Royal Mail and its secret plan to undermine its workforce
Oct 20 2009 09:32
#32
john wrote:
baboon wrote:
Of course the more workers that support the post workers, the better, but the real key is not public opinion as such, but active solidarity both within and outside the postal sector.this is just getting semantic:
worker support = postive public opinion = active solidarity outside the postal sector
we're arguing the same thing
I don't think that this is semantic at all. I think that most campaigns that aim at influencing 'public opinion' are actually campaigns aimed at the media and the 'middle classes'.
Devrim
Oct 20 2009 09:49
#33
baboon wrote:
firemen on strike in M'ter, threatening to spread to Merseyside and Essex.
Really? I know they're already out in Sheffield, but I thought that was just a South Yorkshire and London dispute. But further discussion of the subject should probably go here.
Oct 22 2009 19:57
#34
Why? Surely the struggle of the firemen and the postal workers are linked and need discussing together. They are in response to the same attack.
The postal workers are being set up by the ruling class in order to take a battering in order to undermine the confidence of the whole working class. The ruling class knows that faced with the developing attacks on the working class, especially those that are being unfolded in the public sector are going to cause a response from the working class. Thus, they want to defeat the postal workers, a sector that the rest of the class has great respect for.
In this context the struggles of the firemen takes on added importance, because they show that there is a growing response within the public sector to the attacks.
In this situation it is essential that revolutionaries underline the importance of the simultaneity of the struggles in the public sector. Also we have to warn about the strategy of the ruling class in relation to the postal workers.
Oct 22 2009 23:34
#35
I don't think seperate topics suggest that there isn't simultaneity.
Oct 24 2009 17:06
#36
That is true, but surely the need is to understand the overall strategy the ruling class is unfolding against the developing struggles by the class. May be we should have a thread on the question of the ruling class's strategy (if fact even if there is one)?
Oct 26 2009 19:04
#37
Active solidarity outside the postal sector = other workers joining in with their own struggles, creating the potential for joint pickets, demonstrations, and meetings.
'Public opinion' is controlled by the mass media. I guess 'class sentiment' would be a better way of putting it.
Oct 26 2009 23:02
#38
Class sentiment’s good. Class instinct as well?
Broadening the question out. The general wage cut being imposed across large areas of industry on workers on a median wage seems to be running at something between two and four hundred pounds a month, plus increased prices, increased pension contributions and the ever-flexible, flexibility – an open-ended weapon. Unemployment, with its misery all-round, further depressing wages. This is a brutal attack on the working class.
But in line with recent developments, there is an expression of militancy and simultaneity of struggles within the working class in Britain. I wouldn’t underestimate the strength of the bourgeoisie, particularly the British, but they are not entirely strong. They are now relying on their unions, and that puts increasing pressure on the unions faced with workers who want to fight. Their “restitution” of the BNP was, in great part, directed against the working class. What the post strike has shown so far is the militancy of the workers and the limitations of the picket lines. “Selective” strikes mainly serve to carve the workers up and in the case of the post send the majority home, out of the way. If the post strike is to link up with a potential strike at TNT, for example, (see other thread) there will need to be much more direct involvement of more workers and for that you need mass meetings.
Oct 28 2009 20:38
#39
Beltov wrote:
Active solidarity outside the postal sector = other workers joining in with their own struggles, creating the potential for joint pickets, demonstrations, and meetings.'Public opinion' is controlled by the mass media. I guess 'class sentiment' would be a better way of putting it.
Surely the key point in terms of active solidarity in this dispute is persuading unemployed workers not to work as scabs, given Royal Mail's plans to hire thousands of them as discussed in this very thread?
Oct 28 2009 21:03
#40
I cannot see disuading scabs and extending and uniting current struggles as being in contradiction with each other.
By the way I see the Daily Morror published a copy of Royal Mail Managements letter encouraging existing workers to scab with all manner of promises and enticements in the middle of the so called 'negotiations'.
