On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:36:12 +0100, "Brimstone"
 wrote:

>Derek wrote:

>>> Indeed, our current standard of living would not be there without
>>> unions.
>>
>> Indeed my standard of living would be very much better if the industry
>> I was in hadn't been multiply unionised.
>>
>> People said "Don't you feel you should make a contribution to the
>> union for getting pay rises for you that you didn't contribute to ?"
>>
>> I just answer "No it would be more appropriate for the union to pay me
>> compensation for the damage done to the industry I trained for a
>> career in, at my own expense".
>>
>If you object so strongly to unions then why did you go into such an 
>industry,

Maybe other choices were also unionised or otherwise less attractive.
Whatever,  I would still end up by being disadvantaged because the
Union monopolised the negotiation of pay and conditions of service
under threat of calling a strike.

>and stay there?


Early in one's career changing jobs too soon is seen as demonstrating
lack of commitment.

> Why not find a different employer or go self-employed? 

Who says I didn't ? But that's an aside, the Unions damaged my
industry so I couldn't use the training in which I'd invested, and I
didn't get to vote on it.

I certainly don't see myself owing the Union money in respect of the
benefit I gained from the Union negotiating pay rates though plenty of
paid up members have said as much.

Since such benefit was negative the way I see it is they owe me.

Derek

Derek wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 15:36:12 +0100, "Brimstone"
>  wrote:
>
>> Derek wrote:
>
>>>> Indeed, our current standard of living would not be there without
>>>> unions.
>>>
>>> Indeed my standard of living would be very much better if the
>>> industry I was in hadn't been multiply unionised.
>>>
>>> People said "Don't you feel you should make a contribution to the
>>> union for getting pay rises for you that you didn't contribute to ?"
>>>
>>> I just answer "No it would be more appropriate for the union to pay
>>> me compensation for the damage done to the industry I trained for a
>>> career in, at my own expense".
>>>
>> If you object so strongly to unions then why did you go into such an
>> industry,
>
> Maybe other choices were also unionised or otherwise less attractive.
> Whatever,  I would still end up by being disadvantaged because the
> Union monopolised the negotiation of pay and conditions of service
> under threat of calling a strike.
>
Are you suggesting that you, as an individual, could have negotiated a 
better deal for yourself directly with the company directors than the union 
did, if you had been allowed?