Cruel but apt, Pat.
However, whatever your thoughts about the man himself that is tragically young by today's standards.
I didn't particularly care for the man or his politics, but I must admit that I have a grudging admiration for his tenacity and the fact that he spoke his mind.
|
Funny enough I listened to a recorded interview with him on R4 yesterday afternoon in which he described himself as a communist socialist, and his philosophy was "Each according to his needs".
From someone earning 145k and depriving a needy family of a council house that comes across as rank hypocrisy.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 11:03
|
We don't know what he did with his 145k do we?
Obviously his needs were fulfilled by a council house.
|
|
I was never particularly enamoured with union leaders of Crow's type but, in his case, a lot of the work he and the RMT did was intended to improve safety, both for staff and passengers.
|
"We don't know what he did with his 145k do we?"
Food?
|
|
At least he no longer needs to defend his salary as was the case yesterday. No doubt his widow will stay on in the council house.
|
|
It was a jaw dropping moment for me when I read the news this morning. I also heard the R4 interview with him. Love him or loathe him you couldn't ignore him....the world's a poorer place.
|
>>....the world's a poorer place.
I'm with ^this^ geezer.
|
>> From someone earning 145k and depriving a needy family of a council house that comes
>> across as rank hypocrisy.
Historically, council housing was a 'mixed economy' with blue and white collar workers living cheek by jowl. That balance was upset by Right to Buy. The idea that such housing is solely for the needy is of much more recent origin, only really coming to the fore under the coalition.
Holborn and St Pancras MP Frank Dobson was regarded as 'in touch' because he lived in a Council House in the constituency.
|
|
I don't think that's in good taste Pat. In any case, he has a widow and four young children who will continue to live there. Indeed the children can 'inherit' the lease if they continue to live there.
|
>>
I don't think that's in good taste Pat. <<
Neither do I, but we seem to thrive on bad taste on this forum, so what the hell?
Bob Crow would thoroughly approve of my remark.
Pat
|
My understanding is that the council house belonged to his partner and that they were the only one in the nine houses street where they lived who paid rent, rather than receive benefits.
Ironic though that he apparently died from blocked tubes.
|
>> Ironic though that he apparently died from blocked tubes.
>>
Fair do's...you win on that one....that's a good one.
|
Ken Livingstone is quoted in the Independent:
'The only working-class people who still have well-paid jobs in London are his members.'
I hadn't thought of it that way, but maybe the adoration of the wider public isn't everything.
|
>> I hadn't thought of it that way, but maybe the adoration of the wider public
>> isn't everything.
In industrial relations terms such adoration is next to nothing. Strikes with real public support are rare as hen's teeth, hence the usual 'holding country to ransom' narrative.
|
>>
>> I hadn't thought of it that way, but maybe the adoration of the wider public
>> isn't everything.
>>
>>
>>
Indeed, afterall not everyone paid union subs.
|
|
Were I a tube worker I'd have loved him. If I were a tube traveler I wouldn't.
|
|
Is there such a thing as a working class any more ? I was once quite proud of my working class roots, my grandparents on both sides would probably be classed as working class - Guest House keeper and bus mechanic/driver.......dunno where I would place myself. I probably have middle class credentials I suppose but have no aspirations !
|
>> Ken Livingstone is quoted in the Independent:
>>
>> 'The only working-class people who still have well-paid jobs in London are his members.'
>>
Only because the rest of the working class can't afford to live or work in London because of the cost of tube fairs, increased to pay his members.
Tube drivers are GROSSLY overpaid.
|
>> Only because the rest of the working class can't afford to live or work in
>> London because of the cost of tube fairs, increased to pay his members.
>>
>> Tube drivers are GROSSLY overpaid.
>>
I'm not an expert in living costs in London, but I find it hard to believe that the working class are struggling to live in London because of tube fares?
|
>>
>> I'm not an expert in living costs in London, but I find it hard to
>> believe that the working class are struggling to live in London because of tube fares?
transport costs put up the cost of living, and diminish the living standards of the working class - Something Bob Crowe never managed to work out.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 19:11
|
|
To the point of not being able to live there? I would have thought housing costs came way higher.
|
>> To the point of not being able to live there? I would have thought housing
>> costs came way higher.
