Postal workers national rank and file meeting, Sunday 28 October

Workers Power and/or Permanent Revolution. Usual rank and filist trot rubbish unfortunately.

10-1 odds on the phrases "break from the Labour Party" and "new workers party" being used on the day.

despite the fact that it does look pretty clearly like a recruitment drive for a trot group - the actual demands are pretty similar to the libcom position (assuming for the timebeing that this actually exists) on these strikes, isn't it?

Not sure. All I can tell you is that PR/WP have spent the past two weeks building up to this on rmc prior to the announcement. It's possible they're trying to set up something broader (like a post version of the shop stewards network thing) but it seems roughly along the same lines with a bit thrown in to distance themselves from that.

I suppose my point is does it matter if it's a front outfit for PR/WP if the demands are ok?

if it actually happened it would be something to support, but just with prior knowledge that there would have to be a conscious efffort to avoid domination by PR/WP (and obviously a rejection of the 'new workers' party' line!)

Alright then john time for a closer look:

"postworker" and/or shop stewards network .. Fighting Unions .. Workers Power .. Postworker .. National Shop Steward Meeting

Postworker = AWL
Shop stewards network = Bob Crow + Prison Officers Association + others
Fighting Unions =

So it's AWL + Workers Power, who've turned up at some of these top down conferences as well.

There isn't an official libcom position on the public sector strikes although I think we pretty much agree on most of it.

A "referendum on privatisation and inequality" completely misses the point of what this is all about. The 'potential for a united strike' also suggests that this might still be called by the unions, even a one day strike on those terms is very unlikely.

This is pretty basic, uncontroversial stuff. It doesn't say anything about why they're acting like this though. It's also the case that outside a couple of militant sectors, there's not that much initiative and action to repress for them.

Lumping the POA and post wildcats in together (and uncritically as well) is well dodgy - as we've discussed elsewhere on here. Also it's not a case of campaigning for these tactics, it's a case of extending them once they start. Mentioning the court injunctions and anti-union laws also leaves things open to a campaign against them - i.e. direct action to gain reforms in favour of the unions.

It's worse than not enough, again this also leaves the ground open for a party with a rank and file base to act as surrogate leadership.

So the whole point as putting pressure upwards on the union, rather than controlling strikes themselves. Upwards pressure is a by-product of people taking things into their own hands, putting it as an end goal scuppers things from the start.

7. - same again.

This is a lot more timid than the most militant offices who may yet walk out against the agreement when announced later today - bypassing a no vote and resumption of official action that'll take weeks to come through.

Very abstract. Neither of these things would be 'bad', but these votes are already out at the moment, and once again it's appeals to the leadership in terms of bringing anything forward.

1. It's addressed to 'the unions' rather than workers themselves - I thought the whole point was that the leadership wasn't going to do anything? Also what about changes to jobs that aren't related to privatisation, are these alright then??

I know this post has been grump grump grump but it just looks like an in for the left sects here...

.. as shown by "the radical youth" at the end of the sentence.

Again, the issue isn't privatisation and neoliberalism - it's attacks on living and working conditions of which privatisation is just one way to push these through. Either they need to come out and say 'capitalism' or focus on the immediate material effects, but 'privatisation and neoliberal programme' is just leftist crap that obfuscates the real issues at hand.

thanks for this catch

I think if something like this rank and file meeting was proposed (and taken up) I would be inclined to overlook a number of these differences to the ideal position (that you rightly identify) and to get involved anyway - surely you can make the argument for a more direct (non-union-mediated) form of worker militancy once you get involved in something like this.

It seems that you're main objection is that it is run by a trot group (which I agree is no good, but think you could still get involved and make an argument from within) and that they advocate radicalizing trade unions instead of direct worker militancy (wildcats, etc.) (but, again, I think you can make that case once you're involved).

Surely all of your objections can be used against any kind of trade union politics? - personally, I think the unions are crap, but that doesn't mean I'm not a member of one, nor that I wouldn't try and make the case for more militant activity from my position within them.

