SHU COUNCIL MEETING 7th MAY 07

[Guest]

just seems to me there is no need for delgates to the shu why not get rid of the delgates three men voted into position at the agm voting papers sent to the members with the balance sheet they are returned unopened at the agm then the count could take place at the agm

the three members elected run the shu until the following agm

 

the three members must come from diffrent feds the man with most votes takes the chair

good or bad idea what do you think

 

 

Works well elsewhere.

[johno]

bruno from your postings inferring that the responsibility and example being set by the current regime is the fault of the membership and not the leader and his team. the follow on would be there is no such thing as individual responsibility. once someone is elected to a position their actions are directly attributable to those who elect the individual. this would imply that the actions of people like hitler pol pot franco lennin stalin idi amin and so were attributable to the people they slauughtered as they had been elected by some of these same people.

[THE FIFER]

bullied out alf and fifer had a lot to do with that along with mr barlow maybe fifer could tell us if he had anything to do with that as well i dont think fifer is the type to run for a lawers letter might be someone told him too!!!if so that would blow the lid on what mr barlow is capable off? come on fifer tell us!!!! you could save the shu in one move

 

 

tha fact is frank u dont even know what u are talking about, the lawyers letters were sent to all the councillors regarding the secretary going to lose her job, when the situation came up from the chairman putting this forward that's when i informed him that we all had lawyers letters on this matter, nothing to do with barlow or anything, and as far as having to do with him going off it was well after that and it was because he could get nowhere with the body of the hall, who were all blasting at him, so get ur facts right, and that's me finnished with the matter lets get on with racing pigeons,

 

[Guest]

lawers letters from who fifer and what were they implying that was wrong and who paid for the letters at the end of it all ??? as we the members never were told what the letters were about or who sent them so now we know

[Guest]

bruno from your postings inferring that the responsibility and example being set by the current regime is the fault of the membership and not the leader and his team. the follow on would be there is no such thing as individual responsibility. once someone is elected to a position their actions are directly attributable to those who elect the individual. this would imply that the actions of people like hitler pol pot franco lennin stalin idi amin and so were attributable to the people they slauughtered as they had been elected by some of these same people.

 

I think from your analogy you infer the wrong idea from my post.

 

History tells us that the people you cite weren't elected they murdered their opponents so theirs was the only party. Nor did they become tyrants overnight, they grew into that role bit by bit. The very first time the ordinary people didn't say no to their excesses, that was taken as their green light which made their next bit of growth towards despotism a lot easier, and opposition against them a lot harder.

 

Don't know how long JB was shu president for, but folk only started 'shouting' about him on this forum last year. Despite all that was said right up to the day of election in March 2007, he was elected again. So if all that was said about him was true, members elected 'a hitler pol pot franco lennin stalin idi amin' again - even although they knew of his past history, and had a choice of candidates.

[Guest]

lawers letters from who fifer and what were they implying that was wrong and who paid for the letters at the end of it all ??? as we the members never were told what the letters were about or who sent them so now we know

 

thats right frank come to think of it why were we as members not told of the contents of thwese letters ,so come on fifer enlighten us about there contents

[johno]

bruno the people i refer to have all been elected at some stage in their rule. hitler was elected as were the rest. the method of election may be questionable but they were elected. the implication of your viewpoint is that in the event of elected leaders ignoring common ideals and principles then we have no right to take issue with them as we elected them. effectively what you are proposing is that we should not expect elected officials to act with the common interest of the members in mind. you continually propose that it is not the individuals involved to blame. i would think that leaders with the interest of the membership in mind would not have the shu in the position that it is now. we are now on post 155 on this subject. this would indicate to a reasonable person that something is seriously wrong. finally i would be greatful if you would allow me to think for myself and stop attempting to make me feel inferior or ridicule my posting. i accept debate and indeed appreciate the content and views of others. i do not appreciate attempted bullying and attempted patronising from you or anyone else.

[JADE]

Why oh why is this still carrying on. From what I have seen of him, Mr Barlow has been an excellent SHU president and the union is in competent hands despite what the doom and gloom merchants say. I dont know the details of the WoS membership issue but I would doubt that his present circumstances would contravene shu rules or he would not have allowed it to occur. Having led the SHU through a difficult period in its history it would have been an injustice if he was not allowed to carry on as president in its centenary year. From what I have heard on the grapevine I doubt if he will stand again next year. What will you all find to moan about then. I could hazard a reasonable guess who the next president will be and if I am correct he will be an excellent choice.  

