So last night I got around to reading the full version, of Ben Argo’s latest blog post. It took me twelve hours to summon the strength to read the full article after my first attempt, only reaching the first mention of American politics before feeling the need to throw my computer out of the nearest window. After reading the full post I felt that I should respond with a view supporting the public sector, and so it begins.

Dear those on strike,

Whilst I understand the reasons why you are going on strike, I want to ask you this: what do you expect to achieve out of tomorrow?

I am 99% certain that after the next couple of paragraphs it’s going to become abundantly clear you in fact do not understand why public sector workers are striking.

When I’m worked last year as student rep for the University of the West of England I felt that my feedback to the management was falling on deaf ears, and that they don’t care for the 25 voices that I represent when they have a student base of 30,000.

While initially it may seem like being a student representative of a classroom of 25 students is a fair comparison to being a trade union leader, it is in fact not, at all.

As much as I appreciated the work you did for us last year and agree that it mainly (some of our suggestions did come through this year lets not forget.) fell on deaf ears, I think you need to look at the situation from another perspective.

Had there been an alternative to “Grim and bear it” in regards to our issues with our course it would not have taken much to push a few students over the edge.

We were paying for the privilege of learning, not being paid for the privilege of a job. Don’t like the course? The option was there to leave. Don’t like your job? Oh, you need the money to live. Some people do not have a choice. They have families to support and cannot afford to be out of work.

Therefore, I know the feeling that all of the trade union members are in. They represent a small voice of a very large public sector, and they feel their voices will not be listened to properly. I therefore support the idea of all the unions coordinating together to help their voices be heard.

I know that you regularly coordinated with some of the other student representatives on issues such as external access to files, Dropbox etc. But would you continue to cooperate with them if one of the reps disagreed with your point of view on Dropbox? Would you feel it is any less necessary? If the other reps though that Dropbox was an unneeded commodity, and not worth their time pursing would you still want it?

However, this is where I put my conservative hat on. Whilst the trade unions are out there attempting to make their public voices heard, they are forgetting 4 things.

1. The government is and has been very willing to talk. However, if you’ve noticed across the pond in America, two very different partisan viewpoints can struggle very hard to meet a compromise.

I would actually love to know the compromise to which you are referring. This paragraph is filled with so much ignorance, that I don’t know where to begin. I suppose with some essential facts: The 2 main parties in America are both more right wing than the conservative party we have here. They also do not agree on fucking anything. Almost all of Obama’s campaign promises which could have made a significant difference to America have been blocked by the republicans. This happens regardless of who is President, republican or democrat.

With those facts in mind, I’m almost certain you either do not have a clear understanding of how American government works, or you don’t have a clear understanding of what “compromise” means.

2. The fact that you have tax-payer funded pensions is an added bonus. A lot of people in the private sector receive very little or no pension at all, and none of it is funded by the British tax payers. It honestly looks like the trade unions are acting like a spoilt 8 year old, who is throwing a tantrum because he only got 20 presents instead of 30. Please at least some sign of gratitude that you have these tax-payer funded pensions.

Public sector pensions are not an “added bonus” like you claim. They are there to allow people who provide the public with a service for most of their lives to be able to afford a reasonable level of living when they can no longer work. Public sector pay is generally lower than private sector, and as such smart private sector workers should be putting money aside for a situation where they can no longer work.
By freezing the increase in pensions, the money these workers will be receiving is effectively being whittled away as the cost of living increases.
Tax payers are paying for these pensions as gratitude for what these people do for us on a daily basis, perhaps you’d prefer to pay your medical bills when you need medical attention or a prescription so we can privatize the health care industry.
I know that I’d rather pay some tax, and £7 for a prescription than to pay the ludicrous prices drugs sell for in the states. As someone who relies on asthma medication to live, I appreciate our public health service more than some.

In my opinion paying for public sector pensions is not a tax, but an investment in the countries future. These workers are educating our children, keeping us healthy etc.
To accept their work and to leave them broke is beyond evil.

3. The government has acted recently to offer an improved offer. In other words, they have made a compromise. Now it is your job to do the same. This is, again, exactly the same issue as is happening with the United States’ debt crisis, neither party can reach a compromise.

Comparing a room of paid off by big business politicians to a workers union is a pretty poor comparison. The union are trying to achieve the best possible outcome for their members, and strike action is a never taken just because they want an extra tenner a week. In a way this strike is a tool to force the government to sweeten their side of the deal.

4. By going on strike, you are disrupting education in schools, colleges and universities; you are disrupting medical treatment to ill patients; and you are disrupting public transport at airports, trains and the like. By going on strike, you are forcing public agencies, which are already strapped for cash, into drawing up expensive, temporary contingency plans, so some level of service can continue. By my example, I’m losing 2 hours of paid lectures tomorrow, and frankly I want my fees back for them. The point I’m trying to make is this strike is just going to cost the government a lot of money, and frankly I think this money could be better spent on, uhm, I don’t know… funding your pensions?

This paragraph makes me feel like you don’t understand the point of strike action. The point is to inconvenience the government, if the people striking did not have such an obvious effect on the country; the strike would be far less poignant. The workers are sending the government a message that they have a profound effect on how this country is run, and as such should have a fair pension at the end of their career for the good work they have done.

So yes, strike action is inconvenient to you and to me, and it’s bloody well suppose to be. As well as showing where these people are needed in society it also forces the general public to pick a side in either supporting them, or not. The point of “picking a side” of course is forcing you to think about the issues that are under dispute, something which I don’t think you have. At all.

Anyway, best of luck with your strike tomorrow. I hope you get nothing back.

This post is definitely not intended to be a personal attack on you however, I hope that in future it makes you think before you post your thoughts to the internet.