Oct 28 2009 21:46
#41
Yeah, I wouldn't say that they're in contradiction either, it's just that extending and uniting struggles is always a good idea in any circumstance, whereas in this one specific dispute the employer have openly declared their attention to hire thousands of scabs, so it makes more sense to focus on that here. They're not in contradiction, but they're not exactly the same thing - with extending/uniting existing struggles, you're going to be mostly looking at workers who already have jobs, with discouraging scabbing you're going to be talking to the unemployed.
Oct 28 2009 22:34
#42
But as has been frequently pointed out here and elsewhere, it is not the scabs that will defeat the strike - they have always been largely irrelevant in Royal mail disputes over the last few years. What has been a big issue, however, has been the dominance of the union over the action.
Oct 28 2009 23:26
#43
While scabs themselves aren't going to defeat the strike the villification of the strikers by tabloids with pictures of eager "temp Christmas workers" won't do any favours in terms of public sympathy especially during the "economic crisis". Especially as shit service from badly trained scabs will be blamed on strikers.The union will have a bigger role in determining the outcome of the struggle, you're right.
Oct 29 2009 10:27
#44
Oct 29 2009 12:32
#45
The question of extending the struggle within and without the post office is very important, but so is the workers control of the struggle. As steven says as long as the union is able to dominate the struggle it is trapped, and it will be drawn out and defeated.
As for the role of 'scabs' this depends on how well the union controls the situation. If they can keep it divided up between this and that part of the workforce the management will be able to use them as part of their divide and rule tactics. If the postal workers are able to impose their own dynamic on the struggle their role will be very limited if not none existent: 1, because all workers will be out, 2. workers will be better able to discuss with those breaking the strike because there will be more people on the picket lines, there will be demonstrations etc (at the moment the pickets are minimal or none existent, the union are telling workers to stay at home).
Oct 29 2009 20:05
#46
Just a few thought on the whole 'scabs' issue. Granted, the RM management move to employ 30,000 of them is extremely provocative, and by taking legal action on this question the CWU seem happy to make this an issue, and a very distracting one at that.
IMHO, these people are temporary workers. Given the massive rise in unemployment recently, I don't think we should throw the efforts of our class brothers and sisters to somehow find money to feed themselves and their kids -- and to build up funds to have a half-decent Christmas holiday -- back in their faces. Many of these people will have lost their jobs this year -- from services, manufacturing, who knows even the financial sector -- so to go on the offensive and follow the union campaign to villify them is pretty disgusting.
A more productive approach to the temporary workers would be to extend solidarity to them, to educate them about the attacks being made on the full-time workers through meetings and face-to-face discussions, and encourage them to support the full-timers. I'm not sure how. But I know for sure that dehumanising and attacking the temporary workers is extremely divisive and corrosive. I've worker as an agency worker myself in the catering industry, and believe me the insecuruty and working conditions faced by temps are far worse than the full-time staff. They're disposable. They get treated like shit. Let's not forget that.
Oct 29 2009 21:38
#47
Agree with Beltov above on the question of scabs. Contractors are also in the same position across all the major industries; less pay, worse conditions, holidays, pensions and more insecurity. It's deliberately created because it's a powerful division of the working class - two people doing the same job for a different rate, put worker against worker. It creates divisions throughout the class.
The fixation on scabs in the Miners' Strike was a major contribution to the defeat suffered by the working class - it had international ramifications.
Farce makes a good point about talking to the unemployed and, by extension, should also be to the temporary workers being brought in. For this more workers need to be more directly involved. At the moment, the union has this strike under control.
Oct 29 2009 23:32
#48
We've just produced a leaflet on the current struggles and invite comrades to download it and distribute it
http://en.internationalism.org/files/en/postal-strike-leaflet-1-2009.pdf
Oct 30 2009 16:30
#49
What possibilities do people think there actually are for linking up struggles across different sectors, such as post, bus and fire? If they were all directly employed by the local council, it'd seem a lot easier, since they all answer to different employers I kind of find it hard to see how we can suggest they can do so without appealing to really vague notions of shared class interests. Thoughts?
