# Understood signal to show that you disapprove of strikers?



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

You know the way cars passing pickets tend to beep their horns to show that they are in support?

Well I was wondering is there any accepted and understood way to show that you are NOT in support?


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

I could think of one or two ways, mainly using said number of fingers in a gesture towards the offenders..

You could always swerve towards them, missing them at the last minute to scare the bejesus out of them. 

Any particular group you wish to take your anger out on?


----------



## WaterWater (19 Feb 2009)

How about a car sticker saying- 

_"I'm taking 10%_." or

_"I can't afford a tan"_. or

.....?


----------



## Chocks away (19 Feb 2009)

I saw an elderly man give a one fingered  victory sign during the cabbies drive-slow earlier in the week. This he managed by folding his index finger and firmly clasping his thumb over it .


----------



## DrMoriarty (19 Feb 2009)

Spitting is fairly unambiguous, I'd have thought.

Pelting rotting fruit and vegetables is more effective from a distance, but necessitates carrying around a suitable stock of ammunition.


----------



## Purple (19 Feb 2009)

Verbal abuse?
Repeatedly crossing the picket? ... actually I might try that one myself.


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

Smashbox said:


> Any particular group you wish to take your anger out on?


 
Various, in the not too distant future.

I suppose hand gestures are the most obvious - but don't exactly carry much decorum.


----------



## Padraigb (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> You know the way cars passing pickets tend to beep their horns to show that they are in support?
> 
> Well I was wondering is there any accepted and understood way to show that you are NOT in support?



I suggest that you beep your horn to show that you don't support them.


----------



## grahamo (19 Feb 2009)

I wouldn't expect to see much support for workers on here as posters on AAM seem to be a different demographic, I'd imagine a lot of self employed and small business owners. You have all jumped to the conclusion that because posters on here don't support the unions, the majority out there won't either. A little bit arrogant, this may come back to bite you in the bum in the next few weeks . 
I think there is going to be a serious amount of industrial strife in the coming weeks/months. The union I'm a member of is currently balloting for strike. I'm voting for strike action
A lot of posters on here feel the need to felon-set ordinary working-class people with the nonsense that as soon as we all agree to start working for f*ck all and 'smash' the unions then competitiveness will return and the Celtic Tiger will be back with a vengeance. Yeah Right!


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> Well I was wondering is there any accepted and understood way to show that you are NOT in support?


 
How about voting differently in future? Perhaps this would lead to a change in policies which would negate the need for industrial action in the first place.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

grahamo said:


> A lot of posters on here feel the need to felon-set ordinary working-class people with the nonsense that as soon as we all agree to start working for f*ck all and 'smash' the unions then competitiveness will return and the Celtic Tiger will be back with a vengeance. Yeah Right!


 
Well, of course they see it that way, otherwise they would have to hold their hands up and take responsibility for the dreadful voting choices [and resultant policies] that have been made over the last 15 years!


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> How about voting differently in future? Perhaps this would lead to a change in policies which would negate the need for industrial action in the first place.


 
Well doesn't apply to me anyway - have never voted FF and never will.


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

grahamo said:


> You have all jumped to the conclusion that because the minority on here don't support the unions, the majority out there won't either.


 
Actually not one person I've spoken to (from wide range of backgrounds) support the unions on this.



> ...this may come back to bite you in the bum in the next few weeks .


 
Don't really understand this. If you're saying that holding the nation to ransom may change collective minds then I think you are wrong - personally speaking, it will only increase my contempt.



> A lot of posters on here feel the need to felon-set ordinary working-class people with the nonsense that as soon as we all agree to start working for f*ck all and 'smash' the unions then competitiveness will return and the Celtic Tiger will be back with a vengeance. Yeah Right!


 
I can't think of one poster who has said this, or believes it.

I will be personally encouraging everyone I know who disapproves of industrial action to make their feelings known as strongly and obviously as possible.  What form this may take is a different matter.


----------



## redstar (19 Feb 2009)

Any unemployed people out there (including myself) could stand alongside any strikers and carry a poster saying...

_"I will NOT PAY the  Pension Levy,
 I will NOT PAY the Income Levy,
 I have NO Job"_


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> I will be personally encouraging everyone I know who disapproves of industrial action to make their feelings known as strongly and obviously as possible. What form this may take is a different matter.


