The post you are reporting:
Absolutely Ross,
When we have debated this subject before and I have expressed that I would be in full support of DHB workers striking, and so they should. I also agree with Barry that this is a 'them and us' situation, which cannot be said for the other examples Barry has mentioned. If a small business is struggling and makes people unemployed, that is very sad but in most cases unavoidable. It is also true that these people don't have it so 'cushy'. But organisations as large and profitable as DHB can offer security which is in their own interests. It's a fairly rudimentary business concept that the care of employees is in the employer's interest. This care then permeates into the rest of the social construct and town, for instance the children of the people being made jobless (not even redundant!) regardless of striking action will develop a 'them and us' attitude because of the way their parents are being treated. How it will be damaging to the town, I don't know. Good employment is the only thing that DHB has given to the town, so the only damage is being administered by them! It's not like they can move operations elsewhere...or even to Whitfield!
Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a fairly accepted model and even 15 year old could tell you that it is beneficial to support the work force. From Sir Titus Salt building Saltaire to large American corporations offering free healthcare schemes, all concerned parties win! DHB have the ability to support their work force and are declining in favour of lining the pockets of 'them' at the top. I don't believe they should be running a charity but the people at the top (them) are proverbially dumping on the people at the bottom (us). It is this vast inequality that makes this situation unacceptable. Of course DHB have made sure that they are legally within their rights to do so...but then the legal system is still underpinned by 'them' anyway.
This isn't rooted in the 70's this is a fundamental problem in this country and another of the inconsistencies of modern Conservative thinking (perhaps an oxymoron) It's all well and good promoting individualism when faced with a level playing ground, but in Britain we are not. How we can have a system that is still so riddled with birthright (and in DHBs case jobs for the boys) and then say "people should get off their backsides earn they want" this is beyond logic. For instance it's funny how the same people that support the monarchy are the same people that moan about people not 'earning' their situations (from houses to benefits). Now I don't really mind the fact that we have a monarchy and I'm sure the royal family are all nice people, but how can we deny the existence of 'them and us' in this country all the time we have a permanent reminder that self determination is just an illusion. I'm all for a meritocratic nation, but let's face if however hard I work, I'm never going to be King of England...I'd even do it for less money; I know more about architecture and I reckon I could make better pork pies. The workers of DHB (if they do strike) are getting off their back sides and doing everything to fight this moral injustice.
It's interesting Barry has a house in France, I would love one. I'd like to live in France one day, the sense of community, tradition and social solidarity; all things in direct contradiction with 'individualism' I think we could learn a lot from them and also relearn a lot of what we have forgotten since the 1980's. Protest and strikes, based in fairness and solidarity are what made this country great. From the Levellers to the Chartists, we live in a society (if there is such a thing) that has shown the world democracy...although there are still a few things we need to sort out!
