16bha
New member
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-24647843
Looks like Unite have been caught out by Ineos closure plans.
Looks like Unite have been caught out by Ineos closure plans.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Have Ineos called Unite's bluff?
- Thread starter 16bha
- Start date
chimneys
Well-known member
- Jun 11, 2007
- 3,589
Looks that way.
Wonder if the Unite members now out of work will turn on their champagne socialist masters who brought them out on strike?
Uncle C
Well-known member
1-0 to the guys in blue.
Beach Hut
Brighton Bhuna Boy
This is bad news all round though as it gives a mandate for petrol prices to ramp up.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,294
i dont see it has anything to do with petrol prices, the dispute was around the cost to run a chemicals plant at the site. the refinery was seperate and would probably stay open (though unions threatened to call a strike their)
JJ McClure
Go Jags
I'm sure those paying their union fees are delighted that their union have just got them all fired. Unite will have to do some serious back tracking to sort this one out.
jmsc
New member
Ineos made £2 billion profit in the UK last year and $48 billion profit worldwide
last year and you critisize a union for fighting against a pay cut for it's employees?
NSC is sounding more like the Daily Mail every day. Shame on you!
last year and you critisize a union for fighting against a pay cut for it's employees?
NSC is sounding more like the Daily Mail every day. Shame on you!
Tony Towner's Fridge
Well-known member
Another ridiculously ill informed opinion with no understanding of he factual content of what is going on.
Keep reading the Morning Star and dreamig of Red Ken!
TNBA
TTF
Bevendean Hillbilly
New member
They wanted to shut it down in two years anyway. This has just given them an excuse.
Seagull on the wing
New member
Here we go again....profit is not a dirty word....if firms did'nt make a profit there'd be no firms...no firms,no jobs....the job was withdrawn because the unions wanted to blackmail the firm....unions have far too much power to say how a firm is run. Yes it is a pay cut...most people have taken a cut in real terms and nobody is forcing them to work for Ineos....they have offered reduced terms or no job...see Unite have gone back with their tail between their legs and agreed to the new terms when they found out their grandstanding has failed.
The employees as you called them are working for Ineos...not Unite.
jakarta
Well-known member
My understanding from the Sunday Times is that the petrochemical plant (not the refinery) was the issue as it loses £150 million a year.
As has been previously mentioned Ineos are a massive multinational who clearly make most of their profits overseas so why should they keep a lossmaking plant open or not try to restructure so it doesn't lose money?
I don't think Unite have thought through this at all....
As has been previously mentioned Ineos are a massive multinational who clearly make most of their profits overseas so why should they keep a lossmaking plant open or not try to restructure so it doesn't lose money?
I don't think Unite have thought through this at all....
Royal Mail will be looking on closely.
Clearly they'll not be closing the business, but they may be happier to leave the CWU outside looking in.
Clearly they'll not be closing the business, but they may be happier to leave the CWU outside looking in.
chimneys
Well-known member
- Jun 11, 2007
- 3,589
Brother JMSC
In the real world (outside of the public sector) significant loss making ventures are very rarely kept open (unless for group strategic purposes). They have to stand on their own two feet to survive and not rely upon the wealth of the parent company.
Unite has got it wrong and is now crawling back with its u turn. A shocking game of brinkmanship by the union hierachy, with its poor members as the expendable pawns. If this pans out the way its looking, I wonder if Unite can be sued by its members?
drew
Drew
Nobody said profit is a dirty word. Just that if companies make massive profits then it seems only fair that not only the shareholders are rewarded with dividends but the people that contributed to achieving those profits benefit, whether that be by improved conditions, higher pay or even profit related bonuses.
As for Ineos, I'm not sure they have called the Unite's bluff, which is an odd way of describing protecting employees. Ineos have stated that they can produce the same chemicals in the US at half the cost. I doubt they have any intention of keeping the chemical plant open and any talks will merely to be seen to be going through the motions. As I understand it they have wanted to close the plant for some time and all that has now happened is that the Union have given them the opportunity to do thsi and come out not looking like the bad guys.
chimneys
Well-known member
- Jun 11, 2007
- 3,589
I didn't think the workers in question did contribute to Ineos's profits, as this section of the plant is significantly loss making? Assuming so, is Ineos now supposed to be a charity?
drew
Drew
Whilst the closure is of the petrochemical plant is the issue here is the effect this will have on the viability of the refinery. If that goes, who is going to fill the hole in supply to the north of the UK.
drew
Drew
I was commenting generally in relation to you post about profit being a dirty word. I thought that was clear from the start of my second paragraph but apparently not!!
Apologies, it was Seagull on the Wing's post about profit.
beorhthelm
A. Virgo, Football Genius
- Jul 21, 2003
- 35,294
apparently typical salaries are 50k there, so seems the workers are being rewarded. they also fund pension to the tune of £40k per empolyee. without NI and overheads, that 6m a month, so a large chunk of the losses. obviously you can only run the plant with so many staff, so if this fix cost base doesnt want to change, the only way to remove the cost is to sack and close. shit but thats economics. the underlying story in this seems that Unite were more concerned about their official (who was also embroiled in the Falkirk seat shenanigens with Labour) than discussions about the other 1400 staff. they took their eye off the game, believing the company wasnt serious. i dont reckon you rack up billions of £ profits by playing around, you mean what you say.