# Bring back the Coal Board!



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

Well not just the Coal Board, the Electricity Board, the Gas Board, the GPO and the man from the Pru who knocked every week to collect your insurance money and was like a family friend.


I am fed up with this lark of changing suppliers all the time. Just tried to sort phone and broadband and mobiles out because my bill from BT had risen to an average of £80 per month! Have ended up with losing the fibre connection for the broadband as it is "at capacity" and have got no mobile signal! Land line is ok though (I hope).


Then house insurance was up for renewal. We are limited, by Chris being a bit of a power tool freak, to companies that will cover his garden tractor, chain saw, petrol strimmer, plumbing tools. car tools etc. This usually means an "unlimited" option on contents so that shed contents are covered. We were with M&S but that had risen quite a lot so went on the hunt. Getting no where (NFU are a possible but did not want to take us on while we were having builders in) so phoned M&S to see if they would do a deal to keep the custom. No, but - if I go on line and get a "new" quote I might find a better deal. So I did and I did! I even got it lower than the original deal two years ago!


Aaargh! It is almost a full time job keeping abreast of all the utilities (not long changed electricity supplier). 


Bring back the Coal Board


----------



## Webby1 (Mar 11, 2012)

And of course all those companies are run for profit and often for the profit of foreign companies............................THAT's where we want to get control of our own affairs etc etc

Those nationalised companies were not run very well....................but many private companies in the 70's were also run badly. But they and local councils could be run better rather than selling everything off to people who just want to make a profit......................nothing wrong with making a profit.But our council could use the profit for local services rather than a French company emptying our bins.......what nonsense.

I don't want to hear the outdated claptrap about unions etc etc......................just because it doesn't work and Jonny Grenfell says he can do the job cheaper................there is no need to abandon the principle. 

IMAGINE companies run for the good of the people to provide a public service and not for the profit of some foreign shareholder.......................take back control of our borders and our own affairs I say. 

You may say I'm a dreamer.


----------



## ThePrisoner (Jan 13, 2009)

Webby1 said:


> You may say I'm a dreamer.


But you're not the only one :smile2:


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

Yes Pat. The UK needs some good old fashioned monopolies.


----------



## Pat-H (Oct 30, 2009)

erneboy said:


> Yes Pat. The UK needs some good old fashioned monopolies.


Well we have plenty of monopolies anyway. Go on a train journey and see what "choice" means.

But at least state owned ones ensured the money stayed in the public circle. Unlike now where the profit is leeched away.

Privatisation by and large hasn't worked. Well it has worked if the objective was to cream off the public funds....


----------



## Matchlock (Jun 26, 2010)

Yes I remember the monopolies from the '70's, forced to be a member of a union against my will or I would not have a job.
Trains running on time (not) most of the public monopolies ran at a loss if not all and paid for by the taxpayer, I do not consider Public Servants as tax payers, they are funded by the private tax payer's and to be fair to us they give some back.

The three day week, some silly sod turned on a machine and the power company cut of the power, difficult getting out of a factory with no natural light.

I was working for Rowntree Mackintosh at the time, good company and not at all a militant union place (the secret was if you where a shop steward you where offered a management position, amazing how many clamored to be a shop steward) but we still had to follow national walkouts.

Took a month to get a phone connected by the PO even though the line was extant and of course British built cars where crap, you always dreaded ending up with a Friday afternoon job.
Inflation took off but that was maybe due to decimalisation and the '80s where not much better.

Yes in the early '70's I was an active member of the Labour party but the growing up experience made me think otherwise so I abandoned it, I am not into castles in the air but am a realist.

Saying all this I think growing up with the music from the '70s was good, about the only thing going for it.

Do I want to go back there.....Nah


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

Ooops! Didn't mean it to be a political post  Just frustrated at all the time I, personally, have to spend researching and making mistakes, then rectifying them.


We said a similar thing the last time we wanted a domestic appliance. In the old days if you wanted a cooker you went to the Electricity Board and chose one in your price range. If it went wrong they fixed it or replaced it. Now you have to do a day's research to find the right one from a whole host of suppliers that you are not sure that you really trust. 


