Over at the Speccie, Ed Holmes has written a piece about the mechanics of Union beligerence. He highlights the recent public sector strikes that are targeted at popular events and times. He rightly points out that a militant minority tends to speak on behalf of the less militant majority. You can read it HERE. This is my reply:
These strikes always seem to emanate from the public sector or the former public sector, the main reason being that union membership has collapsed elswhere and of course, they stand little chance of bankrupting their employers but draw maximum embarrassment from governments.
In reality it is the last stand of the Union bully. They do not have popular support for the tactics they use, and indeed draw a considerable amount of obloquy.
Whereas it is fine to discuss the mechanics of how they do it, what needs to change is public perception. I have said it over and over that the Government needs to name the demons. It needs to ensure that the message is that unions today are a travesty of their historical intentions.
The Government cannot do this while the State media still has a sentimental attraction to the Tolpuddle Martyrs and their chief correspondents are openly left-wing.
There is though a ray of hope. When the last strike took place at the BBC, Paul Mason, one of their Lefties-in-Chief was quite vocal and indeed, articulate about the reasons for the strike. Was anybody bovvered? Did anybody worry that Newsnight got cancelled?
Union bullying has been kettled. Sooner or later, even the public sector will be defeated. I merely takes political will, and given the union's obvious death wish, the general public will be happy to pay their fare to Switzerland.
There is a more comprehensive analysis of current thinking here: http://www.economist.com/node/17851305?story_id=17851305&fsrc=rss