You are thinking like Bob Crowe,
Tube workers pay goes up much faster than rate of inflation, tube fares go up to pay for it. Not all recovered by fares so the precept paid to TFL goes up
Due to councils have to pay more for TFL, they rents in council houses go up, shop workers pay needs to go up, Every service in London costs more, Cost of living goes through the roof. Its the butterfly affect.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 19:22
|
Well to be thought of as thinking like Bob Crowe that's a first.
Like I said I'm not an expert in London living costs, slash tube fares through driver pay cuts would lead to a big cut in the cost of living for the working class in London and allow many working class to more to move to London. That's what you mean isn't it?
|
>> Well to be thought of as thinking like Bob Crowe that's a first.
>>
>> Like I said I'm not an expert in London living costs, slash tube fares through
>> driver pay cuts would lead to a big cut in the cost of living for
>> the working class in London and allow many working class to more to move to
>> London. That's what you mean isn't it?
No. that won't work, can't work, damage done. Cost of living never goes down below what it was, you only sped it up or slow it down. He sped it up.
And freely admitted, when question about the effects of price increases or strikes, "I am not interested in other people, my job is to look after my members"
And thats what made him a grade A hypocrite. He claimed to be a socialist, but was not interest int he fraternity of workers rights or living standards, merely his own members. He was a superb TU leader for his members, and he was the only figure who could keep his union executive in order.
His legacy tho will be a determination to bring in driverless trains at all costs at the expense of his members jobs. Another thing he could never understand, moving with the times.
|
>> No. that won't work, can't work, damage done. Cost of living never goes down below
>> what it was, you only sped it up or slow it down. He sped it
>> up.
Clamping down on tube drivers pay now and in the future could help reduce the cost of living to cut the cost of living for the working class in London and allow some more to move in?
|
The impact of tube driver's wages (or those of other LT staff) going up 10% rather than 5% has near diddley effect on cost of living in London.
Rents meanwhile rise inexorably. My former colleagues living in shared flats were paying 6 times as much in rent as for their Travelcards.
|
How many tube drivers are there in London?
Edit answered my own question 2012/13: 3193
I find it hard to believe they are responsible for the reducing of living standards in London and keeping the working class out of London. They seem a very small number in the population of 9 million.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 20:00
|
>> How many tube drivers are there in London?
>>
>> Edit answered my own question 2012/13: 3193
>>
>> I find it hard to believe they are responsible for the reducing of living standards
>> in London and keeping the working class out of London. They seem a very small
>> number in the population of 9 million.
How old are you? do you remember hyper inflation? and its causes? clearly not.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 20:08
|
|
No I don't remember hyper inflation, was it tube drivers' wages that caused it?
Last edited by: sooty123 on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 20:18
|
>> The impact of tube driver's wages (or those of other LT staff) going up 10%
>> rather than 5% has near diddley effect on cost of living in London.
>>
>> Rents meanwhile rise inexorably. My former colleagues living in shared flats were paying 6 times
>> as much in rent as for their Travelcards.
Another one only thinking in isolation. And another one who has forgotten hyper inflation.
|
>
>> Another one only thinking in isolation. And another one who has forgotten hyper inflation.
The causes of hyper inflation were commodity prices and the 'Barber Boom'. Leapfrogging wage increases were at worst contributory and more likely a consequence.
|
>> >
>> >> Another one only thinking in isolation. And another one who has forgotten hyper inflation.
>>
>>
>> The causes of hyper inflation were commodity prices and the 'Barber Boom'. Leapfrogging wage increases
>> were at worst contributory and more likely a consequence.
Ok fine, lets move to the winter of discontent model then.
I seem to recall you saying that was valid as well.
|
>> Ok fine, lets move to the winter of discontent model then.
