Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Refinery strike threat to oil and gas fields

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 25 April 2008
THE UK's gas, electricity and oil production could be hit by the strike at Scotland's only oil refinery, impacting on energy prices, experts warned last night.

View Video
The mass walk-out at Grangemouth is likely to force the closure of dozens of North Sea oilfields, which provide about a third of Britain's natural gas, at a cost of £50 million a day.

BP, the operator of the Forties pipeline that carries about a
third of the UK's oil production to shore from some 50 fields, yesterday revealed plans were already being made to close down production on a number of platforms.

Most of the pipeline's oil goes to a plant near the refinery – and it relies on the refinery for its power. So, if it loses its power, it will also have to close.

The government admitted that the two-day strike, which starts on Sunday, could have a knock-on effect on energy prices.

However, ministers in England and Scotland insisted there was enough fuel and urged motorists not to panic-buy as that could cause unnecessary problems at the pumps.

The pensions deadlock between Ineos, the refinery owner, and the Unite union showed no sign of being broken, despite desperate demands from industry and politicians.

Tony Woodley, the union's joint general secretary, will today address a mass meeting of workers at Grangemouth.

Their action will force the closure of the refinery, other than its safety facilities, and the shutdown has already begun.

It takes in up to 750,000 barrels of oil a day, from about 50 fields, some of which is refined for products such as petrol but the majority of which is shipped to BP's nearby Kinneil plant for stabilising and exporting.

Kinneil is powered by the utilities provided by Grangemouth, and if it cannot access them, the oilfields – which also produce gas – will have to be shut down.

David Hunter, an energy analyst with the consultant McKinnon & Clarke, said: "This will lead not only to a shortage of oil, but also gas – by-product of producing oil at many fields – and electricity, as 40 per cent of electricity is produced by burning gas.

"This couldn't have come at a worse time for consumers, with energy prices at all-time records. Wholesale prices are 89 per cent higher than a year ago for power, with gas up a staggering 127 per cent. There have been further increases today, with winter gas hitting new highs of 83p/therm. If the strike goes ahead, things could get worse and that is going to hammer hard-pressed homes and businesses."

A spokesman for BP said shutting down Kinneil was "a possibility" and it was making preparations to do it safely, while keeping users of the pipeline informed. He said the firm had asked for assurances from Ineos that it would continue to supply utilities to Kinneil – but if it was unable to, the plant would close.

Gordon Russell, a convener for Unite, said: "If our power station is down, then they will lose facilities at Kinneil."

Malcolm Webb, the chief executive of the trade body Oil & Gas UK, said there was "no justification whatsoever" for the dispute adversely impacting on North Sea oil production. He said the UK economy would lose out on about £50 million for every day of disruption.

The Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform said it did not expect the strike to have "a significant impact on oil supply via the Forties pipeline to the UK".

A spokeswoman said: "The global oil market is well supplied to deal with this short-term supply disruption. The UK sources gas from a variety of routes and we do not anticipate disruption to the nation's supplies."

However, she added: "There would nevertheless be significant operational and economic impacts on many of the companies involved in gas and oil production in the North Sea, and there could be an impact on prices."

It had been thought Lothian Buses, which serves Edinburgh, would have to cancel all services on Monday, after it did not receive the fuel it expected to be delivered yesterday. However, John Swinney, the finance secretary, said later that the bus company had received assurances it would get diesel from BP today.

The airport operator BAA has advised airlines to refuel at their point of origin where possible in order to safeguard fuel reserves as a precautionary measure.

At First Minister's Questions yesterday, Alex Salmond urged motorists to rely on public transport and not make unnecessary journeys in order to conserve supplies. He insisted the country could cope with the effects of the walk-out if drivers did not panic-buy – as many have been doing since the strike was announced at the end of last week.

"Clearly, it is a time when we need everyone's co-operation in not having repeat buying, in behaving sensibly and responsibly, to cut out non-essential trips, to use public transport," he said.

"But the central message is that stocks of the available range of fuel will stretch into May and there is the capacity to import more if required."

John Hutton, the UK Business Secretary, called on Unite and Ineos to get back round the table after last-ditch talks collapsed on Wednesday night.

Ministers in 'don't panic' message to motorists as refinery staff set to walk out

Q & A: STRIKE IMPACT

Why is Grangemouth refinery going to shut down?
On Sunday, 1,200 workers will go on strike for two days in a dispute over pensions. Ineos, which owns the oil refinery, has said it will be forced to shut down for safety reasons.

What's the problem with the pensions?
Ineos wants to close the final pension scheme to new employees and make some changes to existing workers' entitlements. Unite, the union, is furious.

But a two-day strike surely won't have much of an effect on operations?

The shutdown started last Saturday and is a gradual process, throughout which the plant will not be at full capacity. Ineos has said there will be issues for a month.

Is the whole plant going to close?
No. Unite, which has balloted for strike action, has said it will allow the firm to keep the plant "warm" to stop safety breaches and allow it to start up again.

Even so, is a strike at one oil refinery going to affect me?
Grangemouth generates the fuel for all of Scotland and northern England. If it is not operational, petrol stations across the region will have to access other sources – such as relying on the UK's 67.5 days of oil reserves or importing fuel from overseas.

So should I rush out and fill up my tank then?
No. Panic buying is the worst course of action, and is more likely to cripple fuel supplies than the strike alone.

But won't we run out of fuel?
Not according to the Scottish Government. Alex Salmond, the First Minister, told Holyrood yesterday "there are substantial and ample stocks of every variety of fuel and petrol". He said:

"That is an important factor for people to bear in mind. These stocks will last well into May. There is the provision to import more stocks if required.

"Therefore, assuming that consumer behaviour is responsible, then there should be limited difficulties in terms of both inconvenience and disruption."

What about the Westminster government?
It is also urging caution. John Hutton, the Business Secretary, told The Commons: "Over the last few days, significant additional supplies of imported fuel have been made available in Scotland. I have been advised by the industry that there is sufficient fuel to re-supply forecourts and other users ahead of the planned industrial action.

"Industry has also advised us that, at present, fuel stocks at Grangemouth, together with planned imports of finished product through Grangemouth to replace lost production, should be sufficient to maintain supplies through the period of the industrial action and the consequent restarting of the plant."

So are motorists listening to them?
Not all of them. There has been a run on the pumps since Sunday, and petrol firms have been accused of "profiteering" by putting their prices up in response. Louise Doherty, of price checker website petrolprices.com, said: "There have definitely been rises across Scotland and examples of where they have risen considerably more than we would expect in the past week. One petrol station raised its prices twice in one day. It is unfair, because motorists do still have to fill up."

She said there had been examples of 11p per litre rises in the cost of diesel, and of 6.6p per litre for unleaded petrol.

Is the Government worried?
They're not pleased. Mr Hutton said: "The oil companies have reported significant increases in fuel uptake this week in response to concerns about shortages of fuel. Whilst this response is understandable, I want to emphasise that industry has made it clear that there is sufficient fuel available via imports and that any localised shortages will be re-supplied quickly."

How much oil do we actually have left?
Under European Union law, the UK is required to hold reserves to last for 67.5 days.

What else will be affected by a shutdown at Grangemouth?
Quite a lot, starting with the North Sea oil industry. Grangemouth is served by the Forties pipeline, which is owned by BP and takes in oil from about 50 fields in the North Sea. The majority of it is stabilised for transporting at Kinneil, which is powered by Grangemouth utilities. If it cannot get electricity and steam, it cannot take the oil and the fields will have to be shut down.

How important are these oil fields?
Very. They account for about a third of all activity in the North Sea. They include the giant Forties Field, now owned by Apache Oil, and five main BP oil and gas platforms, Andrew, Bruce, Rhum, Everest and Lomond.

Will any other commodities be hit?
Natural gas. Gas and oil are extracted together from oil fields. In the Forties, the oil goes to Grangemouth, while the gas goes to other terminals, such as St Fergus, near Peterhead. If the fields are shut down, obviously there will be no gas – and the fields produce about a third of the UK's gas supply.

But what about my gas central heating and my hob?
You'll still be able to use everything – gas should not be running out any time soon. There are plentiful reserves, mainly the Centrica-owned Rough Field storage facility. The National Grid has said any loss from the Forties should be made up through "normal market mechanisms". The government does not anticipate any disruption to consumers.

But surely there will be an economic impact?
Oh yes. The government has said it expects "significant operational and economic impacts on many of the companies involved in the North Sea". There could also be an impact on prices of gas and electricity to consumers, who are already reeling from recent price hikes by energy firms.

Isn't anyone trying to stop all this?
Yes. Mr Salmond, John Swinney, the finance secretary, and the UK government have spent the past few days trying to get management and unions to take part in talks to resolve their disagreements. The Scottish Government also arranged for independent pensions expert Stewart Ritchie, president of the Faculty of Actuaries, to carry out a study to clarify the issues in dispute in relation to the Ineos pension fund.

Low profile millionaire quietly built fortune
IF THERE is no such thing as bad publicity, the Grangemouth strike must have done wonders for Ineos, its owners, whose name previously meant little to the average motorist filling up on the fuel it refined.

And if the multi-million pound chemical empire was unknown in relation to its power, its chairman, Jim Ratcliffe, boasted an even lower profile.

