Talking Things Down
Government ministers started the row - by claiming that strike action will cost the country a whole lot of money - £500 milion apparently in lost productivity - since lots of people will have to take time off work to look after children - and so on.
Now I have no idea whther £500 million is a realistic figure - but that's neither here nor there - because the whole point of a strike is to cause disruption - normally speaking anyway.
The aim is absolutely to inflict harm and damage on your opponent - if it ain't hurting it ain't working - why would anyone call a strike that doesn't have any real impact or effect.
But that's the problem with strikes - in the public sector especially - because they end up damaging ordinary people - like you and me.
So instead of saying - 'No, next week's strike won't cause a lot of problems for people - or damage to the economy'.
The Bubs should be saying - 'Yes, it's going to be hell next week for a lot of people - but we're absolutely justified in the action we're taking - and it's all the government's fault'.
But the Bubs can't say that - because it isn't true.
The strike is about defending vested interests - and that's why it won't enjoy wide public support.
If the Bubs came out and said - 'We agree that final salary pensions schemes deserve to go because they benefit the better paid - and represent a tax on low paid workers'.
Then they might get my support - but they won't because the fight is not about the low paid - it's a strike for the better paid to 'have what they hold' - to preserve their more favourable treatment and better conditions.
And that's why it is a reactionary strike - and one that deserves to fail.
