Sussex students pass motion in support of posties
Oct 20 2007 15:39
The University of Sussex Students' Union just passed a motion of support for the strike, with reference to scab student labour in Liverpool, and with the intention of increasing student awareness about union organising. A letter is also being written to be sent to the Liverpool students' unions informing them about this and asking them to take some sort of action. Will post up the letter when I get it.
Other students on here should try and do similar things at their universities as it could be a good way of getting their student unions to start an education campaign about workplace organising (as is happening at Sussex now). Anyway, here's the motion in full.
USSU wrote:
This Union notes:
● That Royal Mail workers have been engaging in an industrial dispute of significant importance.
● That these workers are defending their work rights and conditions from a direct attack on the part of the Royal Mail bosses.
● That temporary work agencies have been recruiting students to fill in for striking postal workers, thus recruiting them as scabs.
● That in Liverpool around 300 students have been recruited for this purpose.This Union believes:
● That it is the right of any worker or workers to defend their workplace and their conditions of work.
● That the outcome of this strike might set a precedent for upcoming public services pay disputes.
● That workplace struggles are of direct concern to students because students are workers in formation. In this sense, the present defence of working conditions by workers is thus the defence of future working conditions of present students.
● That students should in no way undermine these struggles waged by workers, but to the contrary, if anything support these.
● That the actions of the Liverpool students are, whether the students were aware of what they were doing or not, detrimental to the struggle of the postal workers.
● That students lack education about the union movement and the attack on public services.
● That education about the ways in which temporary work can undermine strikes can prevent this from happening again.This Union resolves:
● That it will sign a statement expressing solidarity with the striking Royal Mail workers and send a letter to Liverpool's SUs to raise concerns about the ways in which temporary work for students has undermined the postal workers' strike. (Wording to be agreed by Operations committee)
● That it will put out information explaining what scabbing is and why it should not be done in its Media, in order to prevent students from further undermining the ongoing postal workers' strike.
Oct 20 2007 16:29
#2
Of course its good Ed, just ensure its not a token gesture.
Oct 20 2007 16:31
#3
If it's anything like my old university then monst students will be unlikely to ever know.
Passing motions is to a large extent useless, but if it does serve to improve awareness then it has achieved something.
The students at my uni had a meeting and passed some resolutions, but unless they pass on to more substantial action nothing will come of it. Although the train strike looks to be dying down it's still holding in part although it was only supposed to be a one day strike on thursday, if the EDF and the rest come back out then we could be looking at a sustained period of strike action. I've seen reports about rail workers voting for all out strikes although I'm not sure how accurate they are.
Oct 20 2007 17:00
#4
I don't think passing motions is 'bad' but it doesn't mean much either. Having said that the statement is pretty solid in itself. As a side note the SU at that Liverpool university is apparently a scab union (in as much as a student union can be) - they ousted the old one due to their support of the AUT lecturers strike, so although you might piss them off sending something, it'd be worth looking at other avenues to actually communicate to the students in question.
edit: the one bit of the statement that I didn't like, as I'm sure you'd guess:
Quote:
That students lack education about the union movement and the attack on public services.
Undoubtedly this is true, but it misses the point of the current dispute.
edit again: and it could possibly have mentioned the attacks on students (fees etc.) which force them to take low-paid casual jobs - i.e. that the attack on wages and conditions isn't just going to affect them in the future but is affecting them directly now.
Oct 20 2007 17:23
#5
Discussion about this on Royal Mail Chat here
Quote:
It was actually John Moores University students who were used to scab. As far as I can find out, no University of Liverpool, Hope University or Edge Hill University students scabbed. The IWW Education Workers IU660 are producing a leaftet for students explaining what a scab is and why students shouldn't break strikes.
That's for your support Matti and all the best with your letter to Liverpool SU, who I understand have Tory members in many prominent positions.
Oct 20 2007 17:29
#6
Its undoubtedly a good thing.
Is there still a dodgy anarchist group in sussex uni btw? And if so, what is there relation to this motion?
Oct 20 2007 17:36
#7
there are two 'anarchist' orgs in sussex uni, sussez autonomous and black cat group. i use the quote marks cos autonomous are pretty vague politically, though ed can give you more info on that. black cat are libertarian communist and got this motion passed. its not perfect cos i wrote one originally as a statement from the black cat group, and didn't realise it would be put before the union 
so it was rewritten last minute. But i think this is a pretty good development, but in itself won't do anything to mobilise the student body.