Mr Ratcliffe has been described as being "to chemicals what Philip Green is to retail or Lakshmi Mittal is to steel" – but also as the UK's "most private billionaire". the Sunday Times Rich List ranks him 10th, with an estimated fortune of £3.3 billion.

A chemical engineer, his career segued neatly into private equity when he moved from Esso to Courtaulds and then to venture capital firm Advent in 1989.

Three years later, he teamed up with another chemist-turned-entrepreneur, John Hollowood, to lead a buyout of Inspec Group from BP for £40m. When the co-founders parted company in 1998, its value had grown 15-fold.

Mr Ratcliffe then led a management buyout of part of Inspec's chemicals divisions to create Ineos Group and set about acquiring businesses.

The quiet family man, based in Southampton, later admitted he was "surprised" at the speed of the group's rise – funded mainly through debt. The jewel in its crown was the $9bn takeover of BP's Grangemouth plant in 2006.

Although keen to keep a low profile – often even branded secretive – he is known as a ruthless dealmaker who specialises in buying up assets from old oil giants.

On his website, he states: "We believe Ineos is a refreshing place to work and we are prepared to embrace new approaches to business.Safety is our first priority. We believe strongly in employee share ownership, we are highly focused on growth and EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation) and see the 'customer as king'."



The full article contains 2240 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Angus Ogg,

24/04/2008 23:33:57
Neither the employer or employees representatives have any sense of perspective or responsibility beyond their own narrow interests.

The country is going to pot, and neither of these outfits give a dannn about this.

One answer for such a pivotal and strategically important part of the nations wellbeing....

Nationalise the thing.

Compulsory purchase from Ineos so they don't make an obscene profit, and make any employee at Grangemouth have exactly the same strike rights and responsibilities as the Police.

That any of these parties can hold a nation to ransom for their own narrow interests is a contemptible disgrace.
2

Senga Jean,

25/04/2008 00:15:12
Now would anyone like the LIB/Dems under Nichol Stevens be anywhere near the corridors of power in Scotland? After FM questions I would not put him in charge of my daughter's pet goldfish. He makes Wendy look responsible in comparison.
3

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 25/04/2008 00:52:01
What was possessing BP to sell Grangemouth to Ineos? They have to get electricity and hot water from Ineos so that BP's North Sea oil can be processed. One third of North Sea production and £25million of revenue stuck in the pipeline, turning off the treasury's money tap so that an employers and a union can wage a war of words with each other over the pension rights of employees that don't yet exist.
Am I in some parallel universe here? The whole country seems to be running on empty here and I'm not talking about motorists. If the government can nationalise a twopenny-halfpenny bank because there are queues in the high street, why the h*ll are they not nationalising Grangemouth. Tomorrow morning's lost tax revenue could have it into public ownership by teatime.

It would not surprise if after months of dragging on, Ineos just decides to sack the workers close the plant move to Eastern Europe and refine the stuff there. Then ship the stuff back. I assume they know how to refine petrol in Poland. Asda's petrol already comes in by tankers from the continent. Most fuel to cover the shortfall at Grangemouth will come from Europe.
4

Senga Jean,

25/04/2008 01:07:03
WELL IF WESTMINSTER HAS ALL THE POWERS THEY SHOULD GET OFF THEIR (MISTRESSES) TOES!
5

Senga Jean,

25/04/2008 01:09:13
I was trying to say something really offensive but I do not have the bottle (or the gas)
6

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 04:45:35
Instead of listening to Nicol ranting on about the Scottish Governments statements of reassurance to bring this dispute into perspective, perhaps some self control by the media would be more responsible. The surge in panic buying is causing some concern, but there is more than enough supplies of all the fuels.

The behaviour of the Oil processor shows that the unacceptable face of the capitalist system. BP handed over a 40 million pound pension scheme that grew well whilst it was part of BP. There was little or no conflict between the company and its workforce for many years. This company spent some of the pension fund (which did not belong to the company) on purchasing other business's. I believe totally in the free market system, but I also believe that any business has responsability to the community it builds it wealth in. If this company chooses to abuse the people of Scotland, then perhaps a review of its permission to own and run our nations resources is long overdue. A complete review cannot be run in the interest of Scotland and its people until Scottish People are free from the chains of the London Government. Only patriotic Scottish People who believe in our People and Great Land above all others can make these decisions. It could mean following other Independant Countries and Nationalising the processing plants and general infrastructure.

It is very interesting reading in the various Newspapers, when general consensus, puts the value of Duty to the London Government of oil processing at this one plant at 25 million per day. This does not include the Oil that is processed in other plants and shipped overseas. As the UK is just an average user of petrol, then the processed oil exports to overseas must be at least two to three times that amount of further income. 9,125 million a year by a Scottish Government, plus our fairly large other forms of income makes us a very wealthy country that is subsidising England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as t
7

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 04:48:14
continued: England, Wales and Northern Ireland as well as the European Union, who have chose to cut Scotlands subsidies in spite of us being one of the largest contibutors when based on per capita basis.

It Certainly is Time for the Scottish Nation.
8

Cappo Del Monte,

25/04/2008 06:29:00
This union knows exactly what its doing.
It knoew it has to shut down the refinery if there is a strike, it also knows the knock on effect to industry, workers, drivers, hauliers etc.
This union is holding a nation to ransom, all for a non contributary pension scheme , which we all know, just is not feasable nowadays.
Am sure there are plenty Polish and Europeans who would give their right arms for those jobs and conditions, sack the lot of these leaches and give the jobs to deserving people
9

James Dickson,

Mozambique 25/04/2008 06:33:13
Come back Maggie
10

1745,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 07:09:47
Why not put Nicol Stephen in charge of the strike ,from yesterday's performance he is bound to make a bigger hash of it than the present protaganists.
11

1745,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 07:09:47
Why not put Nicol Stephen in charge of the strike ,from yesterday's performance he is bound to make a bigger hash of it than the present protaganists.
12

UrbanFox,

25/04/2008 07:31:13
These striking thugs have to be hit hard. They should be sacked, lose ALL their benefits, and the jobs should be given to foreign workers. There is no place in today's Britain for this kind of vindictive strike action.
13

JamesMc,

Asia 25/04/2008 07:36:58
So Scotland is pulling in over 100 million pounds in revenue from oil a DAY, and yet the Unionist parties (and Scotsman newspaper) still harp on that there is no money to be made in an independent Scotland from North Sea Oil.
14

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 07:45:29
Good Luck to them. It's good to see the working man and woman with real power. We're a democracy aren't we? These people have the right to withdraw their labour. If it causes the Nation so much hassle, it just shows what an important job they do so they should be properly renumerated.
15

Andrah,

Embrugh 25/04/2008 07:48:57
Why would nationalising it help? The overwhelming number of strikes take place in the public sector. Remember the giant British Leyland that manufactured a large proportion of our cars, lorries and buses? They were wedded to strikes! Where is it now? Nationalisation would signal our reversion to third world status.
16

hibbyspurs,

25/04/2008 08:05:01
yes yes yes... Scotlands windfall on the "natural lottery"... We've heard it all before.. Of course when production in the North Sea starts to drop off then everyone will wonder why theres no money... But hey ho thats an argument for another universe apparently.. Lets just jump on this as another excuse to ram the prospect of independence from our big bully brother down south down everyones throat.

Cant the nationalists ever change the record instead of actually concentrating on the here and now instead of staring wistfully into the future at what might be or looking back 700 years (YES 700 YEARS) to what was?

The issue here is that a union & an employer cant agree on conditions for the workforce and through this there is the potential for the rest of the populace to suffer from fuel & energy shortages. From what I've heard in the last 24 hours INEOS have actually told the workforce that they can keep all their current benifits and the only change is that new employess will not be able to join the final salary pension scheme. Hello? How many other employers have done this in the last few years (I know mine has)? The final salry scheme will be replaced with a stakeholder or other scheme to new employees so what is the unions problem here? They are effectively fighting for rights of employees who dont exist yet!

Then again maybe theres a bigger picture here, like a few years ago when similar things started happening.... I think it was 1979..... Lets look at New Labour now..... Being bullied by the unions.... These workers at Grangemouth are just the latest to join the que of walkouts in a blatant attempt by the unions to destabilise the government in already troublesome times.

Another classic case in the Labour Parties history of the tail wagging the dog im afraid....

The summer of discontent is upon us.... The only good news is that with any luck it'll bring down our totally inept government and cause a general election which in return will result in t
17

hibbyspurs,

25/04/2008 08:09:51
#20 continued

which in return will result in the unons getting their erses kicked once again when the tories get in.

Will life get better under a tory government? Who knows... but surely the tories under David Cameron cnt do any wors than GB and labour are doing just now? If they do turn out worse then someone might as well just turn the power off and call it a day for Britain.... (ooops someone is already turning the power off)
18

Ian C,

Fife 25/04/2008 08:19:15
Scotsman needs to do its homework !

The Forties field is owned not by BP but by US company Apache North Sea. They bought it from BP some 4-5 years ago.

Always check facts otherwse you end up being like the Sun !
19

Knapdarlich,

25/04/2008 08:49:50
#10:

You say "BP handed over a 40 million pound pension scheme that grew well whilst it was part of BP."