>>
>> I seem to recall you saying that was valid as well.
>>
By 78 inflation had receded from a peak in 1975 of nearly 25% back to 8% so not clear where that leaves the wages drive inflation argument.
|
>> Cost of living never goes down below what it was, you only sped it up or slow it down. He sped it up.
As you say Zero, it rises but never falls. It rises for many reasons, among which tube fares frankly figure a hell of a long way down the list.
>> "I am not interested in other people, my job is to look after my members"
>> And thats what made him a grade A hypocrite. He claimed to be a socialist, but was not interest int he fraternity of workers rights or living standards, merely his own members.
What do you mean, 'merely'? It was his JOB, the members paid his WAGES!
Bob Crow was a trade union leader, a paid manager really, not some sort of ideologue politician. He was working in a country where workers' rights had been solidly established in law for several decades, and where no one over the age of 30 or 40 has any reason to complain about the standard of living... perhaps I should add: for the majority of course, for those in the loop, since there are - as in all societies - excluded categories of variable and shifting size. Those will always be with us.
|
>> My understanding is that the council house belonged to his partner
My understanding is that a council house belongs to the council. I don't think Crowe understood that rather basic issue either.
>>
>> Ironic though that he apparently died from blocked tubes.
LOL
|
>> I don't think that's in good taste Pat. In any case, he has a widow
>> and four young children who will continue to live there.
Yes they can - but is based on qualification and the qualification will be reviewed if the rant wa sin his name.
>> Indeed the children can 'inherit'
>> the lease if they continue to live there.
Nope. not the case, the council can move them a more suitable property. Its not a lease.
|
Bob Crow looked a fairly sympathetic figure to me. Far more intelligent and urbane than the ghastly donkey Scargill who did his members nothing but harm and was a godsend to Mrs Thatcher.
Did he like a drink one wonders? Was he a long-term smoker? In any case fronting for a trade union is a stressful job and the poor guy died young.
These people aren't very left-wing. Union members en masse won't stand for it. They are materialists, not ideologues.
|
>>
>> These people aren't very left-wing. Union members en masse won't stand for it. They are
>> materialists, not ideologues.
>>
Union leaders have mostly been capitalists at heart, whatever they might publicly claim otherwise. Their main aim is to advance the interests of their own members and not for the greater good of the working class in general. Hence the obsession they had with wage differentials, the TGWU would get a much needed pay rise for the labourers in the plant and the engineering union would immediately call their members out to restore differential and spark the inflationary cycle that would put the unskilled workers back where they were before. When I worked as an Ink Mixer back in the seventies, NATSOPA and the GMWU who were the two main unions in the factory hated each other's guts and were constantly at war.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 19:26
|
Much as I totally disagree with Zero (as usual when it comes to politics and real life world), I just googled and found out that a tube driver will get paid £52k plus perks by 2015.
That is a hell of a lot of money in my book for driving a train along a track. Not sure how it compares to your normal train drivers though.
But a common feeling on here is that everyone gets paid too much apart from people on here??
|
Not sure how it compares to your normal train drivers though.
>>
>>
From my understanding it's about par with train drivers. Depends on all sorts of things of course. location, company O/T etc.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 21:28
|
"a tube driver will get paid £52k plus perks by 2015"
Terrible isn't it? Forward, stop, open door, close door and repeat. They've never even knocked any cyclist over.
|
I think fully trained Metrolink drivers (Manchester tram) get around £30,000. They have to drive the trams on the road and in my book being a tram driver is probably harder than being a tube driver.
Then we have the poor bus drivers who have to drive in horrible city traffic and deal with bad passengers. I suspect London is far worse than Manchester in that respect.
Last edited by: RattleandSmoke on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 21:46
|
>> I think fully trained Metrolink drivers (Manchester tram) get around £30,000.
In terms of the lifestyle it buys that's no less than and probably better than £50k in London.
|
But other London workers don't paid that much more, if I worked in Tesco in the West End would I get £12 an hour? I doubt it.
