rep helping non union members ?

[Tman]

What's the solution...or the problem?
Is that not just an empty sound bite?

The problem is ordinary working men and women not having the terms of/conditions of employment bestowed upon them from the Heavens above. They thereby have to devise means by which those rights will in fact be conferred upon them, as they rightfully should be.
Historically, the solution has been for them to join forces, show solidarity, organise themselves into trade unions and undertake industrial action when necessary. {Hic}

Or-

Satisfactory terms and conditions aren't an automatic right, but thanks to the power of organised labour they were/can be introduced over time.

Yep, sound bite time.

[fishtank]

The problem is ordinary working men and women not having the terms of/conditions of employment bestowed upon them from the Heavens above. They thereby have to devise means by which those rights will in fact be conferred upon them, as they rightfully should be.
Historically, the solution has been for them to join forces, show solidarity, organise themselves into trade unions and undertake industrial action when neccessary

Nope.
That problem was resolved long before you were born sunshine, It's not a problem you can jump on and pretend to be fighting.
The problem for this generation is falling membership numbers and a general feeling among working class people that unions have become over political and irrelevant.

Now we've tried the old "closed shop" model and to be honest in the 21st century it isn't going to fly so I've given you the real "problem"...What's the solution?

[mbavelja]

.If you aren't part of the solution you are a part of the problem.

Is that not just an empty sound bite?

It is possibly the most childish thing I have ever seen on this forum.
Over the years I have seen colleagues deal with divorce, bereavements, arrest, miscarriage, cancer, custody battles, adoption battles, repossession - the list is endless.
To suggest that any of these people should only be entitled to a bit of friendly advice if they are up to date with their subs is so lacking in compassion that it beggars belief.
Any rep who believes that is the correct way for a trade unionist to behave needs to think again because, to paraphrase - you ain't no trade unionist bruv.

[jetblack]

Nope.
That problem was resolved long before you were born sunshine, It's not a problem you can jump on and pretend to be fighting.
The problem for this generation is falling membership numbers and a general feeling among working class people that unions have become over political and irrelevant.

Now we've tried the old "closed shop" model and to be honest in the 21st century it isn't going to fly so I've given you the real "problem"...What's the solution?

Stop trying to be a smart arse. People unwilling to join the union are a part of the problem for ordinary working people. If you facilitate them, then so are you. Full stop.
I stated the problem as I see it, because you asked me to - you define the problems and solutions as you see fit, and I'll do likewise.

Over the years I have seen colleagues deal with divorce, bereavements, arrest, miscarriage, cancer, custody battles, adoption battles, repossession - the list is endless.
To suggest that any of these people should only be entitled to a bit of friendly advice if they are up to date with their subs is so lacking in compassion that it beggars belief.
Any rep who believes that is the correct way for a trade unionist to behave needs to think again because, to paraphrase - you ain't no trade unionist bruv.

If you wish to offer support re. a miscarriage to a non union member then that is up to you. Good on yer. But I don't really think that that is what the OP was about. It certainly isn't what I was talking about - so you are a bit out of order to suggest that I lack compassion.

Reps are in the employ of members. Aren't they ?

[fishtank]

People unwilling to join the union are a part of the problem for ordinary working people.

No.
They are just the symptom.
The real problem is why they are unwilling to join a union.
You wouldn't have made a very good doctor.

[jetblack]

The real problem is why they are unwilling to join a union.

With respect, that is for a different thread, and in my opinion, is off topic.

And, FYI, I would have made a great doctor - but unfortunatley I was too thick. Much like yourself. Thats why I'm currently wasting time playing semantics with people like your good self.

You say potato, I say potarto - lets call the whole thing off

[mbavelja]

If you wish to offer support re. a miscarriage to a non union member then that is up to you. Good on yer. But I don't really think that that is what the OP was about. It certainly isn't what I was talking about - so you are a bit out of order to suggest that I lack compassion.

But what if any absences related to the miscarriage (or a male colleague needing time off to support their partner) then leads to triggering a review under the Attendance Procedure or the stopping of wages?
Should the rep offer advice or simply fixate on compliance with a financial transaction?

[jetblack]

If you wish to offer support re. a miscarriage to a non union member then that is up to you. Good on yer. But I don't really think that that is what the OP was about. It certainly isn't what I was talking about - so you are a bit out of order to suggest that I lack compassion.

But what if any absences related to the miscarriage (or a male colleague needing time off to support their partner) then leads to triggering a review under the Attendance Procedure or the stopping of wages?
Should the rep offer advice or simply fixate on compliance with a financial transaction?

Why do you suggest that in such circumstances it is the rep who is fixating on "compliance" with a financial transaction ?
Because in those circumstances if the individual still isn't willing to join our union then it is well and truly that person individually, I would say, who is fixated with non compliance of a financial transaction.