The pension fund passed over to INEOS as part of the transfer of ownership was actually a great deal more than this. The £40m that gets bandied about was the effective surplus within the overall fund. BP's pension performance was no better and no worse than many other schemes, but BP had deep pockets and could afford to bail the fund out through the very poor investment return years of 2000-2004.

"There was little or no conflict between the company and its workforce for many years."

Sorry, that's just rubbish - there has always been conflict, but BP's position was always to cave in...because it could afford to!

"This company spent some of the pension fund (which did not belong to the company) on purchasing other business's"

This is dangerous and irresponsible regurgitation of utter tosh, suggesting a Robert Maxwell-esque fraud. The allegation lead to INEOS, quite rightly, issuing a defamation action against Unite for this making it. And guess what - the union have now withdrawn it. The issue is that while the BP pension fund was in surplus at the time of ownership transfer, the surplus was not transferred - i.e. the pension fund was transferred FULLY FUNDED, with no current pensioners (these all remained with BP) - how many schemes is the UK are in that enviable position today? Very few.

A pension fund excess does NOT belong to the pension members. Under UK GAAP accounting rules it belongs to the employer (BP). INEOS never had the £40m talked about, so any drivel about what they've done with it is exactly that - drivel.
20

Saoghal Beag,

25/04/2008 08:50:32
17 wonder if they will halt the olympic buildings or the iraq war?

hibbyspur a windfall that hs lasted over 20 years at least. a revenue that would ahve allowed this country to invest in the future and establish a strong financial platform. Instead we have financially shored up english governments.
21

Sedov,

Scotland 25/04/2008 08:55:36
the workers at the refinery are striking, not for pay, but for a secure future for those to come and indeed for the principle of a decent and dignified retirement for all workers. Pensions are a fundemental right for all workers and it is part of the refinery local agreements that all workers including new workers have a final full salary pension - just the same as their bosses have and the bosses in the banks and big business. This company are making massive profits and it these workers who are making their profits. workers, especially in the public sector have had enough of attcks on their living standards - enough is enough, the fight back has begun in earnest and it won't stop here.
22

Smutley,

Embra 25/04/2008 09:06:19
Well said Sedov.

The energy industry has made obscene profits off the back of sky-high oil prices, yet still they want more. They want to flog their employees' futures so they can line their shareholders' pockets even further.

Support the strike!
23

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 09:10:06
#25 Occupational pensions are NOT a right but are a privilige and there are plenty of people around who simply do not have one. The Grangemouth workers are doubly priviliged in that they are not being asked to contribute to their own financial future and the whole of the cost is being borne by their employer so not only do they get well remunerated while they work but they will continue to do so in retirement, all at the company's cost.

And yet still that is not enough. They want the company to carry on doing this in perpituity. Get real. There are precious few final salary schemes still open to new members and this must be the only non-contributory final salary scheme left in the country.

If I ruled the world, I'd get management and unions into a room, lock the door and not let them out until they have reached an agreement. They're going to have to somewhere along the line so just get on with it.

Seems to me the management have made a significant concession in keeping the scheme non-contributory but, for whatever deeper reason, the union remains intransigent. And meanwhile the general population and economy suffers for the sake of people who do not even work in the place! If the present workforce doesn't like it then they can always move on to other employers.
24

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 09:12:19
#26 Please explain how keeping a non-contibutory final salary pension going is flogging their employee's future.
25

Nippy sweetie,

25/04/2008 09:15:57
Pensions are not a right, stakeholder pensions are a right and businesses simply cannot sustain final salary pensions.

We who choose to work in the private sector have to look after our own pensions, and to say just because a business is in profit, it is ridiculous to say that they can chuck money at unsustainable pension schemes.

If you believe fantastic pensions for life are a right you probably should be looking for a job in the civil service, and the rest of us will continue subsidising these schemes as well. At least businesses have the common sense to say no.

Where are the government, they need to step in and sort this out, but hey don't worry we have fuel until May...........of yes that's 5 days away
26

!Ya basta!,

25/04/2008 09:17:00
Sedov, you have made pretty much the first sensible comments.

The article appallingly but so typical of todays world, barely mentioned and does not even attempt to discuss the issue that has caused this situation. As with most mass media outlets, the paper jumps immediately and completely to the side of business as if labour issues did not exist. Indeed, where do we see labour issues debated these days? Nowhere, they are only considered as a bit part in business disucssions.

The workers are fighting for a decent pension. Just because everybody else has given up on that doesn't mean that they should. The government has billions to bail out the banking industry but does not support it's own electorate in securing some basic rights. In the end, when we have mass old age poverty in the future yet again the public sector will have to put its hand in its pockets because private enterprise will have failed again.

The rights of businesses have achieved such superiority that nobody even mildly questions them these days. Sure business are creative and key to development. However, unchecked they are corrosive and destabilising. Contrary to common orthodoxy, in fact NO business anywhere survives without some public subsidy and there is also is no such thing as a free market. It is just a concept and does not exist, anywhere.

From the little information available elsewhere, the workers seem to have a point. Can Ms. McIntosh please retire to the business section and can a real journalist please give us a balanced article.

27

mcbogtrotter,

USA 25/04/2008 09:17:54
You might remember that the same thing happened in the US years ago with the Air Traffic controlers and in the US we lost the right to strike for most industries.
You will do well to remember that a strike is the only way workers can for anyone to listen to them, and think Raymond from Exxon got a 240,000,000.00 gold watch when he left why is one man worth that much but the workers in most industries can not get a fair share of what they produce. We need Unions to hold these corporations to task.
We just settled a contract for Rail Road labor and it took 5 years why because we can not strike so we have very little power to create some equality.
Most is the industries are making a killing especially oil, so there is plenty to go around if we do not let the corp heads steal it all.
Besides I thing the oil in the ground belongs to the people of the planet #1 Angus I think you may be right.
28

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 09:19:36
#25 Sedov

I suspect we might be on opposite sides of the political spectrum but I'm with you there. I'm a believer in the power of the Market. The bankers, venture capitalists and speculators all made a lot of money when times were good but have all gone running to the tax payer for bail outs when times are getting a bit dodgy. No doubt Ratcliffe has a very safe pension pot and iron-clad share options. Well he and Ineos have come up against a bunch of workers which the Market has given economic muscle, so tough. They have the power, the free market says they can use it.
29

Venachar,

25/04/2008 09:20:24
#23 Knapdarlich

Someone with a bit of sense at last. You could have added the appalling health and safety record of Grangemouth over the years.

#25 Sedov

What socialist utopia do you live in? "Pensions are a fundamental right for all workers...." Utter tosh.
How many people in Scotland do not have Company pensions. Quite a lot!

This lot at Grangemouth are loonies that are throwbacks to the 70's. All we need now is that other bampot from the west coast, Tommy Sheridan to turn up to support his brothers and sisters and the farce would be complete.

Sorry shouldn't call it a farce, these idiots are affecting just about everyone in Scotland over a non issue.

Is this loony Labour and the Unions last mad throw of the dice in Scotland?



30

,

25/04/2008 09:21:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 09:27:57
#25 and #32. The article above contains the following quote "On his [Ratcliff] website, he states: "We believe Ineos is a refreshing place to work and we are prepared to embrace new approaches to business.Safety is our first priority. We believe strongly in employee share ownership."

So those greedy capitalist share holding lackys you complain about actually are likely to include the workforce. It is not unusual in these sorts of shreholding schemes for employees to get preferential prices or even free share issues. What more do these guys want?
32

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 09:32:09
#33 Venachar

You're right, pensions aren't a right, they're a very nice condition of employment. It these guys want to withdraw their labour to protect the conditions of the post, not just themselves, good on them. I seem to remember many very paid executives saying they needed the 7 figure salaries, golden hellos, golden goodbyes and share options or they would head overseas. They got them and good luck to them. But you can't have it both ways. Why shouldn't workers use a bit of the same old threat to get what they want? Lord knows, I ain't no socialist. This is the freemarket, red in tooth and claw. You and the City can't have it both ways.
33

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 09:33:50
#30 You say "The workers are fighting for a decent pension."

These workers already have a more than decent pension that they have not contibuted one penny piece to, nor are they now being asked to. So get real.
34

mcbogtrotter,

25/04/2008 09:36:34
Remember when there were a lot of corp takeovers the first thing that happened was a take over of the pension funds and a lot of workers lost out, it happened to the Airline pilots most of their pensions were cut in half this happened due to airline bankrupcies the ones who lose are the workers as usual.
These funds have to be protected and any overage should stay in the fund as it was greated through the investment of the fund money, it is no fun to get to retirement age and then be told you have no pension or medical care and this happens to frequently.
35

Brian Ferrari,

25/04/2008 09:37:16
Sedov and Draco

Remember one thing: It is not the workers that are valuable. It is the job they do that is valuable.

If these workers were so valuable they would be able to leave and get as good an employment package elsewhere. You know they couldn't do that. There are any number of prople that would be happy to take their place on the package that is being offered to new employees.
36

Knapdarlich,

25/04/2008 09:38:02
Several posters have made comments about the seemingly outrageous profits INEOS and the other oil companies make...