In central and south Manchester at least £30k will buy you very little, a friend of mines neighbours has just sold a 2 bedroom house on a rough council estate for £180,000, it was on the market for less than a week.
A year ago I was saying my parents would be lucky to get £200k for their house, well now it is more like £250k+ prices have just gone mad here, and £30k for a tram driver seems a raw deal compared to how much they get in London. I will accept that people in London have to commute a lot further though as most of central London is now impossible to live in for most ordinary people. I not saying London wages should be the same, I accept that living costs are higher and wages should reflect that but £52,000 seems a hell of a lot. It is a hell of a lot when us tax payers are paying their wages unlike systems like the Metrolink which operate on a self funded basis, e.g all the drivers wages are paid for by the passengers.
The issue is why are the wages for tube drivers so high? I suppose it cannot be nice driving in tunnels all day long and it must be quite stressful, but then so is being a £25k a year nurse in an A&E department.
|
>> Terrible isn't it? Forward, stop, open door, close door and repeat. They've never even knocked
>> any cyclist over.
>>
They do however tend to knock a sizeable number of pedestrians over, albeit most of them on a voluntary basis. If you'd like to volunteer for dealing with that sort of thing on a fairly regular basis, step forward.
I find it somewhat ironic that one of the contributory factors to train drivers receiving a decent wage is that they are treated as more essential workers than the traditional nurses, doctors and teachers; because the same people who vilify railwaymen for getting that wage are the same ones who play hell at the railway companies for not settling the disputes before strike action occurred.
|
|
My late father-in-law was a steam fireman then driver, followed by driving Merseyrail electric trains. The drivers were always the creme de la creme railway employees, both in status and pay.
|
>> My late father-in-law was a steam fireman then driver, followed by driving Merseyrail electric trains.
>> The drivers were always the creme de la creme railway employees, both in status and
>> pay.
My Father was an LNER driver, both steam, diesel, freight, passenger trains, the royal train and latterly electric express.
His pay was crap and I never saw him because he had to work 7 days a week to make ends meet.
Status they had, pay they didnt. Renumeration for drivers started to change in the 80s
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 22:13
|
|
Well Zero, he never complained and left a sizeable estate to his only child after his death.....
|
|
Didn't get that driving trains I can assure you
|
|
I can equally assure you that it was...:-) :-) His leisure time was spent almost exclusively on his hobby of gardening.
|
>> I can equally assure you that it was...:-) :-) His leisure time was spent almost
>> exclusively on his hobby of gardening.
I can assure you that it wasn't, I can even produce a 1972 train drivers wage packet to prove otherwise.
You wanna go there and argue this one with me?
|
My paternal grandfather never earned more than a fiver a week, yet when he died, more than 55 years ago, he left a fully paid for detached bungalow in Abbey Wood and enough cash to leave his 4 grandchildren 500 quid apiece - a sizeable lump in those days. (Enough for my first "proper" car, an Austin A35 + a bit left over).
I guess my father and his sister had a bit too!
Last edited by: Illegitimi non carborundum on Wed 12 Mar 14 at 18:40
|
>>I can assure you that it wasn't, I can even produce a 1972 train drivers wage packet to prove otherwise. >>
I'm talking about a period up to 10 years prior to that.
Please don't try and make out I don't know what I'm talking about - it is my late father-in-law I'm referring to and I still have the copy of his will.
|
|
And Zero is talking about his father. Perhaps you are both correct for your own families and are arguing at cross purposes.
|
>> >>I can assure you that it wasn't, I can even produce a 1972 train drivers
>> wage packet to prove otherwise. >>
>>
>> I'm talking about a period up to 10 years prior to that.
When wages were even worse
>> Please don't try and make out I don't know what I'm talking about - it
>> is my late father-in-law I'm referring to and I still have the copy of his
>> will.
Well clearly you can't comprehend the written word very well
Go back and find where I said your FiL didn't leave a large wedge.
