Atilla
Legendary member
- Messages
- 20,772
- Likes
- 3,972
Yes I do disagree with how Thatcher dealt with it. That is the point. Could have been done much better. Must try harder.
I am not supporting the unions either. It is purely one of approach.
British managers are bunch of dollops who were taking the mickey yes along with the unions. When ever the competition came up with a new model, new engine, more reliable it was always the unions who woudln't work harder, faster or cheaper - since the beginning of time.
Look at ship-building - in order to compete they kept reducing wages. It was the same response in cars. You too are skirting the issue. Management lead, workers follow.
I like the German model (surprise surprise) where unions and banks sit on the decision making body of large enterprises.
So you like the way Thatcher dealt with the unions - close down industry and make everyone unemployed. That is called CUT YOUR NOSE OFF TO SPITE YOUR FACE!
I'm not soft, red, socialist or communist either. Just a manager. I know man management and I know project management. There is a distinction on when to crack the whip on show stoppers and went to drive men to meet targets.
As for the idea you have to start from somewhere. That somewhere is by motivating your troops first. Men don't go to work on empty stomachs. Fill stomach first then work.
If you work your men first and then fill their stomach - output is effected. Speaks volumes on emphasis to approach.
Do you not see the distinction?
The emphasis is on faith and belief one puts on the labour force will be the driving point. Failure to deliver on expectations is a pretty powerful social force.
Something that Thatcher as per evidence - saw and thought nothing of.
That's the problem with our leaders and management - bloody minded, opinionated souls. As Nigel Lawson put it - she would listen to some experimental economist instead of her cabinet or chancellor. So he resigned. After much trying he resigned. Nigel Lawson is a very clever man. It was the way you stood up to Maggie. He also did it in the interest of the UK finance industry as Government policy was creating confusion and in a muddle.
This is what people are writing about her saying how fantastic and strong she was. Unbelievable as CV would put it. Hey but she was strong! Oh all right then bless her cotton socks.
I'm always impressed by German and Japanese work ethic and how they take pride in their work. 4 to 8 times as many engineers as British ones, why is that? Because they are rewarded and their point of view respected.
Sadly LV if out of the arguement the only observation you draw is that we are still feeding next round of inflation then you miss the point.
One more point - as per pretty much most of the UK population the unions had their day and they were on their last legs imo. People were fed up. Time and sentiment was not the same as during Heath's time. (Heath loathed Thatcher too by the way - perhaps he was sexist or perhaps he just thought she wouldn't listen and got fed up and became resentful - just like your average labourer who doesn't get listened to by management. We are not that different are we?)
So there could easily have been new laws drawn up and passed through parliament. As was done. She could have listened to her cabinet as alarms were being raised by Heseltine and other members. Unions in the 80s would not have been the same as in the 70s. Nothing remains the same.
They are now talking about restoring Balance to the UK industry. By that they are talking about new manufacturing.
To your last statement - I'm not talking theoretical communism. I'm talking German and Japanese mode of operation.
Listen, cooperate and excel as a team.