 
I have no problem with people expressing their views about the Public Sector (for lets face that it what this thread is about) but what's the problem with industrial action? Are workers (both public and private sector) not entitled to take industrial action? It is a long accepted form of protest by workers particularly in this country.


----------



## redstar (19 Feb 2009)

grahamo said:


> The union I'm a member of is currently balloting for strike. I'm voting for strike action



I am a private sector employee being made redundant.  I cannot see how strike action will help matters in any way. When the strike is over the strikers can go back to work the next day. For over 300,000 of us, that is a luxury. 

There are many reasons for unions to be annoyed at the Govt but could their well paid leaders not come up with some alternative to strikes ?

Strikes destroy jobs and costs the economy a fortune in lost productivity.
Strikes are a blunt instrument - they only affect those who need the services being withdrawn, and don't hurt the real culprits - the Govt and the bankers.


----------



## RonanC (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> Actually not one person I've spoken to (from wide range of backgrounds) support the unions on this.


 
Caveat, tell me this, Who are the Union in your opinion? 

The Members are the Union. 

Did someone hold a gun up against the heads of 12,721 lower paid public and civil servants that are members of the CPSU? Did this same person tell 83%  of them to vote for industrial action? 

Are you trying to say that the lower paid section of the public and civil service are that stupid and not able to make their own minds up and take a stand against the what this Government is trying to do, while at the same time handing over the deeds of the country to the Banks. 


We all need to take a stand. We all need to do something to get ourselves out of this mess that the Banks and the Government got us into. Its OUR country after all. Some will be hit harder than others in the same way some benefited more than others during the good times. 

I'm sick to the teeth of reading such crap on this webiste (a fantastic website, that I have been delighted to use over the last couple of years), constant slating of the public and civil service as a whole when in reality this mess was created by those with all the power. 

I'll take a hit, i'll pay my way, but when I see the likes of the criminals running our banks and getting away with what they have done (and there's more to come!), special needs school children being denied a decent education due to a €7m cut in funds while the banks get €7bn... 

Where is the justice in this country?

We should all stand together and not use forums like this to incite hatred amongst our fellow workers. 

I will be striking, not just for myself but for every decent person that has paid their way, paid their taxes and is fed up with whats going on and wants change now!


----------



## jhegarty (19 Feb 2009)

grahamo said:


> I wouldn't expect to see much support for workers on here as posters on AAM seem to be a different demographic, I'd imagine a lot of self employed and small business owners.



Really ? 


I though the average person on here has massive credit card debts, baldy built houses and is made redundant next week.


----------



## remey (19 Feb 2009)

I'm sorry, I have no symathy for those striking. I have many friends and family who are in the public sector so its not like I'm just in the private sector and ignorant!

I have just heard again today about a friends brother who lost his job, his wife lost hers just before Christmas. They have 2 young kids. Also I have very close friends and both have lost their jobs in the last 2 months. Again, they have 2 kids. I'm not talking about big banker wages either - some very modest salaries, less than €30k.

Lots of people are being made redundant, with no pensions or pay offs. If you asked I'm sure 99% of them would very gladly swap with the public sector, take the reduction of the pension levy and know they have jobs and pensions.
I am on the brink of losing my job, 2 brothers have lost theirs and we've no comeback, you wont see us striking, so no, I have absolutely no symathy whatsoever.
Glad this is the letting off steam thread because its coming out my ears right now!!


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> I have no problem with people expressing their views about the Public Sector (for lets face that it what this thread is about)


 
It's not.



RonanC said:


> I will be striking...


 
So what would you regard then as an unambiguous public indication that I do not agree with your actions?


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

Maybe you could throw rocks at them. Sharp edged ones. Or sharpened sticks.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> It's not.


 
Of course your thread is about public sector workers... has any other poster mentioned any other group of workers who are taking industrial action? 

You could have at least changed the title of the thread to clearly identify your target!


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> ... has any other poster mentioned any other group of workers who are taking industrial action?


 
That's up to them - I have no control over what other posters may or may not bring up.



> You could have at least changed the title of the thread to clearly identify your target!


 
My *target*? I think you are simply being paranoid now - and unfair.

Not to mention OT.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> Various, in the not too distant future.
> 
> I suppose hand gestures are the most obvious - but don't exactly carry much decorum.


 


Caveat said:


> My *target*? I think you are simply being paranoid now - and unfair.


 
Firstly, you start a thread when many public sector groups either are currently considering or have voted for industrial action. You also indicate that you wish to take your anger out on various groups "in the not too distant future". ICTU are organising a mass demonstration next Saturday. 

You then indicate that the public sector was not your target! Yeah, gimme a break.....


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Smashbox said:


> Maybe you could throw rocks at them. Sharp edged ones. Or sharpened sticks.


 
A very unhelpful contribution ......


----------



## DavyJones (19 Feb 2009)

There is a strike in progress for the last few months and I pass them on a regular basis. Even when it was hard frost and rain , there would be atleast 15 lads standing outside, even at 6.30 in the morning. I don't think much of unions but these hardy lads have slowly won my respect. They are private sector workers if that matters to some posters.


----------



## Sunny (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> Of course your thread is about public sector workers... has any other poster mentioned any other group of workers who are taking industrial action?
> 
> You could have at least changed the title of the thread to clearly identify your target!


 
Is there any other group talking about industrial action? Probably tells it's own story


----------



## TheBlock (19 Feb 2009)

Sunny said:


> Is there any other group talking about industrial action? Probably tells it's own story


 
Dublin Bus are stiking soon are they not? This is not due to the Pension Levy but due to the manner in which some redundancies are being enforced. Should we "Throw Sharp Rocks" at these men/women many (260) of who will soon be without a job and without a redundancy payment.


----------



## Sunny (19 Feb 2009)

TheBlock said:


> Dublin Bus are stiking soon are they not? This is not due to the Pension Levy but due to the manner in which some redundancies are being enforced. Should we "Throw Sharp Rocks" at these men/women many (260) of who will soon be without a job and without a redundancy payment.


 
What are you talking about? Are Dublin Bus a private sector company? Of course I have sympathy for the drivers who will lose their jobs. I also have sympathy with the other 100,000 or so workers in the past 12 months. 
Dublin Bus seems to be implementing a last in first out system. Whats so immoral about that? The unions aren't even trying to protect jobs. They are simply trying to get massive pay outs for some workers (willing to hazzard a guess that those with strong union connections would be first in line).

Just can't understand the mentality of people wanting to strike. Why not organise a massive protest march or something for a Sunday if there is some sort of moral argument to be made. 

Will the Dublin Bus drivers have sympathy for the unemployed people who can't make it to job interviews, unemployment offices, post offices etc when they are on strike?


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> A very unhelpful contribution ......


 
I'm sorry you don't approve, but I was answering Caveats original question, not waffling off like you have done.

In case you havent read it, this was the OP's question : '*Understood signal to show that you disapprove of strikers'*

My answer was to that.


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> gimme a break.....


 
Maybe you should in fact give *me* a break 

YOBR, although there have been some tongue in cheek responses and a little digression, it was a genuine question.

If you don't want to answer, that's fine.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Smashbox said:


> Maybe you could throw rocks at them. Sharp edged ones. Or sharpened sticks.


 


Smashbox said:


> I'm sorry you don't approve, but I was answering Caveats original question, not waffling off like you have done.
> 
> In case you havent read it, this was the OP's question : '*Understood signal to show that you disapprove of strikers'*
> 
> My answer was to that.


 
I do not advocate violence, or any other form of civil disobedience as a method of expressing disapproval, either to strikers or, indeed, anyone else. Obviously, you have no such objection.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> How about voting differently in future? Perhaps this would lead to a change in policies which would negate the need for industrial action in the first place.


 


Caveat said:


> Maybe you should in fact give *me* a break
> 
> YOBR, although there have been some tongue in cheek responses and a little digression, it was a genuine question.
> 
> *If you don't want to answer, that's fine*.


 
Caveat, I have given my answer already.


----------



## mf1 (19 Feb 2009)

jhegarty said:


> Really ?
> 
> 
> I though the average person on here has massive credit card debts, baldy built houses and is made redundant next week.




I resent this baldy bit slur!!!

mf


----------



## sandrat (19 Feb 2009)

baldy people should have to pay a tax for not having the expense of getting hair cut


----------



## DavyJones (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> I do not advocate violence, or any other form of civil disobedience as a method of expressing disapproval, either to strikers or, indeed, anyone else. Obviously, you have no such objection.




I thought it was funny, saying that I do like a joke.


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

YOBR said:


> Caveat, I have given my answer already.


 
So are you saying that your only answer to this question:



Caveat said:


> is there any accepted and understood way to show that you are NOT in support?


 
Is this?



YOBR said:


> How about voting differently in future? Perhaps this would lead to a change in policies which would negate the need for industrial action in the first place.


 
If so, fair enough. How would I turn this into something I can physically say or enact in front of strikers then?


----------



## DavyJones (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> If so, fair enough. How would I turn this into something I can physically say or enact in front of strikers then?




Stick it on a placard and stand there starring at them and maybe hissing?


----------



## Caveat (19 Feb 2009)

DavyJones said:


> Stick it on a placard and stand there starring at them and maybe hissing?


 
 Yeah - or maybe I'll do an "interpretative dance" or something.


----------



## sandrat (19 Feb 2009)

do a rain dance so they get rained on?


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

Nice one Sandrat. No violence there for YOBR to object to. I do love a bit of violence, I do. 

Caveat, can you hiss? That'd be good if you could.


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

I also love bald men...


----------



## TheBlock (19 Feb 2009)

Sunny said:


> What are you talking about? Are Dublin Bus a private sector company?


 
I was answering your Query..."Is any other group talking about industrial action"




Sunny said:


> Dublin Bus seems to be implementing a last in first out system. Whats so immoral about that? The unions aren't even trying to protect jobs. They are simply trying to get massive pay outs for some workers (willing to hazzard a guess that those with strong union connections would be first in line).


 
Massive Payouts?? That's hardly likely if it's a last in first out system they are implementing. The immoral thing is that they are not paying redundancy payments to many of those they are letting go.

I agree with you that maybe a better form of protest could be organised but I would hardly throw rocks at the strikers.

I thought this was a thread on people striking didn't realise it mattered wheter the strikers were public or private sector as it never mentioned that in the initial post.


----------



## Chocks away (19 Feb 2009)

Caveat said:


> Yeah - or maybe I'll do an "interpretative dance" or something.


Why not contact that mad stepdancer who jumped in front of the racing cars/marathon runner. I'm sure that publicity is a double edged feather duster.


----------



## Smashbox (19 Feb 2009)

Good idea chocks, Neil Horan!


----------



## Sunny (19 Feb 2009)

TheBlock said:


> I was answering your Query..."Is any other group talking about industrial action"
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
I was referring to another post when someone was saying this thread was about public sector workers. Simply pointing out that it would be hard not to be considering they are the only ones threatening industrial action.

Again you miss my point about the payouts. The Unions don't want a last in, first out system because there won't be massive redundancy payments for their buddies. They have no interest in protecting the actual jobs there. Would have sympathy if that was the case. Why don't they show solidarity by seeing if they can cut payroll costs some other way except for lay offs? Also workers will get the statutory redundancy if they are entitled to it so again whats immoral about that. Why do people assume they are entitled to massive pay outs when it comes to being let off?

Redundancy sucks for everyone but I can't see why around 400 lay offs (as horrible as that is) can be used as an excuse to hold the public transport users of this Country to ransom.


----------



## Green (19 Feb 2009)

Sunny said:


> Redundancy sucks for everyone but I can't see why around 400 lay offs (as horrible as that is) can be used as an excuse to hold the public transport users of this Country to ransom.


 
INHO the public transport users of this country are being held to ransom by the outdated regulatory system of bus licensing in this country. It dates from 1932!


----------



## woodseb (19 Feb 2009)

my mum always told me that sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me....


...therefore i'll be throwing sticks and stones at them


----------



## Purple (19 Feb 2009)

Or as a friend’s wife says _"Sticks and stones may break my bones but whips and chains excite me_"... God, I have been tempted...


----------

