool. David Lacey
  • Score: -3

1:22pm Sun 16 Mar 14

cushybutterfield says...

No mention made of the fairly recent London tube railway strike, when hundreds of thousands of ***Working*****worki
ng class commuters and working class families, either could not get to work and/or were left stranded for hours in central London in bitter winter conditions. Many of them getting up at 5.OO (and even earlier) to get to work, ruined by *** so called*** caring far left commie backed, Unions, refusing to modernise. ****WORKING Commuters PAYING THOUSANDS A YEAR for annual train tickets. The Tube Drivers are currently on £4O, OOO Plus a Year. Decent working class families and people suffering again because of dinosaur unnecessary punitive Union Strikes, oppressing working class people trying to EARN a living and getting to WORK...
No mention made of the fairly recent London tube railway strike, when hundreds of thousands of ***Working*****worki ng class commuters and working class families, either could not get to work and/or were left stranded for hours in central London in bitter winter conditions. Many of them getting up at 5.OO (and even earlier) to get to work, ruined by *** so called*** caring far left commie backed, Unions, refusing to modernise. ****WORKING Commuters PAYING THOUSANDS A YEAR for annual train tickets. The Tube Drivers are currently on £4O, OOO Plus a Year. Decent working class families and people suffering again because of dinosaur unnecessary punitive Union Strikes, oppressing working class people trying to EARN a living and getting to WORK... cushybutterfield
  • Score: -4

1:31pm Sun 16 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
laboursfoe wrote:
I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for.

There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis.

Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes.
You mean you have the utmost respect for workers, when they do what they are told and moreover, know their place! What a throwback. I suppose you would make unions illegal, or have legislation in place, to so hamstring them, as to make them the bosses poodles!
Even if you deny this, your words tell the truth about your attitude, as much as mine do my attitude. And no, Mr Lacey, it is not ultra left wingerism, it is someone who wants a fair and equitable society. Which does not apply today!
You're wrong, I'm a business owner and I also employ a team of people 6 in total.

They are all intelligent and dynamic folk who understand that you get out what you put in. They are aware of pulling together and all get market rate. They all share roles and mentor each other where they pick up new skills.

They all understand their contribution and also understand where they sit in the organisation.

The issue you have is that you want everyone in the organisation to have equal share of the business profit. If that is the case then perhaps you would be best working in a commune.
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]laboursfoe[/bold] wrote: I have utmost respect for workers, when they realise that there is a line between ownership and working for. There is a distinct difference and if said workers have a problem with owners having a bigger or deciding stake in the profits of the organisation then they should look at starting a business themselves. Or working for an organisation like John Lewis. Workers and owners work hand in hand to the benefit of the organisation. Workers may produce along side but it is often the owners and directors that drive the business forward and implement changes.When one party starts pulling away from that the business and it's customers can suffer. For instance Unions calling out workers for businesses having the ordacity to try and implement changes.[/p][/quote]You mean you have the utmost respect for workers, when they do what they are told and moreover, know their place! What a throwback. I suppose you would make unions illegal, or have legislation in place, to so hamstring them, as to make them the bosses poodles! Even if you deny this, your words tell the truth about your attitude, as much as mine do my attitude. And no, Mr Lacey, it is not ultra left wingerism, it is someone who wants a fair and equitable society. Which does not apply today![/p][/quote]You're wrong, I'm a business owner and I also employ a team of people 6 in total. They are all intelligent and dynamic folk who understand that you get out what you put in. They are aware of pulling together and all get market rate. They all share roles and mentor each other where they pick up new skills. They all understand their contribution and also understand where they sit in the organisation. The issue you have is that you want everyone in the organisation to have equal share of the business profit. If that is the case then perhaps you would be best working in a commune. laboursfoe
  • Score: -1

5:25pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen.
If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally
The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al.
And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post.
I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof.
By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder!
Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen. If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al. And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post. I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof. By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 4

7:14pm Sun 16 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen.
If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally
The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al.
And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post.
I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof.
By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder!
Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!!

But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits.
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen. If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al. And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post. I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof. By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder![/p][/quote]Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!! But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits. laboursfoe
  • Score: -3

7:39pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Longbowman666 says...

It seems to me, and not to speak ill of the dead, that union leaders such as the late Mr Crow are in essence hypocritical. On one hand they rant to their members about the 'workers' being underfoot of the 'bosses' who are paid higher than they are, do less than the 'workers' and are a generally selfish, self-centred and arrogant bunch who have no regard for those beneath them.

