TreeVillan Posted July 22, 2021 Share Posted July 22, 2021 https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/labour-mp-used-connections-jump-24585975?utm_source=linkCopy&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar Labour MP used her connections to 'jump the queue' and get a studio flat, court hears Jurors were told the MP for Poplar and Limehouse Apsana Begum, 31, defrauded Tower Hamlets council for housing benefit and allege it cost £63,928 between the three periods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 24, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24, 2021 Starmer appoints Blair years advisor to chief of staff - “I’ve worked with Sam before. I know he brings great experience from both inside and outside government to running my office as we take our message out to the country at conference and beyond.” https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/jul/24/labour-starmer-appoints-adviser-from-blair-years-as-chief-of-staff-after-byelection-losses What's this message then? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 24, 2021 Share Posted July 24, 2021 Meanwhile.... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 24, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted July 24, 2021 39 minutes ago, dAVe80 said: Meanwhile.... It's fine, they're all massive racists that want to push the Jews into the sea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 25, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted July 25, 2021 13 hours ago, dAVe80 said: Meanwhile.... I'm flabbergasted. Why it took them this long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seat68 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, Jareth said: I'm flabbergasted. Why it took them this long. Agreed. Most normal people would have ditched them when the last fella was in charge. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted July 25, 2021 VT Supporter Share Posted July 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, Seat68 said: Agreed. Most normal people would have ditched them when the last fella was in charge. Haha blame the last guy - this happens often. I'm not surprised, what a mahoosive antisemite he was - level or worse with Ben and Jerrys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 Starmer and Evans getting it in the Independent today, for getting rid of staff and hiring new staff on temporary contracts, with worse Ts and Cs. As a trade unionst who has fought for members in similar situations, this feels a lot like fire and rehire to me. A Labour Party that does not stand against this practice can't call itself the Labour Party. Sickening. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 43 minutes ago, dAVe80 said: this feels a lot like fire and rehire to me. except for the rehire bit. It's more of a purge than rehire. And that is somewhat the point, is it not. Judging "political" jobs in the same way you judge "normal" jobs doesn't seem quite right. Those people got those jobs because of their politics at the time of hiring, the politics of the party have changed, so you have people in place who aren't really enthused to do their jobs and no-one is enthused to use them. Thats certainly the case for my niece. She's a Corbynite, she really no longer wants to work for the Party in her current role (she was actively looking for other opportunities) and the Party didn't really give her any meaningful work for a while, she might as well have been counting paper clips. She's got her redundancy at three weeks pay per year worked (well above the legal minimum) and now she's off to work as a researcher for an MP, which she'd already boxed off well before this announcement and was really just waiting for the payoff. It's not quite the same as Fred who works in a factory and is being fired to reduce his wages Call it what it actually is, an ideological purge and one where those that have been got rid off have been compensated way above the legal requirement. None of those people will be rehired in their former role and absolutely most of them will be in another political job very shortly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 6 minutes ago, bickster said: except for the rehire bit. It's more of a purge than rehire. And that is somewhat the point, is it not. Judging "political" jobs in the same way you judge "normal" jobs doesn't seem quite right. Those people got those jobs because of their politics at the time of hiring, the politics of the party have changed, so you have people in place who aren't really enthused to do their jobs and no-one is enthused to use them. Thats certainly the case for my niece. She's a Corbynite, she really no longer wants to work for the Party in her current role (she was actively looking for other opportunities) and the Party didn't really give her any meaningful work for a while, she might as well have been counting paper clips. She's got her redundancy at three weeks pay per year worked (well above the legal minimum) and now she's off to work as a researcher for an MP, which she'd already boxed off well before this announcement and was really just waiting for the payoff. It's not quite the same as Fred who works in a factory and is being fired to reduce his wages Call it what it actually is, an ideological purge and one where those that have been got rid off have been compensated way above the