General Strike? - It'd save money!

When workers take strike action they aren't paid by their employer, their unions give them a subsidy that's meant to make sure they don't lose out financially.

BA crew were paid a whopping (*sarcasm*) £30 a day whilst on strike. RMT probably pays about the same. This works out at £210 for a 7-day working week. For a 5-day week it'd be £150, for 3 days it'd be £90. (Yes, it's easy Maths, but it's handy to see the numbers written down.)

Back in May Thisismoney said Signallers ... earn up to £65,000 a year for working a three-day week, presumably this would be for controlling somewhere really complicated or even, say, the whole of the East Coast Line, which means that very few signallers would earn that much, but using that as an example it works out at an average of, umm, 52 weeks x 3 days = 156 days. Ooh, that's a bit more than £393 a day. So, even if either LUL or TfL gave the unions £30 a day to pass on to the RMT strikers it'd save quite a bit - maybe as much as £360 a day for the highest paid employees.

So Mrs R wonders if we could persuade all the very important union bosses to get their angry workers to go on strike - especially those whose wages are paid out of the public purse? It'd save a fortune.

Worried about the impact on local, regional, and national services? No need!

If the strikes are as successful as the two day walk-out by RMT we wouldn't notice very much, because according to the BBC

London Underground said there was no disruption to services again despite a strike by maintenance workers.

The action by the Rail, Maritime and Transport (RMT) union began at 1900 BST on Wednesday, in a row over proposed changes to jobs, pay and conditions.

Transport for London (TfL) said services operated as normal despite the walkout on the Northern, Piccadilly and Jubilee lines.

The action ended at 1900 BST on Friday.

So it looks as if the trains still worked and nobody really noticed. So, imagine, if you will, if certain high-earners in the public sector took strike action. Would Leeds, for example, grind to a halt without the services of the five-a-day regional coordinator? Would Calderdale be unable to function without the Corporate Marketing Officer? Would the NHS close its' doors to sick people without the protected learning time facilitators?

....

Threadbare socialists?

There's a muddle of tales in the media and blogosphere today that, in isolation, don't seem to have a common thread, but Mrs Rigby has managed to tie some stories together.

Let's start with Old Rightie who says, None So Blind .... As Those Who NEVER See. and

The only criteria a successful society should have is to ensure those from disadvantaged backgrounds with ABILITY and INTELLIGENCE are not passed by. Sadly, Socialists believe we are all the same, except when doling out the top Labour and Union jobs.

And from there straight on to the Mail, reporting that dear Arthur Scargill, ex-President of the once wealthy and which-once-had-187,000-members-but-now-has-only-about-1,600 National Union of Miners, is is threatening to sue his own Union.

He's doing this because the NUM has reduced his benefits, and he doesn't think it's fair. He's doing it because he's losing ... ... around £5,000 a year ... in 'perks', and reckons the Union is breaking a contractually binding obligation to keep his house nice and warm in winter.

Although he retired in 2002 Mr Scargill retains the post of "honorary president" of the Union. He's fortunate to have the use of three-bedroom flat luxury apartment at the Barbican in London - which costs the Union around £33,000 a year in rent and running costs. Mr Scargill's own home is a bungalow near Barnsley - a bungalow that's called a cottage and looks, to Mrs Rigby, very much like a big house (picture Mail)

Mrs Rigby wondered why the NUM might have made this decision now, especially as their membership (and income) must have fallen quite considerably over the years because there's so little mining in Britain. So she went to have a look at that Certification Officer site to see if she could find out a bit more.

Here's an example, which was chosen at random :-

North Staffs Federation of NUM has just one member - according to their 2009 return to the The Certification Officer. This branch of the NUM has, according to the return, zero income from subscriptions, zero income from members, but £7,500 from 'other sources' - listed as "monies received from solicitors for use of office costs and staff". Administrative costs are £8,914 - the breakdown is, to Mrs R's eyes, peculiar but it seems that the branch is being kept open to pay the wages and National Insurance contributions of one 'secretary' - and that's it. This individual is paid a wage, but doesn't seem to pay a Union Subscription.