There's obviously some confusion here - INEOS is NOT an oil company, it is a refiner (makes fuels from crude bought from the oil companies) and a petrochemicals manufacturer. The high oil price that so boosts the profits of exploration and production companies simply pushes up the input prices of INEOS feed materials. Look around anywhere in the financial press about the performance of refiners/ petrochems and you will see that most are struggling, and many are pushing rates on their plants DOWN because the more (product) they produce, the more (money) they lose. It may hardly seem like that when we're fuelling up at the pump, but that's the reality.

It would be useful if more people, before spouting their indignation on a public bulletin board like this, actually took the time and effort to do a little basic research so that they could make informed commentary.
37

Hugh,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 09:46:01
It's in the government's interest for people to "panic buy". Once everyone has an extra half tank of petrol, they can't put any more in and the country will be better protected against disruption over the coming month. Thereafter it will just be a case of buying two half-tankfuls instead of one whole one over the same period.
38

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 09:46:53
#38 - Think you'll find that company pension funds on this side of the pond are offered a high degree of protection. You may have a problem in the US with your unfettered capitalist market approach ("the American way") so go vote for a party this coming November who might do something about that.
39

Venachar,

25/04/2008 09:51:13
#36 Draco

The Union members at Grangemouth can withdraw their labour if the wish and chose correctly to do so, no-one has ever said otherwise.
However from several posters on this site and elsewhere it is evident that the consensus is that the emloyees think they are in a pretty safe position to strike. This has built up over a year. I don't care who's fault it is but your Union has to be pretty stupid or determined to cause trouble if it cannot be settled within a reasonable time frame.

If Ineos were to publish the average wage bill, deductions, contibutions and share save scheme purchases perhaps the general public would easliy see how stupid and greedy these people are.

Would the last person out of Grangemouth please turn off the lights!
40

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 09:53:12
#39 Brian Ferrari

Yes, that's true. But all I'm saying is these guys are free to use their industrial muscle to try to maintain the status quo for themselves and their successors in the post they hold, and good luck to them. I'd say they're being quite selfless. It would be quite easy for them to say 'I'm OK, stuff the new employees.' Companies are there to make money and profit. That's good. If a company can get away with making extra profit by lowering wages or cutting benefits, it will. So why are workers just expected to put up with it without a fight? If they lose, that's the market. If they win, that's the market.
41

Trix,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 09:54:49
Back to the old and bad days of the miners strike. 1200 men holding a gun to the head of the country. Anybody knows that pension plans like theirs are just not feasable, but the union just doesn't care. Designate a refinery an essential service, like the police and enforce a no strike agreement. The union know that they have great power, and will try and force the company to back down, but at what cost?. I suggest that the people of Scotland tot up the additional cost to themselves both in time and in money, and send the bill to "unite". This is not a well thought out dispute. This is just grabbing all that they can get. Hearing the union on the BBC a couple of nights ago was the same old rubbish. "It's never our fault" "The rest of the world have a different scheme, but we are sticking to ours".

Get the SNP to get a grip, or would an independant Scotland be any better? Just think what would happen if we were not able to get fuel from "down South" Then what?
42

Venachar,

25/04/2008 09:59:28
Trix

As has been said before it is a reserved issue, please address your concerns to no10 Downing Street.
43

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 10:00:38
#44 I think it's gone the point of an altruistic battle on behalf their potential successors and become a last hurrah for the dinosaurs of the union.

If they are not careful then they may see their jobs and those of their successors being shipped out to somewhere cheaper. The miners didn't think it could happen to them, nor the shipbuilders, nor the car workers to name but a few industries where high running costs led directly to the exporting of jobs.

Are we short of coal, steel or cars? Nope. Nor would we be short of fuel if Grangemouth was to be closed on a permamnent basis. That's the nature of the global economy nowadays and the union and the workers it purports to represent would do well to realise that.
44

Doh,

25/04/2008 10:00:48
#2 Senga

Yes he needs some help from Christine McKelvey.

That is the amazing thing - genetically all the politicians, and supporters, are just so superior.

It is amazing. You are amazing.
Independance must attract all the brightest and best people. It is amazing.
45

Happy driver,

25/04/2008 10:02:02
How clueless are these union people. Just about every final salary pension scheme in the UK has been shut to new employees. Those existing workers should be grateful they still have one. Anyone in the future choosing to work there will sign a contract knowing the terms of their pension when they take the job.

While they make some pointless protest the rest of us pick up the cost. As is usual with the unions you end up with someone who is probably leading this on a power trip not benefiting the existing members at all. The end result will be Ineos will take a harsher line resulting in redundancies due to increased costs or scrapping all final salary pension schemes.
46

McX,

25/04/2008 10:03:18
Amazing to think that one turn of a spigot and there's UK wide meltdown.
47

Sedov,

Scotland 25/04/2008 10:05:11
The workers in key industries such as oil have the ability to withdraw their labour, which creates the profits for those industries if they think that the wages and conditions are being threatened by the 150 or so multi nationals who control our standards of living. In fact workers in key industries understand very well that have the ability to have the state at their mercy through a withdrawal of their labour but because they are also very responsible and do want to continue earning a decent living workers in general are very reluctant to strike and it takes a lot for them to do so - the statistics on strike days in the UK confirm this and the Uk has a very low strike rate. However, there is a sea change taking place not only in the UK but in Europe at the present time and a cursory look at the situation in Germany, Spain and even little Denmark will confirm this. It is no co-incedence that the massive profits of the few companies who control the economies of europe are dipping as a result of the credit crunch and the deficit in trading with China and Asia etc ( 6% in the UK) , thus they look to their workforces to maintain their profits by their cutting wages and conditions. We are nowhere near the strike wave of the seventies caused by successive pay cuts and job losses and its nonsense to compare that period with this, but watch this space as we are in interesting times which will test both the UK government and the SNP.
48

Publius,

London 25/04/2008 10:06:03
Please can someone advise how easy (or hard) it is to fill up with diesel? I was intending to drive up to Girvan tonight to spend the weekend with my ma. I've got next week off work so I proposed to go up to Speyside for a few days and then back to London (via Edinburgh for a bit of business). If there's no diesel for my car, then I'll put the whole thing off.
I'd be glad of some advice. The radio and TV are useless, but not quite as useless as my business's head office in Edinburgh. They don't seem to know about diesel and anything except Edinburgh buses.
49

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 10:06:10
#50 Yep, and with that power comes responsibility and the union is now just being downright irresponsible.
50

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 10:09:11
#52 You can always get the train. Sure your Ma would appreciate the effort!
51

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 10:12:54
These guys have economic muscle. Good on them. The rest of us are just jealous because we can have our jobs transferred to some Pole on £5 per hour or a Bangladeshi on 50p a day if the company feels like it. Eventually we'll all be on a lot less, as Jambo-ree says, due to globalisation of the economy. Just because I or you can't, doesn't mean some workers can't use the power they have to hold back the tide. If they lose, and a load of Bulgarians are brought in on scabby terms and conditions, at least they tried and I can't blame them for that.
52

Senga Jean,

25/04/2008 10:15:18
#52 There are few problems anywhere. Diesel no problem except in the Lib/Dems mind
53

Venachar,

25/04/2008 10:15:30
#49 probably true.

If the strike goes ahead who is to say that the adverts in Gdansk, Tallin and other east european states are not up already.
If the sheep want to keep their terms and conditions might be a good idea to look at the notice period for dismissal.
Just as easy these days to employ a cheap european with no pension entitlement than an expensive Scot!

As was said above it's the job that is important not the person.

Never mind brothers stick together and you can all march out the gates together, I'm sure you'll be able to find a brass band somewhere!

54

McX,

25/04/2008 10:20:45
#52 Difficult call, old crocus. Fill up on the M6 and you should be ok for Girvan. Points further north and you're better off rolling the dice.
55

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 10:22:36
#57 Venachar

When do you take a stand? If , every year, your boss comes to you and says, because of overseas competition, I have to reduce your wages or remove some of your benefits, do you just put up with it? Like you say, you can change jobs or you can challenge you employer in some way. Perhaps strike or work to rule. If you're fortunate enough to be able to move to a company that's offering you conditions as your's used to be , you're very fortunate. As I said, I ain't no socialist, but I can appreciate it when people try to stand up for their work conditions, even if it's a futile stand.
56

Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 10:24:21
Like I said before, this is happening for all the wrong reasons.
57

Doh,

25/04/2008 10:26:35
#57

"As was said above it's the job that is important not the person."

And is that a good thing?
58

conservative,

Fife 25/04/2008 10:29:09
Come back Maggie and boot these union dinosaurs off to Scargill-land.
59

Brian Ferrari,

25/04/2008 10:29:12
Draco and Sedov

Remember Wapping. And Timex. And the miners.