Well yeah I wouldn't tell people who are aware of the limitations not to go at all - if they actually manage to get momentum behind it then it'd worth putting the arguments in against the specifics given it's claiming to be outside both national and local union structures and open to all Royal Mail Workers (although given it's a postal workers thing that'd be up to actual posties rather than me personally). Given the general lack of interest on RMC in threads like that, I reckon they can see through it and know it's trot sect politicking so won't bother turning up. What's worst about this is that normally these initiatives are set up to ride on the back of grass roots discontent and activity when it's already in full swing- but although the discontent is there there's no guarantee of much sustained activity to be recuperated by these initiatives in the first place.

Yeah well there is a certain leftist language that's universal for sure. The difference is leftist groups tend to use that kinda rhetoric as a means of channelling support for their various self-serving initiatives.

Catch - considering you were encouraging people to post on RMC (which seems to be at least partially set up by shop stewards and is far from devoid of leftist politicking), how is this much different? I mean, is it merely a question of form? Do you think an internet forum is less open to political manipulation than a workers' meeting? I'd take a workers' meeting anyday personally...

I just posted that I reckon postal workers who are sceptical/critical should probably turn up to argue their side

However yes there are some things that are different (judging by the content in the OP which is all I've seen about this).

1. RMC is by run by shop stewards mainly I agree, but afaik they don't have a particular party/sect political line - and if they do they're very good at hiding it.
- this meeting is called by Workers Power / AWL
2. RMC is open to all postal workers and customers (although I think they should ban managers, scabs and small business owners) - so there's an open invitation to post on there.
- this is postal workers only - in fact I think that's one of the big limitations given it's supposed to be about widening the struggle to other sectors - it's maintaining the sectionalism of the trade union form at the same time as it claims to go against it :brick wall:

Again, judging by what's there, it doesn't look like a general workers meeting, it's a substitutionist replacement for one. If it becomes a genuine workers meeting (unlikely in the present climate), then there might be more to argue about, but to be honest I doubt it's going to amount to all that much.

For the sake of argument, please explain to me why it isn't a genuine workers' meeting. As far as i can see, it is a meeting of workers. I'm assuming you mean a workers' meeting minus any political affiliation which would then make your presumption concerning the improbability of a meeting minus any sort of leftist bandwagoning pretty accurate IMO. I mean, yeah this dispute is national headlines, did you think the Trots would ignore it?

OK I spent over an hour on the phone to someone who was at the Postworker meeting that called for this (although not an hour talking about this meeting), seems not is all quite as it seems (but no better).

Postworker is an SWP front group, not an AWL one.

WP wasn't at the actual meeting that called for this, they just drafted this statement to make it look like it was their initiative instead of the SWP's.

So still a trot meeting, like the postworker last week one some non-aligned people will go, but it's still called by trots and likely the majority attending will be trots.

I'd love to think otherwise, but would prefer to be pleasantly surprised than bitterly disappointed.

On the plus side, the bloke I spoke to will probably go, so we may get a report back from it.

Quite dynamic trots... At first it looked like they were attacking or at least questioning the unions and then they turn to make it about "fighting" unions and pressure...

Catch: I was thinking of your critique of the meeting being for postalworkers only. If the purpose is to widening the struggles to other sectors it is, to say the least, a bit strange. But it's not that bad, on the contrary I think it can be really good, for struggling postalworkers to meet and discuss their experiences and struggles. You don't walk in to the union trap just through meeting people with similar conditions and possibilities, similar jobs. What do you think?

It looks like the cut and pasted from someone elses homework and changed the first couple of paragraphs. Given Workers Power are a rump of students that kicked out all the older members, probably not far from the truth.

I don't think there's a particular problem with just postal workers meeting up - but in the context of the statement it shows the limitations of what they're actually proposing.

Whoever is behind this resolution the most interesting point is that they begin by calling for a public sector wide movement. The fact that this could be a SWP front should not blind us to what they are trying to imprison in their rank and filism: a desire amongst postal workers and others for a wider movement. The SWP are experts at using geniune feelings within the working class in order to try and set up radical sounding union fronts. It is interesting that they also feel they need to appear to be 'radical' about the unions, they obviously feel they need to do this to keep their influence. Whoever is behind the meeting it could provide the opportunity to discuss with militant workers caught in the union trap.