Try as she might, and despite wading through the tortuous website that is NUM.org, Mrs R can find no indication of what an individual mineworker might pay to be a member of this union. However, according to the to 2009 NUM returns there were indeed a mere 1,611 members, with income from 'contributions and subscriptions' of £162,325.00 - which suggests that each active, paying, member pays about £100 a year.

The union does have other assets and receives investment income, which has reduced due to low interest rates and, presumably, the recession. But to simplify things let's imagine the NUM only uses membership fees ... to pay Mr Scargill's fuel bills would take the full subscription payments of 50 members, with another 330 subscriptions paying for his London flat luxury apartment. Which means that 385 people - almost 25% of the fee-paying members of the NUM - are paying their dues to ensure there is £38,000 a year available to maintain Mr Scargill's two-homes lifestyle and to keep him warm and cosy. That, Mrs R needs to remind you, is in addition to any pension/salary he may also be receiving, from the union.

Another 89 members' dues are needed to pay the wages of the single North Staffs NUM Federation employee - a 'wage' that equates to about a quarter of Mr Scargill's 'expenses' and/or 'perks'.

That's nice, don't you think? Don't you think all those NUM members are pleased to see their money being used so wisely?

Looking at the rest of the balance sheets it suggests that between 2007 and 2008 the NUM took quite a hit financially, with more going out than coming in - and so there was less money at the end of the year than at the beginning. Hardly surprising really, when you think about it, and hardly surprising that they're trying to take steps to cut their spending and balance the books.

Let's change tack, and quickly whizz over to the current issues with "Unite" - the Union chosen by many of British Airways' cabin crew - and staying with the Mail which reports that

Britain's best-paid flight crews – with the most senior staff earning up to £56,000 a year – are questioning the wisdom of signing up to a ... summer of strikes

because

'Many ... simply can't afford to go out on strike

Mrs R recalls, back in April, that Unite imposed a compulsory fund-raising levy on its branches, aiming to collect £700,000 towards a strike fund. At the time the union was 'paying' striking staff the grand sum of £30 a day - £150 for five days, which would not cover living costs for most people and is less minimum wage ... which in itself generates all sorts of state handouts because it isn't enough to live on. It's also almost exactly half as much as Mr Scargill gets, or was getting, in 'perks'.

Another Mail article suggests that BA has won the battle, that staff are demoralised and "Willy Walsh has won". If this is true it's possible that BA staff could have realised they were being taken for mugs by their union bosses - one of whom tweeted the proceedings of Acas arbitration discussion, whilst another who earns £122,000-a-year (courtesy of union members) decided to go off on holiday - using EasyJet.

It's also possible that some of the BA staff recall the 'striking' 1970s. Mrs R's blog isn't the place to discuss the rights and wrongs of these 'famous' strikes - but will say that the industrial action overseen, and seemingly encouraged, by Mr Scargill caused a lot of heartache, upset and discomfort for many, many, working-class people who had no dispute with their own employers and who were themselves struggling to make ends meet at a time of rising prices and recession.

Mrs R hasn't a clue if anybody predicted that the strikes, which included a no-maintenance agreement that extended to not pumping water out of mines, would result in mine-closures and almost all Britain's coal being imported - but that's what happened and as a result whole towns and communities suffered for very many years, and we now pay miners in other countries to extract the coal that is used to make our electricity. The people who weren't hurt too much by those strikes were the union officials, safe with their subscription-funded salaries and nicely useful 'perks' which, it appears, at least one very important ex-union official continues to enjoy - even in retirement.

So, let's imagine for a moment what would happen if, as a result of ongoing strike action, BA were to fold. It wouldn't necessarily affect the whole country, and probably wouldn't affect whole towns and communities in the same way as mine closures did. But, if BA were to be sold abroad and the company was rebranded, restructured, and based at an airport elsewhere in the world there would be significant British job losses in a huge range of associated services. This would have a knock-on effect in local communities (reduced income for shops, clubs, small businesses etc) which could be devastating. It would affect many, many, more people than the few striking BA cabin crews but would be unlikely to touch the lives of those who are encouraging the strikers -  the few very important Unite Union officials who will continue to receive their salaries and any associated perks, because they work for the union itself.

