Apparently there is a public sector strike going on...

[Old Greg]

What court has decided this?

An interesting conundrum. No court has jursdiction.

War of aggression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court refers to the crime of aggression as one of the “most serious crimes of concern to the international community”, and provides that the crime falls within the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court (ICC). However, the Rome Statute stipulates that the ICC may not exercise its jurisdiction over the crime of aggression until such time as the states parties agree on a definition of the crime and set out the conditions under which it may be prosecuted.

However:

The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which followed World War II, called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing...to initiate a war of aggression...is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole."

And it was enough to hang Prime Minister Tojo of Japan who was found guilty on:

Count 1 (waging wars of aggression, and war or wars in violation of international law)
Count 27 (waging unprovoked war against the Republic of China)
Count 29 (waging aggressive war against the United States of America)
Count 31 (waging aggressive war against the British Commonwealth of Nations)
Count 32 (waging aggressive war against the Kingdom of the Netherlands)
Count 33 (waging aggressive war against the French Republic)
Count 54 (ordering, authorizing, and permitting inhumane treatment of Prisoners of War (POWs) and others)

[Old Greg]

No it is not fine, but it is the best there is. It should always be under review and continually improved. it should not be manipulated by public sector employees who wish to use their monopolistic positions to pursue their own agendas.

Legal protection of the right to strike is part of 'the best there is'. It creates a counter-balance to the power of employers.

[Mich the Tester]

No it is not fine, but it is the best there is. It should always be under review and continually improved. it should not be manipulated by public sector employees who wish to use their monopolistic positions to pursue their own agendas.

So effectively you want public sector employers to be protected against the use of strikes by their employees (by banning public sector strikes), but you don't want private sector employers to be protected that way. That's state power over private enterprise, collective needs over individual liberties.

[DodgyAgent]

Legal protection of the right to strike is part of 'the best there is'. It creates a counter-balance to the power of employers.

True. But the balance is skewed by the monopolistic nature of public services. fair enough an outright ban may be a step too far. from what I gather the calling of a strike can still be done by a minority so the rules need tightening.

[Old Greg]

True. But the balance is skewed by the monopolistic nature of public services. fair enough an outright ban may be a step too far. from what I gather the calling of a strike can still be done by a minority so the rules need tightening.

It can only be done by a majority of votes cast, just like electing an MP, Councillor etc.

[DodgyAgent]

An interesting conundrum. No court has jursdiction.

War of aggression - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



However:



And it was enough to hang Prime Minister Tojo of Japan who was found guilty on:

What has this got to do with the Iraq war?

[Mich the Tester]

If you are a public sector worker you should not be allowed to strike

True. But the balance is skewed by the monopolistic nature of public services. fair enough an outright ban may be a step too far. from what I gather the calling of a strike can still be done by a minority so the rules need tightening.

Good to see you're open to persuasion. If I was wearing my hat, I would doff it. But of course I don't wear a hat indoors.

[DodgyAgent]

It can only be done by a majority of votes cast, just like electing an MP, Councillor etc.

If only it was that simple

Cameron attacked the low turnout thresholds in union strike ballots and challenged the validity of mandates to take industrial action derived from ballots conducted more than a year ago in some cases.

The prime minister said: "I think the time has come for setting a threshold. It is time to legislate and it will be in the Conservative manifesto."

[Old Greg]

What has this got to do with the Iraq war?

Have a look at the wiki links for various definitions, but here is one of them:

"Aggression is the use of force by a State or Government against another State or Government, in any manner, whatever the weapons used and whether openly or otherwise, for any reason or for any purpose other than individual or collective self-defence or in pursuance of a decision or recommendation by a competent organ of the United Nations".

[DodgyAgent]

Good to see you're open to persuasion. If I was wearing my hat, I would doff it. But of course I don't wear a hat indoors.

If you track back on threads I have argued in () you will see that I am always ready to concede a point or an argument. Unlike most on here who will argue black is white or switch the argument on to something they think they can win.