jimbaerselman
New member
I understand the point of view of the employees who choose to remain. They feel that the terms of service are poor for the job they do - especially when those have been changed from when they joined.
The market place doesn't seem to agree. A 10% - 15% loss rate over the first two years would be seen as very good in the private sector. I don't know about the public sector. But since MCA appear to have no difficulty recruiting to replace these losses, it looks as though the terms of service are set roughly right. Yes, there's a 'lost training effort' cost. There always is in every field of employment.
It's worth bearing in mind that any firm/employer whose industrial relations are seen as bad (strikes) will ultimately have more difficulty recruiting. Their cost of labour will then increase. In the private sector this tendency will be limited by competition - no point in putting the firm out of business.
In the public sector there's no such natural check, so it will always pay a powerful union to rattle the cage, even if that destroys relations, since then more cash will to be paid to recruit new staff. Union members will gain. Tax payers will suffer. Eventually, customers will also suffer due to worse relations between management and staff. Witness the lack of initiative and co-operation by BA junior staff in trying to solve BA's terminal 5 problems (I know, private sector, but strongly unionised - ex public sector!).
Ah well.
I'm sympathetic. But cynical, too. In these matters there are many manipulators around, each with their own agendas.
The market place doesn't seem to agree. A 10% - 15% loss rate over the first two years would be seen as very good in the private sector. I don't know about the public sector. But since MCA appear to have no difficulty recruiting to replace these losses, it looks as though the terms of service are set roughly right. Yes, there's a 'lost training effort' cost. There always is in every field of employment.
It's worth bearing in mind that any firm/employer whose industrial relations are seen as bad (strikes) will ultimately have more difficulty recruiting. Their cost of labour will then increase. In the private sector this tendency will be limited by competition - no point in putting the firm out of business.
In the public sector there's no such natural check, so it will always pay a powerful union to rattle the cage, even if that destroys relations, since then more cash will to be paid to recruit new staff. Union members will gain. Tax payers will suffer. Eventually, customers will also suffer due to worse relations between management and staff. Witness the lack of initiative and co-operation by BA junior staff in trying to solve BA's terminal 5 problems (I know, private sector, but strongly unionised - ex public sector!).
Ah well.
I'm sympathetic. But cynical, too. In these matters there are many manipulators around, each with their own agendas.