It would seem to Mrs Rigby that going on strike at the wrong time in the modern world only seems to hurt the strikers themselves, and their friends and neighbours.

And maybe that's where a bit of education, a bit of reading, a bit of logical thought and an element of caution might just come in handy, especially when you compare Mr Scargill's current situation with that of the BA strikers - part of whose dispute with BA relates to their contractual 'perks', as does his with the NUM, hence his complaint that ...

'They agreed I should rent a local authority flat during my period in office and following my retirement that would carry on until my death. There are many people who have two homes.'

Mrs Rigby wonders if, maybe, Mr Scargill should take unilateral strike action, and withold his services as honorary president until the union capitulates. That, surely, would be the thing to do rather than resorting to using solicitors - because, after all, that's what he told/encouraged his union members to do all those years ago - and most of them only ever had one home, and their homes could have looked something like this. (Picture Sunniside Local History Society)

Socialism eh! All the same, all in it together, and all aiming for a common cause - to help ... actually, Mrs R wonders to help just who, precisely?

Is it to help the poor, downtrodden 'working man'* battle against punitive, dangerous or unfair working practices, or is it 'these days' merely to help massage over-inflated egos of a few self-styled very-important-people who see their own empires crumbling along with falling union membership?

..........

*

As an aside - Mrs Rigby wonders how many 'top' union officials are women?

....

Unite imposes £700k fund-raising levy

Mrs Rigby thought she heard this mentioned on the radio the other day, but as she wasn't listening properly she thought she might have imagined it, however the story was carried by BBC on 29th March.

It appears that Unite union is to raise £700,000, and is planning to do this by imposing a levy of approximately £230 on each branch.

The money is, according to BBC, needed to pay £60 to each of the union members who were balloted (i.e. not necessarily only those who took strike action).

BBC quotes Mr Woodley as saying:

"This is an unprecedented move and it shows that Unite is absolutely determined to give our members all the support they deserve in winning this battle against ... BA"

Yes, it is unprecedented, and Mrs Rigby thinks it's a most peculiar thing for a union to do, especially as it's been in receipt of quite a bit of public money and appeared to be fairly wealthy - see here (about Union fees) and here (government funding).

Mrs Rigby thinks Unite must, surely, have made sure they had enough in their coffers to fund strike action so quite naturally wonders why they need this additional income - and need to raise it quickly.

The Mail carries a similar story but says

A proposal for a mandatory 2 per cent levy for the next quarter to support the BA strikers was approved by the union's general executive

and goes on to say that the money would

... go on strike pay and other ways of supporting union members involved in the dispute

Okay, fair enough, but the BBC reckons it would only be enough to give the strikers £60 each. Assuming the numbers quoted by Unite are correct - 12,000 strikers - it leaves them £20,000 short and doesn't allow for any of these extras.

But the Guardian 29th March said

Unite, which is paying cabin crew £30 a day, has agreed to pay crew for the duration of their roster duty if they walked out on a long-haul shift. Its main cabin crew branch, Bassa, has incurred expenses by hiring football club premises near Heathrow as strike headquarters and leasing minibuses to drive striking crew members to picket lines around the airport.

Mrs Rigby scents a large rodent - the figures simply don't add up and who, these days, can expect to pay their household bills (including mortgage etc) on the £30 a day quoted by the Guardian?

£30 a day is less than minimum wage.

Is the union out of touch with reality?

This isn't the 1970s and these people aren't impoverished labourers - and to be honest, £30 is a bit of an insult. These BA staff are used to earning considerably more than £30 a day, more than £60 a day too and are probably used to a fairly decent standard of living and are likely to have fairly high living costs.

So, will there be a next swathe of action? Can the union afford it? Can the strikers afford it?