I merely said he didn't accumulate it on a train drivers wage. You said they were well paid
And in that respect I confirm you don't know what you are talking about
|
>> I merely said he didn't accumulate it on a train drivers wage. You said they
>> were well paid
>> And in that respect I confirm you don't know what you are talking about
>>
>>
FFS they were at different times and in different parts of the country. You've no way of knowing what life story or good fortune in home ownership etc enabled Stu's FIL to accumulate.
My great Uncle worked down the mines and bought a shop and enough local property to be well known as a landlord. I met somebody on a training course 10yrs ago who came from village he's lived/bought in. Turned out her in laws bought land for their house from my Gt Uncle.
|
>>
>> >> I merely said he didn't accumulate it on a train drivers wage. You said
>> they
>> >> were well paid
>> >> And in that respect I confirm you don't know what you are talking about
>>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>> FFS they were at different times and in different parts of the country. You've no
>> way of knowing what life story or good fortune in home ownership etc enabled Stu's
>> FIL to accumulate.
FFS my father was a train driver from 1949 so the times
Were the same and FFS there
Was a national wage agreement so FFS get your facts right
>> My great Uncle worked down the mines
Miners got paid more and got free coal so what's that got to do with it
>>
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 14 Mar 14 at 19:05
|
>> FFS my father was a train driver from 1949 so the times
>> Were the same and FFS there
>> Was a national wage agreement so FFS get your facts right
Not to pour petrol on the fire, a genuine question, you knew how much you dad got paid throughout his career and even before you were born (assuming you aren't 65) ?
|
|
All sorts of ways people made fortunes. I know of a tale of someone buying army surplus at the end of WW2 and selling it.... made a small fortune (actually quite large)... was wealthy for years. Married someone younger and she disappeared with the money.
|
I found his stash of wage slips when he died. I also know in 1963 he had to sell the car to pay for the christmas dinner, I also know all the times I didn't see him because he had to work overtime, I also know all the things I couldn't have because of the cost, I also know my mother had to work full time on piece work to make end meet.
His last wage packet in 1972 was 32 quid for the week (inc overtime) I started work (admittedly in the computer business but at only 19) in 1973 at 36 quid. My uncle at Dagenham was on the Ford line pulling 47 quid a week.
Train drivers wages were not good. In the days of steam (he started as a engine cleaner at 14, fireman at 18, and driver at 21) drivers had shed loads of status but the pay was never any good.
|
|
OK thanks. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how much my parents earned, I can't say I looked into it or tbh would be that interested, but thanks anyway for the reply.
|
>>His last wage packet in 1972 was 32 quid for the week (inc overtime)
£1600pa in 1972 wasn't a crap wage.
Pretty sure my old man was on about £1400pa as an HEO in the civil service back then from an old diary of his I saw (junior managerial grade, perhaps overseeing an office of 4 or 5 grunts).
|
|
I think the average wage in in 1972 was nearer two grand. I doubt a 19year old earned more than an HEO.
|
www.measuringworth.com/datasets/ukearncpi/
Nominal earnings suggests it went from around £1000 to £1500 between 1970 and 1973 suggesting some funky inflation (2012 data around £25k)
I saw another page that suggested around 2 grand for 1972 but same data stack also suggested it was around £37k at 2012 money so no idea what average that was looking at.
|
>> www.measuringworth.com/datasets/ukearncpi/
>>
>> Nominal earnings suggests it went from around £1000 to £1500 between 1970 and 1973 suggesting
>> some funky inflation (2012 data around £25k)
>>
>> I saw another page that suggested around 2 grand for 1972 but same data stack
>> also suggested it was around £37k at 2012 money so no idea what average that
>> was looking at.
I can only go by what I was earning. At 16 I got 10 quid a week winding transformers (Peace work) then went to apprenticeship at 8 quid a week, at 19 I got 22 quid a week building photo me machines, and at the same age jumped to 36 quid a week in another job, turning down an "improvers" role at BT for 30 quid a week.
|
|
Yeah IT was overpaid even then ;-)
|
|
Why do you think I grabbed it!
|
>> 10 quid a week winding transformers (Peace work)
With you? Peace is putting it a bit strongly. You must mean 'piece'.
