So it begins...

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › So it begins...

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 30

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959018 16-Feb-2018 11:03

tdgeek:

Good summary, there is no difference apart from Unions being an official organisation, so thats more transparent than deals behind closed doors. However, unions are yesterdays news thanks to the Employment Contracts Act. The left is more centre than its ever been, the right the same.

Umm, say what now? Under this Labour government, the unions have had more say about how employers manage their staff than they have for a long time. The Unions are alive and well (sadly).

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959025 16-Feb-2018 11:07

6FIEND:

No union endorsement required.

Thanks, well that's pretty clear then.

I need to find this article, it was saying she was provisionally leader subject to a second vote and approval by the Union. It was consistent with my understanding of the rules, which I am unsure how I could have had wrong for so long. I wonder where I got the original information from?

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959028 16-Feb-2018 11:08

networkn:

tdgeek:

I did a google and never saw that I just saw the 20% vote they have, MP's have 40%, cant recall the other. Party members I think it was

Unions are an organisation, so as they are closely aligned it makes sense to have a say, so they have a small say. On the National side, businesses and National are also joined at the hip, but there is no business "movement" so to speak. But they certainly do have a big influence you can guarantee that, but you wont read about it in the daily news

I don't agree with your assessment, however the fact remains that a leader can not be a leader of the Labour party without the unions. Even if it's 20% that is far more than "a little say". If I cut your pay by 20% for example, or increased your rent, I don't think you'd say you had a little pay cut :-)

Depends if my salary was 6 figures or 7!

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959035 16-Feb-2018 11:10

tdgeek:

networkn:

tdgeek:

I did a google and never saw that I just saw the 20% vote they have, MP's have 40%, cant recall the other. Party members I think it was

Unions are an organisation, so as they are closely aligned it makes sense to have a say, so they have a small say. On the National side, businesses and National are also joined at the hip, but there is no business "movement" so to speak. But they certainly do have a big influence you can guarantee that, but you wont read about it in the daily news

I don't agree with your assessment, however the fact remains that a leader can not be a leader of the Labour party without the unions. Even if it's 20% that is far more than "a little say". If I cut your pay by 20% for example, or increased your rent, I don't think you'd say you had a little pay cut :-)

Depends if my salary was 6 figures or 7!

No, it wouldn't. 20% is 20%. If you were talking in actual dollar amounts that would be true. You'd either consider 20% a significant amount or you wouldn't. Most people would.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959041 16-Feb-2018 11:14

networkn:

tdgeek:

Good summary, there is no difference apart from Unions being an official organisation, so thats more transparent than deals behind closed doors. However, unions are yesterdays news thanks to the Employment Contracts Act. The left is more centre than its ever been, the right the same.

Umm, say what now? Under this Labour government, the unions have had more say about how employers manage their staff than they have for a long time. The Unions are alive and well (sadly).

More say than what? Im not aware of any graph of union intervention than any other time. Off course they will put their oar in when it comes to labour issues, that what Labour does as well, as they have pro labour (worker) policies, that's why unions are aligned with them. The same worked in reverse when National diluted the unions involvement and moved that along so the businesses had more clout in labour issues, re ECA. Same thing, opposite policies, opposite agendas. As to alive and well, I hardly hear about unions at all these days.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959045 16-Feb-2018 11:18

networkn:

tdgeek:

networkn:

tdgeek:

I did a google and never saw that I just saw the 20% vote they have, MP's have 40%, cant recall the other. Party members I think it was

Unions are an organisation, so as they are closely aligned it makes sense to have a say, so they have a small say. On the National side, businesses and National are also joined at the hip, but there is no business "movement" so to speak. But they certainly do have a big influence you can guarantee that, but you wont read about it in the daily news

I don't agree with your assessment, however the fact remains that a leader can not be a leader of the Labour party without the unions. Even if it's 20% that is far more than "a little say". If I cut your pay by 20% for example, or increased your rent, I don't think you'd say you had a little pay cut :-)

Depends if my salary was 6 figures or 7!

No, it wouldn't. 20% is 20%. If you were talking in actual dollar amounts that would be true. You'd either consider 20% a significant amount or you wouldn't. Most people would.

If I was paid 7 figures I wouldn't care, that's just me. 20% is a minority, I'd even class it as a significant minority share. But in terms of a vote, its only 1/5 of votes. An input, but not control

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

6FIEND

774 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 589
Inactive user

#1959047 16-Feb-2018 11:19

networkn:

6FIEND:

No union endorsement required.

