vole Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 Not sure why I tried to post a reasoned explanation , a waste of 5 minutes obviously seeing the dumb response . Taking a spell away , it might be catching . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sou'Wester Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) So you are saying that anyone who works in a position where the public would be affected by their absence shouldn't be allowed to strike? That means anyone in those jobs can be shafted by their employers with no recourse to the actions those employed in different jobs are able to do. Doesn't seem fair to me. Should the military be allowed to strike? Genuinely interested in your opinion. Edited April 28, 2016 by Sou'Wester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted April 28, 2016 Author Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 Not sure why I tried to post a reasoned explanation , a waste of 5 minutes obviously seeing the dumb response . Taking a spell away , it might be catching . If you are talking about the Liverpool Pathway there was a building weight of evidence that it was being used inappropriately in some cases. There were far too many concerns for it to be allowed to continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 Should the military be allowed to strike? Genuinely interested in your opinion. Definitely not. They take an oath of allegiance. If they were to go on strike they would be ordered back to work. Failing to do so would be a convictable offense within military law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sou'Wester Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 Not all members of the military take an oath of allegiance but that's just me being pedantic. Your right in as much as they could be convicted (probably under mutiny laws), but if they're on strike, why follow the order to return to work? and who would enforce it? From a practical perspective why would the military striking be significantly different or less reasonable than junior doctors or the police? Public sector workers after all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zipdog Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) Definitely not. They take an oath of allegiance. If they were to go on strike they would be ordered back to work. Failing to do so would be a convictable offense within military law. Do our doctors not take a oath upon qualification to preserve life at all costs?? I do not think such an oath dismisses your right to strike. The doctors feel that such a contract is damaging to the future of heath care, making doctors work increasing long hours and chipping away at a heath care system which is free at the point of use is a valid reason to strike in my book. The same way I would not knock military personnel for striking if there pay was being reduced by 30% and the equipment they were being given was substandard to the opposition. Edited April 28, 2016 by zipdog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 Not all members of the military take an oath of allegiance but that's just me being pedantic. Your right in as much as they could be convicted (probably under mutiny laws), but if they're on strike, why follow the order to return to work? and who would enforce it? From a practical perspective why would the military striking be significantly different or less reasonable than junior doctors or the police? Public sector workers after all. Well I would suspect that either they`d return to work or find themselves arrested by the MPs. Barring virtually total support for the action some other branch of the military would have to step in to police it. It`s highly unlikely anyway, soldiers are taught to follow orders largely without question. If the military was ever going to refuse to obey orders imo it would have been in WWI when going over the top. The fact they didn`t rather proves that it is unlikely it will ever happen. The difference is that most people sign a contract that gives them certain responsibilities at work. They do not sign an agreement that says if they disobey an order they may be arrested and imprisoned. Do our doctors not take a oath upon qualification to preserve life at all costs?? I do not think such an oath dismisses your right to strike. The doctors feel that such a contract is damaging to the future of heath care, making doctors work increasing long hours and chipping away at a heath care system which is free at the point of use is a valid reason to strike in my book. The same way I would not knock military personnel for striking if there pay was being reduced by 30% and the equipment they were being given was substandard to the opposition. I`m presuming you`re referring to the Hippocratic Oath? I did look into that when composing an earlier reply. Apparently not all, or perhaps even very many, doctors take it. Even if they did it would be far more a moral oath compared to that of a soldier which is legally binding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sou'Wester Posted April 28, 2016 Report Share Posted April 28, 2016 (edited) Well I would suspect that either they`d return to work or find themselves arrested by the MPs. Barring virtually total support for the action some other branch of the military would have to step in to police it. It`s highly unlikely anyway, soldiers are taught to follow orders largely without question. If the military