I think the Union will win this time round. But I bet BP make sure they aren't left at the mercy of the refinery again.
60

Sedov,

Scotland 25/04/2008 10:34:49
On the raised subject of 'trade union power'. This is of course a myth and one of the greatest propoganda cliches of modern times as witnessed by the
words of Thatcher of 'the enemy within'. The enemy mainly being working families standing up for their themselves. In France which has the highest strike record of any country in Europe and also the highest success rate in gaining reforms as a result of their actions, the membership of trade unions is lower than in the UK and one of the lowest in Europe. Workers, when faced with attacks on their living standards will take action whether or not they are in a trade union and in many cases in defiance of their trade union leadership who normally side with the bosses. These are the facts whether we like it or not.
61

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 10:39:09
#63 Brian

You're probably right. Wapping, Timex and the miners strike were all marred by violence. They were disputes of their time when workers were trying to hold back the tide of changes in works practices. I couldn't blame the workers for trying then, even if their fight was hopeless, the way the world was going, and I held no truck whatsoever with the violence and intimidation of those days. And now the economy is changing further and faster. Workers in the 70s and 80s had to measure the efficiency of their companies against other EU countries or the USA or Japan. Now we all have to measure the profitablity or productivity of companies in realtion to much poorer workers than that. I fear that in the coming years most of us are in for a big shock in relation to our living standards. Then we might just look back and understand the motivation of the Grangemouth workers.
62

Jock ex 45Cdo RM,

THORNHILL 25/04/2008 10:42:21
Pension Problems?
What pensions have the 'management' in their emplyment packages, bet it's much better than the operatives!!
Go to arbitration? Last time Gordon Brown and his expat cronies went to arbitratation (Police ? ), his cohort would not accept the arbitors findings.
The Press, as usual making headlines out based on half truths, resulting in half lies, all in the name of newspaper sales.
63

Venachar,

25/04/2008 10:49:12
#61 Doh

Never said it was a good thing, it is just a fact.

A number of years ago one of my shift operators in a Shell facility said "Oh they will never get rid of us, they need us". Six months later a full shift disappeared and a full layer of management went at the plant.

Draco

What effect is there on the current employees with the Company's proposals? Where has the "every year" bit coming from? Are you talking personally?

My view is that Unite's action is disproportionate to the problem. I have been made redundant in my life, I've been in a job where I did not receive any increase in salary for 5 years due to market forces and I have indeed moved when required.

You are correct, this is indeed futile. The wages at Grangemouth are probably some of the best in relation to qualifications required. I would love to see the wages published, then you can ask a gradute if he/she would not mind that salary and a non contrib pension.

You are probably right in that it will be futile.




64

hibbyspurs,

25/04/2008 10:50:45
#24

"a windfall that hs lasted over 20 years at least. a revenue that would ahve allowed this country to invest in the future and establish a strong financial platform. Instead we have financially shored up english governments."

And therin lies the problem.... When will you people get a grip and realise its not an ENGLISH government but the government of the UNITED KINGDOM...

This constant anti English overtone at every opportunity becomes a little tiresome I'm afraid and at times is almost racist.

So the English just pillage our natural wealth..... Then again dont the revenues raised from taxation on the English people help to support services north of the border or perhaps we just steal that do we? What nonsense to describe the North sea oil as Scotlands property when the country is part of a unified kingdom whose constitution has been enacted by a legally elected government and agreed to by all those invlved in its creation. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure the first monarch of the union was in fact King James the 6th of Scotland (James the 1st of England) was it not. Hardly sounds like we were dragged kicking & screming into the union in the first place now does it?

However if the bigoted minority who feel the English are to blame for everything then sure as hell we'll be dragged kicking & screaming out of it by you lot.

Dont dare try and get me wrong either, I'm dammed proud to be Scottish and I laugh at English failures in football etc along with so moany other Scots. However I'm also dammed proud to be British and proud of the union that has lasted for hundereds of years.

On my passport it says "British Citizen" & I'm proud of that, you must surely be ashamed when you travel outwith the confines of the UK as I am 100% certain that if you hold a UK passport it says exactly the same thing.
65

forestry,

DUNS 25/04/2008 10:59:57
I bought deisel yesterday at 127p/litre. The second 3p rise in two weeks and was told by the proprieter that 2.5p of that rise was due to the current crisis. ( he is not to blame, Pace Petroluem dictate the price he sells it for)
The Scottish Government stated last night that they would not tolerate exploitation of the current crisis.
Write to your MSPs/MPs and demand that they stop this exploitation.
BETTER STILL BOYCOTT ALL PACE PETROLUEM OUTLETS.
66

Knapdarlich,

25/04/2008 11:00:05
#66 - all INEOS staff at Grangemouth are on exactly the same pension terms, and all are faced with the same proposed changes.

What's this dispute all about? For individual members I guess its principally about the changes to their current terms - but major concessions appear to have been made on those already by management. Are the workforce altruistically and selflessly making a stand for those yet to join the company? - Hmm.

My guess is that this is more about union power; the union may be desparately opposed to having two groups of members to represent that are on different terms.

Why? - because it would mean that in future disputes the interests of members may align differently depending on which set they're in, leading to the potential for internal dis-unity and making it much, much harder for the union to gain concensus within its internal processes.

In my view, local members have been sold a pup - their own interests are being manipulated "for the greater good"....of the union.

The best thing members could do is to initiate a vote of no confidence in its current leadership and replace them with people more directly sensitive to members real needs, without the grandstand politicing.
67

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 11:02:35
#67 Venachar

I'm giving the benefit of the doubt to the workers as to their motives in this. As you say, it would appear they have nothing to lose in terms of their own current terms and conditions. If they're using the power they have to preserve the working conditions of future workers, what's wrong with that? I appreciate the reality of today's global economy. But this year it may be final salary pension, next no paid holidays, next no sickness pay,next only half an hour break a shift. I can't condemn anyone for wanting to preserve the advances made in working conditions in this country over the last century, even if it probably isn't realistic.
68

Jock ex 45Cdo RM,

THORNHILL 25/04/2008 11:05:57
# 69,
Thornhill Dumfriesshire
Diesel now 128.9 as of now, as I type!
Will keep you informed.
69

forestry,

DUNS 25/04/2008 11:07:40
# 72

Email your MP or MSP and tell them .
70

Ralph99,

25/04/2008 11:16:17
The money Ineos have lost due to the strike is paltry compared to what it would have cost to maintain the pension.

So, what's really going on?

Is it Ineos attempting to break the union at Grangemouth? Seems an expensive way to do it.
Is the Ineos owner so egotistical that he'd rather lose millions than lose to the union? Surely he's not that daft?
Or perhaps when the government are losing all that north sea tax money and the petrol forecourts are empty, Ineos will be in a very strong position to bargain with the government?
I think the union have been duped into this strike and the pension dispute was 'engineered' for other purposes.
Then again maybe it's my imagination running riot.
71

Ralph99,

25/04/2008 11:17:38
No. 75 should have read: The money to save the pension is paltry compared to what is lost due to the strike
72

Venachar,

25/04/2008 11:18:37
Draco

You talk about next year, what if!
Well what gives Unite the right to affect every layer of Scotlands life and business because of their own interests.
I will give you an example. My daughter works in a continuous process factory, 24 hours a day production.
The shift employees are bused in from Stirling/Falkirk and other parts of the central belt. Why should her firm suffer because their is a shortage of diesel and the buses don't run? Can her firm send the bill to Unite?
The union members at Grangemouth can strike for as long as they like but the should not be able to cause disruption to others.

73

subrosa,

25/04/2008 11:19:53
# 23 Many thanks for your post. That answers some of my questions.
74

forestry,

DUNS 25/04/2008 11:21:41
See post #69

Should anyone want to discuss Pace Petroluems exploitation of its customers feel free to call the Scottish Manager, Mr Stuart Birnie on 07831 387251.
75

forestry,

DUNS 25/04/2008 11:24:00
Strange ! He is not answering his phone.
76

Iain Bhern,

25/04/2008 11:28:21
I wonder if anyone has considered the possibility that once closed down Ineos might try to say that the cost of re-opening the plant is not economically viable!
77

Alan B,

25/04/2008 11:30:44
The wider issue is the government really need to sort out the pension mess. Brown has simply made it worse.

I would suggest in the modern world. An end to final salary schemes replaced by a personal pension for every individual. An employer should be required to pay into that pension a minimum of 5% of an employees salary.

This means that it takes account of the fact that people have multiple jobs and switching job puts ur pension in problems. It leads to be people sticking with jobs they would otherwise leave and does not help enhance having a flexible workforce.

Employees could put in extra gross monies into there scheme if they want.

The government also needs to the same with public sector employees. So many people stay with civil services jobs that they are bored with and have given up on just for the pension.

They also need to bring public sector retirement age into line with the private sector. Early retirement will be possible if ur pension can afford it not as a right.

Retirement age in general should rise, as we have an aging population and we need to work to provide enough for that retirement. The cake should not be spread too thinly. There is also no need to throw people in the scrap heap as they get older.

I would suggest if retirement age is moved to 69, but with flexiblity when people reach 60 to work part time. Easing back to after the age of 60 seems a good idea.