Too much choice is very stressful


----------



## Webby1 (Mar 11, 2012)

> Do I want to go back there.....Nah


I tried so politely to say NOBODY wants to go back there BUT that does not mean the principle is not a good one and could be made to work, although there will always be the blah blah blah 1970s.

I say this country is owned by the people, not French and now Chinese investors ...............building us a nuclear power plant...........now that's a joke


----------



## Glandwr (Jun 12, 2006)

Well if brexit goes through, which I am getting ever more optimistic it wont. I'm with you Pat. We will be swamped by carpetbaggers from the States riding on our "trade deal" with "our bestested friend" Trump. In which case I would say yes nationalise everything quickly. 

If however a stake is driven through th heart of brexit, apart from the railways that I see as an ideological privatisation too far let it be. Oh and maybe water.

Dick


----------



## Revise (May 13, 2012)

Remember when BT had the monopoly for directory enquiries. You used to call 192 for a few pence and get your number. 
Now it is open to market forces and you have loads of choices who you can dial. But look at the cost you get charged to call it.

Calls to the 118 118 directory enquiry service now cost a minimum of almost £9 - DOUBLE the price from just two years ago.
In June 2015, MoneySavingExpert.com found that 118 118 call costs from a landline were a minimum of £4.50 made up of £1.88 per call plus £2.57 per minute (minimum 60 second charge).
Now the firm's product information states that "calls to 118 118 cost £4.49 per call plus £4.49 per minute".

Why do people keep going on about in the 70's this, in the 70,s that That is 50 years ago. Lets look forward for a change.

When a privatised company is sold off to the free market it always seems to have a large price increase to make money for the shareholders. Why cannot the govenment be the main shareholder and make the money. A bit like France, Germany Japan and many other countries.


----------



## dghr272 (Jun 14, 2012)

Revise said:


> ................... Why cannot the govenment be the main shareholder and make the money. A bit like France, Germany Japan and many other countries.


They will want to be heavily involved, unfortunately governments to date have lacked the required expertise to run businesses, they haven't a clue regarding good management, just look at the current lot.

To support my argument you just have to look at the financial state of the country now and the history of previous attempts regarding nationalised industry's. (I worked in one, the management and the unions were equally to blame for the inefficiency)

Please note, I include governments of all persuasions, and given the beliefs of both main parties can you imagine the turmoil to such nationalised industries when one lot is voted out.

Business needs stability combined with slick change control, that won't exist with the old model.

Imposed stability such as communism didn't work for others either, rigid 5 year plans failed miserably.

Terry


----------



## Webby1 (Mar 11, 2012)

You are right Communism and rigid 5 year plans failed miserably,Nationalised industries were generally useless and so were many private industries.

Really across the board it was all a bit rubbish in the 1970's(apart from the music).......................thickos everywhere from management to unions to 

dictators of communist countries.

But that doesn't mean the principle has to fail...............given the quality of our expertise these days I just do not believe it is beyond the wit of humanity to run services for a reason other than profit for shareholders.

There is no inherent reason why our local council cannot empty our bins as well as a French company (who seem to employ the same staff and processes) and put any profit into local services.....................don't trust Johnny Grenfell and certainly don't let him build you a nuclear plant. And while we are at it collect all the due taxes from multi million pound companies who just laugh in your face....................now there's expertise in action.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

I worked for a city council and I can say that they wasted a lot of money and didn't expect much work from most of their staff. Others may be different, but what I saw was wasteful to the point where I couldn't bear to remain part of it.


----------



## dghr272 (Jun 14, 2012)

Webby1 said:


> You are right Communism and rigid 5 year plans failed miserably,Nationalised industries were generally useless and so were many private industries.
> 
> Really across the board it was all a bit rubbish in the 1970's(apart from the music).......................thickos everywhere from management to unions to
> 
> ...


They must employ the same staff under TUPE legislation, but make no mistake they can and do then change T&Cs, certain protections are afforded to transferred staff but ultimately these companies do effect changes in terms of salary and efficiency.

The main part of the TUPE legislation used to change T&Cs is detailed below.

"the employer and employee can agree to vary terms and conditions if the sole or principal reason for the variation is an economic, technical or organisational reason entailing changes in the workforce".