was ever going to refuse to obey orders imo it would have been in WWI when going over the top. The fact they didn`t rather proves that it is unlikely it will ever happen. The difference is that most people sign a contract that gives them certain responsibilities at work. They do not sign an agreement that says if they disobey an order they may be arrested and imprisoned. Perhaps I'm just playing devils advocate. I would reiterate that not all members of the military take an oath of allegiance they certainly don't all 'sign a contract'. I would suggest a contract isn't worth the paper it's written on if your particularly aggrieved anyway. Edited April 28, 2016 by Sou'Wester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted April 29, 2016 Report Share Posted April 29, 2016 Perhaps I'm just playing devils advocate. I would reiterate that not all members of the military take an oath of allegiance they certainly don't all 'sign a contract'. I would suggest a contract isn't worth the paper it's written on if your particularly aggrieved anyway. I suspect you are Perhaps you could enlighten me as to which personnel do not take an oath or sign a contract? Employment contracts in civilian life certainly do not usually have particularly severe consequences if broken. Something I`ve already said. However if your average infantry soldier suddenly decides he`s not going to obey an order then the consequences are likely to be time in the glasshouse and possibly a court martial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sou'Wester Posted April 29, 2016 Report Share Posted April 29, 2016 (edited) Officers in the Royal Marines don't by tradition, I believe there is other examples as well. DM I agree with you btw, I was just being difficult. My point was even if we could I know very few that would (they'd walk away before they took strike action). That is in spite of cuts and changes not dissimilar to others working in public services including junior doctors. It might be wishful thinking but I'd like to think that's because we're aware of our intrinsic value to the people we really serve which is the public. I rather hoped junior doctors would have approached things in a similar manner. Suck it up or leave but don't take general strike action which only puts the wider public at risk. Edited April 29, 2016 by Sou'Wester Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark74 Posted April 29, 2016 Report Share Posted April 29, 2016 My friend who is a policeman said things are so bad in the force that they wish they could strike....but they are not allowed apparently... In the private sector if your job terms & conditions change in a way that you don't like you look for another job and move on & the company replace you. In professions like Dr's, Nurses or Teachers etc it's not as easy. Of course people in medical profession can transfer to an agency and become a locum or Bank nurse, you can move abroad etc but the post you left will not be filled straight away by an NHS Dr or Nurse etc they would have to temporarily replace you with the very agency you have probably gone to work for....so you could theoretically be back in your current job but getting paid more....which the NHS have to pay for anyway.... they knew what they signed up for is often used, but what they signed up for is now changing....& like most of the public sector not for the better. I do think that most Junior Dr's are striking not just about pay but about much wider issues....whether this is right under the remit of current strike is debatable but nevertheless concerns which must he addressed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted May 27, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2016 (edited) So now the real motives are coming out, a bunch of militants at the BMA. http://www.hsj.co.uk/topics/workforce/exclusive-huge-leak-reveals-bma-plan-to-draw-out-junior-doctors-dispute/7005113.fullarticle http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/junior-doctors-secretly-plotted-drag-8059153 http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/05/confirmed-the-junior-doctors-strike-was-about-money-not-patient-safety/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/26/yes-the-junior-doctors-strike-was-about-money-but-blame-the-bma/ I reckon a lot of the junior doctors will be pretty peeved about that, realising now they were used as mugs Edited May 27, 2016 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted May 27, 2016 Report Share Posted May 27, 2016 How very silly of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 27, 2016 Report Share Posted May 27, 2016 Well, so the truth has come out and you really can't claim whatsapp messages to be a distortion or out of context - you couldn't get more contemporaneous and on point if you tried. Now, where was that earlier thread on here.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted May 27, 2016 Report Share Posted May 27, 2016 Wokka wokka Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Green Posted May 27, 2016 Author Report Share Posted May 27, 2016 (edited) It also shows a total lack of understanding about how the real world works, putting stuff like that on social media is just childishly nieve Still, he's toast now I should think. He was openly saying no matter what the government comes up with we won't agree to it! Edited May 27, 2016 by Vince Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.