The legacy I was referring to was that which encouraged dog eat dog, no matter what the social cost is.

I also believe in principals of solidarity - but the lead has to come form the strong, not the weak. I would have more sympathy if the powerful unions were showing more solidarity to the disenfranchised, but what I am reading this is that anyone with power albeit economic, or having a powerful bargaining tool can and do use this to their advantage, usually to the detriment of the powerless.

I have read transport unions arguments that they are paid derisory pay compared with their managers - but what happens in the end is that whatever they 'win' is not at the expense of management, but at the expense of those who, for example, are on minimum wage, and have to make choices between going to work and how much they spend on feeding their families.

My 'rant' isn't solely directed to unions, but to a much greater extent at the current government, whose policies are pushing more and more people into poverty, and at the same time demonising them for being benefit claimants.

it could be argued that in any revolution there would be 'collateral damage', but it borders on Stalinism where certain powerful unions look towards overthrowing their masters, as long as someone else faces the cannons.

Trade Unionism grew from a time when capitalists held the power of life and death over workers. But now the capitalist and powerful unions hold the power over the most poor, and they are the ones who suffer most.