I've seen this used at first hand leading to staff earning less and working more, the new contracts were set in the context of sign or you're out, the economic reason being they were the current market rates for the job as opposed to the comfortable pay and benefits levels set by the previous employer. That's how they make the profits they do.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploa...-rights-on-the-transfer-of-an-undertaking.pdf

Terry


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

I've priced a fair few big maintenance contracts covering numerous sites for health trusts. TUPE was mentioned but we often had quite a job getting details. On one in particular I figured a team of 3 of my staff could do the work. When we were finally given the details of the staff we'd have to take under the TUPE clause I found out that they had 22 staff doing that work and that they weren't mobile and couldn't be asked to move from site to site. That condition may have been changed, it was ridiculous.


----------



## Revise (May 13, 2012)

Time's have changed. One firm I used to work as a HGV driver, and the firm was run by the union. We went on strike and had the management held to ransom over silly stupid things. I was embarrassed for some of the things we were asking for. I was offered redundancy and moved on to pastures new. The same firm is still going strong, Same union, same workforce. But they have come into the 21 century with their working practices. As they knew if they did not move change their working practices, they would have all been out of work. 

If we think and live in the past we will never move forward. We, as a nation, need to look forward and work together and stop reminiscing about what it was like in the 70's and how it is going to go back to the way it was then.


----------



## Pat-H (Oct 30, 2009)

Unions are a representation of the workers who form them. Nothing to stop employees forming their own union and asking management to recognise them as a collective. For many firms this works well as it makes it easier for the firm to deal with the workforce.
But if the workers don't engage with those representing them then you get union reps who run amok. Its for those that vote them in to manage them.

Unions can and do work well and help re dress the balance that otherwise the bosses hold.

And that's why they are often opposed, the bosses want it all. The lowest wages paid, horrible non family friendly shift patterns, sack anyone they fancy (or don't)

Individually workers have little control but as a group they have some. Ultimately if everyone's fair it works. And it is doing so today in many areas but as that does't make news its invisible.

As for TUPE its an important mechanisum to protect workers. Yes it can be abused by **** employers and its not perfect. But I sold my company and the staff where TUPE'd over and as the sellers of the company we ensured their new contracts where as good as before and any changes where ok with the staff. Its all about respecting people, even those sweeping the floors.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

We do seem to have 'embraced' competition in the market but at the expense of everyone benefiting. Only a few actually benefit and the rest run around like ants and are expendable.
At least with one supplier you knew who to complain to to voice the problem. Now it's ping pong to no where.

Ray.


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

Banks are the same. You used to get to know your Bank Manager and he knew you.


A while ago I worked in the Credit Control department of the branch of a large Builders Merchants. Our customers were known to us and, for the most part. we jogged along with us threatening to stop their account if they did not pay it and they threatening to take their business elsewhere.
One small builder came in and told us that he was sorry but he was going under and could not pay all of our outstanding account. We were shocked. It turned out that he had put his and his sons house up as guarantee on a small site he was building. He was nearly there, having sold one house and with another nearly finished etc. The bank pulled the plug on him. He lost everything. They gained his and his sons house and a nice, nearly finished, building site.


Would a Bank Manager have done that? I don't think so.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

Banks always cash in on the collateral customers have put up when times get difficult. It is shameful, though they'd say they are only saving a bad business from getting deeper into debt and doing the only thing they could do to recoup their money.

In fairness though that is almost always due to unsophisticated customers borrowing what to them are substantial sums of money that's repayable on demand, which is very bad business practice. Unfortunately many small business know their own trade well but aren't financially astute.


----------



## patp (Apr 30, 2007)

This is where the Bank Manager counselled them.


----------



## rayrecrok (Nov 21, 2008)

Coming from a mining family, from a mining village, from working when I left school for the NCB, From my dad a Pit Deputy then overman and finally dying from the dust he inhaled getting the coal that all the nimbys who now will not even have "Fracking" near them yet were quite happy for the miners to suffer on their behalf as it wasn't near their lives and properties, unlike the mining areas that had all the dirt and subsidence for 200 years!.. And were the ones that made England great and made it's economy the best in the world while others slept.. 