Oct 20 2007 20:24
#8
Yeah, I think the stuff about it being a token gesture is definitely a concern though I think in this case it will actually be a catalyst for action. From what I've been told there is already an article about the Liverpool students going in the next copy of the student paper with an adjunct on why scabbing is bad. I also imagine that we'll be able to use this motion to get the union to support other events. That said, I'm not even gonna be at Sussex until the new year so whereas I'm a revolutionary voyeur for the meantime, dara is closer on the ground with regards to what is actually going on.
That said though, what do people think can be done to build on this motion? How can we make this statement more than an empty gesture?
Catch, cheers for the heads up about the scab student union. Which one by the way? John Moore's or one of the other ones? Who ousted the old SU?
NB on Sussex anarchist groups: None of the Sussex anarchist groups are 'dodgy' (what does that even mean?). The Black Cat Group came out of Sussex Autonomous and have a much more class struggle approach to organising whereas I'd say that SA are a lot more Post-Modernist in outlook ('plurality of struggles, plurality of methods' type thing). Though we split from SA relations are still good and we still co-operate where possible. We just think they dress funny really 
Oct 20 2007 21:46
#9
One thing could be to pass a motion banning scab employers from advertising/recruiting on campus. Although I'm not sure if that would mean anything or if you could enforce it.
Oct 20 2007 22:19
#10
Quote:
Catch, cheers for the heads up about the scab student union. Which one by the way? John Moore's or one of the other ones? Who ousted the old SU?
Er, not sure. It was on RMC somewhere, but I'm sure madashell would know.
Oct 21 2007 10:47
#11
catch wrote:
I don't think passing motions is 'bad' but it doesn't mean much either.
I think that it is worse than useless. I agree with Catch in that it doesn't mean much, but it does convince people that they are doing something, and is a diversion away from class politics.
Devrim
Oct 21 2007 11:04
#12
Devrim wrote:
catch wrote:
I don't think passing motions is 'bad' but it doesn't mean much either.I think that it is worse than useless. I agree with Catch in that it doesn't mean much, but it does convince people that they are doing something, and is a diversion away from class politics.
Devrim
I definitely see where you're coming from Dev, but I also think that you're not taking into account how bad all the other stuff that passes for 'student politics' is. I think that this motion signals a shift (or possibly just an anomaly, that much will be seen..) of the political discourse at Sussex in a more working class direction. Sure, its no general strike for universal higher education but it does make a nice change from the usual 'boycott coca cola' stuff and I'm sure the Sussex folks will be able to use this to build on other stuff. Though I've been wrong on this before so we'll have to see..
Oct 21 2007 11:10
#13
I'm glad those kids in Sussex are supporting us. Support from any direction is a bit thin on the ground just now so we're hardly in a position to pull it to pieces when it does come along.
At least the Sussex students who passed this motion aren't crossing picket lines like sudents did in 1926 and this motion might make the scabs at JMU think about what they're doing.
Oct 21 2007 18:13
#14
Devrim wrote:
catch wrote:
I don't think passing motions is 'bad' but it doesn't mean much either.I think that it is worse than useless. I agree with Catch in that it doesn't mean much, but it does convince people that they are doing something, and is a diversion away from class politics.
Devrim
Its not a diversion from class politics, its just a means of making it easier to target employment agencies recruiting scabs for the postal strike should they try a recruit on campus without getting as much comeback from the university authorities.
I don't think anyone is under the illusion that the motion itself does fuck all or that an individual student working for 12 weeks in a post office cares too much what motions some lefties on the SU pass. Hence the whole point of the ''distrbute agit prop clause'' which allows black cat group and other studets a free hand and maybe access to SU support or funding in their endeavours.
Oct 21 2007 18:39
#15
catch wrote:
Quote:
Catch, cheers for the heads up about the scab student union. Which one by the way? John Moore's or one of the other ones? Who ousted the old SU?Er, not sure. It was on RMC somewhere, but I'm sure madashell would know.