One of the problem with pensions, is that it is probably the most difficult thing for us to provide for.
78

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 25/04/2008 11:35:27
My understanding was that Ineos wanted to change the pension scheme for future employees in order to justify the investing of £750million in upgrading Grangemouth to make it more efficient. I doubt if they will wish to do so now. Why upgrade a refinery there when they could build a brand new one in Eastern Europe for less, staffed by Poles on lower wages and easier terms. Much petrol and diesel is shifted by sea anyway. And when the North Sea runs down what is the point of a refinery there. The Russian pipelines would be nearer.
It is economic lunacy for Ineos to invest in an area with such an intransigent union. If I were them I would consider relocating to a cheaper area and shipping in the finished product.
I fear Unite will kill the golden goose that has been laying very good eggs to their non-contribuory pension scheme.
79

Sprite256,

edinburgh 25/04/2008 11:38:35
#22
Read the article. It says that BP owns and operates the Forties pipeline and Apache owns the field.
80

subrosa,

25/04/2008 11:41:10
# 45 Get the SNP to get a grip, or would an independant Scotland be any better? Just think what would happen if we were not able to get fuel from "down South" Then what?

It is my understanding they are not getting fuel from 'down south' but Rotterdam.
81

Venachar,

25/04/2008 11:45:40
#83 IRN

You damn yourself with every posting you moron!
82

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 25/04/2008 11:53:18
I hope we will not import fuel from England to our petrol stations . That is THEIR oil not ours . ring a bell anywhere SNP voters ???
83

Iain Bhern,

25/04/2008 11:53:37
#84, your post rather gives credence to my comment at #81.
84

Draco Was a Wimp,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 11:54:53
#77 Venachar

I'm afraid it's the case that some workers wield more power than others. We'd all notice if the doctor's, nurses, police, electricity workers , (oil refinery workers?) withdrew their labour. It might be a wee while before we'd notice if the woma selling lipstick in Boots went on strike. No disrespect to her, but it's a kind of jungle law. Just as it seems wrong tht they can hold the rst of us to ransom, employees shouldn't be penalised just because they hold more important posts.
85

Alan B,

25/04/2008 12:13:07
Buckpool Loon
"The Scottish Government should inform the retailers in no uncertain term that the will be fined if they resort to those tactics"

Do they have the power to do so?
86

The Strategist,

25/04/2008 12:21:35
Ineos is effectively a private equity company that happens to specialise currently in refining assets. It will have borrowed most of the money to buy Grangemouth and I would not be surprised if Scottish banks were involved in the loans.

Now, it will be finding the costs of those loans are on the increase and its pip squeezing of costs at Grangemouth will be intensified.

87

Doh,

25/04/2008 12:24:30
#82

Thoughtful post.

Of course you are right we haev enormous pension problems, mainly one of too high expectations.

Every year we become relatively less wealthy compared with our competitors but wish to retain the same benefits. That is only possible in the public sector that is better insulated from market forces.

Pretty miserable outlook for European workers.
88

Venachar,

25/04/2008 12:29:27
Draco

Nobody is indispensible. The blame game is dead easy to play. Whether or not the management of Ineos are right, wrong or green men from Mars, there is only one cause of this problem for Scotland.

Unite and its members have decided to withdraw their labour over something that does not affect one single person currently employed in the facility.

If any person was losing their pension provision then I would agree with their action. I just cannot reconcile what they hope to achieve and what they are going to do to the rest of the country. It is not negotiation it pure and simple blackmail.

This is almost as bad as when the Electrical Union decided to improve their members benefits by agreeing and arranging private health care for its members. What happend, the fraternal brothers pilloried the leadership and suspended the union from the TUC. How dare the Electricians have the temerity to look after their members.

The Electricians weren't hurting anyone, and no-one currently employed at Grangemouth will suffer yet they are going on strike. Must be the emissions pollution around there that is affecting their brains!


89

Niadh,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 12:44:16
So they are striking because the Final Salary Pension scheme is being closed to NEW ENTRANTS.
The people already working there are not affected by this change.
It is also a change that is being made across the UK. Even the civil service is using money purchase pensions now.
Next they will be striking to get a pay increase to cover the costs of the hike in gas and electricity prices that this strike is apparently going to cause.

If gas and electricity proces do go up as a result of this they will loose even more sympathy from the general populace.
90

Zedd,

Fife 25/04/2008 12:56:02
A lot of people here seem to be grudging these workers good pensions and salaries. I know that other nations can provide cheaper labour, but is that really the route we want Scotland to go down? Business has social and economic responsibilities but INEOS seems to be interested in neither.
91

Venachar,

25/04/2008 13:02:08
#98 IRN

Like I said, you damn yourself with every posting.

What does the toughguy bit mean? Is it that some people have common sense and do not follow dimwit union officials around like sheep and can express their view. You sound like that nit Robinson from BL spouting forth union speak.
As someone else has said on here today, the only people who will suffer will be the ordinary union members, not the officials.

You know nothing about nothing about me, nor my political outlook. However I have had a union card for the last 35 years!

You have used the phrase " Unilateral changes made by Ineos....." well as far as I am aware they have been under discussion for quite some time but non have been implemented. This would say to me that you are in an intransigent position with no prospect of ever agreeing anything with anyone.

I'll look for that brass band shall I?





92

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 25/04/2008 13:28:45
100 IRN I understand that the employers had withdrawn their proposals affecting existing employees and that this dispute concerned only future (i.e. non existing) employees.
I also get the impression that the reason for the dispute is that the employer is a billionaire and can afford to continue the current arrangements. Such would allow the leap of logic that where an employer was not a billionaire, that the unions would be content to diminish the benefits of existing employees with regard to pensions.
93

Doh,

25/04/2008 13:29:08
From the Civil Service pension web site

"Suppose Ahmed earns £22,000 in the year to 31 March 2009. This would earn him a further pension of £506 a year, bringing his total pension earned to £742 a year. If the increase in RPI was then 2.4%, Ahmed’s pension would increase to £760 a year (£742 x 1.024)."

This is under the nuvos scheme where the employee contributes 3.5%. Doesnt matter what the employer contributes - the scheme promises to pay out 2.3% of annual pensionable salary - regardless of inflation, economic performance etc.

So Ahmed over a 40 year period can actually gain a 40 x 2.3% pension, except luckily for the tax payer it is capped at 75% so he will have to make do with a pension of £22,000 x 0.75 = £16,500.


Now let us consider Ahmed's brother Fayed. He has a
earns the same amount each year but has a money purchase private pension.

As a rule of thumb for every £100,000 he saves he can hope to buy an annuity (pension) of about £6,000.

So Fayed and his employer would needed to have saved 16.5 x 100 / 6 = £275,000. About £6,875 a year for 40 years (I know his brother retired 5 years earlier...).

Let us half that amount to allow for stockmarket growth (above inflation!). And let us half it again since Fayed's employer wants to match his contribution.

Fayed needs to contribute about £1,718/year.
Ahmed was contributing 3.5% or £770/year.

Lucky Ahmed, poor Fayed.

But dont worry this wont happen cause Fayed will be made redundant before he retires anyway.
94

Venachar,

25/04/2008 13:35:54
Zedd

No-one is begrudging anyone anything. I suspect #100 IRN works at Grangemouth. Why don't you ask him/her to state what their gross pay was last year and what his current pension entitlement is. I doubt he/she would respond. The reason he/she will not do this is because most people in this country would consider what he/she has compared to the rest of the country's workforce as pretty well paid.

This is a completely unnecessary strike which will affect most, if not all of Scotland. This is for a demand/ultimatum that others here have already said does not match reality in the real world.

If you are lucky enough to have a company pension, 99% of members make a contribution. These guys say making a contribution is a pay cut - it is still their money being saved for them.






95

Venachar,

25/04/2008 13:40:31
#105 IRN

Union speak - moron!
96

fearmunger,

glasgow 25/04/2008 13:45:41
This whole things stinks like a refinary at low tide. 25 years ago the left of centre press in scotland like the daily record would have been saying "reduce your fuel consumption to suport the workers" today its all the end is nigh and pull the ladder up jack I'm alright. There is no crisis! yet the way the media portray it we should all be heading down to Grangemouth to barraick the workers for having the nerve to ask for their pension rights to be protected. Obviously BP must be in dire need of the cash which either means their profit reports are lies or maybe life would be easier for them if they managed to reduce what little unionsied support their workers have.

Now we are all of a sudden being told that 1/3 of the north sea oil is about to be cut off, its just scaremungering. this strike will have a similar effect on the gas supply yet no one is being as daft as to try and fill calor bottles from the kitchen hob.

And for those monomanics amoungst you on this site who see everything as a opertunity to either support or suppres scottish nationalism with regards to oil production the facts are this 1)The scottish executive has no legal control past the low tide mark(hmm wonder why that is)and so have no say in what is undertaken on the oil fields 2) the majority of north sea oil is landed in England and never comes anywhere near scotland and 3)the suggestion that these oil fields are in scottish territorial water is highly debatable. The idea that the UK held "ownership" of anything out past a 4 mile radius from the shore line only came into effect as a result of the Cod wars. If indenendance were to be granted by westmister it would only really be obliged to offer back what it had incorporated into the UK in the 1700's which sure as hell didn't include the Forties oil field. And if you dont think that would happen ask yourself why the British empire held onto a daft wee place like the Falkland Islands with such vigor.
97

fearmunger,

glagow 25/04/2008 13:59:00
you have to love the targeted marketing on this site, at the top of the page right now as I type is an advert for shell and down the side an advert for a car market, fantastic.

