Posh Boys in trouble?

[handsomefortune]

darn it, i can't get your daily mirror video link to work calum da jazbo - (just the 'microsoft' advert repeatedly). i don't see that the text makes cleggers look any more moribund than usual, it just makes him look like a waste bin, (same as usual) for macaroon to dump in, excuse, hide behind. that's what cleg is 'for'. (the same as when something goes wrong, and warsi takes the rap, does the media appearances, that's what she's 'for'). messing with the constitution, and 'cleaning up' virtual life, protecting children is handy, as you don't have to necessarily do, or prove much. you can even say you've changed things for the 'better' when you haven't, which is always useful! besides the media will churn out column inches of verbage regardless!

as for the (sleb-like)? colourful large photo images accompanying the article - they appear both lavish and large, and (personally) repel me from politics, rather than draw me in...it looks more like a coup for the mirror reporter, sitting in the large, empty victorian room, with the pm Himself, teapot 'at the ready'! it's a bit 'alice in wonderland' somehow... (but not as witty).

[ahinton]

your post # 296 ahinton.

...in which I merely questioned (with tongue firmly in cheek, as I'd have assum ed was rather obvious!) whethr bullying really did come "free" at Eton (as fhg had suggested, possibly also with tongue in cheek) or whether it had to be paid for; shome mishundershtanding there, methinks...

[ahinton]

Back in its enlightened early days, Channel 4 had a programme titled "Union World", which examined and went well into the internal politics and power struggles of the labour movement; but it then dropped it, along with the channel's phone-in street service equivalent of the Beeb's "Feedback", (then under a different name iirc), on grounds of union matters being "boring" to the general viewer, and the call boxes abused.

Although I don't recall in what context, I do remember the BBC being challenged on air over not having taken up its public broadcasting duty to assume responsibility for trade union news coverage - something it no longer did on programes such as Panorama - and the Beeb stating that such matters were now dispersed under under different news items in which union matters were treated as ancillary. As a consequence, a) union news is something which only ever comes up when there's a dispute on, or the question of that evil thing the union block vote arises in relation to the election of a Labour Party leader; and, b) the general public remains ideologically in blighted ignorance of what trade unions are for, let alone their history and role within the labour movement; and it takes a certain level of political consciousness to understand why this is the case.

Whilst you are right about much of what you write here, I question the part about what trade unions are "for" and what the public perceiption might be of what they are "for"; things move on in the labour market and in trade union activities, just as they do in all other walks of life and, whilst the trade union movement obviously grew out of the labour movement (or vice versa, whichever way you might care to look at it), the value and purpose of trade unionism today, whilst not fundamentally different to that of its origins, is nevertheless quite diferent to waht it once was and it is less the harbinger of left-wing socialism than it was once considered to be.

At best, trade unions represent a balancing viewpoint and their input into the labour market can often be constructive and benefit employers and members alike, yet, as you suggest, most of us tend only to hear about trade unions when there is either a dispute or the makings of one or when something controversial or negative-sounding is afoot. Trade unions have accordingly acquired something of an image problem which has, broadly speaking, been thrust upon them externally rather than than arising as a consequence of extreme left-wingery from within, especially over the last 30 yeas or so. I remember, in my relatively early days of trade union membership, two branch secretaries evidencing the kind of right-wing stances that most people would not dream of associating with trade union members, let alone officials, but that did not seem in any way to interfere with their dedication to the Musicians' Union.

Incidentally, my only problem with that union (from which I resigned some years ago) was when I applied for life membership of it following 35 years' continuous membership (in accordance with the rules) only to be told that, in order to qualify for this privilege, members must also have attained state retirement age! - a movable and eventually to be abolished concept in the first place and one which in any event has rather less relevance in the music profession than in most others; they wouldn't accept my protest, so I parted company with it and even the fact that I had risked expulsion from grammar school by joining it cut no ice with it.