Sorry if this seems you know, a bit whassername. I just can't help it. Eagle eye, relentless passion to explain carp.
I seem to remember that piecework made it easy to exploit workers by adjusting the required output per hour. I seem to remember that when I was a prole my senior colleagues complained about it. Of course hypocritical trade union leaders from shop steward upwards did what they could to counter the bosses, often quite successfully.
But in the end the owners or equivalent win. Stands to reason innit?
I love this country. It could be better but it could be worse.
|
>> £1600pa in 1972 wasn't a crap wage.
>>
>> Pretty sure my old man was on about £1400pa as an HEO in the civil
>> service back then from an old diary of his I saw (junior managerial grade, perhaps
>> overseeing an office of 4 or 5 grunts).
At same time the start point for higher rate tax was in region of £5k pa, one hundred per week. That bought you a decent lifestyle of a house in developments such as Tranmere Park in outer Leeds and foreign holidays.
An HEO today would be in region of £30 - £35k in Londonbut with a staff charge of 50-70. Prior to redundancy I was offered a post in next grade, SEO, with a staff charge of 200. Salary, in Birmingham, was under £40k.
|
Z
As you fine know I simply sought to demonstrate that circumstances in working/middle class occupations vary and that, without getting involved in detail, some people's luck/opportunity bettered that of others.
My own Father was a sales manager in right place/time around 1960 to be part of a partnership that acquired rights to import into UK textile dyes and chemicals from a major French producer.
Twenty five years later he was in right place again to sell out to their French principals and ICI.
A few months/people the other way and he'd have been a wage slave to 65 and lost all or a big chunk of his pension when the old company went belly up in late eighties.
|
>> Z
>>
>> As you fine know I simply sought to demonstrate that circumstances in working/middle class occupations
>> vary and that, without getting involved in detail, some people's luck/opportunity bettered that of others.
And it missed the point. Didn't dispute he left a wedge - The point was that Train drivers were not well paid. Why does no-one read the thread of posts properly?
Last edited by: Zero on Fri 14 Mar 14 at 21:43
|
>> And it missed the point. Didn't dispute he left a wedge - The point was
>> that Train drivers were not well paid. Why does no-one read the thread of posts
>> properly?
But you said on Wednesday 'Didn't get that driving trains I can assure you'.
I've no way of knowing truth of either Stu's FIL or your Dad's earnings. My point was simply that even with all other things exactly equal luck, location and circumstance make a vast difference to where you fetch up at retirement or death.
|
>> >> And it missed the point. Didn't dispute he left a wedge - The point
>> was
>> >> that Train drivers were not well paid. Why does no-one read the thread of
>> posts
>> >> properly?
>>
>> But you said on Wednesday 'Didn't get that driving trains I can assure you'.
>>
>> I've no way of knowing truth of either Stu's FIL or your Dad's earnings. My
>> point was simply that even with all other things exactly equal luck, location and circumstance
>> make a vast difference to where you fetch up at retirement or death.
Not if the only financial input is train drivers wages. I though that was a perfectly clear statement.
|
|
I did which is why I wondered if you were arguing personal perspectives that were both valid. I more recent times you could accumulate wealth through 'carpet bagging' for example. Not anymore but I have relatives who did well out of that.
|
>> Well Zero, he never complained and left a sizeable estate to his only child after
>> his death.....
They never caught the driver the great train robbers employed. Where was your dad 8/6/63?
;>)
|
Good post R O'R.
And I well remember the kind words said in my ear when as a welder and later as a panel beater I didn't want to join any union - which the two main unions involved took as me taking sides against both. Like New York gang warfare, it was.
|
>> >> Nope. not the case,
>>
>> Yes the case.
>>
>> www.islington.gov.uk/services/housing/counciltenantsandleaseholders/your-tenancy/tenancy-services/Pages/succession-of-tenancy.aspx
Not the case
Quote
You can only inherit the tenancy if the council approves your claim to succeed to the tenancy.
