My point, if there is one, is the absolute opposite of such as you are having me suggest or believe. Which if you read again my initial post on this thread, you may well come to understand.
This admiration for Mick Lynch - "what a bloke" - inevitably brings into focus his views upon other matters too. Taking it beyond how he represents his members, which he is paid to do in any event. Presumably in previous days when he championed Brexit he thought to do so was in the best interests of his members, otherwise he should perhaps have kept quiet upon the subject. And if his voice regarding Brexit had reached this forum he would have been in the main slagged off like .. err. Nigel Farage. I suspect that your pointing out that Mr Farage shares your view upon our voting system will not lead to your praising him with a "what a bloke". Not that voting reform is necessarily needed. You will find that Nigel has a dog in the PR fight too - he's not on your side because it suits anyone but him - be careful what you wish for. Though "what a bloke" does apply to Nigel, one way or another. And Mr Lynch too. Despite being unable to agree with all views that they hold. So after all that I'm probably agreeing with you. Certainly no need for apologies.
Having met Mick Lynch and spending time in his company I can tell you he is a top bloke who cares about other people , his views on Brexit aside which I disagreed with but in all other aspects on human decency and fairness he’s spot on . Having never met Farage and no ambitions of doing so his views on human decency and fairness are almost non existent he proudly spouts his vile worldly views to anyone one who’ll listen especially the media . Mick is a top class bloke Farage is an utter lovely person
Guess time will tell with Lynch. He doesn't seem to be someone prepared to negotiate and reach a compromise from various interviews I've heard. There has to be a point when you concede you will never get 100% of what your ultimate aim is, and pushing on regardless can do more harm than good in the longer term.
How you drawn up that conclusion ? He’s said in almost every interview ive seen he’s willing to compromise and negotiate other than job losses , which for a union leader I’d expect and hope sincere .
Just the way he came across on TV. Just seemed to be a my way or the highway type of guy. Just an observation really. TBF anyone can claim they want to negotiate but then not shift an inch. He defo doesn't beat about the bush though.
Your observation is very biased because in no way has he hinted he wouldn’t negotiate and all his words and intentions were that he would . Yes your right anyone can claim to negotiate then not shift and that includes the rail bosses and govt . As I say I can’t see how you’ve taken that view by his interviews ,only a very biased viewpoint would come to that conclusion .
I doubt any union leader expects never to concede anything, but he'll know where the line needs to be drawn!
On the one side you've got people outright saying they won't negotiate further and on the other you've got a man quite literally saying that he wants to, something which you kind of acknowledge you know he has said, but your take away from that is that HE won't negotiate?
Biased towards what or who? I want these guys to come out on top with a good deal and not just get brushed aside by the corporates. Purely my observation of the bloke, you can say what you want on TV and do something completely different in practice. Our politicians do it all the time!
Course it’s bias , your assuming he’s not sincere in the interviews which to me doesn’t interpret you want him to come out on top . Not all politicians are deceitful and to assume someone isn’t sincere not knowing or any proof is bias .
I watched it last night, Lynch came across as the only adult in the room. The rest of the panel were unimpressive, as for Rachel McLean... possibly one of the worst showings from a minister in recent times, the part where she quoted from the document saying that there would be no compulsory redundancies, when it was quite clear in fairly plain English that it did not say that was quite bizarre.
No it isn't bias is just personal opinion from watching a few snippets on TV. If there is any bias it is towards the workers being represented, I want these underpaid workers to be paid fairly instead of the people higher up the corporate tree widening the gap further. My judgement on Mr Lynch will be on his actions not lauding him up for a few soundbites on TV, same with MP's.
You would have thought she would have been at least half prepared and somewhat in the know. Always baffles me when they get found out so easily bit like she had read the title on document but not the content.
Is it ****, he honestly didn't sound sincere.. It sounded more like to me someone beating his chest saying what everyone wanted to hear. BUT like I've said, I'll judge him by his actions ultimately. There's nothing wrong in having a first impression that differs to yours fella and I hope for the thousands he is representing that he is a good as his words suggest.
There was nothing in that interview to suggest what you’ve summised , it’s not a case of having a different view to mine it’s a case of a biased opinion no one else had even in the media .