Comment #82 is the only sensible person here by the way (i include myself in that)
98

fearmunger,

25/04/2008 14:02:57
#111 I agree England has no right to it either but the rump of the british union that would be left if scotland went its on way would have a right to it as it is claimed under british soverinty. I'm not saying its right or wrong mate, I'm just saying that's the way it stands. Also I doubt very much that the companies who own that pipe line will be to keen to have the scottish exec turning up with a big tug boat to drag the end of the thing up from Stockton to Tayside. Ownership of the oil is one thing, ownership of the means of extraction and production is another.
99

Publius,

London 25/04/2008 14:23:59
Thanks to all for advice about availability of diesel. I've decided to postpone my trip for a week or two.

100

Knapdarlich,

25/04/2008 14:35:17
#98, 100, 105 etc

Let's be absolutely clear about this - INEOS have not unilaterally changed anything whatsoever within the pensions area. To say thay they have is a LIE.

They have been in negotiations with staff (both union and non-union) about their proposals for change to the pensions arrangements and have been for 6 months or more. The statutory consultation period is 60 days, I believe, which means that management have gone well beyond what is required of them or what many other employers would have done.

The world doesn't stand still and while change is rarely welcome, it is always necessary. If Grangemouth need £750m investment to continue as a long term viable business (i.e. "stay in business" expenditure, not growth!!) it is reasonable for those putting up the money to expect some give and take with the workforce.

Much has been made of the prominent voice of the union, but what of the 500 hundred or so non-union staff? Who's going to look after them when statutory redundancy notices start dropping through their lettboxes, or the 500 or so contract staff that HAVE ALREADY been laid off or given notice?

Turkeys are voting for Christmas!

#103 - you're plainly just barking.
101

Venachar,

25/04/2008 14:41:29
#113 IRN

BP sold Grangemouth because the amount of reinvestment that was needed was too great at the oil price at the time.
Similarly the OM's have sold off their assets in the north sea as the fields become depleted, a bit of profit still in them.
Ineos bought Grangemouth to make money for a while, as they have done elsewhere in Europe. Without investment Grangemouth is going to die sometime in the future.
If anything the jealousy comes from the workers/unions against Mr Ratcliff is it?
Grangemouth could just as easily have closed, btw that course of action was on the drawing board.
Mr Moxon deputy general secretary of the STUC states that employees earn £30,000 at Grangemouth(see BBC website). This is without doubt basic and not including overtime/shift payements. How can I say this well over a decade ago some of my tech/operators were earning £35000 including overtime. How much now, you take a guess, and of course all payments are now pensionable.

As for hiding behind a computer and the web, well as I said you don't know me, but calling you a moron is me being polite, when it was to your face there would be a bit more invective in it I can asure you.

102

Daibhidh,

Edinburgh 25/04/2008 14:51:37
Given the vast majority of people in Scotland oppose this strike, which, let's be frank, is down to the greed of a few well-paid workers who receive pension deals most of us could only dream about, why don't WE picket the picket line nad protest over the greed of these striking money-grabbers?!
103

W Smith,

Middle East 25/04/2008 15:13:07
Around 70% of the oil refinery staff in the Middle East are Indian, Pakistani or Fillipino.

Most of them are working for less than £350/month.


THE WRITING IS ON THE WALL YOU LAZY MILITANT B"£$%&S - now get back to work before more oil companies 'do a Shell' and cut jobs and take the jobs elsewhere.

BTW
Slamond wants to make Scotland the 'green capital of Europe'.

Well we're heading in the right direction eh Salmond?

Will the last one to leave Scotland switch the lights off!
104

Knapdarlich,

25/04/2008 15:21:06
#120

I didn't see you presenting any advanced concepts, just the distorted parnoid verbiage that typifies the out-pourings of rabid national socialists. "Blame the English!" - have you been taking soundbites from Mugabe??
105

Jambo-ree,

25/04/2008 15:32:04
#115 and #120 - You've got your tongue firmly in your cheek, yes? God I hope so!
106

VinoTinto,

25/04/2008 16:15:32

My uncle used to say that if Scotland needed an enema then they'd put the hose in Grangemouth. Carry on lads - STRIKE - Ineos will then invest their money in Europe and we can get rid of that dreadful polluting monstrosity - the Greens should be supporting this!!
107

Elinor Dashwood,

Linlithgow 25/04/2008 16:53:06
Interesting comment #124 VinoTinto - I live downwind of grangemouth and I had peace and quiet with no flaring of the stacks last night. It was nice. I do like the ability to drive to work though. And the only petrol station in Linlithgow has queues and is limiting folk to £20. Crud.
108

Alfred E. Neuman,

25/04/2008 17:19:19
Grangemouth is a dump. Not as bad as stinking Glasgow though.
109

Paula,

25/04/2008 17:26:52
That the union has been allowed to do this to the detriment of so many people is obscene. The comment from the union buddy sounds almost gleefull.

The government need a right good kick up the backside, what are they doing about it? Nothing as usual.
110

McX,

25/04/2008 18:00:57
At last the perfect job for Alf. Polish up your CV feller.

http://www.hips.org/Jobs.html#Re-entryCoordinator
111

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 18:29:21
128
McX
I wonder what a"Bad Date Sheet Coordinator"
actually does...
112

Tradamus Lampada,

Toronto 25/04/2008 18:40:15
It was reported on the radio here this morning that gasoline prices have risen again as a result of a strike in a refinery in Scotland!

Is there ANY possibility that the Grangemouth refinery processes oil that will be used in Canada?
113

Alfred E. Neuman,

25/04/2008 18:50:44
128 McX

I see you and yourlike got the Trump story shut down in a concerted effort by all the usual nat-monkies.

What is hips? I dare not open the link for fear of it being more farmyard/cow/horse beastiality and pornography that you bot admitted to doing (as Methalions) and posted links to your dirty pictures.
114

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 18:58:10
Don't worry about the link Alf, this is nothing like 'BeastClub' that Methalions posted on the Trump thread.
115

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 19:14:03
132
Hiya fakie.
Was wondering when you would get round to me.
116

Terrier2,

25/04/2008 19:17:24
This strike merely covers up the real fuel crisis, which has been inflicted on the British people by the Labour government in the form of excessive duty on fuel. The fact people have been panic buying should iullustrate to the government that motor fuel is a necessity for many, not some luxuary to be taxed. If they want to help the environment they should take action to reduce the cost of public transport by investing in infrastructure, and encouraging competition.

I hope now that the haulage companies/fuel protesters who took action in 2001 will also now come out against the government, to demand Brown and Darling resign and we have a general election. We will then see how the parties which advocate increased fuel duties and the global warming fraud actually fair.

I have already filled my car up, and have been out filling every possible legal container with fuel. I have also been stocking the fridge - as food in supermarkets will run out, as the delivery lorries run out of fuel next week.

Panic buying = Crisis = End of Brown (maybe even Salmond as well)

I would prefer to have the country at a standstill for a couple of weeks, rather than have another 1 year of Gordon Brown.

Liberty or Death
117

McX,

25/04/2008 19:25:05
#131 Alfie, it's work and wife safe...just a gag amidst the cuntsoup on the forum. You never know you might like the job.

Alf, Alfie, Alfred old fruit, why the constant accusations? Yes, there are some undesirable types on our side and equally on yours. Have the Hootsman been sending bat signals into the sky to tell you it was the fault of us cybernats?
118

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 19:37:55
135
McX, Alf the MAD

132 is the culprit.

119

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 19:51:19
137
He may owe fines...
120

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 20:02:38
140
I always wondered about the rusty chains in the cellar.

Edwardian libraries must have been far stricter.
121

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 25/04/2008 20:05:56
Whatever grievance Unite has with Ineos is up to them. Unite is causing me uncertanty and potential disruption to many more than me. Why should we suffer because of them? Do they think that will give them any sympathy?

I say to Unite that if you don't care about me, why should I care about you? You aint my brother.

The French had a good idea once. It was all to do with wanting more money for railway workers. Guess who went on strike?

It was the ticket sales staff and inspectors.

Yep, the public got freebies and were not inconvenienced. Shame about Unite - still stuck in the past.
122

McX,

25/04/2008 20:16:36
#139 Herr Comma, I am if anything magnanimous.

#136 Congrats Conan, your very own fakie. Remember in order for him to live you have to feed him, play with him and love him. Like your very own life size tamagachi.
123

Parafin Young,

Grangemouth 25/04/2008 20:35:22
What a mess! For years the site has had weak management who have caved into many Union demands. In all of the coverage there is no mention of the threatened strike ballot two years ago that yielded the unions a one off payment and a significant increase in pensionable salary to cover for the loss of share schemes. Come on journalists do a bit more digging...could be a good one for the Sundays!!



124

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 20:35:22
144
McX
Can I take him for walks?

I said WALKS.
125

,

25/04/2008 21:31:40
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
126

McX,

25/04/2008 21:36:32
#149 Good luck taking on all 1200 of them.
127

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 21:38:43
149
Shall you threaten their children next,SS?
128

Pomodora,

Gravesend 25/04/2008 22:09:52
It's always interestng to note on which articles the SCOTSMAN allows comments and very often unlimited comments. Never on the nepotism of MP's and how they lead their brood to drink at the Parliamentary trough (todays story) or other pro-establishment stories but are always ready to open the column for Union bashing allowing the right wing know nothings to "flog" heir prejudices.
129

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 22:20:24
152 Pornodora

The Trump column was open and then closed after Methalions (an SNP harcore nutter) started posting links to "Gay Beastiality" web site and offering frank discussion of what he does with a Horse or a Goat.

