DonutUK:
Is it just me, or does anyone else feel very uneasy with the idea of the Army being used to support fuel companies in an industrial dispute?
I really do wonder what sort of country we are becoming…considering that between the Armed Forces a huge number of trades are mirrored with that of a civilian nature, is this a sign of things to come?
You would soon moan on here if your boss had to start laying boys off because of no fuel for the units!!! Cant have it both ways
No I wouldn’t because it wouldn’t last 5 minutes with sufficient support. When they can see you’re serious and willing to act it often changes their mindset.
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
Wonder who will take responsibility should a serious accident occur when amateurs do the job of pro’s, will the govt of the day be standing up and taking the hit, not bloody likely.
Some amazing attitudes here, i’m bloody sure some of you think we should all have our pay cut to the same as the bloke idiot enough to work for carp money cos he gets a big motor.
We should be aiding and abetting what left of decent unionised workers pay and conditions, gives us something to work towards, in negotiation for our own jobs or in the hope of getting onto the best paid work in time.
Think a bit more about if fellers, if they cut the tanker drivers wages or increase their hours for the same money, what message does that send out for the rest of the employers.
Bend over and take it dry without a sound there’s a good chap.
Mr B:
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
They haven’t got a choice if told you are to do it.
All that wil happen is that will see yet another influx of taliban drivers come over with ADR and work for peanuts so not much choice other then get on with the job
brados:
Am I right in thinking that after the last dispute the fuel distribution companies started to change employed drivers for owner drivers? The reason for this is simple and it will follow after this dispute also, bit by bit all fuel delivery drivers will eventually be self employed. The unions these days do not have any power such as they had years ago - the good old tory party saw to that in the thatcher days (no capital on thatcher, she doesn’t deserve it!). As for us Brits sticking together - there is no chance, the surrender monkeys could teach us a lot on that score.
It’s always been the same since the general strike of 1926 and before then.The title is right the army is always the last resort of any government.It’s also easy to see the hypocricy of governments like ours,in complaining about foreign governments using their armies to get what they want in civil disputes,when the British government has proved itself one of the worst offenders throughout history,while also being on the side of mutiny in armies when it suits it and against when it doesn’t.
Mr B:
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
No it won’t. The squaddies are in no position to argue about this. I don’t like them being used and abused like this but I won’t turn my face away from the young men and women who serve this country, sometimes paying the ultimate price.
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate
No, I don’t think that it will have that effect.
99% of people who support the strike will realise that the squaddies are simply obeying orders.
However, if some act like the police during the miners strike (lets not go there again!) taunting by waving wage packets etc I would expect some backlash, but I doubt that this would happen…unless cameron decides to try and inflame the situation as per thatcher by instructing them to do these kind of things.
Unfortunately using the Army to provide a civilian service isn’t a new thing, as a poster already mentioned, during the Seventies, which I presume age wise many on this site won’t recall, the Army was used in many strike related duties delivering fuel being one of them along with fighting fires, refuse collection and Ambulance driving. The military has no say in what the Government wants to use it for once it has been cleared by the Top Brass and MP’s that make up the Commitee that decides on assistance to the Civilian Government by the Military whether this is during civil unrest, strikes or major national emergency/disasters.
The guys in the Forces themselves generally have no political views and the feeling we had during the Seventies was most strikers were lazy sods and the civilian population should just get on with the job they do and stop moaning, of course we wouldn’t know or care to be honest as to what the real situation was. It also didn’t matter which Party was in Government although the Conservatives did tend to look after the Forces more than Labour which always wanted to reduce and cut as much as they could unless they had got us into a war then they needed everyman jack!
Having said that it was also a change to do some civilian work and be amongst the civil population instead of cracking their heads or trying to calm them down. The Army lads involved received excellent treatment from the population during the Fire and Refuse strikes for instance. Its just another job and whether they will be able to carry it out as well as the civilians they are replacing doesn’t concern them either they only do as they are taught and told and one day they will find themselves doing the same work as a civilian and no doubt the mind set will completely change. Happy days Franky.
brados:
Am I right in thinking that after the last dispute the fuel distribution companies started to change employed drivers for owner drivers? The reason for this is simple and it will follow after this dispute also, bit by bit all fuel delivery drivers will eventually be self employed. The unions these days do not have any power such as they had years ago - the good old tory party saw to that in the thatcher days (no capital on thatcher, she doesn’t deserve it!). As for us Brits sticking together - there is no chance, the surrender monkeys could teach us a lot on that score.