Oct 30 2009 22:29
#50
Just to get the ball rolling on Farce's pertinent questions:
The possibilities for linking up struggle exist but that’s not to say it’s immanent or that it will take a majority form. Just small attempts of workers to fight on their own ground, Vestas was an example of this, can express a positive development of the struggle. And though we are obviously interested in the current situation here, the class struggle has an international context. In the latter, we’ve seen many expressions of militancy, combativity and some self-organisation and extension – solidarity in one form or anther. In China the class struggle is posing big problems for the bourgeoisie. In Lindsey earlier in the year, thousands of workers mobilised and were on the streets. Many mass meetings giving a real strength to the struggle.
If there were to be any linking up of struggles at the moment they would be minority actions and worth more than sterile staggered strikes with the majority of workers absent. In Britain in the 80s there were significant, potentially favourable simultaneous strikes in several major industries, which apart from some demonstrations and flying pickets, failed to unite in any way. A majority movement of workers linking up is not very far away from the mass strike and that would be the condition for a development of consciousness within the class. Certainly, as Farce and others have said, capitalism divides workers up – employed/unemployed, public/private different bosses, different conditions, and different rates of pay. But the overall boss of the workers, the main enemy, is the state.
Oct 31 2009 11:36
#51
RMT video, explaining the CWU dispute:
Oct 31 2009 14:19
#52
Farce wrote:
What possibilities do people think there actually are for linking up struggles across different sectors, such as post, bus and fire? If they were all directly employed by the local council, it'd seem a lot easier, since they all answer to different employers I kind of find it hard to see how we can suggest they can do so without appealing to really vague notions of shared class interests. Thoughts?
Well, that's me told - Unite, the CWU and the FBU have called a joint strike rally for today outside the firestation at 4 (not an arbitrary time, that's when the firefighters walk out). Also backed by the UCU, although they're not on strike. So struggles linking up definitely isn't as unlikely as it might sound, even if it is still firmly under the control of the union leadership. Also dunno how big it'll be, since striking bus workers we talked to on the picket line this morning hadn't heard of it. 
Still, I think I'm right in saying that any connection between different groups of striking workers counts as good stuff. I'll report back from it in a bit.
Oct 31 2009 16:26
#53
Cheers farce!
Oct 31 2009 19:33
#54
Very interesting farce. The point about the striking bus workers not knowing about it, underlines your point about the union dominating. The unions will make a big song and dance at times about unity etc but when you get down to the reality a lot of the time it is all very tightly controlled with only a small number workers involved.
However, the main point is the unions felt the need to do this, thus they must be getting a feeling from the workers that this is what they want. Thus, the unions will move before the workers do. It is is an indication of what is going on at the moment.
On the early morning BBC news today they talked about the struggle of the Leeds binmen spreading to Britghton! Anyone know anything about this? The main point of the item was the growing number of struggles.
Oct 31 2009 19:50
#55
Jack's involved with the Brighton stuff - basically their single status pay deal seems to be going the same way - cutting the men's wages instead of bringing the women's up to the same level, I think they are trying to get a strike ballot at the minute.
Their bin workers are in GMB,.
Nov 1 2009 13:39
#56
Brighton bin men voted 94% for a one-week all out strike from Nov 9, working to rule from Thurs with further strike dates to be announced. I understand the Unison local government branch is keen to ballot to join them over the same single-status issue but this is being strongly resisted from regional/national level. Posties are also due to be on all-out strike Nov 9 so there could be a chance to encourage them to visit each others' picket lines.