I think the Scotsman is doing the sensible thing by preventing SNP hardcore (and paid up members of beast club) to post things that they could potentially be sued for.
130

Conan the Librarian™,

25/04/2008 22:38:33
152 Pomodora
Re 153
He is a fakie, who impersonates SNP posters in a scatalogical, indeed, bestial(faking Meths) manner.
Note "Pornodora".
He just can't help it.

Sigh.
131

thoms,

Grangemouth 25/04/2008 22:45:02
#149 Stirling Sentinel is an idiot :-)

We support you in Grangemouth guys/girls, if people did their research and knew the facts they wouldn't be so quick to judge. Who created the fuel fiasco? Ineos on Monday released info to the press creating 'panic buying' and only today admitted there was enough fuel to last if everyone had gone about their business as normal.

The guys at the refinery are reacting to actions from Ineos, they did not create this situation, and they regret the effect the scaremongering has caused to the public caused by Ineos and hopefully they'll resume normal business as soon as possible. they've got the right to strike/withdraw labour they want to retire on a decent pension which they have contributed to for years as part of their wage package (reduced wage rises in lieu of non-contributory pension payments by the company). To simply come along and effectively make them pay 6%, and that was never taken off the table but merely deferred for three months, this would affect ALL employees now as well as in the future. In effect a wage cut. They've worked all these years for a decent pension only now to be offered a reduced pension and this is what they're against.

Ineos = Greedy Employer - not the other way about.

Hopefully the truth will come out and Ineos are exposed for the lies they've told, I beleive the reifinery guys I speak to and have know for years more so than a company I don't know that's only been there for 2 years. 2 years and BP were there for 70+ and no problems like this, I know where the problem is and it's not the workers.

100% behind you guys/girls :-)
132

theleftwing,

bo'ness 25/04/2008 22:56:48
#155
spot on
95% of the people on this site wouldn't have known who ineos was 10 days ago. all of a sudden they are all experts.
133

thoms,

Grangemouth 25/04/2008 23:22:14
#155

Yeah, I don't blame a lot of folk though as the media seems to be biased, i.e. more leaning towards Ineos who's put out lots of press items and less for the workers, as the union haven't released too much press info as they've been busy with other matters relating to the strike, I've heard from one of my friends in the plant that the union will try and counter this by releasing more facts and eventually the truth will be out there, they said it was mentionedd at their mass meeting today, but sadly, the media is still showing more of the Ineos opinion and less from the Union, but it appears to be changing, here's hoping the truth gets out there.

All the best :-)
134

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 25/04/2008 23:40:45
Like I said in my earlier post at 142, all you unionistas with an axe to grind had better think of some way to take your grievance out on the company and not the people.

My pay and pension has nothing to do with you and your pay and pension has nothing to do with me.

Unless of course you make it that way. My answer is to tell you all that I don't care about your problems as I don't burden you with mine. And I do not try to change the world with mine.

You lot seem to think the world owes you a living - you are just as bad as public sector employees.
135

theleftwing,

bo'ness 25/04/2008 23:51:42
were not trying to change anything either.
136

 Methalìons,

25/04/2008 23:54:55
153

Hi Conan, I was on about cows as well. But, the rude picture I posted was a picture of a pig.
137

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 25/04/2008 23:56:48
160. You've already changed the price of petrol at the pumps. Hope you're satisfied.
138

 Methalìons,

25/04/2008 23:56:57
Laws on zoosexuality tend to be shaped by three main factors:

Animal welfare concerns
Personal moral views of shapers of opinion
Cultural beliefs about the act
Issues confusing the matter are that such research as is available is not widely known, and that cases which come to public light may not be representative of the whole spectrum of this behavior.

Posner (1996) states, "there is some evidence that bestiality was particularly reviled because of fear that it would produce monsters... At early common law, there was no offense of cruelty to animals... The focus of [cruelty to animals] statutes is different from that of the traditional sodomy statute; anticruelty statutes are concerned with both the treatment of the animal and with the offense to community standards, while anti-bestiality provisions embodied in the sodomy statutes are aimed only at offenses to community standards."

Animal welfare bodies usually, but not always, view zoosexuality or zoophilia as a matter of animal abuse, or at the least, of concern. A notable exception is the Swedish Animal Welfare Agency, which in 2005 addressed concerns over a surge in horse-ripping incidents by reviewing the matter and concluded that although animal cruelty legislation needed updating, a ban on zoosexual activity was not justified by research.
139

Jock Tamson,

Scotland Caledonia, Alba 25/04/2008 23:59:14
160. But there again, I only sit around in pubs all day, reading broadsheets and wondering how many t's there are in Mowat
140

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 26/04/2008 00:02:36
But there again, 160, as I said earlier, I don't care about your business as long as doesn't affect me.
141

theleftwing,

26/04/2008 00:05:50
stay locked in the pub for a few weeks and it won't.
142

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 26/04/2008 00:06:03
theleftwing. What does a Bo'ness girl use for protection during sex?

A bus shelter
143

cat1903,

Scotland 26/04/2008 00:06:30
#159

You are right,this has nothing to do with you.

What the workers are doing does take their grievance out on Ineos,it was Ineos that decided to involve the public when they announced this would cause fuel shortages when the truth was if people had carried on as normal there would be no problem - Ineos later admitted that there was more than enough fuel to cover the strike under normal usage.

Could it be that Ineos are happy to upset the public in the hope that the workers cave?

Between Ineos PR and the media the public haven't a hope of getting the true facts.
144

theleftwing,

26/04/2008 00:08:33
thats funny
theres not a bus service to/from bo'ness
145

Conan the Librarian™,

26/04/2008 00:11:26
161
My fakie...aww.
I feel so proud; now is there anything you need?
Fresh straw? Water?
I've got some really rusty chains in the cellar?
146

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 26/04/2008 00:17:10
168, cat1903. What does it have to do with you that it does not have to do with me?

Petrol has gone up in price and there might be shortages at the pumps. The price of everything might go up as a result. That is what it has to do with me.

What has it got to do with you that it has nothing to do with me?
147

Conan the Librarian™,

26/04/2008 00:50:24
172
Hoi! Comma! He's my monster, and I shall decide what to do with him...

Oh all right then, but make sure the villagers are ugly as it's meant to be a punishment after all.
148

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 26/04/2008 00:51:42
172, the invisible person. I a am sur there is a philosophical reason as to why you have no name.
149

Jock Tamson,

spell check camp 26/04/2008 00:53:30
re 174,

I promise to spell correctly in future
150

cat1903,

Scotland 26/04/2008 00:57:02
#171

It has nothing to do with either of us.

Petrol has gone up partly because of the impending strike at Grangemouth and greedy forecourts waiting to cash in. They have received their fuel today at a set price, no different from any other day, in reality it will take several weeks before the actual price hikes come through. Petrol has gone up in price because of scaremongering from Ineos causing forecourts to be greedy and hiking their prices but also because of the attacks on the Exxon Mobil plant in Nigeria, extra demand from developing countries such as China and also Opec (the oil cartel) unable to increase production. This is the TRUE reason why the price of oil has been going up since last year, well before this strike.

As for shortages at the pump, this was caused by Ineos scaremongering the public into panic buying, no fault at all of the workers.

The price of everything probably will go up due to the rise in the price of oil and due to the extra cost of transporting fuel to cover shortages caused by Ineos.

As I said,this has nothing to do with you,me or the public apart from we will be the ones paying more for everything due to Ineos dragging the nation into this dispute, not the workers.
151

Ineos worker,

Falkirk 26/04/2008 10:38:15
Ineos makes at least £1,000,000 a day proit form the complex.
If we pay for our pension they will make £1,006,000 a day profit.

They have changed our retirement age to 65, just like everybody else. But the have also cut the payments into our pension because they expect you to die when you are 69 years old.
Between the payments 6% and the change retirement age I will loose over £150,000 in my working life and have a pension for my last four years of life reduced to £8000 a year.

That money that I would have earned will no longer be sent in the local area. As for the average wage of £40,000.....I wish. This is made up of overtime, the reason we work the overtime is the company will not start new workers until the pension is sorted (by the way they need over a 100) You could be one of these lucky people you want us to sell down the river.

As people have said "if you are not happy move", well shell pays more as does BP and their pensions are better. May be they should cut their wages as well, until everybody in the country is on the same wage and then the company's could make even more money from us, or in this case one person.

None of us want to strike our cause damage to our country.
Who should make money from the Scottish oil. Scottish workers or one man!
152

westview,

in the bike shed 26/04/2008 16:42:53
Where is our "Two Jobs" Secretary of State for Scotland / Minister of Defence in all of this? Is Browne helping by not using fuel to drive to Scotland or even accross England ,to talk with the Unions and owner of the plant? Or is he defending us in Iraq, or just canvasing for labour votes in the London election?
153

boilermaker,

lerwick 26/04/2008 18:55:49
#177 Not all BP pensions are better.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.