[Guest]

bruno the people i refer to have all been elected at some stage in their rule. hitler was elected as were the rest. the method of election may be questionable but they were elected. the implication of your viewpoint is that in the event of elected leaders ignoring common ideals and principles then we have no right to take issue with them as we elected them. effectively what you are proposing is that we should not expect elected officials to act with the common interest of the members in mind. you continually propose that it is not the individuals involved to blame. i would think that leaders with the interest of the membership in mind would not have the shu in the position that it is now. we are now on post 155 on this subject. this would indicate to a reasonable person that something is seriously wrong. finally i would be greatful if you would allow me to think for myself and stop attempting to make me feel inferior or ridicule my posting. i accept debate and indeed appreciate the content and views of others. i do not appreciate attempted bullying and attempted patronising from you or anyone else.

 

I think from your closing remarks that you have again read things into my post which aren't there and aren't intended. In the light of your continued paranoia about me, please refrain from reading or replying to any of my future posts, as this is the last reply you'll be getting from me.

 

[me]

Why oh why is this still carrying on. From what I have seen of him, Mr Barlow has been an excellent SHU president and the union is in competent hands despite what the doom and gloom merchants say. I dont know the details of the WoS membership issue but I would doubt that his present circumstances would contravene shu rules or he would not have allowed it to occur. Having led the SHU through a difficult period in its history it would have been an injustice if he was not allowed to carry on as president in its centenary year. From what I have heard on the grapevine I doubt if he will stand again next year. What will you all find to moan about then. I could hazard a reasonable guess who the next president will be and if I am correct he will be an excellent choice.  

 

 

Who is going to be the next President then Jade?

 

[Guest]

 

thats right frank come to think of it why were we as members not told of the contents of thwese letters ,so come on fifer enlighten us about there contents

 

Really part of history, Sammy, and should remain there. The letters were addressed to all Council members and reminded them of their responsibilities as employers given a membership motion at the time to remove the SHU Secretary from her post. She is a paid employee.

[me]

 

Really part of history, Sammy, and should remain there. The letters were addressed to all Council members and reminded them of their responsibilities as employers given a membership motion at the time to remove the SHU Secretary from her post. She is a paid employee.

 

 

People do get made redundant Bruno and here is the bottom line if we were being run on a proper financial footing we would not have a full time secretary, most of the year they must sit around twiddling their thumbs. More importantly there is just not enough members left to justify it and there is fewer of us every year. Its going to break eventually and no lawyers letter is going to make a blind bit of difference!

 

[frank-123]

if the post was made part time iam sure you have to offer it to the person in the fulltime position

[harky]

if the post was made part time iam sure you have to offer it to the person in the fulltime position

 

dont think it would make much difference bart even if they done it for nothin you would still get people complaining .its the only thing there good at and enjoy makes them feel superior if there was nothin for them to complain about then they would be lost .sad it is realy sad

[ALF]

Why oh why is this still carrying on. From what I have seen of him, Mr Barlow has been an excellent SHU president and the union is in competent hands despite what the doom and gloom merchants say. I dont know the details of the WoS membership issue but I would doubt that his present circumstances would contravene shu rules or he would not have allowed it to occur. Having led the SHU through a difficult period in its history it would have been an injustice if he was not allowed to carry on as president in its centenary year. From what I have heard on the grapevine I doubt if he will stand again next year. What will you all find to moan about then. I could hazard a reasonable guess who the next president will be and if I am correct he will be an excellent choice.  

 

YOU JUST SAID YOU DONT KNOW THE DETAILS OF THE WOS "FED" SO WHY POST ABOUT IT???

[doos r us]

she dont need to know the details only that it aint illeagle as per the rule book

[Guest TAMMY_1]

 

Really part of history, Sammy, and should remain there. The letters were addressed to all Council members and reminded them of their responsibilities as employers given a membership motion at the time to remove the SHU Secretary from her post. She is a paid employee.

 

Being a paid employee does not guarantee a job for life, I was a paid employee once.

[Guest]

 

 

People do get made redundant Bruno and here is the bottom line if we were being run on a proper financial footing we would not have a full time secretary, most of the year they must sit around twiddling their thumbs. More importantly there is just not enough members left to justify it and there is fewer of us every year. Its going to break eventually and no lawyers letter is going to make a blind bit of difference!