Thanks, well that's pretty clear then.

I need to find this article, it was saying she was provisionally leader subject to a second vote and approval by the Union. It was consistent with my understanding of the rules, which I am unsure how I could have had wrong for so long. I wonder where I got the original information from?

I wonder if the article was referring to the "vote of confidence" that all Labour leaders need to win that has to be held within 3 months of a General Election? The only thing that would be incorrect then is that the confidence vote is Caucus only - not a full caucus/membership/affiliate affair.

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959048 16-Feb-2018 11:26

Bare news day on this topic, Stuff is empty. Newshub has Twyford picking JC. So, probably not much will happen for a few days, the runners will be canvassing their MP's. One might drop out before voting day

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959049 16-Feb-2018 11:32

6FIEND:

networkn:

6FIEND:

No union endorsement required.

Thanks, well that's pretty clear then.

I need to find this article, it was saying she was provisionally leader subject to a second vote and approval by the Union. It was consistent with my understanding of the rules, which I am unsure how I could have had wrong for so long. I wonder where I got the original information from?

I wonder if the article was referring to the "vote of confidence" that all Labour leaders need to win that has to be held within 3 months of a General Election? The only thing that would be incorrect then is that the confidence vote is Caucus only - not a full caucus/membership/affiliate affair.

I recall the part about within 3 months, but I am certain I heard about it requiring final approval from the union. I am wondering if it wasn't an article, but perhaps something in the news. What I recall was something about having to reassure the unions that she wouldn't be going against their goals or something. It was a while ago now, I am a little foggy on the details, and possibly the finer details aren't correct.

However, it would seem I am incorrect, based on whatever information I had.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18777 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12769

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1959059 16-Feb-2018 11:54

networkn:

That is incorrect. They cannot elect a new leader permamently without the unions approval. Which accounts for a specific % of the total vote count.

Labour needs to break away from this arrangement. A Government should not have an arrangement with any one lobby group. I am not anti Unions as such I am anti these arrangements and would be equally opposed to church groups, employer groups or sports groups have a relationship in this manner.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959063 16-Feb-2018 11:59

MikeB4:

networkn:

That is incorrect. They cannot elect a new leader permamently without the unions approval. Which accounts for a specific % of the total vote count.

Labour needs to break away from this arrangement. A Government should not have an arrangement with any one lobby group. I am not anti Unions as such I am anti these arrangements and would be equally opposed to church groups, employer groups or sports groups have a relationship in this manner.

Well, I am partially incorrect in what I claimed. they get 20% of the say, they don't have final approval as I had thought.

However, if Labour was to remove the union vote, I think Labour would cease to exist or become a minority party ala the Greens, as the basis for Labours existence is the Unions. I believe it would fracture the membership and a second party would be started with the same requirements as currently exist under Labour.

Samsung

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).

tdgeek

30048 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 9455

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959067 16-Feb-2018 12:03

The unions aren't the basis, Labour is the workers party, National is the businesses party, so both sides have their two key sectors of the population. If Labour moved away from being the workers party, then it would be a party the doesn't support workers or businesses, now that would be weird. The unions are just more obvious than the relationship that National has with businesses, other than that its just the same

networkn

Networkn
32884 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15483

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1959070 16-Feb-2018 12:13

"The New Zealand Labour Party was formed in 1916 by various socialist parties and trade unions. It is thus the country's oldest political party still in existence"

Sounds like they were pretty much the foundation.

Do you honestly believe that if Labour dropped support for unions, they could continue to exist?

GV27

5979 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4212

#1959073 16-Feb-2018 12:16

tdgeek:

The unions aren't the basis, Labour is the workers party, National is the businesses party, so both sides have their two key sectors of the population. If Labour moved away from being the workers party, then it would be a party the doesn't support workers or businesses, now that would be weird. The unions are just more obvious than the relationship that National has with businesses, other than that its just the same

This would be correct if, say, the Business Roundtable directly voted on who the National Party leader was. It is not the same.

Rikkitic

Awrrr
19086 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 16356

Lifetime subscriber

#1959075 16-Feb-2018 12:19

networkn:

Do you honestly believe that if Labour dropped support for unions, they could continue to exist?

Another way of looking at that might be where else could the unions go? They would probably stick with Labour regardless of what it did.

Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | ... | 30