As an aside, Mrs Rigby doesn't, actually, like what these pictures from the Mail show. It may be that these pictures indicate that the strikers aren't necessarily 'wealthy' enough to pay for decent childcare during industrial action

Children should have no place on, or near, the picket line, but their parent(s) and/or carers must have thought it was a reasonable place to spend a day out - either that or the children had nowhere else to go.

It would be interesting to know what Social Services would say if one of the parents/carers was a smoker as well as a striker.

....

GOS on rail strikes

From here

The GOS says: ... just a thought about these rail strikes.

All my life I've been OK with the idea of strikes. It's always seemed to me that the decision not to go to work has to be one of the few great freedoms we can exercise - provided we are prepared not to get paid for it, of course. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

But I understand that next week rail staff are withdrawing their labour only between 6 and 10 in the morning, and again between 6 and 10 at night. If that's true, it stinks. That's not just exercising your democratic right to stay in bed of a morning. That's deliberately targeting innocent travellers who have done nothing to you, causing them absolutely the most inconvenience that you can - while still presumably drawing a full day's pay since 10 in the morning until 6 in the evening is 8 hours.

No doubt somebody who knows can write in and correct me if I've understood it wrong, but on the face of it that's vicious, calculating, cynical and unprincipled.

Mrs R wholeheartedly agrees, which is why she's quoted this in full - no point in duplication is there?

And thanks to The Filthy Engineer for pointing Mrs R in the right direction to read Grumpy Old Sod's thoughts.

....

Rail safety.

The RMT claims that saving money will risk safety.

Will that be the same sort of safety as caused the Potters Bar rail crash?

Is that the same sort of safety that let a car get on the line in front of a train in January this year - killing the driver? As RAIB says

The RAIB’s preliminary examination indicates that the level crossing barriers were raised as the train was approaching the crossing. There is no evidence that the actions of the motorists or the driving of the train contributed to the accident.

How about this sort of safety, maintenance safety from February 2010, relating to a "high speed derailment of one pair of wheels on train 1F45, the 14:55 hrs service from St Pancras to Sheffield, at about 15:46 hrs on 20 February 2010." when

Train services between the East Midlands and London continue to be disrupted after a train derailed in Leicestershire.

Up to 200 passengers were forced to leave the 1455 GMT London St Pancras to Sheffield service near Kibworth on Saturday evening.

'Nuff said.

....

Some strike action must be made illegal.

For these people at least. (And in Telegraph here)

Let's, first, look at how some Labour MPs have been caught out trying to fill their pockets with lobbyists' cash, in return for favours

- Patricia Hewitt, a former health secretary, who claimed she helped to obtain a key seat on a government advisory group for a client paying her £3,000 a day.

- Geoff Hoon, the former defence secretary, offered to lead delegations to ministers and told the reporter that he was looking to turn his knowledge and contacts into “something that frankly makes money”. He said he charged £3,000 a day.

- Margaret Moran, the Luton MP who was forced to pay back £22,500 in expenses, boasted that she could ring a “girls’ gang” of colleagues on behalf of clients. Among those she named were: Jacqui Smith, the former home secretary; Hazel Blears, the former communities secretary; and Harriet Harman, the deputy leader of the Labour party.

Oh, they're wriggling, of course they are. They're saying they didn't go along with the scam because they thought something was amiss - but none of these three, not one, said, "No!" then and there. They must have thought about it, wondered what they could get out of it, wondered if it might be worth it.

We know Mr Blair has made quite a lot of money, but didn't want anybody to know because it was 'sensitive'. We know that he shredded documents before leaving office. His children have Irish passports, he doesn't stay long in Britain any more - it would be quite interesting to learn where he pays his taxes, especially as he owns a rather nice house, with a tennis court - in England.

But all that's just fine - because he supports the Labour Party, so he doesn't get called rude names by the media.

And now some of the top "public servants" in the land might think it's just fine to go on strike, and walk out of parliament on Budget Day. Instead of doing what they're paid for,

Those MPs taking part will also join union chiefs on a boat trip along the Thames at Westminster

Secondary picketing is illegal in this country.

