BNP councillors and UNISON

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Jerboa, May 3, 2003.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Here’s an interesting one to debate which I am sure will get the tree huggers screaming.

    The BNP have recently won three council seats in very close proximity to where I live. They have won these fair and square by the democratic process which we, as members of the armed forces, are paid to uphold.

    However, the loony left UNISON union have declared that they will instruct all of their members (and therefore all council employees) not to follow any instruction given by these newly, legally elected representatives of their people.

    Now, UNISON is not an elected body, it has no legal power, it most definitely is NOT elected by the constituents of the towns that its members serve.

    So, what should be done about the UNISON standpoint? Should any civil servant body be able to refuse to work for the democratically elected representatives of the people just because they don’t like that particular flavour of government?

    Before this turns into a slagging match against the BNP, save your breath. I live here, you don’t (apologies to the 1 or 2 that might), and therefore you are not qualified to comment upon conditions within my town. I heard the rubbish which the other 3 parties came out with and it didn’t convince me to vote for them. The majority voted BNP (I personally didn’t vote for anybody), therefore an attack on the BNP representative is an attack on the majority and as much as I am sure you would like to think so, they are not all wrong. That is a different debate altogether.
  2. That is the problem with a democracy, people you don't like get elected.  The unions, in they heyday during the 1970s, had their own agenda and the electorate didn't figure much in it.

    I assume that the vast majority of those who voted BNP would be described at "natural" Labour supporters.  Therefore, when looking at their local issues, they  reviewed the other parties as follows:

    Tory: Would not vote for them even if their lives depended upon it.

    Labour:  Seen to be anti-English and anti-England.  Prone to apologise to everyone else for "English Crimes" etc.

    Lib-Dem:  Can wait for us to all become Europeans and ditch the Pound.

    If you are feeling a second class citizen in your own country and that your history & culture are sneered at, who do you vote for?

    Politics is all about perception.  If you think all is well, then the "feelgood" factor will outweigh any real adverse conditions.  Conversely, if all is well but you feel sh@t upon, then it will colour your thinking.  I don't know the real situation in Burnley & the like, but large portions of the population are obviously not happy.  The powers that be have to address the issues, the BNP will not go away no matter how much you wish it.  
  3.       I dont know how concils work do councillors  give instructions directly to there work shy minons ?
         if they dont want to work for  councillors  .Quit
      end of problem .
           I think union would be on sticky ground over this .
      I think there is wide spread hysteria over the bnp
          The other parties seem to think if the bnp are not squashed  immediatly we will all wake up in 4th reich
       Probably union leader reliving student politics days
  4. They are no the only ones - Amicus - MSF Section have issued a document about BNP as well. one part of the document issued by their legal department,   The document is called
    so I gather i am not breaking any laws by quoting it says
    "under trades union  Labour Relations (consolidation) Act 1992, a member of a trade union who suffers a detriment or is expelled by his/her unionm may claim that he/she has been unjustfiably disciplined by the union. the minimum compensation in a successful claim is £2,600. Regrettably, the current law does not allow trades unions to discipline or expel a member, simply for being a member of a political party.  therefore the union's rule book must be utilised in order to discipline or expel a member lawfully, by examining the conduct of the individual concerned and whether that conduct has breached the objects and rules of the union."

    yet on their website they say  but I cannot find the document anywhere on this site, I am working on getting it in full so people can read and verify for themselves.

    My own opinion is that is discrimitory in it's own right, and has nothing to do with my own political beliefs, which is NOT BNP IF YOU ARE WONDERING
  5. Democracy = Everybody gets what nobody wants ;)
  6. well i think its more a warning shot to blair
    "sort this asylum business out or it will get very nasty and you are not getting a grip on it and we look like mugs to all asylum seekers who seems to be flouting every law and jumping benefits/housing queue ahead of old/single mothers/unemployed british people"
    no suprise that a lot of people are viewing all asylum seekers with suspicion when what we really need is more doctors/scientist/skilled engineers NOT sponging layabouts who also abuse this counry hospitality by undermining it Capt Hook is a prime example
  7. I do not know much about union law however vespa has a point

    Near where I live a local village post office has a counter dedicated to "non-residents"(p.c. language of course)
    Can you believe it!!

