"Should the police be allowed the option to strike?" thread in "General Mayhem"
Originally Posted by Voyager Indeed. But why do they need 'protection'? If they were doing a good job..... Kennedy was doing a good job...

Kennedy was doing a good job

---

http://www.therevcounter.com/touring...do-france.html

Of the whiskey bottle

---

The Cardiomyopathy Association a heart muscle research leader
http://www.cardiomyopathy.org


Accelerated ageing made easy

The planet that puts a WTF smiley immediately after the phrase 'honourable assurances from the Government'...why do you ask??

---

Es mejor morir de pies que vivir en las rodillas

MC 004

I voted yes (in real life, rather than here) for the *right* to strike, but I would never exercise that right unless the situation went utterly tits up. I really couldn't see that happening tbh, even now.

Me too, I've already got the guns.
Where is the hole in a jelly doughnut?
Yeah, just look what he did for Viet Nam. The moon thing was cool, but he didn't actually do that. That was some other folks.

---

DCProofrock, A true 'Murcan. Land of the Home, Free of the Brave.

It is a hard one. I do think the right to withdraw labour as a protest against working conditions is valid but I can't imagine a sensible situation where there could be literally no policing of the streets at all.

A work to rule perhaps?

---

For sure. But it is not 'the public', who would be most affected and broadly support the Police case (I think), that are the problem here, it is the 'employers' - H.M. Government.

So a 'work to rule' targeted at the politicians would be highly appropriate. Perhaps that would be against Thatch's vile anti-trade union legislation - but who is going to arrest the police?

The other option is that during this work to rule the crimes committed goes up. This would certainly cause the goverment to sit up and pay attention just from the media attention this would get.

Not that I'm suggesting the off duty police turn their hand to burglary but expert training works both ways i.e. anyone who knows about setting up internet security is the ideal man to know how to get round it

---

I'm sure ANY action would get the governments attention at the moment. But I do think it would be a mistake if to do so if it would cause some harm to the currently (largely) supportive public.

I like that idea. Cheap easily implimented approach to expressing your feelings on the issue with minimal impact on the public. Even hounourable I'd say.

---

BOB Crufts 2008 & Loose Shoes
www.bayingbasset.com

I voted for other, I think that the arbitration process should be binding on both parties and then the police should not be allowed to strike. The fact that the police are bound by the process but the government aren't, then I think the police should be entitled to industrial action. I don't think that striking should necessarily be the action they can take, a work to rule maybe

absolutely not. shouldn't be in a job like the police if you want the opportunity to strike.