This was the Liverpool Guild of Students, who are the union for Liverpool Uni. Basically, there was a bit of a tussle on the guild council between the lefties (mostly trots and left liberals, afaik) and the tories, the lefties were slightly outnumbered by the tories, so a motion was passed condemning the striking lecturers for the assessment boycott while "supporting in principle" that they should be paid better. The lefties wrote a short leaflet signed as being from a minority within the guild, which they distributed on the picket lines and within the uni, explaining their objections to this, and were forced out as a result. This isn't really relevant and as I understand it, it's pretty standard student politics, but it seemed worth clearing up.
In any case, JMU student union (where Workbank's office is) is a completely separate organisation, so you'd be better directing any letters at them, though what with the wildcats already being over in Liverpool, I'm not sure what the situation is with Workbank.
Oct 21 2007 18:42
#16
cantdocartwheels wrote:
Its not a diversion from class politics, its just a means of making it easier to target employment agencies recruiting scabs for the postal strike should they try a recruit on campus without getting as much comeback from the university authorities.I don't think anyone is under the illusion that the motion itself does fuck all or that an individual student working for 12 weeks in a post office cares too much what motions some lefties on the SU pass. Hence the whole point of the ''distrbute agit prop clause'' which allows black cat group and other studets a free hand and maybe access to SU support or funding in their endeavours.
OK, if you think that passing motions in student unions is class politics, fine.
Devrim
Oct 21 2007 18:53
#17
Devrim, while I'd agree that student politics and student councils are generally a waste of time, if they can funnel some money from the NUS to cover the cost of their leaflets and pamphlets (which is the impression I'm getting), surely that's pretty useful, depending on the content of the leaflets, obviously.
Oct 21 2007 20:23
#18
madashell wrote:
Devrim, while I'd agree that student politics and student councils are generally a waste of time, if they can funnel some money from the NUS to cover the cost of their leaflets and pamphlets (which is the impression I'm getting), surely that's pretty useful, depending on the content of the leaflets, obviously.
how does this differ from trots passing all sorts of wanky motions at union meetings? it's the same thing, you mediate yourself through an official 'respectable' rather than organising directly, why not print the leaflets yourselfs with other students concerned with the issue?
The dynamic of passing motions strategy leads to an inevitable watering down of politics to what will be acceptable to the union, not to mention anarchists and communists are suppoused to push autonomous activity and self organisation not piggy backing on completely co opted organs.
Oct 21 2007 21:13
#19
revol68 wrote:
how does this differ from trots passing all sorts of wanky motions at union meetings? it's the same thing, you mediate yourself through an official 'respectable' rather than organising directly, why not print the leaflets yourselfs with other students concerned with the issue?The dynamic of passing motions strategy leads to an inevitable watering down of politics to what will be acceptable to the union, not to mention anarchists and communists are suppoused to push autonomous activity and self organisation not piggy backing on completely co opted organs.
Student unions are not quite the same as actual, TUC unions though, their function is completely different. Which isn't to suggest that they're anything other than a pile of wank, but they're much easier to manipulate than real unions. Personally, I wouldn't bother, partly for the reasons you point out and partly because I can't stand student politicians, but I can see why the Black Cat lot are doing this.
Oct 21 2007 21:16
#20
why not print the leaflets yourselfs with other students concerned with the issue?
Or why not print the leaflets yourselves with other students concerned with the issue, using SU resources. The later being acquired through the passing of the motion.
Oct 21 2007 21:35
#21
revol68 wrote:
how does this differ from trots passing all sorts of wanky motions at union meetings? it's the same thing, you mediate yourself through an official 'respectable' rather than organising directly, why not print the leaflets yourselfs with other students concerned with the issue?
I guess this would depend on the situation on the ground. Say, for instance, if the only lefties at Sussex were involved in the SU and spent their time passing motions through the union for all sorts of shit (which does happen at Sussex admittedly), then I would say the difference would be none. However, as there are quite a few class struggle oriented activists at Sussex who should be able to use this motion to fund and publicise various events and/or agit prop, I think it does differ.
To my knowledge, there is already an article in the next issue of the student paper about what scabbing is and why students shouldn't do it, this is a direct result of this motion. Of course we could have just printed leaflets ourselves but it seems easier to do it this way so that the union could print it for us in a bigger quantity then we could have and distribute it more efficiently than we could have.