Nov 1 2009 13:40
#57
There actually wasn't that much interesting to report in the end, beyond the simple fact of good-sized delegations of posties and bus workers going down to the firefighters picket lines (which is clearly good in itself). BBC call it 80 people. Heavy SWP influence - SWPers spoke representing NUT and NUJ before we got any actual strikers. There was also an appeal for an anti-deportation campaign of a local asylum seeker who'd fled Nigeria after people had tried to kill him for organising bus workers there - would be interesting to know how supportive the demo as a whole, rather than just the leftists on the platform, felt about that. Had one terrible drone from the Trade Union Council who used to be President of ASLEF deliver a speech about how we needed to stop a tory government getting elected - to his credit, the striking bus driver did talk about how we can't just talk about the "tory anti-union laws", since they are tory and Labour anti-union laws by now. Only other moment that really made me cringe was when the chair talked about the need for unity between employed and unemployed workers, especially in the face of Royal Mail's attempt to undercut its workforce, and then introduced the next speaker - for a moment I actually thought it was gonna be a fellow doley talking about something that might be relevant to unemployed people, but of course not, it was the local SWP full-time official, who's apparently qualified to speak on the subject cos he used to be a precarious casual worker at one point in his life, FFS.
Also worth noting that all three of the striking workers spoke about the extent to which this isn't just an economic/pay/conditions struggle, it's a fight for dignity against management bullying and intimidation, especially on the buses (where one guy got a six-month written warning for taking the day off after his mother died, and people wanting time off sick are pressured into seeing the company doctor and then not allowed time off if the company doctor says they can work, no matter what their independent GP may say), but also with the firefighters being unhappy not just at the shift changes, but also at the way management have attempted to impose them without listening to opposition.
So, yeah, the local strike support group that's getting set up does look to be strongly SWP-dominated, but anarchists have been invited to give their contact details for it, apparently cos they were impressed by the fact that we were down on the bus workers picket lines this morning with flyers for the joint rally. You might've thought a strike support group should be open to anyone who wants to support the strikes anyway, but there you go.
Nov 1 2009 19:24
#58
Thanks for the update.
Joseph, yes I heard they were going to try to get a ballot. In London at least it is pretty much impossible to get UNISON to approve a strike ballot - at least in any sort of timeframe when it could actually achieve anything. They will not permit any ballot industrial action while any negotiations are still ongoing with the employer - so they'll only allow one when it is too late - effectively not permitting any strikes.
I've written about my request for a ballot on here previously (supported by 96% of members in my team), so good luck to Brighton...
Nov 1 2009 21:19
#59
Interesting developments and reference the workers quoted above, indignation is an element in class consciousness.
It's important to argue against the positions of the SWP and for the opening up of any organisation of the struggle to all workers. It's the SWP's method to dominate and constrain such expressions. It's a role they played to perfection in the 80s.
Nov 2 2009 15:31
#60
I totally agree that we should be opposing SWP dominance over the struggle, but it'd be good to have more practical suggestions as to how? To anyone with much experience of dealing with them, it may be obvious that at some point they'll try to dominate and constrain the struggle, but to anyone who's never encountered them before, judging them solely by their behaviour in this dispute (or trio of disputes) so far, they just seem like the most active and well-organised group supporting the strikes, which is hard to oppose. Of course, there's still every possibility that the workers'll just tell them to piss off of their own accord, but that'd most likely be out of an instinctive distrust of outsiders wanting to get involved in their affairs, which'd hardly be a positive development from our point of view. So how can we argue against the SWP's dominance without just banging on about the miner's strike (which, to young workers striking for the first time, probably seems not much more relevant than bringing up sodding Kronstadt - I was born in the 80s, after all)?
On a related note, what do people generally think the role of anarchist/communist militants in supporting disputes that aren't directly our own should be? In my group, there seems to be a consensus that our role should just be to support the struggle and not seek to give out anarchist literature, which is perfectly fair in theory but in practice, with no workplace resistance group or "revolutionary union" to support, tends to mean that we just come across like particularly dedicated union militants, which isn't exactly ideal. Is this just a natural, inevitable consequence of being involved in struggles that haven't yet come up against the limits of unionism, or is there some way around this?
this is just getting semantic:
worker support = postive public opinion = active solidarity outside the postal sector
we're arguing the same thing