Then on the other hand they take home a salary that most of their membership can only dream of - in Mr Crow's case in the region of £145,000 p.a, and take holidays in places that their membership could never afford to go, both of which they justify by saying ' Well, I have a lot of responsibility and I deserve my wages' - which, oddly enough, is the same attitude that they decry the 'bosses' for having.

I for one would have much more respect for someone who didn't just pay lip service to their ideals and beliefs - I never agreed with Tony Benn's politics, however I respected the fact that the man stuck to his principles and rejected a hereditary title, in direct contrast to the likes of Mr Prescott who was forever giving the 'down with the House of Lords' speech and yet who didn't hesitate to take a seat there when it was offered!

If Mr Crow and the others of his kind want (or in his case, had wanted) to claim the higher moral ground, then it takes more than just saying words.

For many the time of 'us versus them' is gone, and those firms that work together for the betterment of themselves and their employees are the ones who are surviving. The whistle-blowing 'everybody out' brigade are to them a thing of the past, and good riddance to them.
It seems to me, and not to speak ill of the dead, that union leaders such as the late Mr Crow are in essence hypocritical. On one hand they rant to their members about the 'workers' being underfoot of the 'bosses' who are paid higher than they are, do less than the 'workers' and are a generally selfish, self-centred and arrogant bunch who have no regard for those beneath them. Then on the other hand they take home a salary that most of their membership can only dream of - in Mr Crow's case in the region of £145,000 p.a, and take holidays in places that their membership could never afford to go, both of which they justify by saying ' Well, I have a lot of responsibility and I deserve my wages' - which, oddly enough, is the same attitude that they decry the 'bosses' for having. I for one would have much more respect for someone who didn't just pay lip service to their ideals and beliefs - I never agreed with Tony Benn's politics, however I respected the fact that the man stuck to his principles and rejected a hereditary title, in direct contrast to the likes of Mr Prescott who was forever giving the 'down with the House of Lords' speech and yet who didn't hesitate to take a seat there when it was offered! If Mr Crow and the others of his kind want (or in his case, had wanted) to claim the higher moral ground, then it takes more than just saying words. For many the time of 'us versus them' is gone, and those firms that work together for the betterment of themselves and their employees are the ones who are surviving. The whistle-blowing 'everybody out' brigade are to them a thing of the past, and good riddance to them. Longbowman666
  • Score: -3

8:21pm Sun 16 Mar 14

David Lacey says...

Superb!
Superb! David Lacey
  • Score: -4

10:49pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

laboursfoe wrote:
tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen.
If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally
The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al.
And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post.
I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof.
By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder!
Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!!

But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits.
No, actually I was not, Afraid you are wrong. Afraid, you have the wrong end of the stick, or argument!
[quote][p][bold]laboursfoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen. If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al. And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post. I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof. By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder![/p][/quote]Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!! But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits.[/p][/quote]No, actually I was not, Afraid you are wrong. Afraid, you have the wrong end of the stick, or argument! tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

10:54pm Sun 16 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

I see Mr Lacey, you have found yourself a "new best friend".
Longbowman, I agree, wholeheartedly about the likes of Prescott, the rest of your polemic, however, is merely that, with rhetoric thrown in! By the way, is your longbow yew?
I see Mr Lacey, you have found yourself a "new best friend". Longbowman, I agree, wholeheartedly about the likes of Prescott, the rest of your polemic, however, is merely that, with rhetoric thrown in! By the way, is your longbow yew? tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 2

11:14pm Sun 16 Mar 14

laboursfoe says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
laboursfoe wrote:
tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen.
If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally
The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al.
And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post.
I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof.
By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder!
Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!!

But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits.
No, actually I was not, Afraid you are wrong. Afraid, you have the wrong end of the stick, or argument!
"The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that?"

Those are your words..... are they not??!!

So on the basis that the workers are paid to bake the cake, does this not suggest that because they help make it they would be eligible to have 'a little of the cake ' they baked??!!!