Quote
There can only be one succession of a secure tenancy.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 12 Mar 14 at 12:42
|
>>Quote
>>You can only inherit the tenancy if the council approves your claim to succeed to the tenancy.
Succession is a statutory right. The Council is statutorily required to approve your claim if you qualify. As you note, a previous succession would mean the Council would not approve it. It appears that in this case the tenancy is in the wife's name, and therefore the children would be eligible.
|
I'm not sure how much this matters, but....
Succession (once) seems to be a right if you pass the eligibility tests which are more than simply closest relative. However, you can be forced to move to another property that is deemed more suitable.
So, its true that succession more or less exists but it is subject to qualification, which is not quite what is normally regarded [at least by me] as inheritance.
Especially since it is also subject to potential replacement with more suitable accommodation.
Nonetheless the family clearly have more rights than none.
Who was it who said (paraphrased); A difference which makes no difference is no difference at all?
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 12 Mar 14 at 17:14
|
>> >>Quote
>>
>> >>You can only inherit the tenancy if the council approves your claim to succeed to
>> the tenancy.
>>
>> Succession is a statutory right. The Council is statutorily required to approve your claim if
>> you qualify.
Not according to that information you supplied.
|
>> Not according to that information you supplied.
I'm struggling to see your argument here Z. Provided you meet the criteria to succeed the Council must approve.
Even if tenancy were in Crow's name then MM's link says his kids or his partner are entitled to succeed.
|
>> >> Not according to that information you supplied.
>>
>> I'm struggling to see your argument here Z. Provided you meet the criteria to succeed
>> the Council must approve.
Where does it say must approve?
I can however see lots of references to consider your claim but nowhere does it say that they have to approve.
Last edited by: Zero on Wed 12 Mar 14 at 20:33
|
>> I don't think that's in good taste Pat. In any case, he has a widow
>> and four young children who will continue to live there. Indeed the children can 'inherit'
>> the lease if they continue to live there.
>>
Yes, one succession of tenancy at 'low' rent is permitted.
|
>> he described himself as a communist socialist, and his philosophy was "Each according to
>> his needs".
>>From someone earning 145k and depriving a needy family of a council house that comes
>>across as rank hypocrisy.
Agreed.
One may admire the way he did his job since seemingly he did well by his members.
But one surely cannot admire the man; a hypocrite, insisting he deserved his salary albeit it apparently beyond his needs, taking a council house despite appearances suggesting he didn't need it, and spending at least some of his money on expensive luxury holidays and cars.
Now I don't begrudge him any of that, or anything else, good luck to the bloke; but then I don't set myself up as believing in holier than thou economic ideals. Regarding him as anything other than an ambitious capitalist who did well at his job is somewhere between naive and puerile.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 11 Mar 14 at 21:54
|
I would guess that he was actually very rarely home so whether it was a council house or a castle, he probably spent more time in hotel rooms.
I can't quite understand the argument that if you have a good wage you shouldn't be in a council house. I am not houseproud - if I earned that money I would spend the majority on cars and holidays and sod the house!
But at least he was giving the council rent for it, so income, and it means that there will still be one council house that hasn't been bought up and not replaced with affordable housing.
|
>>I can't quite understand the argument that if you have a good wage you shouldn't be in a council house
Whilst I would argue that point, that wasn't actually what I said/meant.
I was referring to the fact that he set himself upon a pedestal with his declarations about beliefs and behaviour, but then didn't adhere to them himself.
|
>> be in a council house. I am not houseproud - if I earned that money
>> I would spend the majority on cars and holidays and sod the house!
Social housing is subsidised and not there so one can waste money on new cars. Other people who can't afford cars can't get council houses because greedy gits are hogging them.
|
Crow's own take on the situation:
tinyurl.com/q5csnmx
|
>>
Social housing is subsidised and not there so one can waste money on new cars. Other people who can't afford cars can't get council houses because greedy gits bought up all the housing stock and then line their own pockets as the councils need to pay them to house the folks who can't afford to get on the property ladder.