 

I think your post sums up the absolute garbage dished up at the time. Cut this post and that post because the workload doesn't justify it. Fine. But first you have to measure the workload and prove that the posts are redundant. And Tesco can't fire Asda's employees, and nobody can fire anyone just because they don't like them.. and then there's little trifles like unfair dismissal, employment tribunals etc. Yes, would have solved the finances and squared the books, but would have meant an £0 balance in all accounts.

[gangster]

 

Being a paid employee does not guarantee a job for life, I was a paid employee once.

 

WHEN WAS THIS THEN I WAS ONLY AWAY FOR THE DAY!!!!!!!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

[me]

 

I think your post sums up the absolute garbage dished up at the time. Cut this post and that post because the workload doesn't justify it. Fine. But first you have to measure the workload and prove that the posts are redundant. And Tesco can't fire Asda's employees, and nobody can fire anyone just because they don't like them.. and then there's little trifles like unfair dismissal, employment tribunals etc. Yes, would have solved the finances and squared the books, but would have meant an £0 balance in all accounts.

 

 

You have had quite a few Bruno daft posts in your time Bruno but this is one of the best.The office is only busy for a few months of the year that is the facts not garbage, facts and in case you ain't noticed we are losing members hand over fist.

 

The rest of your post is meaningless "garbage". Think you need a holiday Bruno.

 

Any chance of making it a long one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Guest]

 

 

You have had quite a few Bruno daft posts in your time Bruno but this is one of the best.The office is only busy for a few months of the year that is the facts not garbage, facts and in case you ain't noticed we are losing members hand over fist.

 

The rest of your post is meaningless "garbage". Think you need a holiday Bruno.

 

Any chance of making it a long one!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Part-time HQ? Staffed by numpties? Get your application in quick, that is once you've returned to the real world and brushed up big time on your social skills.

[me]

 

Part-time HQ? Staffed by numpties? Get your application in quick, that is once you've returned to the real world and brushed up big time on your social skills.

 

The office is frequently "manned" by part time employees and I have alwas found them to be pleasant and helpful I think calling them numpties is a bit much really Bruno. You have obviously never been there. The rest of your post is yet again ,I'm afraid, meaningless "garbage".

 

[Guest]

 

The office is frequently "manned" by part time employees and I have alwas found them to be pleasant and helpful I think calling them numpties is a bit much really Bruno. You have obviously never been there. The rest of your post is yet again ,I'm afraid, meaningless "garbage".

 

Of course it would be meaningless to you, you can't grasp basic facts. You can't for example tell the difference between a part-time Organisation and part time staff. On social skills, you also seem unable to grasp basic facts - that you frequently call real people worse than numpties and think nothing of it, while at the same time jump down other folks throats for similar namecalling, then go on to twist what they say - in this case attempting to apply 'numpty' from staff in an office that clearly doesn't exist to people in another one that does.

 

Take back what I said about the brush in my last post tho, its not a cosmetic job, but a full personality transplant & rewiring job that you need.

[Guest]

bruno iam sorry to say but you have scrubbed/locked posts for less that what you have writen in your last post and i think that me has the right to think and post his oppinions as well it is tru that the memember ship was over double when a full time sec was appointed and the staff level was less than is there now so simple business management shuold sugest tha if their are less indians their should be less chiefs

[Guest]

bruno iam sorry to say but you have scrubbed/locked posts for less that what you have writen in your last post and i think that me has the right to think and post his oppinions as well it is tru that the memember ship was over double when a full time sec was appointed and the staff level was less than is there now so simple business management shuold sugest tha if their are less indians their should be less chiefs

 

I do not dispute anyones right to think and post opinions. What I dispute is the right others feel that they have to have a go at me (and others) and twist the meaning of what is said to their own ends.

 

They, and others like yourself in this post, also expect me to turn the other cheek. Well truly sorry Frank,  Pots, Kettles and Heat in the Kitchen all spring to mind and Mr Nice Guy doesn't get out to play on Tuesdays.

 

On the last part of your post - please remember that we were talking here about the position a number of years ago, and not the current day. Clearly, some folk appear hung up on the past, and, IMHO, it is hi time the past was consigned to where it belongs, the past.