Can you provide any sources that show this is the case? Any quotes from bodies on the ground showing that they are not striking for the "wrong" reasons?
a) Evidence of distortion:
-
Creative editing of quotation to fit the "racism" narrative.
(See:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/03/race-bbc ).
- repeated headlining the strike as "protests against Italian workers". (No, it's protests against the actions of bosses).
b) These are the demands adopted by the Lindsey Oil Refinery construction strikers at a mass meeting on 2 February:
* No victimisation of workers taking solidarity action.
* All workers in UK to be covered by NAECI Agreement.
* Union controlled registering of unemployed and locally skilled union members, with nominating rights as work becomes available.
* Government and employer investment in proper training/apprenticeships for new generation of construction workers - fight for a future for young people.
* All Immigrant labour to be unionised.
* Trade Union assistance for immigrant workers - including interpreters - and access to Trade Union advice - to promote active integrated Trade Union Members.
* Build links with construction trade unions on the continent.
* Re-instatement of [victimised worker] John McKewan
(John Monks, general secretary of the European Trade Union Confederation, said the Lindsey refinery dispute was typical of problems that had become apparent across the EU where workers were employed outside their home country.
The issue arose in Britain because UK law requires foreign workers to be employed only in line with minimum legal conditions, rather than on the same pay and conditions as homegrown staff in the same jobs, said Monks. This meant that workers from countries where pay and conditions were less favourable were able to undercut British workers, and European law deemed that any attempt by unions to enforce the same conditions would breach directives on the free movement of labour.
http://www.etuc.org/a/5795)