Secondary picketing
It is unlawful to picket other companies’ premises where workers are not in dispute with your employer. For example, if you are on strike you should not go to the premises of your employer’s customers to encourage their workers not to handle your employer’s goods. This is known as secondary picketing.

But, presumably, it's just fine for union activists to try to prevent Parliament working - maybe because it isn't a "company".

So Mr Serwotka, in [a] letter, dated March 16 and headed 'To all members of the PCS Parliamentary Group' [wrote]:

'Our members will be taking strike action again on Budget Day ...

'There will be picket lines (my bold) at Westminster and we would ask MPs not to cross in solidarity.

'We will also be taking a boat up the Thames past Parliament on the day which will be suitably equipped to generate media interest for our members' case.

Mr Serwotka isn't talking about demonstrating, he isn't talking about bringing something to the notice of Parliament - he's talking about picket lines at the Houses of Parliament, intended to stop MPs getting into their place of work, and as a softener he'll take them for a nice boat trip on the Thames, with reporters and TV cameras in attendance.

Is that a bribe?

Mrs Rigby honestly doesn't know the answer to that, she doesn't know if, "If you refuse to go to work I will take you for a nice boat trip instead," counts as a bribe. Maybe somebody else will know the answer to that one.

Oh, and according to the website

PCS has a highly active all party parliamentary group with over 65 members.

Ordinary people, according to DirectGov,

have the right to try to prevent or stop industrial action if the industrial action is, or is likely to be, unlawful and either:

* is likely to prevent or has prevented you from receiving goods or services
* is likely to reduce or has reduced the quality of the goods or services you get

This is called the 'citizen's right to prevent disruption'.

So we could have the bizarre situation of ordinary people demanding their MPs turn up for work, to ensure government happens!

But don't hold your breath - it won't happen, because these are Labour MPs, and everything Labour MPs do is brushed under the carpet by the media.

If any MP decides to strike on budget day it will be made very clear who they are working for, and it will not be their constituents - who elected them, and whose taxes pay both their salaries and extremely generous personal expenses, and whose taxes will pay these same MPs a 'winding up allowance' on leaving Westminster.

Mrs R wholeheartedly agrees with these MPs opinions:-

Conservative MP Mark Pritchard:

'Not content with closing Britain's airports and railways, union bosses are now colluding with Labour MPs to disrupt democracy itself.

'Any Labour MP who fails to open his or her Commons office on Wednesday should have their pay docked. This bears all the hallmarks of a co-ordinated union spring offensive against the nation.'

Eric Pickles is also right, he said,

'This could only happen in the topsy-turvy world of the Labour Party where your loyalty to the unions takes priority over serving your electorate.'

It's a great pity there are no quotes from Labour MPs who think this possible 'strike' is a disgrace.

Who'd have ever thought to wonder whether or not it is 'legal' for MPs to go on strike and halt the process of government - in Britain, in 2010.

Oh, and where's Mr Brown, the man who is Prime Minister of The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland? Is he in hiding, again?

....

World rule and a theme song?

Is this what Mr Brown meant when he talked about 'world government'?

BA strike could go global as Unite enlists support of U.S. union Teamsters

Unite leaders will today meet with one of the most powerful trade unions in the U.S. as they dramatically escalate the British Airways strike.

Unite is to hold talks with Teamsters, just one of the overseas unions to offer its support for their controversial walkout due to start in days.

The 'International Brotherhood of Teamsters' has more than 1.4million blue-collar members in the U.S. and gained notoriety when its leader Jimmy Hoffa went missing in 1975 after a meeting with a mob boss.

Unite has also enlisted unions in Germany, Spain and Italy to an international campaign of militancy that could cause chaos at airports around the world.

Union sources say action from overseas unions could make it impossible to clean, service and refuel BA planes.

This would undermine attempts by BA to keep aircraft in the skies and lead to more misery for the public, who already face massive disruption to flights over Easter.

and from here

Last night the American union said in a statement: “We stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters at Unite who are fighting for a fair contract at British Airways.”

Its involvement followed conversations between Tony Woodley, Unite’s joint general secretary, and James Hoffa **, the leader of the Teamsters.