It’s always been the same since the general strike of 1926 and before then.The title is right the army is always the last resort of any government and it’s easy to see the hypocricy of of governments like ours in complaining about foreign governments using their armies to get what they want in civil disputes when the British government has proved itself one of the worst offenders throughout history while being on the side of mutiny in armies when it suits it and against when it doesn’t.
Mr B:
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
I was wondering how long it would be before this was brought up.
I wonder how many of the people buying newspapers that spout populist twaddle daily about “our brave boys and girls” would feel when actually confronted with a serving soldier, obeying his legitimate orders to carry out actions that Joe Public disagreed with.
How would that sit with The Sun/Mirror/Star/other comics when “Outraged from Tilbury” starts complaining about being brutalised by a horrible man in green overalls?
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate
No, I don’t think that it will have that effect.
99% of people who support the strike will realise that the squaddies are simply obeying orders.
However, if some act like the police during the miners strike (lets not go there again!) taunting by waving wage packets etc I would expect some backlash, but I doubt that this would happen…unless cameron decides to try and inflame the situation as per thatcher by instructing them to do these kind of things.
I doubt the PBI will be getting the O/T payments the filth were getting…
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate
No, I don’t think that it will have that effect.
99% of people who support the strike will realise that the squaddies are simply obeying orders.
However, if some act like the police during the miners strike (lets not go there again!) taunting by waving wage packets etc I would expect some backlash, but I doubt that this would happen…unless cameron decides to try and inflame the situation as per thatcher by instructing them to do these kind of things.
Blimey del get real that distrust of Army personnel being happy to follow orders has always (rightly) been an issue within the union movement up to the point where now,as then,the knowledge that they’d probably be prepared to use arms on their own people if they were ordered to.Nothing will change in this country until the situation arises in the army (or the police) of open disobeyment of orders concerning any involvement and taking sides in civil disputes.
Mr B:
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
They haven’t got a choice if told you are to do it.
All that wil happen is that will see yet another influx of taliban drivers come over with ADR and work for peanuts so not much choice other then get on with the job
Exactly they’ll follow whatever orders they are given wether that be walking into a minefield in zb Afghanistan (to supposedly save us from muslim ‘terrorists’ when those terrorists can just walk in here anyway at Dover to add to the government’s pool of cheap labour) or supporting the government against their own people.
Real bravery is an army that is prepared to disobey orders when required as well as follow them.
del949:
sorry carryfast. I have read that 6 times and still don’t understand your point.
To put it simply the 1926 General Strike was broken largely by the actions of the army and the knowledge by the union leaders at the time that the army would take all required action,including use of force of arms,against their own people.I don’t think that there’s any reason as to why both the government or the army should be viewed any differently now,in that sense,just as the union movement viewed their actions at that time.
There’s no way that a strike can be won in that type of environment,which effectively means that,as always,we just live under a regime whereby we get a choice of dictatorship every 5 years that is ultimately based on what the army does and the army’s continued support.Simples.
Which would you all prefer doing the fuel deliverys during the dispute, the British Army or Alojzy, Dominik and several thousand of their mates shipped in from eastern Europe. When all the tears have dried, pride mended and the tanker drivers are ready to go back to work, the Army will just clear off back to polishing their guns and shining their boots up, if they go for the alternative there may be no jobs left for the tanker drivers to go back to.
If you can’t get fuel for your truck you will be laid off - or even sacked if your boss is fed up enough and jacks it in alltogether. Of course you could come out on strike in support of the tanker drivers - might be a bit lonely though.
I don’t disagree with you but fail to see how that is relevant to wether the public would punish the army for doing the fuel deliveries.
I maintain that most people would see the army as merely obeying orders.
There is a huge difference in what the reaction would be if the army were to use lethal force on any strikers etc.
Mr B:
If the army is used to deliver fuel for non emergency reasons and they break a strike the good will they have with help for heroes will quickly evaporate.
They haven’t got a choice if told you are to do it.
All that wil happen is that will see yet another influx of taliban drivers come over with ADR and work for peanuts so not much choice other then get on with the job
Real bravery is an army that is prepared to disobey orders when required as well as follow them.
As if that is gonna happen soon as you sign on the line you dont get a choice
soon as you sign on the line you dont get a choice
always have a choice, just that the repercussions are a lot more severe
At least they can’t put you in front of the firing squad for it now…or can they?
