Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Hundreds of workers protest against Italians/Foreigners 'taking jobs'...

well you have given up trying to be particularly coherent :0

If this is not your aim, why are you posting up totally unsubstantiated rumours, (and then not even sourcing them correctly)?

The only logical explanation is that you are desperately keen to show that the strikers are racist.

Bullshit. I want to know what the far-right is up to and what, if any, influence they are having on events.

The unsubstantiated rumour is one I would like to substantiate. I thought posting it here may get an answer? Judging by the response, no one knows. Fine. I'll take it as bollocks until I hear otherwise.
 
<snip>with nominating rights as work becomes available.

genuine question... how would this work in practice?

would it be on a longest unemployed person on the list who's qualified for the job get's the work basis, or erm what?:confused:
 
This action seems to be fuelled by a jingoistic press though. Jobs for local people??? These are BNP slogans. It was likely that there were going to be more strike action as a result of the Recession but it seems to me to be going in the wrong direction. It should be the owners of industry that are the targets not fellow workers. It's such a long time since there has been industrial action on this scale in the UK that everyone wants to support it, but there is probably going to be a lot more, this is the wrong place to start imo.
So you'd support things like demands that migrant workers are given the same pay and conditions? Maybe even demands that they are assisted in participating in the same union as their workmates via union provided translaters? If only there were a massive group of striking workers who'd just agreed on something like that :rolleyes:

The "jingoistic press" have been caught on the backfoot with this one, and they've been trying as hard as they can to overemphasise every single instance of nationalism they can find.
 
This seems to me a straightforward case of a PR 'wedge strategy' being used to attack broader solidarity with the striking workers.

In this case the wedge being applied is the accusation of racism, deftly suggested by the media as the motivation for the strikes.

This does several things:

1) it attracts actual racists, thereby giving the media something to concrete to point to
2) makes the striking workers' cause potentially toxic for those who buy the media/PR line
3) distracts the public from the economic issues involved by supplying an ignoble alternative explanation for the strikes and making that the media talking point that they spend most of their time focussing on.
 
Are you saying it is 'local jobs for local people'?
Well, people who live locally, which is fair enough, IMO. What could possibly be wrong with that?

It's not as if they're proposing some mechanism to check that the people listed are *local* in the sense that they are originally from the area.
 
I think the only racism here is not employing British workers?What's up with an Italian business employing Italian workers over British workers?Nazi cunts!!!!!!
 
Why on earth should jobs be only available to locals?
That's not what it actually says though, is it?
Union controlled registering of unemployed and locally skilled union members, with nominating rights as work becomes available.
In other words, a register of unionised workers who live locally and can be put forward as candidates for jobs by the union branch. Seems like an excellent way for local branches to practice a bit of practical solidarity with their unemployed FWs.

Anyway, what is your problem with the demand? And what do you think it suggests about the strikers?
 
Anyway, what is your problem with the demand? And what do you think it suggests about the strikers?
It doesn't 'suggest' anything - it indicates very clearly there is some negative sentiment regarding people who are not 'local'. Why does it need to mention 'local' at all if the intention is not to favour local people?
 
It doesn't 'suggest' anything - it indicates very clearly there is some negative sentiment regarding people who are not 'local'. Why does it need to mention 'local' at all if the intention is not to favour local people?
there's a big difference between 'local people' meaning people who were born locally and can trace their family line back several generations locally... which can essentially be taken as code for it being a racist viewpoint... and the more inclusive 'local people' which just means people who're living in the local area regardless of where they were born, or what their skin colour is.

nothing to be ashamed of in favouring local people for jobs if it's the latter version of local people, and lots to be said in favour of it IMO... and that's my take on what the strikers mean by it as well.
 
I think the company who have the contract are racist in that they didn't want British workers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 
nothing to be ashamed of in favouring local people for jobs if it's the latter version of local people, and lots to be said in favour of it IMO... and that's my take on what the strikers mean by it as well.
sort of busts nationally-agreed union positions tho doesn't it - and makes me wonder why strikers from other parts of the Uk would support it, unless they also want a divided workforce
 
nothing to be ashamed of in favouring local people for jobs if it's the latter version of local people, and lots to be said in favour of it IMO... and that's my take on what the strikers mean by it as well.

At a guess i'd say you're wrong...........The protesters are fucking fuming that foreignrs have have taken the jobs of brits
 
there's a big difference between 'local people' meaning people who were born locally and can trace their family line back several generations locally... which can essentially be taken as code for it being a racist viewpoint... and the more inclusive 'local people' which just means people who're living in the local area regardless of where they were born, or what their skin colour is.

nothing to be ashamed of in favouring local people for jobs if it's the latter version of local people, and lots to be said in favour of it IMO... and that's my take on what the strikers mean by it as well.
This.

Spion, do you have any evidence that the Socialist Party members who proposed these demands did so out of xenophobia? It looks more to me like an attempt to deracialise the dispute over jobs by making it about creating a means for the union to help unemployed people who live nearby into work. Notice that the demand doesn't actually refer to 'local people', by the way.
 
Back
Top Bottom