And is this to be Unite's election theme tune?



**
James Hoffa - son of Jimmy Hoffa, who vanished in 1975 and was declared 'legally dead' in 1982.

....

Spring of discontent?

The Unions always seem to flex their muscles when Labour's in power. They've been remarkably quiet for the last few years, but it looks as if they're getting twitchy and want to show us who's really in charge of the country.

Britain poised for first national rail strike in 16 years

Easter rail travel is under threat from three industrial disputes which could halt trains in the first national rail strike for 16 years.

Signalmen, maintenance staff and supervisors are all poised to strike in disputes over job losses, pay and changes to working practices.

Knowing the dire state of the motorway network, it'll be interesting to see how quickly the whole country grinds to a halt. Do they care whose holidays they mess up?

Seems not :

Bob Crow, the general secretary of the RMT union, which has balloted thousands of signalmen and maintenance workers for a possible strike, said: “I am not Mystic Meg **, but I would not book any rail travel for the Easter period.”

As Robin Gisby, Network Rail’s director of operations, said

“I can’t live with the RMT holding the whole country to ransom. The union wants a cast-iron guarantee there will not be any compulsory redundancies. I cannot give that guarantee.”

Odd, don't you think, that none of the Union high-ups seem to have any idea what's going on in the country, have no idea what the word 'recession', 'broke' or 'running out of money' mean.

Maybe they think Mr Brown's high tax policies are for their benefit, so the money would land in their pockets, and their pockets alone. Tough luck - it doesn't work that way, not in the real world.

They should try tracking the pennies backwards, and work out where they come from. The money always starts off in the private sector, it only gets into the public sector via taxation , government fees and charges, so if the big boys who pay lots of tax leave the country, as they are, then there won't be anything to pay public sector wages with - it doesn't matter how much tax those in the public sector pay, it's only pushing the cash round in circles, it's an illusion of wealth, an illusion of prosperity.

The unions, and government, can vilify rich people as much as they want - but when they leave Britain they take their money, and their taxes, with them. All they leave behind are empty offices, empty shops and empty houses - no income from communality charges, no income from business rates, no VAT on shopping, no car tax, no fuel duty, no national insurance contributions - nothing,  zilch, zero. But the country they move to gets a little bit richer.

The Unions chaps could also take a peep at the trade figures.

Excluding oil and erratic items, the volume of exports fell by 6.0 per cent and the volume of imports fell by 1.2 per cent, compared with December.

Mrs R doesn't even pretend to be an economist, but even she realises that there's less money coming into the country than for years. Fewer exports, she thinks, means less home-grown money and could also mean that we're importing essentials, rather than making (or growing) them here which, ultimately, increases Britain's dependency on the rest of the world. And, of course, the rest of the world doesn't pay UK tax, even though Mr Brown thinks it should.

Mrs Rigby can't imagine any of the union activists will be giving charts and graphs more than a cursory glance though, they're probably too busy wondering what's happening wrt to Jordan's marital woes, or Lady Gaga's hat.

** Mystic Meg, by the way, is an astrologer from The Sun newspaper

....

PCSU plan to unleash Prescott?

Although Mrs Rigby thinks there might have been a bit of a typo and they were referring to the "forces of Hull", you'd think, wouldn't you, that they'd have waited until after the election to make a threat or two, especially as the government hasn't yet repealed the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill that limits protests around Parliament. and Generally extends to whole UK - otherwise they won't get to have their well-supported protest marches.

We'll 'unleash hell' on Tories, threaten unions as public sector is gripped by new militancy

And you think, wouldn't you, that because the Police aren't allowed to take industrial action the vitally-important-to-national-security PCSOs would be bound by the same rules.

Seems not.

· Solid support among civilian staff working for the Met Police, including 999 operators, community support officers and House of Parliament security.

Goes to show that they're no better than the rest of us and maybe, if anybody sees a PCSO chewing gum and then chucking it on the ground, any of us could issue them with a fixed penalty notice for littering.

Sauce for the goose and all that? No?

