Tesco Drivers dispute

[Filo]

A person that is prepared to cross a picket line to the detriment of the workers with a grievance is a scab in my eyes, just like strike breakers are. If the workers of this Country stuck together during disputes rather than being selfish, the anti union laws put in place by the Tories would n`t be worth the paper they were written on, working conditions would be better, there would be less companies paying the bare minimum and employment agencies would n`t get away with treating people like shit!

If it was me I'd be more concerned about my family, my prospects than solidarity with other workers, but that's just me.

My opinion on this is that the decision to simply sack them is wrong, I'm pretty sure they could find them alternative works within Stobart surely? 

But I don't at all think unions help theirselves in these situations (or most situations).  The lorry drivers get huge sympathy from me, but they're simply badly advised.  From what I saw the trouble causing aspects at my local Tesco didn't look like lorry drivers to me (I assume as usual it's the union activists again causing trouble).  They help nobody but their own egotistical views and their concerns don't at all ever seem to be about their fellow workers but focussed solely on their political anti government views.  It seems strange to me that all they could negotiate was a better redundancy package, you'd think they could've negotiated better terms for their members and helped them keep jobs wouldn't you?  I mean you can't tell me Stobart can take over and not need extra staff?

What do lorry drivers look like?

There were quite a few of men in the group of drivers who stood to benefit a lot more than the others due to their length of service etc, yet they stood together why the guys on the pickets and put solidarity before themselves. Its what friends do....

If Stobarts needed the extra staff then they would have never have been made redundant in the first place, they decided that they could staff the depot with their existing workforce. They claimed that jobs were available in alternative roles, barely any of them were in Doncaster, or the surrounding area - realistically there were no jobs there for the vast majority of them to go to.

When their contracts werre transferred from Tesco to Stobarts, they were on worse conditions, lower pay, lower benefits, less pension etc - and then not only did they have to contend with that they also were served with a 90 day notice almost immediately after the transfer. They didn't want to go on strike, its not like they were getting paid for being on the pickets but they were standing up for what they believed in, and that was Tesco & Stobarts selling them down the river.

These aren't all young men we are talking about either, these are men who may find it difficult to find a new job given their age, men who have families, kids and grandkids to support. Don't ever think that they found the decision to strike easily.

It is funny that those who seem to be supporting Tesco/Stobarts are the same ones who moan about unemployment figures and people claiming benefits etc... yet you have a group of men who just want to work and have lost their jobs a few week before Christmas being criticised for standing up for what they believe in. Would you rather they had just taken it lying down and claimed job seekers?!

Some of you wouldn't know what solidarity and compassion was if it come and slapped you in the face.

Aren't we all supposed to be in this together?

Jenny, you seem to be well clued up in this, can you give us an idea as to why TUPE did n`t come into play in this dispute, on the face of it, it seems like Stobart`s have totally ignored TUPE

[Filo]

It doesn't give them a right to abuse anyone, and I would be absolutely staggered if this was wide spread.... by all accounts the reaction they have had from the Doncaster public has been fantastic. Don't tar them all by isolated incidents.

It really doesn't surprise me at all that you seem to be aware of such incidents, always seems to be the case.....!!

Incidents were on the Free Press website, and on Facebook, so it isn't hard to be aware of them, and other people who have posted in this thread have also seen it happen, so it certainly isn't an isolated incident.

Ah the Free Press! not known for sensationalising things are they, and facebook! well say no more!

Obviously blind to reality then Filo that these incidents have happened. However judging on your posts, you're blind to a lot of things.

Yes facebook is real, and everything posted on there is true, that`s correct is n`t it?

[MrFrost]

It doesn't give them a right to abuse anyone, and I would be absolutely staggered if this was wide spread.... by all accounts the reaction they have had from the Doncaster public has been fantastic. Don't tar them all by isolated incidents.

It really doesn't surprise me at all that you seem to be aware of such incidents, always seems to be the case.....!!

Incidents were on the Free Press website, and on Facebook, so it isn't hard to be aware of them, and other people who have posted in this thread have also seen it happen, so it certainly isn't an isolated incident.

Ah the Free Press! not known for sensationalising things are they, and facebook! well say no more!

Obviously blind to reality then Filo that these incidents have happened. However judging on your posts, you're blind to a lot of things.

Yes facebook is real, and everything posted on there is true, that`s correct is n`t it?

The comments I have read, I have no reason to believe they are not true.

[Jenny]

Jenny, you seem to be well clued up in this, can you give us an idea as to why TUPE did n`t come into play in this dispute, on the face of it, it seems like Stobart`s have totally ignored TUPE

TUPE is not as tight as you would believe, if there is an economic, technical or organtisational reason for getting rid of employees after the transfer or worsening their main terms of employment, then it in effect makes it useless.

Stobarts had organisational reasons - they claimed that they could man the depot from their national service and not with the Doncaster drivers. If any of the drivers had stayed with Stobarts after they were put on 90 day notice they would have been re-employed on a new contract with Stobarts which was on much lower wages than they were getting with Tesco and significantly worse terms.

There were instant reductions in terms, smaller things like losing Tesco discount (which may have been worth a significant sum to some families), pensions worse off etc...

[Filo]

Jenny, you seem to be well clued up in this, can you give us an idea as to why TUPE did n`t come into play in this dispute, on the face of it, it seems like Stobart`s have totally ignored TUPE

TUPE is not as tight as you would believe, if there is an economic, technical or organtisational reason for getting rid of employees after the transfer or worsening their main terms of employment, then it in effect makes it useless.

Stobarts had organisational reasons - they claimed that they could man the depot from their national service and not with the Doncaster drivers. If any of the drivers had stayed with Stobarts after they were put on 90 day notice they would have been re-employed on a new contract with Stobarts which was on much lower wages than they were getting with Tesco and significantly worse terms.

There were instant reductions in terms, smaller things like losing Tesco discount (which may have been worth a significant sum to some families), pensions worse off etc...

As an ex union rep for GMB, i`m surprised UNITE did n`t fight this on the TUPE front, yes Stobarts have used the " organtisational reason" to get around TUPE, but the crux of the matter is that both Tesco and Stobart have been very devious here to shaft the workforce, the correct procedure in this case would have been for Tesco to make the redundancies before outsourcing the work, they`ve obviously tried to wriggle out of paying redundancy payments, Stobart has avoided TUPE on a technicality and area Tesco`s partners in crime!

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

A person that is prepared to cross a picket line to the detriment of the workers with a grievance is a scab in my eyes, just like strike breakers are. If the workers of this Country stuck together during disputes rather than being selfish, the anti union laws put in place by the Tories would n`t be worth the paper they were written on, working conditions would be better, there would be less companies paying the bare minimum and employment agencies would n`t get away with treating people like shit!

If it was me I'd be more concerned about my family, my prospects than solidarity with other workers, but that's just me.

My opinion on this is that the decision to simply sack them is wrong, I'm pretty sure they could find them alternative works within Stobart surely? 

But I don't at all think unions help theirselves in these situations (or most situations).  The lorry drivers get huge sympathy from me, but they're simply badly advised.  From what I saw the trouble causing aspects at my local Tesco didn't look like lorry drivers to me (I assume as usual it's the union activists again causing trouble).  They help nobody but their own egotistical views and their concerns don't at all ever seem to be about their fellow workers but focussed solely on their political anti government views.  It seems strange to me that all they could negotiate was a better redundancy package, you'd think they could've negotiated better terms for their members and helped them keep jobs wouldn't you?  I mean you can't tell me Stobart can take over and not need extra staff?

What do lorry drivers look like?

There were quite a few of men in the group of drivers who stood to benefit a lot more than the others due to their length of service etc, yet they stood together why the guys on the pickets and put solidarity before themselves. Its what friends do....

If Stobarts needed the extra staff then they would have never have been made redundant in the first place, they decided that they could staff the depot with their existing workforce. They claimed that jobs were available in alternative roles, barely any of them were in Doncaster, or the surrounding area - realistically there were no jobs there for the vast majority of them to go to.

When their contracts werre transferred from Tesco to Stobarts, they were on worse conditions, lower pay, lower benefits, less pension etc - and then not only did they have to contend with that they also were served with a 90 day notice almost immediately after the transfer. They didn't want to go on strike, its not like they were getting paid for being on the pickets but they were standing up for what they believed in, and that was Tesco & Stobarts selling them down the river.

These aren't all young men we are talking about either, these are men who may find it difficult to find a new job given their age, men who have families, kids and grandkids to support. Don't ever think that they found the decision to strike easily.

It is funny that those who seem to be supporting Tesco/Stobarts are the same ones who moan about unemployment figures and people claiming benefits etc... yet you have a group of men who just want to work and have lost their jobs a few week before Christmas being criticised for standing up for what they believe in. Would you rather they had just taken it lying down and claimed job seekers?!

Some of you wouldn't know what solidarity and compassion was if it come and slapped you in the face.

Aren't we all supposed to be in this together?

Well for me the difference between the lorry drivers and activists is fairly obvious.  The lorry driver would be more focussed on keeping his job, not spouting the usual rubbish about scumbag managers etc.  Who does that help?  I  mean look at Unite claiming a victory, to me 200 redundant drivers isn't a victory....  Equally on that point I take this quote;

"Well some of the strikers are ex-miners and some are ex-army and it's getting more like the miners' strike and more like a war, a class war!"

Now where in that is there anything about helping out drivers, that appears to be trouble causing to me, that helps nobody?  This is my big gripe with unions, too much politics.

As I've said from reading this and up on this I really don't agree with what's happened to them, to me it seems like a clear and distinct loophole that quite frankly needs closing.  If you're going to sack people pay them what they're due, to me that's fair and distinct.  Sometimes redundancy can be necessary in this case it seems underhand to me.

[Jenny]

You are missing the point - there was no jobs for the lorry drivers to keep!

[IDM]

Hmm... some raw nerves touched here...

Do I have sympathy with the sacked drivers, yes of course..

Do I believe they are right to strike and to protest (in some form) - yes, of course.

Do I believe the drivers and supporters should harass Tesco shoppers - no.

Do I think folks should avoid using Tesco as a measure of solidarity with the drivers - individual choice.  Sure if you live somewhere with alternatives to Tesco and feel strongly enough, then go ahead and express solidarity in this way.  But what if the Tesco is the only reasonably priced store in your town?  Where I live it is Morrisons, but do I know in detail how they treat their employees? no I don't.  Similarly, do we know how the other stores treat their staff, do we really?  Also, how many local jobs would go if Tesco were driven out?

My opinion on strike breakers - in this case, were they even members of the same union?  Also, in this day, some folks might value individual job security ahead of the union cause - yes that is no consolation to those drivers who lost their jobs, but again (unless the union had agreed an all-out strike) the individuals had a choice not to strike.  To then call them "scabs" is abhorrent.   

By all means, disagree (strongly) with the actions of so-called strike breakers, and make your points public.  But let's get away from using this disgusting term "scab".  Disagreeing and opposing does not need to degenerate into abuse, does it? 

Wandering off-thread a little, I get sick of the "scab" chants when we play Notts Co or Forest.  Given that only a small portion of that city's current population would have been miners back in the mid 80's, and a smaller portion of those would have been strike breakers during the miners' strike, how many people do you ("scab" callers) realistically think attend these football games who once were strike breakers?  I would guess tens, hundreds at most out of up to 20,000 at Forest. 

I know football chanting or banter does pick up on extremes, but the aggression and hatred of the "scab" chants is sickening.

Using abusive words like "scab" detracts from the valid points and opinions you may have.

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

You are missing the point - there was no jobs for the lorry drivers to keep!

Again I don't understand this though, are Stobart that inefficient that they had such volumes of time available to meet a huge new contract or were they simply pre empting and bringing in cheaper staff of their own so they didn't have to satisfy the terms of the existing staff?

[Jenny]

You are missing the point - there was no jobs for the lorry drivers to keep!

Again I don't understand this though, are Stobart that inefficient that they had such volumes of time available to meet a huge new contract or were they simply pre empting and bringing in cheaper staff of their own so they didn't have to satisfy the terms of the existing staff?

The latter it would appear. They reckon they can service the Doncaster Depot with their existing workforce. The whole point of redundancy is that the jobs no longer exist... So they'll staff Doncaster with existing drivings who are on lower salaries, far worse terms in respect of sickness, holiday, pensions etc and then they have positions available for the drivers who have been made redundant - most of which are based no where near Doncaster and would mean that the drivers have to sign new contracts on far worse terms that the ones that were TUPE'd over from Tesco.

The fact that they have offered the drivers who have been made redundant 75% of their redundancy package if they take up another position shows the huge gulf in terms between the old Tesco contracts and the new contracts that Stobarts would enforce.

Its not even as if the Tesco contracts were that good, we aren't talking about the drivers getting grossly overpaid of having amazing benefits etc.

[Wellred]

It doesn't give them a right to abuse anyone, and I would be absolutely staggered if this was wide spread.... by all accounts the reaction they have had from the Doncaster public has been fantastic. Don't tar them all by isolated incidents.

It really doesn't surprise me at all that you seem to be aware of such incidents, always seems to be the case.....!!

Incidents were on the Free Press website, and on Facebook, so it isn't hard to be aware of them, and other people who have posted in this thread have also seen it happen, so it certainly isn't an isolated incident.

Ah the Free Press! not known for sensationalising things are they, and facebook! well say no more!

Obviously blind to reality then Filo that these incidents have happened. However judging on your posts, you're blind to a lot of things.

Get those kids back down the mines eh Frosty.

[RoversAlias]

A person that is prepared to cross a picket line to the detriment of the workers with a grievance is a scab in my eyes, just like strike breakers are. If the workers of this Country stuck together during disputes rather than being selfish, the anti union laws put in place by the Tories would n`t be worth the paper they were written on, working conditions would be better, there would be less companies paying the bare minimum and employment agencies would n`t get away with treating people like shit!

That's fair enough if you choose to take that stance Filo, me I prefer to look at it in an individualist way and agree with those who said if it were them, they'd be thinking of their own family first.

John Locke got it right when he theorised on human nature - humans are born selfish, aint nothing gonna ever change that. I adapt from there.

[Muttley]

Jenny

Why weren't all Stobarts drivers put in a pool for the redundancies? That would be normal practice.

[BillyStubbsTears]

I don't understand why the strikers feel the need to abuse people using the services of the company that has just kebabbed them.

I mean. Why can't everyone be nice to each other and sort this out in a friendly style. If the lorry drivers who are losing their livelihoods try to nicely ask shoppers not to use Tesco because Tesco are being a horribly nasty to them and the shoppers say "I'm very sorry but I'm still going to use Tesco because getting my cat food is more important to me than you keeping your job" then why can't the strikers just be nice to them and show no hard feelings?



f*** me sideways but there are some soft-headed shites on here.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Alias

If by taking that Lockian stance, you f**k over someone else, can you really complain if they call you a "scab"?

Or, let's put it another way. In the big scheme of things, is their calling you names a bigger wrongdoing than you being complicit in putting them out of work?

[MrFrost]

Alias

If by taking that Lockian stance, you f*** over someone else, can you really complain if they call you a "scab"?

Or, let's put it another way. In the big scheme of things, is their calling you names a bigger wrongdoing than you being complicit in putting them out of work?

What a load of rubbish. How is shopping at Tesco being complicit in putting them out of work?
Too many people posting on this thread are still stuck in the 80s and clearly haven't moved on with their lives.

[BillyStubbsTears]

Frosty

Read the post above.

[IDM]

I don't understand why the strikers feel the need to abuse people using the services of the company that has just kebabbed them.

I mean. Why can't everyone be nice to each other and sort this out in a friendly style. If the lorry drivers who are losing their livelihoods try to nicely ask shoppers not to use Tesco because Tesco are being a horribly nasty to them and the shoppers say "I'm very sorry but I'm still going to use Tesco because getting my cat food is more important to me than you keeping your job" then why can't the strikers just be nice to them and show no hard feelings?



f*** me sideways but there are some soft-headed shites on here.

I get the sarcasm, but if it was just a case of cat food then then it would be easy to change shops in support of the drivers? 

Before you (not you per se, BST) start slating folks on here who you think are selfish by putting themselves above their communities, have a look at motivational theory.  There is a hierarchy in what motivates folks, primarily to be safe and secure (a roof over your head, warmth, enough food etc) which is much more important than ambition in careers or other personal ambitions.  Somewhere in between comes a sense of being part of a wider community, but this is less of a priority than looking after yourself and family. 

Therefore folks who put their own interests over solidarity with sacked drivers are not being selfish, just normal.  Of course there are extremes in both ways, those who oppose any sort of social responsibility and really are selfish, and those who give up their own comforts and time to help others.  We are all encouraged to be charitable and to help our communities, but for many folks the latter can only happen when they have spare time/money etc on top of their own needs.  In this particular case, there may be many people who do sympathise with the drivers, but who can't afford not to shop at Tesco?

I think it is right for the drivers to protest, and to bring attention of their plight to those who do not understand the particular situation who can then decide on how to express support (not shopping at tesco is a good way of making this expression, but by choice rather than coercion), as long as such protests are not over the top.

What I have no time for, and I repeat, is the use of the word "scab". Have your (strong) views in opposition or support of a position, but abuse is unnecessary.

[BillyStubbsTears]

IDM

I take on board your points. Maybe I didn't make my own point sufficiently clear in my sarcasm.

What several people on here seem to be saying is:
1) I agree that the drivers have been very poorly treated.
2) I agree that they have the right to try to put pressure in Tesco to change their mind.
3) I agree that they have the right to (politely) ask people to support them by not doing business with Tesco.
4) But if those people do not support them, the drivers who are going to lose their livelihood do not have the right to get angry over that lack of support.

Look. No one is asking Tesco shoppers to go on hunger strike and sleep bollock naked in the snow to support the drivers. Do this is nothing to do with people looking after themselves and making sure that they and their loved ones are ok before helping someone else. It is EVERYTHING to do with peoria not being prepared to put themselves out just a tiny bit by using a different shop. It is people saying "I hear that you are going to lose your job. And do you know what? I couldn't give a f***."

And you take offence at the strikers hurling abuse at such people?

Which is the greater moral outrage?

You say that it is ok for the drivers to try, politely, to persuade people. And no more than that. You talk as though this were some sort of student debating society. It is not. It is two extremely powerf and ruthless companies driving men out of work just before Xmas in order to increase shareholder returns. The men have very little power. The one thing they do have is the ability to try to persuade other ordinary folk to support them. And if that means confronting people with the reality if them behaving like insulated, self-centred Kitsons by not supporting them, then that is a legitimate strategy.

[IDM]

BST, I think that using a different shop is an excellent way of expressing solidarity, and I have sympathy with the drivers.  I think it is wrong to lower standards to shouting abuse, as that belittles the argument and loses sympathy, especially with those whose support is uncertain. 

Protest all you want, and strongly, but with dignity.  Does that make sense?

[MrFrost]

I would imagine, that at some point in history, all of Tesco's main competitors have f**ked their staff over. Should we boycott everyone?

[IDM]

BST, do you believe that calling folks who are unsympathetic to the strikers "insulated self-centred c***s" is in any way shape or form going to persuade them to change their minds?

[Muttley]

I would imagine, that at some point in history, all of Tesco's main competitors have f**ked their staff over. Should we boycott everyone?

Yes, boycott the big chains where possible.

One of my resolutions is to buy more from local retailers (eg our excellent market) and so keep money in the local economy.

[BillyStubbsTears]

IDM

I appreciate your preference for protesting with dignity. I just happen to believe that it is hopelessly naive.

We are talking about a massively asymmetrical power relationship here. Tesco and Stobbart hold all the cards. They are being brutally ruthless and unpleasant in their approach to the dispute. But that is not seen by the general public. So the opprobrium gets heaped on the drivers whose behaviour IS in the public domain.

Barring a very, very limited number of cases, no one ever won anything by polite campaigning in such an asymmetrical power struggle. You think Tesco would back down because the drivers win sympathy that doesn't translate into action against Tesco? Get real. Tesco management would not shed a tear. They would only change policy if they get hurt and they will not get hurt by losing some polite, genteel debate.

I'll ask the question again. Which is the bigger moral outrage? Hurling insults or being complicit in someone losing their livelihood?

[BillyStubbsTears]

IDM

Do YOU believe that people who are sympathetic to the drivers but refuse to do even the slightest thing to practically support them are NOT behaving like insular self centred Kitsons?

[AbsolutDRFC]

You are missing the point - there was no jobs for the lorry drivers to keep!

Again I don't understand this though, are Stobart that inefficient that they had such volumes of time available to meet a huge new contract or were they simply pre empting and bringing in cheaper staff of their own so they didn't have to satisfy the terms of the existing staff?

The latter it would appear. They reckon they can service the Doncaster Depot with their existing workforce. The whole point of redundancy is that the jobs no longer exist... So they'll staff Doncaster with existing drivings who are on lower salaries, far worse terms in respect of sickness, holiday, pensions etc and then they have positions available for the drivers who have been made redundant - most of which are based no where near Doncaster and would mean that the drivers have to sign new contracts on far worse terms that the ones that were TUPE'd over from Tesco.

The fact that they have offered the drivers who have been made redundant 75% of their redundancy package if they take up another position shows the huge gulf in terms between the old Tesco contracts and the new contracts that Stobarts would enforce.

Its not even as if the Tesco contracts were that good, we aren't talking about the drivers getting grossly overpaid of having amazing benefits etc.

Are you absolutely sure with your facts here, in that they weren't overpaid in relation to the industry?

[jonrover]

Dispute has ended. Feel free to shop at Tesco again.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/news/business/long-running-doncaster-tesco-drivers-dispute-comes-to-an-end-1-5222722

I'll never set foot in another Tesco store again thank you very much. Apart from to fill a trolley with a couple of hundreds of quids worth of shopping, have it rung through the till and refuse to pay because of the way Tesco treat their workers, as I did on Saturday at the town centre store whilst the protests were going on.

Bravo.

Thanks

[IDM]

IDM

Do YOU believe that people who are sympathetic to the drivers but refuse to do even the slightest thing to practically support them are NOT behaving like insular self centred c***s?

Yes I do.  They may be putting their own interests firsts as is natural, but that may not be for selfish reasons, purely practical or financial ones as I explained.  It does not make them bad people, and certainly not c*nts. 

Yes, abusing folks who have no involvement in the dispute is wrong, regardless of their support (or not) for the strikers.  Yes in the scale of things the sacking of the drivers is wrong on a larger scale.  I am not saying that the drivers and their supporters should be meek in their protests, more that they should be directed and concentrated to help their cause, not to abuse those who dare to shop at Tesco.  Many of the Tesco shoppers may not have been fully aware of all the issues anyway, so they get a mouthful of abuse - are they then more or less likely to then go on and support the strikers?

By all means have a protest at Tesco, to raise awareness, but don't lower the standards to abuse.

BST, I ask you - I have sympathy for the drivers, and I also don't shop at Tesco but that is nothing to do with this dispute - does that make me an insular self centred c*nt in your view?  So vicariously you're abusing me now?  In that case, just do one and leave it.

[Dagenham Rover]

For anyone interested although they deny it Tesco's are acused of advertising posts abroad  at the new Dagenham site 

goto page 8 top left corner

http://edition.pagesuite-professional.co.uk/launch.aspx?pbid=837deba7-ef67-4dba-bdae-c5f1ed9391f9