Fixed that for you :)
|
>> Regarding him as anything other than an ambitious capitalist who did well at his job is somewhere between naive and puerile.
What's ignorant and puerile is calling a paid union official a capitalist. Shape up FMR.
|
|
Do we think he was a socialist then? A socialist who pretty much said sod everyone else, I'll get my members driving tube trains at £60k a year. I didn't see him campaigning for any genuinley exploited workers or giving a damn about the cost of strike action. He simply exploited an opportunity to hold the UK's busines centre to ransom. Not particulary clever or socialist, just exploitative.
Last edited by: Woodster on Wed 12 Mar 14 at 19:19
|
|
Other than the dying at 52 bit, it would appear everyone agrees he did his job very well.
|
>> Other than the dying at 52 bit, it would appear everyone agrees he did his
>> job very well
He did for sure. But he was just as much a short term capitalist as the bankers he despised.
|
|
>>But he was just as much a short term capitalist as everyone else.
|
>> just as much a short term capitalist as the bankers he despised.
Oh deary me. Has the term 'capitalist' acquired a new, wider meaning?
Why are people calling this privileged wage-slave a capitalist? Did he have lucrative multiplying investments that haven't been mentioned in public?
You guys are like a bunch of hypocritical Algerian hacks in the seventies. They used to call me a capitalist because I came from a capitalist country and didn't claim to be trying to overthrow the government by violence. It certainly can't have been a reference to my style of life which was marginal and impoverished. Their expenses and salaries were far better than mine (although the local bumf was artificially expensive for me). To give the devils their due they bought me many a beer and the odd snack, although I did the same for them.
|
>> Do we think he was a socialist then? A socialist who pretty much said sod everyone else,
Doubtless would have seen himself as socialist, but that wasn't his main thing.
Time was when trade unionism and socialism, both struggling for national legal recognition as it were, were hand in hand. But once the principles of 'workers' rights', the right to collective wage bargaining, to strike etc., were established, something like a century ago, the movements were able to diverge. Thus in recent times there have been many right-wing trade unions, some even affiliated to the Conservative Party I seem to remember.
When I did hacking I was far more lefty than I am now. Back then, sixties and seventies and eighties, I was quite shocked by the selfishness of trade unions, until I had thought about it a bit and listened to the discourse of the elements I was lucky enough to meet...
There's nothing specially left wing about the working class, that's just sanctimonious workerist carp. A majority of UKIP members are (we are told) C2DEs rather than ABC1s ... or are we supposed to see UKIP as left wing?
|
>>or are we supposed to see UKIP as left wing
Do we not?
Remember the National SOCIALIST party (i.e. Nazi party) which is regarded as right wing is only regarded as right wing on account of the splendid propaganda of the left wing.
It's policies were entirely socialist; entirely aimed at the man in the street.
|
It's that 'National' that makes the difference. It wasn't left wing propaganda that gave people the idea that the Nazis were right wing fascist toerags. It was the Nazis themselves who clearly thought that was a good thing to be. Nasty prats.
I agree though that there's a big fuzzy area when any totalitarian ideology is at issue. We all know that genuinely socialist movements can have a boy-scoutish, bullying side which is only a whisker away from fascism, virtually indistinguishable from it in demeanour if not in end purpose.
|
|
In the past I've worked with shop stewards who were committed socialists, National Front voters and die hard Conservatives. And the same among the members they represented. Friendships were never affected by one's political allegiances either, despite some heated arguments around election times.
|
>> www.newsbiscuit.com/2014/03/12/bob-crow-brings-heaven-out-on-strike/
>>
Only problem with that is he preferred warmer places anyway, probably went the other direction
|
In memory of Bob Crow, I’m walking to work tomorrow. It’s what he would have wanted.
What irony, he died of blocked tubes.
|
One more council house to let - Harleyman
