Are The Tories Right To Try And Force A Form Of Democracy Onto The Unions?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2696597/Tories-ban-strikes-half-workers-Pledge-change-law-win-election-prevent-two-thirds-walkouts.html

That's my third thread today, so I will don my Panama replace my specs (not rose tinted kind may I add) with my Ray-Ban Aviators, and get outdoors on this the hottest day this year.

[Baldric]

The Unions are there to protect the workers, if the Union Bosses really think they are good enough to tell Big Business Bosses how to run their Businesses perhaps they themselves are in the wrong job, and should be running Multinational Firms not messing about with a bunch of flag waving malcontents!

[EDDIE51]

Are 'strike ballots' held by secret voting as elections are?
I seem to remember meetings being called and a vote for a strike by show of hands at least in some cases. This is unfair (if it happens) as only those who want to strike turn up and once there people are too scared to vote against. I also was actually present when a strike ballot was held , the union rep came round with a box that had 2 slots 'yes' and 'no' you had to put your vote in the box you wanted , in full view of fellow workers. Not surprisingly the vote was nearly 100% 'yes'. I did join the strike but it only lasted 1 day before the union gave in and accepted the company offer.

[New Judge]

The votes are secret ballots these days, Eddie.

[Quizmonster]

Naomi, there is no compulsion whatsoever on ALL political parties to enter a candidate in any given constituency, so I was asking what your view on matters would be if only TWO did. Were that the case, in what way would it be different from a strike/no strike vote? Would a 50%+ turnout be essential for an MP to be chosen in such a situation?

Let's not forget either that many minority parties are far from 'serious' and their candidates are clearly no-hopers as far as the likelihood of being elected goes...the 8 votes for the Straight Banana Party are an irrelevance. It frequently DOES, therefore, pretty well boil down to "this Tory bloke or that Labour woman". Given what ought to happen to the LibDems in England in 2015, that should be even more often the case!

[New Judge]

I don't really think the number of candidates (or choices) is the issue here. Whether there are two or twenty what is under debate is the size of the total vote not the size of any one candidate's proportion of that vote.

But anyway, what the government is proposing is that in the case of a strike ballot where fewer that 50% (or whatever percentage is agreed as the minimum) cast their votes then the status quo (i.e. no strike) will prevail. In your "two choices" election, QM, what happens if the required percentage of the electorate fails to cast their votes?

[ChillDoubt]

so I will don my Panama replace my specs (not rose tinted kind may I add) with my Ray-Ban Aviators
-------------------------
Aviators with a Panama?! Call the Fashion Police!
You want a pair of Wayfarers with that titfer.....

[THECORBYLOON]

NEW JUDGE what about my scenario where 30% of the membership can vote for action and can strike as more than 50% of the members voted but in the other, only 40% of the members vote, they all vote for a strike but cannot strike as the turnout was not more than 50%?

[New Judge]

It depends, Corby, whether you believe the strike should be sanctioned only if at least 50% of the workers cast votes (and the majority of them vote in favour) or whether you believe it should be sanctioned by a simple majority, regardless of how many vote.

I suppose we must look at why this measure is being proposed. I think there is a widely held view that strikes are sanctioned with a very low turnout of voters and in those cases the majority of workers, who may not have bothered to vote, are sucked into a strike. Such a scheme assumes the default position to be "no strike" and that can only be changed if a significant number of the electorate cast their votes. In that respect it panders to and caters for apathy.

I think it is not a sound argument to extend this philosophy to parliamentary or council (or whatever) elections. Here, usually, there is no "default" (unless "no government/council "or whatever is seen as a a valid and acceptable situation). There are cases where it may be valid (e.g elections for police commissioner or elected mayor where the electorate may decide they want the post abolished). But in parliamentary of council elections it is probably true to say that the posts must be filled somehow.

[Quizmonster]

NJ, you ask, "In your "two choices" election, QM, what happens if the required percentage of the electorate fails to cast their votes?"
That was precisely the question I asked Naomi above, except that I phrased it as, "Would a 50%+ turnout be essential for an MP to be chosen in such a situation?"
I'm left still wondering what [i]would{i] happen! Not that I think Naomi or yourself have an answer; I just found it an interesting conundrum that might arise if legislation was passed to demand minimum turnouts in elections.

[THECORBYLOON]

Do the folk supporting this idea not think it odd that it is needed to justify a few days' disruption but when it comes to running the country for five years, any old turnout is fine? If need be, it could be introduced to local and national elections. In the case of a national election the sitting MP or Councillor would remain unless the turnout was at least 50 and another candidate wins. In the case of a by-election, there would be no sitting MP or Councillor so the current system would be used.

[THECORBYLOON]

..at least 50%..

[New Judge]

No I don't have the answer, QM. In fact I don't think there is a satisfactory answer hence the reason I do not think the idea could be extended to parliamentary or council elections. Corby's idea falls down because when a general election is held there are no sitting MPs, Parliament having been dissolved a few weeks earlier. I'm not sure of the constitutional niceties but I imagine a similar situation prevails in the case of council elections.

[naomi24]

There seems to be some confusion here. I was responding to Mikey’s post at 12:49 Fri 18th Jul 2014.

I can’t see the purpose of hypothetically reducing the number of potential candidates in a General Election to a ‘him or her’ vote because it’s a situation that is, and always will be, hypothetical. It isn’t real life. As for votes to strike, maybe only the ‘ayes’ should vote and if they amount to less than 50% of the total union membership, then the result is ‘no’. If people care enough they will vote. That seems fair.

[THECORBYLOON]

NEW JUDGE by sitting MP I meant the one who was the most recent MP. I know an MP ceases to hold that office when an election is called but it was a shortcut. The status quo ante would apply until there is a 50% turnout and another person is chosen.

[New Judge]

But suppose there never is, Corby?

This is the point I cannot progress beyond. In a strike ballot it does not matter (work goes on). In a parliamentary or council election it does (assuming it is accepted that somebody must fill the post). That is why I believe to suggest the same rules apply to both will not work.

[Quizmonster]

Despite an earlier claim on this thread that "you have to have a government", the truth is that you don't. As long as voting remains voluntary, there is nothing at all to prevent every one of us from abstaining or, alternatively, going along to the polling-station and writing 'None of the above' on our voting-slips. What action could be taken against us and - more importantly, perhaps - by whom?
I quite agree that, eventually, something would need to happen, but what was effectively a government-free period in Belgium - already mentioned above - lasted a year and a half.
As regards minimum turnout requirements for union votes and union votes alone, this is manifestly unfair...not that that will bother the Tories, of course!

[DrFilth]

> As for votes to strike, maybe only the ‘ayes’ should vote and if they amount to less than 50% of the total union membership, then the result is ‘no’. If people care enough they will vote. That seems fair. <

if in your location less than 50% turn out to vote for an mp then the result should be none of you are wanted give us another choice , that seems fair

why have it just for strikes let us bring in across the board whenever we have a vote