I never touched a tree when I was a kid that wasn't blackened by the filthy atmosphere or saw a sheep on the moors that wasn't black with the muck off the grass which was brought home to me when I and 2 of my mates went on a weeks fishing holiday to Lincolnshire when I was 14 and everything was clean, it was only when we got to Doncaster on our way to Wakefield and all the pit stacks and mill chimneys started appearing out of the train window I realised what a ****hole I and other Yorkshire folk lived in everyday..

So what I am trying to put across is don't knock the NCB or you insult every miner who gave up so much of their lives in the dark wet and dust to keep folk working and get us out of the financial hole which was left after the war!. Britain ran on "King Coal" and sweat, not guys in red braces tapping away at keyboards in Docklands or bankers who can bankrupt a nation in a heartbeat..

When folk toiled for a living it was down to everybody to make it work and they did, and what is happening to the country now folk don't fancy getting their hands dirty and can't manage on less than £500.00 per week, when I was a kid I am sure I was fitter and happier even in the grime than kids are these days..

ray.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

Bank managers will sell them whatever head office wants them to, they work within strict limits and to stringently applied targets. Money is a commodity like any other, to get good financial service shopping round is essential, yet most businesses deal solely with one bank. That is very risky.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

patp said:


> Banks are the same. You used to get to know your Bank Manager and he knew you.
> 
> A while ago I worked in the Credit Control department of the branch of a large Builders Merchants. Our customers were known to us and, for the most part. we jogged along with us threatening to stop their account if they did not pay it and they threatening to take their business elsewhere.
> One small builder came in and told us that he was sorry but he was going under and could not pay all of our outstanding account. We were shocked. It turned out that he had put his and his sons house up as guarantee on a small site he was building. He was nearly there, having sold one house and with another nearly finished etc. The bank pulled the plug on him. He lost everything. They gained his and his sons house and a nice, nearly finished, building site.
> Would a Bank Manager have done that? I don't think so.


I have lost count of the times I have heard this Pat. Friends who had a large trucking firm were struggling to pay the wages cos their main clients "Freightliner" and "Exide" were taking longer and longer to pay the invoices. Eventually when it got to a six month delay they asked the bank to increase the overdraft limits. Another six months and the bank put a 'manager' in to run the trucks?? Folded within 3 months and again our friend lost virtually everything.

Ray.


----------



## Pat-H (Oct 30, 2009)

But some of this is just people gambling for high stakes.
Put your house and your sons house on the line is a gamble. A gamble you will make a fortune or lose it all. But gambling none the less.

Good business is gambling no more than you can afford to lose.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

If businesses only invested what they could afford lose there wouldn't many big businesses, or at least those who were big would be of necessity be hundreds of years old.

Good business is about taking calculated risks after you have carefully assessed them, including any risks you expose yourself to in the way you borrow money.


----------



## Pat-H (Oct 30, 2009)

erneboy said:


> If businesses only invested what they could afford lose there wouldn't many big businesses, or at least those who were big would be of necessity be hundreds of years old.
> 
> Good business is about taking calculated risks after you have carefully assessed them, including any risks you expose yourself to in the way you borrow money.


And I'd say a calculated risk is one that doesn't expose assets you can't afford to lose like your house.

I ran a business for 30 years before I sold it. I borrowed money I could afford to repay and I let opportunities go that would have risked the stability of the company (stability that the people who worked for me deserved for the effort they put in) So maybe I didn't get as rich as I could have. But the business ran and grew. Staff were employed and I sold for a nice return having never put my house on the line.

So I stand by it. if you are prepared to gamble then you have to expect to lose sometimes. And if you lose then you were the one who made that call.


----------



## erneboy (Feb 8, 2007)

I never put my house on the line either, yet I regularly borrowed what to me were large sums to continue expanding. The business had good a track record and was capable of servicing the debt. I could certainly have borrowed far more money than we could have repaid, they were tripping over themselves to give us it when times were good. I was careful not to have all my eggs in one basket and learned very early on, when Thatcher's spending cuts hit, to avoid borrowing money that was repayable on demand.


----------



## raynipper (Aug 4, 2008)

Even now Alan I take out modest loans to keep and create a good credit rating just in case. We always do have though sufficient funds tied up in case of emergencies after our last experience.
But borrowing at 2.4% costs very little to keep the door open.

Ray.


----------