Anyhow, it looks as if, if the Tories win the next election (and the Unions seem to think it's a foregone conclusion) there might be more "public sector" strikes called by the PCSU - which might make it easier to take photos of the sights of London.

Some clouds really do have silver linings.

....

Help for Unions.

Want to know how to organise a rail strike?

Special instructions are over at Mr Eugenides' place

....

Unite - against Cadbury's chocolate.

.
In July and August members of Unite Union were involved in a consultative ballot on strike action over a pay deal, the results are now in and mean there will be a further ballot of the 12,000 workers to decide whether or not to take strike action.

A representative of Unite said,

Cadbury had agreed a deal of RPI inflation plus 0.5%, with a minimum of 2% for 2009, and ... accused the company of imposing a 0.5% increase because of falling inflation"

A Cadbury's spokesman said,

"We have said all along that we have kept to our three year pay deal and in the light of current pay freezes for all other Cadbury employees this increase is fair, particularly given current economic conditions."

Unite wants what it believes is the right thing for its' members, so wants Cadbury to keep to the exact letter of the agreement.

Mrs Rigby tends to agree with them, she agrees that promises and contracts should be honoured.

But ... and in this instance there is a fairly large BUT ... these are unsettled times. All around the country people are losing their jobs and are desperate to find work. Plenty of people who thought their jobs were safe have seen their employers close down, so they've lost a regular salary. The lucky ones have been able to find more work, the less fortunate have taken hourly paid jobs, for which they get National Minimum Wage of £5.73 an hour. Many of these jobs are part time.

Some people will do almost anything to get work, including Alex Kearns who took a place on the spare plinth in Trafalgar Square to advertise himself. He's been lucky. Many haven't, including some of Mrs Rigby's extended family who are very worried about their future and wonder whether they will ever work again, especially those past their 40th year.

People who have lost their jobs have been promised all sorts of support by central government, but when they ask for help it isn't forthcoming. There's always an excuse, a loophole of some sort, especially if they're married and their husband or wife is working for more than 16 hours a week - irrespective of their wage. It would appear that some promises can be broken.

Recently workers at a wind turbine factory staged a sit in, because they didn't want it to close. They had support from the RMT union, but after eighteen days they gave up, nothing positive came of their protest and 625 jobs were lost - a huge number for the Isle of Wight.

So Mrs Rigby would like to say to these Cadbury workers - you aren't alone in your frustration. You threatened industrial action in 2007 when Cadbury wanted to move a production plant to Poland. Everybody objected to this, including local MPs, but the reality is that if a manufacturer wants to move production to another country they will - even one like Cadbury, that has invested £40m at Bournville.

Looking around the chocolate and confectionery industry Mrs Rigby notices that Mars moved production of its Twix bars to France and Starburst to the Czech Republic - 500 jobs have been lost in Slough.

Nestlé moved production from York and now make Smarties in Germany, Black Magic in the Czech Republic, and Dairy Box in Spain - 645 jobs have been lost in York.

Kraft closed the Terry's chocolate plant - Terry's All Gold and Chocolate Oranges are now made in Sweden, Poland and Slovakia - with the loss of another 316 jobs in York.

Why do you think these firms have move their production away from their historical bases in Britain? - It's because other countries are cheaper, people are willing to work long hours for less money than here in UK, business rates are lower, taxation is lower, transport costs are lower and, in general, so is the cost of living.

She urges you to be careful, and think long and hard before you decide to take strike action because no company is tied to this country. No manufacturer can print money, nor can they exist on debt - they must make a profit otherwise there's nothing to invest in new machinery or new technology and when that happens they cease to be competitive ... and cease trading.

Mrs R urges you to do some more talking, to think carefully about why you think production line staff should be treated differently from the rest of Cadbury's employees - who have accepted the pay deal - and try to reach an agreement that is good enough for now to tide you all through the bad times, so that when the good times come there will be work for you all - and also a chance of even higher wages in the future.

If you can't reach a deal then you risk losing everything, which would be a disaster for you, your families, your town and your children's future employment prospects.

Mrs R wishes you good luck.
.