Hopefully we can draw a line under this once and for all.
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]laboursfoe[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: Actually workersfoe, I do not want everyone to have equal shares of the businesses profit. Knowing the present system of society as well as I do, as long as it exists that would never happen. If the society I wish to see, came about, the things we need to live and even in Capitalism are produced cooperatively, would be produced for direct human use, not for profit. So no, I do not want "profits" shared out equally The issue you, as with many others have, is that you cannot see beyond the present mode of production. You see Capitalism as the be all and end all I, on the other hand, do not. Whether private enterprise Capitalism, or nationalised, centrally run State-Capitalism, vis a vis, the old Soviet Union, China, Cuba, the Labour Party et al. And no, Mr Lacey, not a strop or megastrop,not now, nor in my earlier post. I have asked you to respect my request, you have refused, I will leave others to judge your manners, or lack thereof. By the way that squeaking is definitely getting louder![/p][/quote]Haha Yes, I see what you did with the whole workersfoe thing. Inpiring!! But you're comments earlier weren't about capitalism. They were suggesting. That because somebody works for an organisation they are entitle to demand a slice of the pie above and beyond wages, pension and benefits.[/p][/quote]No, actually I was not, Afraid you are wrong. Afraid, you have the wrong end of the stick, or argument![/p][/quote]"The workers are only asking for a little of the cake they have baked. What do you think is wrong with that?" Those are your words..... are they not??!! So on the basis that the workers are paid to bake the cake, does this not suggest that because they help make it they would be eligible to have 'a little of the cake ' they baked??!!! Hopefully we can draw a line under this once and for all. laboursfoe
  • Score: -2

11:16pm Sun 16 Mar 14

Longbowman666 says...

tolpuddlemartyr1955 wrote:
I see Mr Lacey, you have found yourself a "new best friend".
Longbowman, I agree, wholeheartedly about the likes of Prescott, the rest of your polemic, however, is merely that, with rhetoric thrown in! By the way, is your longbow yew?
As you see it, Sir, as you see it. And yes, in fact, it is!
[quote][p][bold]tolpuddlemartyr1955[/bold] wrote: I see Mr Lacey, you have found yourself a "new best friend". Longbowman, I agree, wholeheartedly about the likes of Prescott, the rest of your polemic, however, is merely that, with rhetoric thrown in! By the way, is your longbow yew?[/p][/quote]As you see it, Sir, as you see it. And yes, in fact, it is! Longbowman666
  • Score: 2

6:23pm Mon 17 Mar 14

Jackaranda says...

loan_star wrote:
David Lacey wrote:
Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him?
.
You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!"
.
Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?
Loopy been banned again?
His abuse of fellow commenters knew no bounds!!
[quote][p][bold]loan_star[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]David Lacey[/bold] wrote: Polly - unless you contain yourself you will be going the same way as Loopy aka sineater, aka loonyleft. Remember him? . You said "Like them, or loathe them, agree or disagree, for that alone they should be respected!" . Why didn't that sentiment apply to Margaret Thatcher?[/p][/quote]Loopy been banned again?[/p][/quote]His abuse of fellow commenters knew no bounds!! Jackaranda
  • Score: 0

6:41pm Mon 17 Mar 14

spragger says...

As go all the foul mouthed & ill informed supporters of the left . ..
As go all the foul mouthed & ill informed supporters of the left . .. spragger
  • Score: 0

8:23pm Mon 17 Mar 14

cushybutterfield says...

All about selfish internal union 'point scoring' politicals, nothing about the 'hundreds of thousands' of working class commenters and working class London families, left stranded and unable to get to work and/or stranded during bitter winter conditions. This is your so called caring so called working class supported 'Trade Unionism for you'. Commuter's getting up at 5.OO am, paying THOUSANDS for Annual Rail Tickets. and earlier trying to get to work, prevented by oppressive dinosaur unnecessary Union strikes. Unions could not care a 'Monkeys', about decent working class people in Britain, its all about them and their left wing commie power,.
All about selfish internal union 'point scoring' politicals, nothing about the 'hundreds of thousands' of working class commenters and working class London families, left stranded and unable to get to work and/or stranded during bitter winter conditions. This is your so called caring so called working class supported 'Trade Unionism for you'. Commuter's getting up at 5.OO am, paying THOUSANDS for Annual Rail Tickets. and earlier trying to get to work, prevented by oppressive dinosaur unnecessary Union strikes. Unions could not care a 'Monkeys', about decent working class people in Britain, its all about them and their left wing commie power,. cushybutterfield
  • Score: -2

11:27pm Mon 17 Mar 14

tolpuddlemartyr1955 says...

spragger wrote:
As go all the foul mouthed & ill informed supporters of the left . ..
As go all, right wing fascist types, who attack anyone and all, who do not agree with the ultra right wing nonsense spouted, without any recourse to logic! who support the right.
[quote][p][bold]spragger[/bold] wrote: As go all the foul mouthed & ill informed supporters of the left . ..[/p][/quote]As go all, right wing fascist types, who attack anyone and all, who do not agree with the ultra right wing nonsense spouted, without any recourse to logic! who support the right. tolpuddlemartyr1955
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree