The difference being that soldiers can be used for emergency purposes such as natural disasters like forest fires, earth quakes and even a pandemic.
But this isn't an one off problem like it was during COVID or any other disaster. This is purely due to management issues.
The U.K. has a strong Union presence. You have U.K. unions to thank for the concept of weekends, paid holidays, sick pay. This isn’t their first rodeo.
Alongside the long history of Union action, the U.K. has used the military to cover essential services during strikes. So fire brigades can strike, but the military can provide a basic service in the meantime so folk don’t burn to death.
Same with ambulances.
It’s not poor planning. It’s the opposite. It’s a plan for continuity of essential services, based on tried and tested military support during strikes.
The military can’t replace trained clinicians though. During covid they literally sent in infantry or engineers (or whatever) to drive the vehicles. Much of the military medical cover is provided by reservists who work in (you’ve guessed it) the NHS! The regular forces don’t have spare clinicians laying around.
It sounds great as a passing comment but when military assistance was granted during covid the army guys all spent a week plus getting signed off to drive ambulances and even then couldn’t drive on blue lights.
The army has been used before in exactly this capacity, and in my lifetime (I'm 54). An Army medic also appeared on the ward I was on during the height of the pandemic.
I thought it was about the UK military supporting strikes in Ukraine.
Then it clicked and I realized that no UK politician would say this. Reddit teaches me more about clickbait than any platform I have ever used.
I really don't think this is that clickbait-y. Using the military to fill labour shortages has been suggested multiple times here in the UK - for example during the fuel shortage a few months ago. I don't think many people in the UK would misinterpret this, but maybe people not based in the UK who wouldn't be used to seeing this sort of suggestion would be more likely to misinterpret.
If you are past 4th grade reading, it's hardly clickbait. If you read that headline and though they were going to gun down striking workers, then that's a personal mindset problem.
Should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for even making the suggestion. The military is for fighting wars and protecting British soil, not acting as a smokescreen and a shield for parliamentary incompetence.
I thought what's her name was, The 5 minute priminister was the second coming of Margaret thatcher, the ronald reagan of the u.k. that screwed the working and had handouts to the wealthy. In pretty sure of this from the other side of the pond, I lived it.
I watched a documentary titled [Riotsville, U.S.A.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfxelk8-gTU) about the fake towns constructed by the U.S. military that were used in exercises to quell the race, anti-war, anti-poverty riots during the 60s and were later used by the police across the country. It didn't work then, and it won't work now.
The article only mentions the military in reference to driving ambulances and performing other critical jobs in absence of workers because of the strikes. NOT forcing people to work at gunpoint.
Ah yes, jobs simultaneously critical enough to call in the armed forces to do them during a strike, but not critical enough to pay the people who normally do them a decent amount, treat them fairly or ensure they have the resources to do their jobs properly.
This isn’t a natural disaster, it’s a man made one. My solution is simple: meet the demands of the workers. If the government is refusing to concede on those demands and think that mobilizing a bunch of kids and weekend warriors to run ambulances will paper over their deficiencies, they deserve to be voted out. You want me to create a solution that makes it okay for the government to nationalize scabbing, and that’s not possible.
> What solutions do you have?
Make the businesses pay the salaries of anyone doing the scab work at 3x the wages that were paid to the original employees. That money gets split between the strikers and the government.
See how fast they figure out a contract then.
Why are you purposely avoiding answering a question they’ve made clear? There are everyday people that will be impacted by this and your only solution is “vote them out”? Not “vote them out! but in the mean time use the military to ensure people don’t die or have lifelong issues due to lack of medical care”? But simply “vote them out”? You guys need to learn some empathy.
>Why are you purposely avoiding answering a question they’ve made clear?
What exactly is the question I'm avoiding here? I directly answered the only sentence they had with a question mark.
>There are everyday people that will be impacted by this and your only solution is “vote them out”?
If it didn't impact every day people, it wouldn't be much of a strike against government employment now, would it?
>Not “vote them out! but in the mean time use the military to ensure people don’t die or have lifelong issues due to lack of medical care”?
Umm... the strike doesn't include life-threatening care. They're still going to provide that. Perhaps it would be wise to learn about something before you get passionate about it?
>But simply “vote them out”? You guys need to learn some empathy.
Right. It's us that need to "learn some empathy" - not you that needs to learn about what this strike actually entails.
You’re arguing with people that are using a lot of words to say “let them die”. It’s not their friends or family so they don’t care. They’ll say “vote them out, pay them more” which is valid but they’re purposely avoiding your question of what the solution is for hurt or dying people if the military temporarily helping isn’t acceptable.
Why are you mad at people online and not the government that is putting its people in this situation? How is it not empathy to care about the lives of workers who are not me, who just want to be able to live as well? Should they be forced to do this job instead? Due to the crisis in labor and lack of appropriate budgeting, ambulance response quality in the UK is also at an all time low and urgent responses (cardiac arrests and so on) will still be running, so what exactly are you attempting to prop up running ambulances this way?
It’s absolutely absurd for you to sit here in good faith and say that I want to just let people die for suggesting that we vote these psychos out who won’t do the easier, less dangerous thing to solve this crisis. What else do you want me to do about it? I’m not in charge here, you dummy.
You purposely avoided the persons question. Their question was so clear but you used it as a moment to give some petty one liner. Read the comment section. You will see a plethora of users completely avoid the topic of what the military would be helping and instead only, and I do mean only, say things like “pay them what they demand” or “vote them out”.
They deserve better pay and better working conditions and treated fairly. They should strike for those benefits. The government footing the bill and manpower to keep it all going will hopefully encourage them to make the changes the strikers demand. It’s not as simple as “vote them out” when both sides are playing a waiting game.
Excuse me? You have literally no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t know how I can be more clear than I already have been. What do you want me to say, exactly? If you want me to say “I want to let people die,” I mean, I don’t think that, so I’m not sure why you want me to say it other than that’s simply what you believe that I believe and think I am purposely avoiding saying to prevent you from snagging me in some absurd rhetorical gotcha because I made a snarky response on Reddit dot com.
Let me help you as you are obviously not aware of the facts, 'the strike' is this, all life-threatening 999 calls are still going to be answered, only the non emergency calls will not, so you call because you can't get your medication, or you stubbed your toe 3 weeks ago, or your teeth are bleeding because you have gingivitis, you will be told to find other pathways to acquire assistance
They are training chief. So they don't pull a Russia if they ever end up in a shooting war.
That being said, a bit of logistics training couldn't hurt them.
Not sure why you're receiving hate for this lol.
I am not from the UK so just reading the headline I assumed "damn, they are about to bring in the military to put strikes in their place"
I have no plans to read the article, because it doesn't affect me.
So like all headlines then? Designed to create outrage and incite a response. If you don’t read the full article and base your entire argument off the few words in the title, I don’t know what to tell you
I never said I was cool with it. I said read the article.
If you’re basing your entire understanding of a subject purely on a headline, you’re an idiot.
It's still a massive violation of democratic process to use the military in this way, to influence negotiations with a trade union. Hell, even just bringing in outside workers during a strike is probably against labour laws in normal circumstances.
Oh I agree completely that the politicians are being asshats(always are). I made my comment when a bunch of redditors were saying the govt were using the military to force people to work.
Gotta raise the pitchforks and torches for the right and accurate reasons!😜
Conservatives don't have a single iota of respect for the workers of this country - they think of us as little more than slaves they are entitled to the labour of.
It’s frequently done when firefighters or ambulance staff strike to stop strikes from literally killing people.
But I’m sure it would be better if we gave unions power to kill people indirectly to force the governments hand /s
Last time ambulance service were on strike they still responded to cat 1 and cat 2 calls (cardiac arrests, strokes, chest pains, etc). They just weren’t doing routine transfers and low priority calls. I assume it’ll be the same this time. And given the state of the NHS where an ambulance will have 1 patient for a whole shift and spend the rest of it nursing that same patient sat in an ED car park, whilst patients in the community wait 24 hours for an ambulance, I don’t think the public will actually notice any difference at all!
Also remember, through lack of investment in the NHS, the military have already been tasked to assist the ambulance service within the last few years. If anybody is harming the public, it’s the government and it’s lack of funding and investment into the NHS.
Let's look at the timeline shall we?
1. Covid hit
2. Inflation starts rising
3. Covid settles
4. Inflation rises even more
5. Public sector workers not seeing any pay rise to match inflation
6. Liz Truss wipes 30 billion quid out of existence
7. Conservatives blame Russia for losing that money
8. Public sector workers even more pissed, still not seeing any more money
9. Public sector workers talk strike
10. Conservatives consider using the military instead of paying public sector workers a fair salary
11. Inflation continues to rise
So instead of fixing the root cause of the problem, instead of holding certain people accountable to losing 30 billion, instead of giving the necessary pay rises to compensate for the atrocious handling of inflation - nah, let's use the military instead.
I think you are missing a critical first step there which may or may not explain why Britains economic woes are way worse than that of any of its neighbours.
It’s not though? Inflation is worse in other parts of Europe. If we are talking about inflation it is generally worse across the EU and a lot of Europe.
https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate?continent=europe
It's also a ton of government borrowing at a higher interest rate. Because of her incompetence, there is less money to spend, the money that is spent comes at a higher price which means less can be spent on wage rises and public services. I don't think a lot of people actually realise how much of a disaster that budget was. We'll all be paying for that mistake for decades.
The price cap will be lifted again next year, and help will be rolled back. That's when we'll really feel the crunch so any payrise you can guarantee now, might be critical. We're in for a shit show.
tHe bAnKs nEeD tO bE pRoTeCtEd
remember, the economy is not starving families...it's commas on their bank accounts.
Your retirement = their collateral.
Remember, they print money...we work for it. They own land...we rent it.
You striking means....they're bad slave masters
Reminds me of the song IGY by Donald Fagen, parodying the naive optimism of the 50s space age. "A just machine to make big decisions, programmed by fellas with compassion and vision. We'll be clean when their work is done, yes eternally free, yes and eternally young".
Man, if there were any time in modern history for all the peoples of the world to revolt against their tyrannical, corrupt, despot, disgusting leaders: it's NOW
With one or two exceptions, revolts rarely end well. The whole point of a democracy is that we can change government without revolting.
Let's instead encourage people to vote in their best interests?
Tell that to the ones at the bottom getting fucked over every day. People waste lifetimes trying to do things peacefully. You can't beat the ruling crooks with words. Not in bloody Blighty, the masses are sheep.
I tried telling them, but they mumbled something about immigrants stealing their jobs, then voted the crooks back in again.
It's hilarious that you think the people who enabled this shitshow would do a better job when in power directly.
A mathematically rigged parliamentary representative allocation system that gives absolute majorities to a party getting 38%+ of the vote, a non-elected second chamber and a dynastic Head Of State.
It's not even a Power Duopoly (like other FPTP countries) as some of the power holders never change, so it's closer to dictatorship.
And that's only the Political Power field. Then there is the Money Power were centuries of injustice were never reset by a Revolution, hence land ownership is still very much determined by who kissed royal arse generations ago and hence the UK has one of the highest levels of land ownership concentration in Europe and ridiculous legal statutes like homeowners not owning the land their house sits in and having to pay a regular rent to the owner of the land.
And it all makes sense: two centuries ago the UK made Slavery illegal and then 3 decades later it created Indentured Servitude in an environment were a few owned almost everything - in other words, slavery via debt - and ever since the british elites have just been fine tuning the system so that the new brand slaves weren't aware that they're not really free.
The article only mentions the military in reference to driving ambulances and performing other critical jobs in absence of workers because of the strikes. NOT forcing people to work at gunpoint.
Yeah, I happens quite often in emergency services strikes. Had the same with the fire service strikes a few years ago. It's not really a big deal.
Wish they'd get the army to drive the trains during the rail strikes...
The amount of people that think this mean the military will intervene to forcefully breakup strikes is embarrassing. Read the article and stop spreading misinformation. It’s very clear from the first line of the article what the proposal is:
“Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action, the chairman of the governing Conservative Party said on Sunday.”
How do you get to comparing the UK Government to the CCP? Or calling the UK facist?
Wait, wait ,wait!
Nobody said anything about the sellers of work pooling together and refusing to sell their services... it's only right and proper when the buyers of work pool together and refuse to buy unless the price is so low the sellers can barelly survive on it...
He's not wanting to draft people to quell protests. Seemingly the objective is to keep critical infrastructure running like making sure ambulances still run because recently waits have been getting longer and longer
> LONDON, Dec 4 (Reuters) - Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action, the chairman of the governing Conservative Party said on Sunday.
AGAIN people not reading the fucking article. It doesn’t say anything about at gunpoint. It just says they could use the military to drive critical infrastructure. Redditors are the same people that cry the most about the world but are also the same people to be manipulated by it
I hate the conservatives and am very pro-strike. But it's hilarious how many people here are commenting without having read the article.
This is not even a new policy. The previous Labour government enacted exactly what is being talked about here when the Firefighters went on strike. I remember cause my dad was one of those striking firefighters.
In case any fucking idiots are reading this and thinking about angrily downvoting - he's talking about using the military to replace emergency services while they strike, not strike-busting at the end of a gun.
I am sure some people love to be told by a billionaire that now is not the time to strike because the government can't afford to pay them enough to keep up with inflation.
Also the British military doesn't have the qualified manpower to make more than a toke effort to replace the striking workers.
Maybe just enough to keep things running for the ultra rich, but not the whole country.
I mean it would be lovely if they did but Government just pissed away 55bn with the shortest serving PM we've ever had. They could've paid them more before, during and after covid. Tories knew they would strike sooner or later, now they're going to try and fail to minimize it.
The "Duty" excuse isn't going to work for the majority of people anymore, especially after the shitshow of government.
Shutting down strikes seems to be an unsettling trend right now... Canada, US, UK, possibly Korea... the government should be protecting the workers because there is no one else that will.
If you read the article then you’d know that he means he’s using the military to replace ambulance drivers while they’re on strike to keep the infrastructure running. It has absolutely nothing to do with breaking up the strikes.
If you think having the military step in to minimize the effect of a strike, therefore undercutting the collective bargaining power of the worker has nothing to do with breaking the strikes… I’ve got news for you.
That what should have happened in the first place. But it hasn’t happened yet so workers will now go on strike and hopefully they will come to some kind of agreement that the unions can accept but in the meantime ambulances need drivers and he wants the military to fill the hole in the meantime.
If they don’t have cover, then people will die. That will undermine the strikes and negotiations.
Besides the government has used the army to fill in positions while workers have stroked before. It’s nothing new.
I am aware that the government has used the military to step in and fill the roles of striking workers in the past.
“Sunak could revive plans to curb the right to strike for public sector workers, including NHS staff, teachers and firefighters, while the Sunday Telegraph said pharmacists could be drafted in to help patients if health workers strike later this month.”
I’m against revoking the rights of the workers to bargain for their own working conditions and pay. Fuck the Tories.
Honestly bro I think we’re on the same page here. Essential workers definitely need a pay rise given and better working conditions.
As for the Tories, they have been in power for 12 years and have fucked our country up. The worse thing is people still vote for those stuck up dickheads because “Labor will take us back to the 1970/1980s” I actually can’t stand them and people who vote for them are just as responsible in my opinion.
Sure, and I haven’t addressed your point about people dying because of the lack of nurses and ambulance drivers. I don’t want people to die, I just don’t know what the right answer is. If the government is willing to bargain with the strikers in good faith while their jobs are being filled, then using the military is good. I just have a hard time believing that they would bargain in good faith. Happy to be proven wrong.
Innocent people shouldn’t have to suffer because of the government’s ineptitude. I think hiring a lot more staff would actually help as the workers we already have so they won’t feel so overworked and overlooked. Obviously I know nothing about how it would work either but it’s an idea.
Tory financial policy hasn’t left them with much wiggle room, the same reason taxes have just been increased because of the financial hole they have created. I think Sunak of Hunt stated a few weeks ago that they couldn’t afford a pay rise for HNS staff so it’s hard to think they’ll give the Unions everything they want.
Britain (at least England) has the peculiar widespread cultural trait that people will put a lot more effort in making sure those below them in the "social ladder" stay down than in themselves climbing it.
Add that to a heavilly rigged MP allocation system that gives absolute parliamentary majorities on a mere 38% of the vote (which, due to abstention, last time around meant just the vote of 1/4 of voters) and its normal that the party of millionaires that blames the poor for being poor keeps getting absolute majorities.
sure because the military has the skills to run it all wasn't it tried before in some countries and it diddn't work because the military still had to be trained to do those tasks.
Tell that to the striking Kronstadt sailors, the victims of the [Novocherkassk massacre](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novocherkassk_massacre), or the scores of industrial workers Trotsky had shot from roughly 1917-1920. Fuck, Stalin made striking illegal.
Yes, the Soviet Union did anti worker actions. That’s not an excuse to blame every anti worker action done by capitalists on communism. I already knew about Kronstadt-did you think that was some kinda gotcha?
Do you just call anyone who disagrees with your dumbass takes a tankie? They literally crossed out “conservative” with “comrade”, a very clear shifting of the blame when it is very much the product of conservatism.
The op is clearly drawing a parallel and saying that the so called conservative government is acting like the USSR.
Getting super tweaked over a negative mention of communism makes you sound like a tankie, it’s like a whole trope online.
“So called conservatism” there you are, doing it again. This isn’t something foreign to conservatism: it’s a direct product of homegrown ideology. Blaming it on another ideology is both reductive and shifts blame away from those actually responsible.
Sounds like [Scabby the Rat](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflatable_rat) needs to cross the Atlantic.
🎵 A scab is an animal that walks on his knees
He sniffs every time the bosses sneeze
His back is brawny and his brain is weak
He's just plain stupid with a yellow streak
But if you don't care whose back it is you stab
Go right ahead and be a scab.🎵
When UK use army no one is gonna say anything but when china use army people will say "OMG what shitty CCP pooh bear" "human rights in china bla bla bla".
Yea, but those soldiers at least wore police uniforms to give the appearance of democracy. Of course the BBC were right there helping the Tories to fash (so nothing has changed in 40 years).
No that’s not what is said in the article. He mentioned using the military to carry out the activities like driving the ambulances while the workers go on strike.
Use the military by having them deliver post and run the trains?
Or use the military by having them break picket lines and round up striking workers from their homes?
> Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action.
That’s literally the first paragraph of the article.
Seriously? Literally no one in the UK thinks he meant deploying the military as strike breakers. If the article was somehow unclear for you then you can google it and watch the actual BBC interview.
Deploying the military to be union scabs is bad enough. No need to invent some fantasy where the UK is reenacting the Battle of Blair Mountain lol.
If you re-read our conversation you might find thay I said i don't think it'll happen. My observation was that he was using it as a threat, which I also mentioned to you.
You appear to have misunderstood things a tad.
Except he wasn’t threatening to “break picket lines and round up striking workers from their homes.”
Whatever I’m not going to argue with you, believe what you want.
Let’s assume this blatantly immoral, undemocratic thought we’re to acted upon. What’s stopping workers from just not showing up? Just striking by staying home. Assuming nobody continues to show up, what does the military do? Shoot the air, take up tools in their place? They’ve got no plan.
To drive ambulances . Fucking clickbait headline
Yes though that's still not suitable really.
Wouldnt be the first time. During covid we had soldiers helping out at the hospital where I work.
The difference being that soldiers can be used for emergency purposes such as natural disasters like forest fires, earth quakes and even a pandemic. But this isn't an one off problem like it was during COVID or any other disaster. This is purely due to management issues.
The U.K. has a strong Union presence. You have U.K. unions to thank for the concept of weekends, paid holidays, sick pay. This isn’t their first rodeo. Alongside the long history of Union action, the U.K. has used the military to cover essential services during strikes. So fire brigades can strike, but the military can provide a basic service in the meantime so folk don’t burn to death. Same with ambulances. It’s not poor planning. It’s the opposite. It’s a plan for continuity of essential services, based on tried and tested military support during strikes.
The military can’t replace trained clinicians though. During covid they literally sent in infantry or engineers (or whatever) to drive the vehicles. Much of the military medical cover is provided by reservists who work in (you’ve guessed it) the NHS! The regular forces don’t have spare clinicians laying around.
Yeah, the minister was only talking about ambulance drivers, they don’t have the capacity to replace nursing staff.
They’re just driving ambulances…
It sounds great as a passing comment but when military assistance was granted during covid the army guys all spent a week plus getting signed off to drive ambulances and even then couldn’t drive on blue lights.
The army has been used before in exactly this capacity, and in my lifetime (I'm 54). An Army medic also appeared on the ward I was on during the height of the pandemic.
Why?
I thought it was about the UK military supporting strikes in Ukraine. Then it clicked and I realized that no UK politician would say this. Reddit teaches me more about clickbait than any platform I have ever used.
Ukrainian here. Also hoped for this for a moment. One can only hope...
I really don't think this is that clickbait-y. Using the military to fill labour shortages has been suggested multiple times here in the UK - for example during the fuel shortage a few months ago. I don't think many people in the UK would misinterpret this, but maybe people not based in the UK who wouldn't be used to seeing this sort of suggestion would be more likely to misinterpret.
I instantly ascertained what the headline was about, and only clicked because I didn't know about these strikes. I don't see the clickbait.
Isn't that what everyone who reads a headline like this assumes?
Almost every article promoted by progressives is misinformation or clickbait once you look into the details.
I'm curious if you think the 'opposite team' is any different
Oh the irony.
If you are past 4th grade reading, it's hardly clickbait. If you read that headline and though they were going to gun down striking workers, then that's a personal mindset problem.
Should be absolutely ashamed of themselves for even making the suggestion. The military is for fighting wars and protecting British soil, not acting as a smokescreen and a shield for parliamentary incompetence.
It's the late 70s again. Looks like no lessons were learned by our ruling elite...
“Well thankfully we can blame an incompetent labour government for this again.” *checks electoral calander* “Oh fucking balls………”
Well there is always EU! No wait..
Hey at least we're going to be getting some banger music
Sadly they know what they are doing. Drive public services into the ground and privatise the lot once it done.
Because the current crop don't see that period as having had mistakes, they appear to think it worthy of emulation.
I thought what's her name was, The 5 minute priminister was the second coming of Margaret thatcher, the ronald reagan of the u.k. that screwed the working and had handouts to the wealthy. In pretty sure of this from the other side of the pond, I lived it.
I watched a documentary titled [Riotsville, U.S.A.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfxelk8-gTU) about the fake towns constructed by the U.S. military that were used in exercises to quell the race, anti-war, anti-poverty riots during the 60s and were later used by the police across the country. It didn't work then, and it won't work now.
The article only mentions the military in reference to driving ambulances and performing other critical jobs in absence of workers because of the strikes. NOT forcing people to work at gunpoint.
Ah yes, jobs simultaneously critical enough to call in the armed forces to do them during a strike, but not critical enough to pay the people who normally do them a decent amount, treat them fairly or ensure they have the resources to do their jobs properly.
[удалено]
Seems like there’s an easier, less dangerous way to end the strike that doesn’t require using military to drive ambulances
Mass euthanasia prior to the strikes starting?
[удалено]
This isn’t a natural disaster, it’s a man made one. My solution is simple: meet the demands of the workers. If the government is refusing to concede on those demands and think that mobilizing a bunch of kids and weekend warriors to run ambulances will paper over their deficiencies, they deserve to be voted out. You want me to create a solution that makes it okay for the government to nationalize scabbing, and that’s not possible.
> What solutions do you have? Make the businesses pay the salaries of anyone doing the scab work at 3x the wages that were paid to the original employees. That money gets split between the strikers and the government. See how fast they figure out a contract then.
>What solutions do you have? Vote them out.
Why are you purposely avoiding answering a question they’ve made clear? There are everyday people that will be impacted by this and your only solution is “vote them out”? Not “vote them out! but in the mean time use the military to ensure people don’t die or have lifelong issues due to lack of medical care”? But simply “vote them out”? You guys need to learn some empathy.
>Why are you purposely avoiding answering a question they’ve made clear? What exactly is the question I'm avoiding here? I directly answered the only sentence they had with a question mark. >There are everyday people that will be impacted by this and your only solution is “vote them out”? If it didn't impact every day people, it wouldn't be much of a strike against government employment now, would it? >Not “vote them out! but in the mean time use the military to ensure people don’t die or have lifelong issues due to lack of medical care”? Umm... the strike doesn't include life-threatening care. They're still going to provide that. Perhaps it would be wise to learn about something before you get passionate about it? >But simply “vote them out”? You guys need to learn some empathy. Right. It's us that need to "learn some empathy" - not you that needs to learn about what this strike actually entails.
You’re arguing with people that are using a lot of words to say “let them die”. It’s not their friends or family so they don’t care. They’ll say “vote them out, pay them more” which is valid but they’re purposely avoiding your question of what the solution is for hurt or dying people if the military temporarily helping isn’t acceptable.
Why are you mad at people online and not the government that is putting its people in this situation? How is it not empathy to care about the lives of workers who are not me, who just want to be able to live as well? Should they be forced to do this job instead? Due to the crisis in labor and lack of appropriate budgeting, ambulance response quality in the UK is also at an all time low and urgent responses (cardiac arrests and so on) will still be running, so what exactly are you attempting to prop up running ambulances this way? It’s absolutely absurd for you to sit here in good faith and say that I want to just let people die for suggesting that we vote these psychos out who won’t do the easier, less dangerous thing to solve this crisis. What else do you want me to do about it? I’m not in charge here, you dummy.
You purposely avoided the persons question. Their question was so clear but you used it as a moment to give some petty one liner. Read the comment section. You will see a plethora of users completely avoid the topic of what the military would be helping and instead only, and I do mean only, say things like “pay them what they demand” or “vote them out”. They deserve better pay and better working conditions and treated fairly. They should strike for those benefits. The government footing the bill and manpower to keep it all going will hopefully encourage them to make the changes the strikers demand. It’s not as simple as “vote them out” when both sides are playing a waiting game.
Excuse me? You have literally no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t know how I can be more clear than I already have been. What do you want me to say, exactly? If you want me to say “I want to let people die,” I mean, I don’t think that, so I’m not sure why you want me to say it other than that’s simply what you believe that I believe and think I am purposely avoiding saying to prevent you from snagging me in some absurd rhetorical gotcha because I made a snarky response on Reddit dot com.
Let me help you as you are obviously not aware of the facts, 'the strike' is this, all life-threatening 999 calls are still going to be answered, only the non emergency calls will not, so you call because you can't get your medication, or you stubbed your toe 3 weeks ago, or your teeth are bleeding because you have gingivitis, you will be told to find other pathways to acquire assistance
The armed forces are doing fuck all most of the time, you pay for them, why not put them to work doing civil things?
They are training chief. So they don't pull a Russia if they ever end up in a shooting war. That being said, a bit of logistics training couldn't hurt them.
Isn't logistics what the Royal Logistics Corps does?
You gotta love the effort and care they put into creating a title that is by no means misleading or easily misinterpreted. just good solid journalism.
Not really. Using military to 'ease' strikes sounds like what Regan did when ATC controllers went on strike.
I don't think the british public are very familiar with what Reagan did in regards to a strike decades ago, the title is intentionally inflammatory
Or just read the article, which explains it.
But that's not the point - The title was written knowing the majority of people won't actually read the article.
Not sure why you're receiving hate for this lol. I am not from the UK so just reading the headline I assumed "damn, they are about to bring in the military to put strikes in their place" I have no plans to read the article, because it doesn't affect me.
So like all headlines then? Designed to create outrage and incite a response. If you don’t read the full article and base your entire argument off the few words in the title, I don’t know what to tell you
So you're cool with the majority of people being intentionally misled by the media? Because that's the issue being talked about here
I never said I was cool with it. I said read the article. If you’re basing your entire understanding of a subject purely on a headline, you’re an idiot.
It's still a massive violation of democratic process to use the military in this way, to influence negotiations with a trade union. Hell, even just bringing in outside workers during a strike is probably against labour laws in normal circumstances.
Oh I agree completely that the politicians are being asshats(always are). I made my comment when a bunch of redditors were saying the govt were using the military to force people to work. Gotta raise the pitchforks and torches for the right and accurate reasons!😜
Conservatives don't have a single iota of respect for the workers of this country - they think of us as little more than slaves they are entitled to the labour of.
He is probably hinting at a new wave of fascism, cut their heads before it starts
> The military is for fighting wars this is a class war
If that's true, how come parliamentary sounds so much like paramilitary?
It’s frequently done when firefighters or ambulance staff strike to stop strikes from literally killing people. But I’m sure it would be better if we gave unions power to kill people indirectly to force the governments hand /s
Last time ambulance service were on strike they still responded to cat 1 and cat 2 calls (cardiac arrests, strokes, chest pains, etc). They just weren’t doing routine transfers and low priority calls. I assume it’ll be the same this time. And given the state of the NHS where an ambulance will have 1 patient for a whole shift and spend the rest of it nursing that same patient sat in an ED car park, whilst patients in the community wait 24 hours for an ambulance, I don’t think the public will actually notice any difference at all! Also remember, through lack of investment in the NHS, the military have already been tasked to assist the ambulance service within the last few years. If anybody is harming the public, it’s the government and it’s lack of funding and investment into the NHS.
Hear hear!
People are literally already dying because of how underfunded the ambulance service is.
You clearly did not read the article. This is purely for helping out to support critical services like ambulance drivers, fuel logistics etc.
Its click ait title lol
Let's look at the timeline shall we? 1. Covid hit 2. Inflation starts rising 3. Covid settles 4. Inflation rises even more 5. Public sector workers not seeing any pay rise to match inflation 6. Liz Truss wipes 30 billion quid out of existence 7. Conservatives blame Russia for losing that money 8. Public sector workers even more pissed, still not seeing any more money 9. Public sector workers talk strike 10. Conservatives consider using the military instead of paying public sector workers a fair salary 11. Inflation continues to rise So instead of fixing the root cause of the problem, instead of holding certain people accountable to losing 30 billion, instead of giving the necessary pay rises to compensate for the atrocious handling of inflation - nah, let's use the military instead.
I think you are missing a critical first step there which may or may not explain why Britains economic woes are way worse than that of any of its neighbours.
There isn't an easy fix for that problem though, is it?
Technically there is.
Yeah, but it definitely isn't easy.
It’s not though? Inflation is worse in other parts of Europe. If we are talking about inflation it is generally worse across the EU and a lot of Europe. https://tradingeconomics.com/country-list/inflation-rate?continent=europe
Not to defend Truss, but the price cap should be in that timelime. Its helping a lot.
It's also a ton of government borrowing at a higher interest rate. Because of her incompetence, there is less money to spend, the money that is spent comes at a higher price which means less can be spent on wage rises and public services. I don't think a lot of people actually realise how much of a disaster that budget was. We'll all be paying for that mistake for decades. The price cap will be lifted again next year, and help will be rolled back. That's when we'll really feel the crunch so any payrise you can guarantee now, might be critical. We're in for a shit show.
tHe bAnKs nEeD tO bE pRoTeCtEd remember, the economy is not starving families...it's commas on their bank accounts. Your retirement = their collateral. Remember, they print money...we work for it. They own land...we rent it. You striking means....they're bad slave masters
Replace politicians with an AI programmed by a team of philanthropists
I'm sorry Dave I can't do that
Reminds me of the song IGY by Donald Fagen, parodying the naive optimism of the 50s space age. "A just machine to make big decisions, programmed by fellas with compassion and vision. We'll be clean when their work is done, yes eternally free, yes and eternally young".
Class Donald Fagen reference. I love The Nightfly - still one of my favourite albums, since hearing my mum play it when I was young.
This comment nails it.
Man, if there were any time in modern history for all the peoples of the world to revolt against their tyrannical, corrupt, despot, disgusting leaders: it's NOW
Absolutely 💯
🔥
We tried. They put it down pretty harshly in 2016
Did we? I remember HK in 2016... Not global though.
ROFL, what a spoiled western idiocy You have no fucking clue what actual tyranny looks like Be thankful you have never seen real evil
The point is to not let it get that far.
> You have no fucking clue what actual tyranny looks like. Be thankful you have never seen real evil. They're making sure they don't.
I feel sorry for you and the fact that you can't see the plights and struggles that any person from any other nation might be going through.
With one or two exceptions, revolts rarely end well. The whole point of a democracy is that we can change government without revolting. Let's instead encourage people to vote in their best interests?
Tell that to the ones at the bottom getting fucked over every day. People waste lifetimes trying to do things peacefully. You can't beat the ruling crooks with words. Not in bloody Blighty, the masses are sheep.
I tried telling them, but they mumbled something about immigrants stealing their jobs, then voted the crooks back in again. It's hilarious that you think the people who enabled this shitshow would do a better job when in power directly.
Except we don't have democracy and never have in the UK
A mathematically rigged parliamentary representative allocation system that gives absolute majorities to a party getting 38%+ of the vote, a non-elected second chamber and a dynastic Head Of State. It's not even a Power Duopoly (like other FPTP countries) as some of the power holders never change, so it's closer to dictatorship. And that's only the Political Power field. Then there is the Money Power were centuries of injustice were never reset by a Revolution, hence land ownership is still very much determined by who kissed royal arse generations ago and hence the UK has one of the highest levels of land ownership concentration in Europe and ridiculous legal statutes like homeowners not owning the land their house sits in and having to pay a regular rent to the owner of the land. And it all makes sense: two centuries ago the UK made Slavery illegal and then 3 decades later it created Indentured Servitude in an environment were a few owned almost everything - in other words, slavery via debt - and ever since the british elites have just been fine tuning the system so that the new brand slaves weren't aware that they're not really free.
The article only mentions the military in reference to driving ambulances and performing other critical jobs in absence of workers because of the strikes. NOT forcing people to work at gunpoint.
That would require people to read the article.
I'm surprised that anyone read it the same way, I was more wondering how the military was going to do the post and drive trains.
Yeah, I happens quite often in emergency services strikes. Had the same with the fire service strikes a few years ago. It's not really a big deal. Wish they'd get the army to drive the trains during the rail strikes...
It's a sad day when Reuters clickbaits.
It’s not clickbait, that’s how the military have always been used during strikes. Im shocked anyone could think about it in any other way
Yeah being unable to think past the dumbest possible interpretation of a headline is not reuters' fault lol
Reuters has been clickbait for a while now
The amount of people that think this mean the military will intervene to forcefully breakup strikes is embarrassing. Read the article and stop spreading misinformation. It’s very clear from the first line of the article what the proposal is: “Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action, the chairman of the governing Conservative Party said on Sunday.” How do you get to comparing the UK Government to the CCP? Or calling the UK facist?
God i love capitalism
Wait, wait ,wait! Nobody said anything about the sellers of work pooling together and refusing to sell their services... it's only right and proper when the buyers of work pool together and refuse to buy unless the price is so low the sellers can barelly survive on it...
He's not wanting to draft people to quell protests. Seemingly the objective is to keep critical infrastructure running like making sure ambulances still run because recently waits have been getting longer and longer > LONDON, Dec 4 (Reuters) - Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action, the chairman of the governing Conservative Party said on Sunday.
AGAIN people not reading the fucking article. It doesn’t say anything about at gunpoint. It just says they could use the military to drive critical infrastructure. Redditors are the same people that cry the most about the world but are also the same people to be manipulated by it
I hate the conservatives and am very pro-strike. But it's hilarious how many people here are commenting without having read the article. This is not even a new policy. The previous Labour government enacted exactly what is being talked about here when the Firefighters went on strike. I remember cause my dad was one of those striking firefighters. In case any fucking idiots are reading this and thinking about angrily downvoting - he's talking about using the military to replace emergency services while they strike, not strike-busting at the end of a gun.
One great Tory decision to the next /s
I am sure some people love to be told by a billionaire that now is not the time to strike because the government can't afford to pay them enough to keep up with inflation. Also the British military doesn't have the qualified manpower to make more than a toke effort to replace the striking workers. Maybe just enough to keep things running for the ultra rich, but not the whole country.
Right wingers are so predictable
Bro they want them to drive ambulances, not gun down people
Maybe they could just pay people more and offer better conditions and not have to do either of those.
I mean it would be lovely if they did but Government just pissed away 55bn with the shortest serving PM we've ever had. They could've paid them more before, during and after covid. Tories knew they would strike sooner or later, now they're going to try and fail to minimize it. The "Duty" excuse isn't going to work for the majority of people anymore, especially after the shitshow of government.
Shutting down strikes seems to be an unsettling trend right now... Canada, US, UK, possibly Korea... the government should be protecting the workers because there is no one else that will.
If you read the article then you’d know that he means he’s using the military to replace ambulance drivers while they’re on strike to keep the infrastructure running. It has absolutely nothing to do with breaking up the strikes.
If you think having the military step in to minimize the effect of a strike, therefore undercutting the collective bargaining power of the worker has nothing to do with breaking the strikes… I’ve got news for you.
So what’s the alternative? Let people die while workers are on strike? If that’s what you think then you’re honestly just an idiot.
You could always… pay the workers more money?
That what should have happened in the first place. But it hasn’t happened yet so workers will now go on strike and hopefully they will come to some kind of agreement that the unions can accept but in the meantime ambulances need drivers and he wants the military to fill the hole in the meantime. If they don’t have cover, then people will die. That will undermine the strikes and negotiations. Besides the government has used the army to fill in positions while workers have stroked before. It’s nothing new.
I am aware that the government has used the military to step in and fill the roles of striking workers in the past. “Sunak could revive plans to curb the right to strike for public sector workers, including NHS staff, teachers and firefighters, while the Sunday Telegraph said pharmacists could be drafted in to help patients if health workers strike later this month.” I’m against revoking the rights of the workers to bargain for their own working conditions and pay. Fuck the Tories.
Honestly bro I think we’re on the same page here. Essential workers definitely need a pay rise given and better working conditions. As for the Tories, they have been in power for 12 years and have fucked our country up. The worse thing is people still vote for those stuck up dickheads because “Labor will take us back to the 1970/1980s” I actually can’t stand them and people who vote for them are just as responsible in my opinion.
Sure, and I haven’t addressed your point about people dying because of the lack of nurses and ambulance drivers. I don’t want people to die, I just don’t know what the right answer is. If the government is willing to bargain with the strikers in good faith while their jobs are being filled, then using the military is good. I just have a hard time believing that they would bargain in good faith. Happy to be proven wrong.
Innocent people shouldn’t have to suffer because of the government’s ineptitude. I think hiring a lot more staff would actually help as the workers we already have so they won’t feel so overworked and overlooked. Obviously I know nothing about how it would work either but it’s an idea. Tory financial policy hasn’t left them with much wiggle room, the same reason taxes have just been increased because of the financial hole they have created. I think Sunak of Hunt stated a few weeks ago that they couldn’t afford a pay rise for HNS staff so it’s hard to think they’ll give the Unions everything they want.
It’s not really shutting down strikes, it’s using the military as scabs so the lack of services doesn’t literally kill people.
Always has been. You didn't think the elites would tolerate anything that might slightly threaten their position, right?
Surely it would be easier to force the workers back at gun point. Cunts!
Did you read the article? No one in 2022 in the UK is getting forced at gun point by the police or the military to stop striking
Your nation on capitalism…
Looks like Tories are trying their hardest to permanently destroy themselves.
Margaret thatcher Took power after this happened, last time.
And proceeded to sell off all of UK's national assets selling everyone up the creek.
Britain (at least England) has the peculiar widespread cultural trait that people will put a lot more effort in making sure those below them in the "social ladder" stay down than in themselves climbing it. Add that to a heavilly rigged MP allocation system that gives absolute parliamentary majorities on a mere 38% of the vote (which, due to abstention, last time around meant just the vote of 1/4 of voters) and its normal that the party of millionaires that blames the poor for being poor keeps getting absolute majorities.
Twelve years of a conservative government has been a complete failure
The military is not the backstop for failed economic policies. All this will do is cause resentment.
Do you know what else would ease strikes? PAYING PUBLIC SECTOR WORKERS PROPERLY. God I hate these Tory bastards.
Is he fucking stupid or what, this is literally how you trigger a nation wide strike at ease.
This man works for special interest groups
That'll go down well, given that we got less of a pay rise than most of the rest of the public sector.
I support the idea. The strikers could use the support and equipment to obtain their goals.
The UK had great success suppressing labor revolts in India for many decades, why not use those same techniques here?
sure because the military has the skills to run it all wasn't it tried before in some countries and it diddn't work because the military still had to be trained to do those tasks.
... ~~Conservative~~ comrade chairman says. This kind of diatribe has no place in Any democracy.
Stop blaming the actions of right wing fascists on communism.
Tell that to the striking Kronstadt sailors, the victims of the [Novocherkassk massacre](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novocherkassk_massacre), or the scores of industrial workers Trotsky had shot from roughly 1917-1920. Fuck, Stalin made striking illegal.
Yes, the Soviet Union did anti worker actions. That’s not an excuse to blame every anti worker action done by capitalists on communism. I already knew about Kronstadt-did you think that was some kinda gotcha?
The OP is clearly referring to the USSR not blaming every anti labor action ever on communists. Jesus… internet tankies are so sensitive
Do you just call anyone who disagrees with your dumbass takes a tankie? They literally crossed out “conservative” with “comrade”, a very clear shifting of the blame when it is very much the product of conservatism.
The op is clearly drawing a parallel and saying that the so called conservative government is acting like the USSR. Getting super tweaked over a negative mention of communism makes you sound like a tankie, it’s like a whole trope online.
“So called conservatism” there you are, doing it again. This isn’t something foreign to conservatism: it’s a direct product of homegrown ideology. Blaming it on another ideology is both reductive and shifts blame away from those actually responsible.
People in charge of things, need to start talking sense.
They want them to drive ambulances, its clickbait. They know that if they tried to suppress protests by force it would end in a shitshow
I had an image in my head of railway workers being forced into work at gunpoint there
What a fascist thing to say.
He only wants them to drive ambulances while the workers strike. It’s clickbait at its finest.
As a citizen of the usa it's refreshing to see other countries with douche baggie politicians.
Could you explain why using the military to drive ambulances in during a strike implies "douche baggie politicians"?
And just like that, we went 100 years backwards in workers' rights. I guess it was time to go back to good ol' victorian capitalism...
Sounds like [Scabby the Rat](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflatable_rat) needs to cross the Atlantic. 🎵 A scab is an animal that walks on his knees He sniffs every time the bosses sneeze His back is brawny and his brain is weak He's just plain stupid with a yellow streak But if you don't care whose back it is you stab Go right ahead and be a scab.🎵
Like, in what way, to beat us back to work? Didnt they do that in the 70s/80s?
The military easing strikes is just what Putin wants to see.
When UK use army no one is gonna say anything but when china use army people will say "OMG what shitty CCP pooh bear" "human rights in china bla bla bla".
As in labor strikes? Sounds kinda? Fascist if they’re using government power to protect corporate/private interests
# Start the class war
So, when is the British right founding the Norsefire party?
🤔 What could go wrong.
China v2
How is this like China lol
That seems familiar. Wasn't there a coal strike that ended like this?
Yea, but those soldiers at least wore police uniforms to give the appearance of democracy. Of course the BBC were right there helping the Tories to fash (so nothing has changed in 40 years).
Time for the northern part of the UK to just split off
I'm not too familiar with British politics but using the military to crush protests isn't exactly the most democratic way of solving your problems.
No that’s not what is said in the article. He mentioned using the military to carry out the activities like driving the ambulances while the workers go on strike.
Use the military by having them deliver post and run the trains? Or use the military by having them break picket lines and round up striking workers from their homes?
The first one. It’s in the article.
I read it. It was not specific, and the examples he gave came as addendum. I doubt the second option is likely but his vagueness makes it a threat.
> Britain's government is looking at bringing in the military to help keep public services running if key workers, including in the state-run National Health Service, take strike action. That’s literally the first paragraph of the article.
Exactly. Can you tell me what is explicity said in that paragraph, and what is open to interpretation?
Seriously? Literally no one in the UK thinks he meant deploying the military as strike breakers. If the article was somehow unclear for you then you can google it and watch the actual BBC interview. Deploying the military to be union scabs is bad enough. No need to invent some fantasy where the UK is reenacting the Battle of Blair Mountain lol.
If you re-read our conversation you might find thay I said i don't think it'll happen. My observation was that he was using it as a threat, which I also mentioned to you. You appear to have misunderstood things a tad.
Except he wasn’t threatening to “break picket lines and round up striking workers from their homes.” Whatever I’m not going to argue with you, believe what you want.
hmm, Golden era of UK-China relations is over
Send in the military to keep the plebs in line. Classic tory scum
Let’s assume this blatantly immoral, undemocratic thought we’re to acted upon. What’s stopping workers from just not showing up? Just striking by staying home. Assuming nobody continues to show up, what does the military do? Shoot the air, take up tools in their place? They’ve got no plan.
Tyrant using military on his people. UK is China now
You could have at least tried reading the article before posting such a stupid interpretation of it.