    Our president probably does not understand the significance of such a victory for a basically bigoted party, as it will be put down to "mid term blues & GW2 retaliation"

    People will at the end of the day vote as their conscience tells them however what worries me about the BNP is the way they have hijacked a few things that mean a lot to me, 1- the union flag, 2 – St George flag, as if they are the only true Brits etc (hate them for that)

    However it is time to face the fact that something needs to be done to stop the rot (so to speak)

    It’s a sad day when such bigots get into power – however small there number - but they do represent a growing trend.

    Hope things start to improve a bit as a result of this so we can all get on with our lives
  8. I think the idea of Jerboa starting this thread was
    It is not what they get up to, wether we agree or disagree with them. It is about unions and civil disobedience if you like, it is just the instructions are only aimed at the BNP. what would happen if Unison didn't like any of the major 3 parties?
  9. I'm not an expert on politics and have never even been to Lancashire, let alone Burnley, but aren't the BNP now the offical opposition there? If thats the case then someone else (probably Labour) will from the majority on the Council. Hopefully, the Tories and Lib Dems will put aside the routine squabbling between the big 3 parties and make common cause with Labour to prevent the BNP and their bigoted allies pushing their agenda to the point where they can actually implement their policies. That said, it is likely to mean protracted boughts of deadlock on the council, to the detriment of the people living in Burnley. The result of this will be shortfalls in essential services such as rubbish collection. Will UNISON stand in the way and let their principles allow piles of uncollected rubbish in the street?

    The emergence of the BNP is a growing problem. They appear to be on an upward curve at the moment. If the big 3 parties fail to address the issues that allowed them to do this (see above on this thread) then there will only more BNP councillors (and not just in Burnley, Blackburn and Calderdale) which just adds fuel to their fire.
  10. I would argue that UNISON are evidencing their policies of discrimination by their actions. This is typical of lefty-liberals, discrimination is bad when it is discrimination they agree with, but discrimination against things they they disagree with is perfectly allowable and indeed should be encouraged.

    Who made UNISON the arbitrators of moral virtue in Burnley? Who legislated to allow UNISON to determine who should be in power? Who allowed UNISON to preach to the people of Burnely about who should or should not be in power. Whether you support the politics or policies of the BNP or not (and I have no idea what they stand for or what the issues in Burnley are, so it's not for me to comment on the relative rights or wrongs of the voters decisions), UNISON have no right to pervert the course of democracy just because they do not like the party in power, or in this case opposition. The people they claim to represent have chosen for themselves the councillors who they wish to represent them. Do UNISON now seriously believe that they know better than the people they claim to represent as a union? Is this not the most arrogant and appalling positions to take? Typical of socialists and liberals thinking they know better how to live people's lives for them than the people themselves.
  11. Just to clarify as I live there as well, it's not Burnley. The three wards were Tipton Green, Great Bridge and Dudley East.

    I, personally, intend to set the bin men on fire the next time they come round.

    Just who the fcuk do unison think that they are to refuse orders from the party that the majority have elected?

    I am hoping that the first order given by one of the BNP councillors and subsequently disobeyed is "go and put that binman out"
  12. further to ORGs last post i live in this area too but Tipton east and Great Bridge are in Sandwell MBC and Dudley east is in Dudley MBC.

    If employees refuse to carry out Legal Instructions within their job specification it is at the very least Misconduct and liable for disciplinary procedures.
    At the most Gross misconduct meaning immediate suspention and if upheld dismissal.
  13. Without wishing to go into detail and therefore being branded, and having read the campaign literature posted throught the door when compared to the other three, I honestly have to answer