My objective in the context of this thread, if I were to do myself the injustice of trying to encapsulate it, is the greater happiness for the greater number. Don't try to take the moral high ground cos you think its OK to help out anyone when they need help.
Cos then you are in danger of invoking the law of unintended consequences
Furthermore, that is not in your job description as a CWU rep.

Its nice when people come to us for help - of course it is, it makes us feel valuable and worth something. Makes us feel important. But you have to ask yourself sometimes "Am I contributing to the greater good". Help them to help themselves by all means. But don't go out of your way to help those that, by their refusal to ally themselves to their colleagues in their trades union, contribute very little to the greater good ie.our terms and conditions.
Because that doesn't make you compassionate in my view - it makes you a mug.
I'm amazed that you can't see that to be honest.

Here's another "soundbite" for you - "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"

And here, yet another - "If a fool would persist in their folly they would become wise"

That should keep the trolls going for a while

[hampshireman]

If you wish to offer support re. a miscarriage to a non union member then that is up to you. Good on yer. But I don't really think that that is what the OP was about. It certainly isn't what I was talking about - so you are a bit out of order to suggest that I lack compassion.

But what if any absences related to the miscarriage (or a male colleague needing time off to support their partner) then leads to triggering a review under the Attendance Procedure or the stopping of wages?
Should the rep offer advice or simply fixate on compliance with a financial transaction?

Why do you suggest that in such circumstances it is the rep who is fixating on "compliance" with a financial transaction ?
Because in those circumstances if the individual still isn't willing to join our union then it is well and truly that person individually, I would say, who is fixated with non compliance of a financial transaction.

My objective in the context of this thread, if I were to do myself the injustice of trying to encapsulate it, is the greater happiness for the greater number. Don't try to take the moral high ground cos you think its OK to help out anyone when they need help.
Cos then you are in danger of invoking the law of unintended consequences
Furthermore, that is not in your job description as a CWU rep.

Its nice when people come to us for help - of course it is, it makes us feel valuable and worth something. Makes us feel important. But you have to ask yourself sometimes "Am I contributing to the greater good". Help them to help themselves by all means. But don't go out of your way to help those that, by their refusal to ally themselves to their colleagues in their trades union, contribute very little to the greater good ie.our terms and conditions.
Because that doesn't make you compassionate in my view - it makes you a mug.
I'm amazed that you can't see that to be honest.

Here's another "soundbite" for you - "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"

And here, yet another - "If a fool would persist in their folly they would become wise"

That should keep the trolls going for a while

Can't decide whether you are mad , bad , good or indifferent. But you are entertaining

[jetblack]

If you wish to offer support re. a miscarriage to a non union member then that is up to you. Good on yer. But I don't really think that that is what the OP was about. It certainly isn't what I was talking about - so you are a bit out of order to suggest that I lack compassion.

But what if any absences related to the miscarriage (or a male colleague needing time off to support their partner) then leads to triggering a review under the Attendance Procedure or the stopping of wages?
Should the rep offer advice or simply fixate on compliance with a financial transaction?

Why do you suggest that in such circumstances it is the rep who is fixating on "compliance" with a financial transaction ?
Because in those circumstances if the individual still isn't willing to join our union then it is well and truly that person individually, I would say, who is fixated with non compliance of a financial transaction.

My objective in the context of this thread, if I were to do myself the injustice of trying to encapsulate it, is the greater happiness for the greater number. Don't try to take the moral high ground cos you think its OK to help out anyone when they need help.
Cos then you are in danger of invoking the law of unintended consequences
Furthermore, that is not in your job description as a CWU rep.

Its nice when people come to us for help - of course it is, it makes us feel valuable and worth something. Makes us feel important. But you have to ask yourself sometimes "Am I contributing to the greater good". Help them to help themselves by all means. But don't go out of your way to help those that, by their refusal to ally themselves to their colleagues in their trades union, contribute very little to the greater good ie.our terms and conditions.
Because that doesn't make you compassionate in my view - it makes you a mug.
I'm amazed that you can't see that to be honest.

Here's another "soundbite" for you - "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions"

And here, yet another - "If a fool would persist in their folly they would become wise"

That should keep the trolls going for a while

Can't decide whether you are mad , bad , good or indifferent. But you are entertaining

I'm good

edit. is there an option for all of the above ?

[UnhappyGremlin]

Fishtank is right.

I advise and support non union members.
They ask me a question, and I'll answer it.
Whilst they don't pay subs, they are expected to abide by agreements and policies, especially local.
And as long as they do, I'll advise them.

But just like Fishtank, I won't represent anyone unless they pay subs.
And by doing this, in my unit, we have in excess of 90% membership.

[mbavelja]

Help them to help themselves by all means.

I don't think anyone has argued for anything else in this thread.
In some situations it may be acceptable, sometimes necessary for a rep to advise (not represent) a non-member.
To extend the hand of trade union friendship. To show a little compassion. To encourage and support. To fulfill their role as an educator.
As you have so eloquently put it - to help them help themselves.
And now, up and down the land, reps can carry on doing that with your blessing.