I'm sure (or I would hope) that this would be the beginning of further dissemination of working class politics, which the union will help with funding and publicity, at Sussex uni. But I dunno, maybe not. What do you reckon (revol, Devrim and others)? Do you think this approach (of using the union to fund the projects of radical students at Sussex) is fundamentally flawed because its asking the union for money? Do you think that articles in student media, paid for by the SU, about the importance of workers' solidarity are useful at all?
Oct 22 2007 08:14
#22
As far I remember you can use the student union buldings to put on fund raising events at Sussex and you'd need to have union motions in favour if you wanted to do that.
Oct 22 2007 08:37
#23
revol68 wrote:
how does this differ from trots passing all sorts of wanky motions at union meetings? it's the same thing, you mediate yourself through an official 'respectable' rather than organising directly,
Er, this motion was passed because recruitment agencies came onto campuses in liverpool specifically to recruit scabs, If there was a wildcat in brighto, they would do exactly the same, i hardly see it as wanky and abstract. If a unison branch passed a motion to counter temp agency recruitment of scabbs during a strike that would be all well and good.
Quote:
why not print the leaflets yourselfs with other students concerned with the issue?
,
Well duh its realistically going to black cat and co. who print the leaflets, but if the student union supports it, they may give us some of this thing called money, with money you can buy many leaflets, money is pretty neat like that. Not only that but the university will fidit harder to pull down posters and the like.
God this is pretty basic stuff, i mean i know you spent your student days ''hatin the five o'' or whatever but i wouldn' have thought i'd have to go over the basic dynamics of organising a group on a univeristy campus with you. As a political group on campus nine times out of ten you have to engage with the SU, if only to book rooms on campus or lecture theatres for film showings, its pretty much mental to try and pretend the SU just doesn;t exist.
Quote:
The dynamic of passing motions strategy leads to an inevitable watering down of politics to what will be acceptable to the union, not to mention anarchists and communists are suppoused to push autonomous activity and self organisation not piggy backing on completely co opted organs.
So we can't pass any motions at union branch meetings now, because that would make us ''un-anarchist'' because liek trots do it occaisionally and they're like bad yeah. Jesus what absolute gibberish.
Oct 22 2007 08:46
#24
related somewhat: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,,2195703,00.html
Oct 22 2007 13:45
#25
Cantdo, he didn't spend any time at uni whilst he was a student, because he is working class.
Oct 22 2007 15:00
#26
what a fucking hero. gawd bless 'im. 
cantdo, you're spot on. unfortunately, it's all about playing the game, ticking the boxes, and then appropriating SU funds.
Oct 22 2007 15:04
#27
yeah when i was at uni you couldn't book a room without being an official SU society. some hoops it's worth jumping through.
Oct 22 2007 19:23
#28
Joseph K. wrote:
yeah when i was at uni you couldn't book a room without being an official SU society. some hoops it's worth jumping through.
there's a big difference between getting recognition from the SU than passing political motions through it and publishing leaflest under it's name, no?
it's not a simple case of conning the SU into funding the publication of Black Cat leaflets but rather Black Cat writing and publishing the leaflets for the SU, under the SU's name and with the SU's money.
If they were able to get money from the SU to publish their own leaflets under their own name with the their own politics i'd say fair fucks.
Oct 22 2007 20:57
#29
i think they will be doing stuff on their own regardless, they will simply also get space in SU publications which have a decent circulation and are usually far less 'chomskyised' (i.e. ideologically uniform) than the corporate press since they're desparate for content. i don't think that represents some unprincipled compromise with bureaucracy.
Oct 22 2007 21:04
#30
Joseph K. wrote:
i think they will be doing stuff on their own regardless, they will simply also get space in SU publications which have a decent circulation and are usually far less 'chomskyised' (i.e. ideologically uniform) than the corporate press since they're desparate for content. i don't think that represents some unprincipled compromise with bureaucracy.
but it isn't just them getting their articles into the SU publications, it's them putting on their SU hat and writing them as the SU, hence the statement is the USSU's not BlackCats.
it would be like Organise! writing stuff for SIPTU or rather putting out generic leftist tokenist motions as SIPTU. it's fucking absurd.
So what do people think about this? Is it even remotely interesting? Does it matter that some lefty students' union has passed a motion about striking posties? Do people think that this is something that lefty students should be pushing for at their universities?
I've got my own opinions on this but will hold back for a bit (mostly coz I haven't got time to go into it properly but also because I'd like to see what other people think first).