legal requirement. None of those people will be rehired in their former role and absolutely most of them will be in another political job very shortly No thats night quite right. There are plenty of people who are right wing who are being let go. This isn't necessarily about which wing of the party you support, or who was in charge when you got hired, this is about cost cutting, because under Starmer and Evans' leadership the party has hemorrhaged memebers and money. Also it's well known that Corbyn retained a lot of staff from the party, who fully expected to get the boot (which when the Forde report comes out may prove to have been a massive mistake), so unless they resigned or left when Starmer got in, there's probably a lot of them on their way out now. Whether they're rehired or not also misses the point. Getting rid of staff and replacing them with staff on worse terms and conditions is wrong regardless. I'm glad your niece has found another job, but I don't think that will be the case for all of them. Especially with the dwindling number of Labour MPs to work for, not to mention the insecure nature of working for someone who could be voted out at the next election. The severance package may be batter than the legal requirement, but it still doesn't make it good. Even the lowest paid members of the company I work for got better, even before the union negotiated a better deal. Whatever way you try and approach it, it's a crappy way for the party founded by trade unions to go about their business. I'm certain Unite and GMB won't be happy about how their members have been treated. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 2 hours ago, dAVe80 said: I'm certain Unite and GMB won't be happy about how their members have been treated. That’s Unite (my Union) who reduced their funding to the Labour Party, because Len doesn’t like Starmer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 (edited) 58 minutes ago, blandy said: That’s Unite (my Union) who reduced their funding to the Labour Party, because Len doesn’t like Starmer Quite rightly too, if they don't believe the party is going to use their money to aid them. There's a whole long list of crap things the current leadership and general secretary have and haven't done that's worked against the unions. I think their affiliation might be under threat at the moment. Labour lose the backing of one of the big two unions, then they'll be in even more trouble than they already are. Also Unison have a Starmer aligned general secretary at the moment, but the members voted in a grassroots lead, left wing NEC, and if it wasn't for Life of Brian crap, would also have voted in a left wing gen sec. CWU, FBU, ASLEF, Bakers Union, are all left wing lead too. They can't afford to be messing the unions about too much more. Edited July 25, 2021 by dAVe80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 58 minutes ago, dAVe80 said: Quite rightly too, if they don't believe the party is going to use their money to aid them. There's a whole long list of crap things the current leadership and general secretary have and haven't done that's worked against the unions. I think their affiliation might be under threat at the moment. Labour lose the backing of one of the big two unions, then they'll be in even more trouble than they already are. Also Unison have a Starmer aligned general secretary at the moment, but the members voted in a grassroots lead, left wing NEC, and if it wasn't for Life of Brian crap, would also have voted in a left wing gen sec. CWU, FBU, ASLEF, Bakers Union, are all left wing lead too. They can't afford to be messing the unions about too much more. It’s just the point that the Union stops, or reduces funding and then the impact is job losses… I think Unite may go from having Corbynite McLuskey to a more, er, how can I put this legally…”straight and democratic”leader. It needs a good clean out of cronies. Its a myth that union members are nearly all died in the wool left wing Labour types. Some are , but others just want their jobs looked after and pay and conditions and stuff, and don’t give a hoot about who is Labour leader. In some ways I think Union leaders are unrepresentative politically of their membership and that mismatch is in some ways harmful for Labour Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, blandy said: It’s just the point that the Union stops, or reduces funding and then the impact is job losses… I think Unite may go from having Corbynite McLuskey to a more, er, how can I put this legally…”straight and democratic”leader. It needs a good clean out of cronies. Its a myth that union members are nearly all died in the wool left wing Labour types. Some are , but others just want their jobs looked after and pay and conditions and stuff, and don’t give a hoot about who is Labour leader. In some ways I think Union leaders are unrepresentative politically of their membership and that mismatch is in some ways harmful for Labour I don’t think we can blame Unite for Labour's finances being in the toilet. That's squarely at the feet of Starmer and Evans. Yeah reduction of funding may have an impact, but not enough for Labour to cut its staff by a third. I'd vote for Steve Turner all day long personally, but then that's probably not a surprise. I'd have liked Beckett, but he did the right thing and stood aside. Shame Graham hasn't done the same, but wouldn't be the left if we didn't Life of Brian. The thought of Coyne winning makes me queasy if I'm honest. Anyone who gets the backing of Rupert Murdoch, is a straight no from me. The left and indeed the wider Labour and trade union movement need a left winger leader of Unite, otherwise the Labour Party is going to drift further away from its roots. As for membership not being overly left wing, you're probably right (the country certainly isn't), but I'd be willing to bet those that pay the levy will be. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 22 minutes ago, blandy said: It’s just the point that the Union stops, or reduces funding and then the impact is job losses… Have Unite actually reduced funding significantly, or have they just threatened it? It should be pointed out that Evans blamed declining membership numbers and legal fees for their financial situation the other day, not anything about the unions.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 5 minutes ago, dAVe80 said: the wider Labour and trade union movement need a left winger leader of Unite, otherwise the Labour Party is going to drift further away from its roots. For the sake of discussion, isn’t part of the problem that it is too attached to its roots? in that those roots came out of manual, male, factory workers, but the UK is now a place where the workforce is more mixed, where manufacturing is a small part of the workforce, where call centres, shops, warehouses, offices and so on are the norm? I wonder if Unions sticking to an essentially obsolete view of the world isn’t a massive mistake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 1 minute ago, HanoiVillan said: Have Unite actually reduced funding by a million quid a year, I think Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 2 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said: It should be pointed out that Evans blamed declining membership numbers and legal fees for their financial situation the other day, not anything about the unions.... Membership rocketed under Corbyn and had fallen back a lot again by the time he went, from a thing I saw. No doubt more have not renewed their three quids that they paid to join and it all adds up. It was great that so many folk were enthused to pay their fee to join, or vote for leader, but even without hindsight it seemed likely that initial enthusiasm was kind of shallow, or unlikely to “stick”. Remain support from a lot of the young new members is one reason I think a lot drifted away - because of Labour’s shambles on Brexit. Labour is a mess. Lacking policies, Lacking members, lacking MPs, lacking funding and still factionally bickering and scheming 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dAVe80 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 8 minutes ago, blandy said: For the sake of discussion, isn’t part of the problem that it is too attached to its roots? in that those roots came out of manual, male, factory workers, but the UK is now a place where the workforce is more mixed, where manufacturing is a small part of the workforce, where call centres, shops, warehouses, offices and so on are the norm? I wonder if Unions sticking to an essentially obsolete view of the world isn’t a massive mistake? Well the unions have changed and aren't just representative of the old ways of working anymore. CWU looks after some call centre staff, Usdaw looks after shop workers and some warehouse staff. PCS, Unite, GMB, or Unison look after some office workers. Only the work changes. The system stays the same. Bosses still exploit workforces. Bosses still drive down Ts&Cs, and make people redundant, and force things like fire and rehire. Trade unions still fight for the same things, even if the trade union act took away some of the power. They still hold the same ideals as the unions that started the Labour Party though. It may not be a given that trade union membership means you're going to vote Labour now, I'll give you that, but workers still need their union in the same ways as always when it comes down to it, so pay their subs and be part of a union. Unions help people everyday with collective and individual industrial relations matters. They win pay deals, get better Ts&Cs, and help people in sickness and disciplinary meetings. On top of that our unions champion and campaign for equality, health and safety, and education etc. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted July 25, 2021 Moderator Share Posted July 25, 2021 18 minutes ago, blandy said: Labour is a mess. Lacking policies, Lacking members, lacking MPs, lacking funding and still factionally bickering and scheming Indeed. I think at a simple level it's the problem between those that believe that you believe in a thing and then get people to vote for it and those who believe that you try to match up to what people will vote for and then believe in that. Traditionally the Labor party has been founded on beliefs (beliefs which I think have become more, not less relevant in a modern economy) they've moved away from those beliefs in order to find votes and have found themselves under Starmer with a solid, capable man here to present a vision of nothing in particular - that's what Labour have become, the party of nothing in particular. I think in that context the factionalism is understandable. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts