Coast Guard staff strike.

11 Apr 2008 12:22:51

Gregory Hall

What kind of rubbish is this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7341980.stm

You blokes over across the pond allow essential public service employees to
strike? I'd fire the lot of them. Nobody forced them to take those jobs. If
they don't like their pay then get a higher paying job and stop putting
their greed before public safety.

In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore. Many of
you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the chance of
being on your own?

--
Gregory Hall

11 Apr 2008 18:37:26

Martin

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

On Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:22:51 -0400, "Gregory Hall" <greghall@home.fake > wrote:

>What kind of rubbish is this?

>Gregory Hall
>
--

Martin

11 Apr 2008 16:45:21

Sebastian Krohn

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake > wrote:
> What kind of rubbish is this?
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7341980.stm
>
> You blokes over across the pond allow essential public service employees to
> strike?

This differs from country to country in the EU. The Brits may. In
Germany the Coast Guard is part of the Police. Thus they are not allowed
to. Your US Coast Guard is (AFAIK) part of the military and as such they
may not, too.

Strike is pretty much the only tool for employees if they feel there are
treated/paid unfairly. I can understand why they do this. The pay in the
article really doesn't sound very much. Especially since Britain is not
the cheapest place around.

I also don't think they will risk safety at sea but cut all not critical
operation till the complete staff is working again. Not unlike strikes
in hospitals. And I'm _very_ sure no one will be left at sea because of
this ...

Seb

11 Apr 2008 14:56:01

Gregory Hall

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

"Sebastian Krohn" <seb@gaia.sunn.de > wrote in message
news:slrnfvv5d1.tdq.seb@schatten.darksystem.net...

> Strike is pretty much the only tool for employees if they feel there are
> treated/paid unfairly. I can understand why they do this. The pay in the
> article really doesn't sound very much. Especially since Britain is not
> the cheapest place around.

I have no sympathy for them. If the pay wasn't good enough for them then why
did they take the job in the first place? What they're doing is almost the
same thing as buying a house in the flight path of a major airport and then
trying to get the airport closed down because it's too noisy. The taxpayers
are footing the bill for their wages and benefits. What right do they have
to willingly take a job knowing full well the pay scale and then striking
and demand higher wages from folks who are being taxed halfway out of
existence as it is? For private companies and corporations I'd agree
striking is legitimate but when the taxpayers are your paymasters take what
they have to offer and if you don't think it's enough you are free to seek
employment elsewhere.

> I also don't think they will risk safety at sea but cut all not critical
> operation till the complete staff is working again. Not unlike strikes
> in hospitals. And I'm _very_ sure no one will be left at sea because of
> this ...

If striking means no decrease in services then haven't they pretty well
proven they aren't the least bit necessary? Why pay them at all?

--
Gregory Hall

12 Apr 2008 07:42:21

Duncan Heenan

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

"Gregory Hall" <greghall@home.fake > wrote in message
news:1pkopt.fbj.19.1@news.alt.net...
> What kind of rubbish is this?
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7341980.stm
>
Oh gosh! Now who will do all those radio checks in the Solent??
It's unsafe!!! - I'll have to stay ashore.
--
Duncan Heenan
(Speaking personally)

12 Apr 2008 08:30:54

Dennis Pogson

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Gregory Hall wrote:
> What kind of rubbish is this?
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7341980.stm
>
> You blokes over across the pond allow essential public service
> employees to strike? I'd fire the lot of them. Nobody forced them to
> take those jobs. If they don't like their pay then get a higher
> paying job and stop putting their greed before public safety.
>
> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore.
> Many of you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the
> chance of being on your own?

Regrettable, but true. The UK public services must be the only organisation
on earth (outside of the eastern bloc) that allows, nay, insists on,
managers, the guys who are supposed to be organising and controlling and
generally running the show, joining the union.

"We're all in this together boys and girls!". What a load of shit. I would
have been fired on the spot if one inkling of desire to join a bloody union
had leaked out to my senior management in the private sector.

My feet would not have touched the ground.

The tax and cost implications of this soft-as-shit policy are staggering.

Dennis.

12 Apr 2008 12:53:18

TonyB

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

>
> "We're all in this together boys and girls!". What a load of shit. I would
> have been fired on the spot if one inkling of desire to join a bloody
> union
> had leaked out to my senior management in the private sector.
>
> My feet would not have touched the ground.
>

These days Denis, you have a right enshrined in law to belong to a trade
union
and any sacking based upon your membership of same would be grounds
for a claim for unfair dismissal at a tribunal.

We should, via this group, express our support for the coastguard and their
action,
some of those guys are on the minimum wage payable by law when they are
doing a highly responsible job
that may one day save our lives. They certainly have my backing. Even their
CEO admits they are
underpaid but says he can't do anything about it.

Unscrupulous employers have always sought to exploit the worker and these
days it's not easy just to change jobs.
If you have spent years training, as required by the employer, you can't
just change career pathway at the drop
of a hat.

This is the first time in their history that the CG have taken this action,
more power to their elbow, I, for one,
hope they are successful.

TonyB

12 Apr 2008 17:51:57

Peter

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

In article <VP2dnZzVKJ0iP53VnZ2dnUVZ8qeknZ2d@bt.com >, TonyB
<hatt.j.bennett@tesco.net > writes

....

>This is the first time in their history that the CG have taken this
>action, more power to their elbow, I, for one,
>hope they are successful.
>
And would anyone in this groups wish to do the work they do for the
money they get?

--
Peter

12 Apr 2008 18:37:45

Steve Firth

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake > wrote:

> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore. Many of
> you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the chance of
> being on your own?

<yawn >

Your trolling would be of a higher standard if you had a clue what you
talking about.

In the USA you have a clueless and largely ineffective Coastguard
attempting recues, when they attempt to recover someone from the water,
particularly using a highwire transer to a helicopter they look like,
and are, complete sodding amateurs. In the UK rescues are performed by a
number of services, including the coastguard, RNLI, Navy and RAF. The
RNLI is almost 100% volunteer, and they make your coastguard look like
amateurs. With the RNLI to hand, no one need fear the consequences of a
coastguard strike/work to rule.

13 Apr 2008 08:46:50

Dennis Pogson

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Peter wrote:
> In article <VP2dnZzVKJ0iP53VnZ2dnUVZ8qeknZ2d@bt.com>, TonyB
> <hatt.j.bennett@tesco.net> writes
>
> ....
>
>
>> This is the first time in their history that the CG have taken this
>> action, more power to their elbow, I, for one,
>> hope they are successful.
>>
> And would anyone in this groups wish to do the work they do for the
> money they get?

No, but I might consider swapping their pension entitlement for mine, and
possibly their holiday and sickness benefits, no doubt the latter fully
utilised.

Pay isn't everything you know.

Dennis.

13 Apr 2008 08:55:47

Dennis Pogson

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Steve Firth wrote:
> Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake> wrote:
>
>> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore.
>> Many of you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take
>> the chance of being on your own?
>
> <yawn>
>
> Your trolling would be of a higher standard if you had a clue what you
> talking about.
>
> In the USA you have a clueless and largely ineffective Coastguard
> attempting recues, when they attempt to recover someone from the
> water, particularly using a highwire transer to a helicopter they
> look like, and are, complete sodding amateurs. In the UK rescues are
> performed by a number of services, including the coastguard, RNLI,
> Navy and RAF. The RNLI is almost 100% volunteer, and they make your
> coastguard look like amateurs. With the RNLI to hand, no one need
> fear the consequences of a coastguard strike/work to rule.

It would be interesting to run 2 videos side by side to verify the integrity
of this paragraph. Perhaps we should send a team of consultants over to
teach the US Coastguard how to conduct such rescues? Demand payment in Euros
of course!

Dennis.

13 Apr 2008 15:09:56

Steve Firth

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Dennis Pogson <dennis_nospampogson@ntlworld.com > wrote:

> It would be interesting to run 2 videos side by side to verify the integrity
> of this paragraph. Perhaps we should send a team of consultants over to
> teach the US Coastguard how to conduct such rescues? Demand payment in Euros
> of course!

Have you seen the USCG attempts to recover someone from the water?
Pathetic is an appropriate description. They throw a sling or drop a
cage to someone, expect a cold, exhausted human being to climb in and
secure themselves, then haul them from the water.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lGwDJM8aIBE

I can't find a decent clip of a UK rescue, perhaps someone else can
spend the time trawling YouTube, but this is typical of a practice:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_VUM7iD5G0

13 Apr 2008 16:41:02

Gregory Hall

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk > wrote in message
news:1ifareq.ap9adi4vsz8nN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
> Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake> wrote:
>
>> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore. Many of
>> you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the chance of
>> being on your own?
>
> <yawn>
>
> Your trolling would be of a higher standard if you had a clue what you
> talking about.
>
> In the USA you have a clueless and largely ineffective Coastguard
> attempting recues, when they attempt to recover someone from the water,
> particularly using a highwire transer to a helicopter they look like,
> and are, complete sodding amateurs. In the UK rescues are performed by a
> number of services, including the coastguard, RNLI, Navy and RAF. The
> RNLI is almost 100% volunteer, and they make your coastguard look like
> amateurs. With the RNLI to hand, no one need fear the consequences of a
> coastguard strike/work to rule.

Point well taken. But the sheer quantity and size of your rescue forces for
such a small kingdom indicates an amateur fleet of sailors with few or no
offshore skills. Why else would there be a pressing need for myriad rescue
forces?

But, I think your point is one most of the world is familiar with. Just
about every real sailor has heard or read about the carnage that occurred at
the Fastnet race from a little old force 10 and your former colony isn't far
behind with their ineptitude as evidenced more than once in the
Sydney-Hobart race series mass founderings.

This kind of thing is unheard of in the United States of America where a
need for such a mass rescue is unheard of. This all means superior sailors
easily get by with minimal rescue services.

Gregory Hall

13 Apr 2008 22:06:26

NotMyRealName

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

In message <1pqgm1.jb7.17.1@news.alt.net >, Gregory Hall
<greghall@home.fake > writes
>
>"Steve Firth" <%steve%@malloc.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:1ifareq.ap9adi4vsz8nN%%steve%@malloc.co.uk...
>> Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake> wrote:
>>
>>> In the meantime you Brit yachties should consider staying ashore. Many of
>>> you need rescuing every other time you embark so why take the chance of
>>> being on your own?
>>
>> <yawn>
>>
>> Your trolling would be of a higher standard if you had a clue what you
>> talking about.
>>
>> In the USA you have a clueless and largely ineffective Coastguard
>> attempting recues, when they attempt to recover someone from the water,
>> particularly using a highwire transer to a helicopter they look like,
>> and are, complete sodding amateurs. In the UK rescues are performed by a
>> number of services, including the coastguard, RNLI, Navy and RAF. The
>> RNLI is almost 100% volunteer, and they make your coastguard look like
>> amateurs. With the RNLI to hand, no one need fear the consequences of a
>> coastguard strike/work to rule.
>
>
>Point well taken. But the sheer quantity and size of your rescue forces for
>such a small kingdom indicates an amateur fleet of sailors with few or no
>offshore skills. Why else would there be a pressing need for myriad rescue
>forces?
>
>But, I think your point is one most of the world is familiar with. Just
>about every real sailor has heard or read about the carnage that occurred at
>the Fastnet race from a little old force 10 and your former colony isn't far
>behind with their ineptitude as evidenced more than once in the
>Sydney-Hobart race series mass founderings.
>
>This kind of thing is unheard of in the United States of America where a
>need for such a mass rescue is unheard of. This all means superior sailors
>easily get by with minimal rescue services.
>
>Gregory Hall
>
>
Plink - Hegory Gall follows various other jerk-offs (wankers in
English) into the kill-file.

--
Spike

13 Apr 2008 22:33:18

Steve Firth

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Gregory Hall <greghall@home.fake > wrote:

>
> Point well taken. But the sheer quantity and size of your rescue forces for
> such a small kingdom indicates an amateur fleet of sailors with few or no
> offshore skills. Why else would there be a pressing need for myriad rescue
> forces?

Because the UK has 8000 miles of coastline containing the world's most
congested shipping lanes. There is no equivalent in US waters to the
Straits of Dover, and the USA does not have to deal with the shipments
of half a dozen other industrial powers within its coastal waters.

> But, I think your point is one most of the world is familiar with. Just
> about every real sailor has heard or read about the carnage that occurred at
> the Fastnet race from a little old force 10 and your former colony isn't far
> behind with their ineptitude as evidenced more than once in the
> Sydney-Hobart race series mass founderings.

Uh huh and of course the US in the main doesn't understand the nature of
storms on this side of the Atlantic or indeed of the extreme tidal range
and associated strong currents in these waters.

> This kind of thing is unheard of in the United States of America where a
> need for such a mass rescue is unheard of. This all means superior sailors
> easily get by with minimal rescue services.

It means that you pussy whipped amateurs stay at home when the wind is
above f4. And if you look at UK statistics very few rescues are those of
leisure sailors, the recent rescues in UK waters have been predominantly
of foreign nationals caught out by the conditions.

14 Apr 2008 00:15:23

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

Duncan Heenan <duncanheenan@tiscali.co.uk > wrote:

> "Gregory Hall" <greghall@home.fake> wrote in message
> news:1pkopt.fbj.19.1@news.alt.net...
> > What kind of rubbish is this?
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7341980.stm
> >
> Oh gosh! Now who will do all those radio checks in the Solent??
> It's unsafe!!! - I'll have to stay ashore.

That's a bit unfair - according to the training (from an RYA-accredited
school), whenever you do a radio check you're supposed to give the name
of the vessel as "S*ns*il Twenty-Three" :- >

WFM, Alan
--
99 Ducati 748BP, 95 Ducati 600SS, 81 Guzzi Monza, 74 MV Agusta 350
"Ride to Work, Work to Ride" SI# 7.067 DoD#1930 PGP Key 0xBDED56C5

13 Apr 2008 10:53:01

Duncan Heenan

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

"Peter" <peter@double.demon.co.uk.invalid > wrote in message
news:AHiEWsEtiOAIFw73@godthoms.demon.co.uk...
> In article <VP2dnZzVKJ0iP53VnZ2dnUVZ8qeknZ2d@bt.com>, TonyB
> <hatt.j.bennett@tesco.net> writes
>
> ....
>
>
>>This is the first time in their history that the CG have taken this
>>action, more power to their elbow, I, for one,
>>hope they are successful.
>>
> And would anyone in this groups wish to do the work they do for the money
> they get?
>
>
> --
> Peter

Plenty of people in Poland, Congo, Pakistan...etc, etc, would be delighted
to run the coastguard service for peanuts. We're importing them by the
million to keep pay and prices low in virtually all other industries, so why
not the Coastguard Service?

14 Apr 2008 10:15:44

Martin

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:53:01 +0100, "Duncan Heenan" <duncanheenan@tiscali.co.uk >
wrote:

>Plenty of people in Poland, Congo, Pakistan...etc, etc, would be delighted
>to run the coastguard service for peanuts. We're importing them by the
>million to keep pay and prices low in virtually all other industries, so why
>not the Coastguard Service?

There's more money to be earned as pirates.
--

Martin

14 Apr 2008 10:43:10

NotMyRealName

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

In message <kk4604d9qnvjk8dsfkrl0k07k3c4said0g@4ax.com >, Martin
<me@address.invalid > writes
>On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:53:01 +0100, "Duncan Heenan"
><duncanheenan@tiscali.co.uk>
>wrote:
>
>>Plenty of people in Poland, Congo, Pakistan...etc, etc, would be delighted
>>to run the coastguard service for peanuts. We're importing them by the
>>million to keep pay and prices low in virtually all other industries, so why
>>not the Coastguard Service?
>
>There's more money to be earned as pirates.

Not, perhaps, if you are Somali and kidnap those on board a French
super-yacht!

--
Spike

14 Apr 2008 12:02:42

Martin

Re: Coast Guard staff strike.

On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 10:43:10 +0100, NotMyRealName <spike@notmegov.com.yuk >
wrote:

>In message <kk4604d9qnvjk8dsfkrl0k07k3c4said0g@4ax.com>, Martin
><me@address.invalid> writes
>>On Sun, 13 Apr 2008 10:53:01 +0100, "Duncan Heenan"
>><duncanheenan@tiscali.co.uk>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Plenty of people in Poland, Congo, Pakistan...etc, etc, would be delighted
>>>to run the coastguard service for peanuts. We're importing them by the
>>>million to keep pay and prices low in virtually all other industries, so why
>>>not the Coastguard Service?
>>
>>There's more money to be earned as pirates.
>
>Not, perhaps, if you are Somali and kidnap those on board a French
>super-yacht!

I was just trying to encourage the Craptain to apply for a post there.
--

Martin