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

[snadge]

In other words, what overtures did the strikers make towards the Italians to get them out too?

They don't need the Italians out, the Italian workers are in a win situation, read my above post.

 

[Fedayn]

So, what was the practical effect of that positive vote? In other words, what overtures did the strikers make towards the Italians to get them out too?

I've never seen someone so desperate to label strikers as anti-foreign bigots in order to prove his political 'integrity'.

As yet we don't know, who's to say. What can now happen, is that, the strikers should approach them asap.

 

[dennisr]

So far, what I can see that the strike has won is 102 news jobs. That's a good thing, but it doesn't match with what was demanded. You could say that that's a result of the BJ4BW workers demand, although modified - by the bosses as a result of not wating to break discrimination law and becuase of existing contractual arrangements with IREM? - as the end result is that the Italians also have their jobs intact.

I'm not going to bother going over and over and over with you the rest of your post. You didn't and still don't understand the nature of the dispute or the class issues that were clearly underlying and you were not interested in information that showed your secondhand black/white view up for what it was - that's why you went with the other side when push cam to shove.

But on the bit quoted about - what dispute recently has achieved 'all of its demands' - if anything the mistaken slogans at the beginning were less of a problem than the utterly cowardly response of so-called lefts like you - you took the side of the employers, the media, the politicians and the BNP in making out out this was simply a reactionary movement about race etc etc not class. The strikers did not go for more precisely because they did not want to be seen as anti-italian.

you made your bed, you lay in it

 

[dennisr]

I've never seen someone so des[perate to label strikers as anti-foreign bigots in order to prove his political ibntegrity.

absolutely - stinks

and then there was that post were he talked about himself as a "red" (when accusing me of "intimidation" - the fantasist). The only people who have ever used that term to me in the past are fash.

i'm not accusing you of that Spoin - but it shows you know fuck all

 

[Spion]

I've never seen someone so desperate to label strikers as anti-foreign bigots in order to prove his political 'integrity'.

Sorry, but that's utter bullshit. I have clearly stated in my earlier post that there were both progressive and reactionary demands. You have to smear me to cover for your spinelessness in dealing with the latter

If I had been for the strike I would still have opposed the BJ4BW and 'locally skilled' demands tooth and nail.

 

[Spion]

absolutely - stinks

and then there was that post were he talked about himself as a "red" (when accusing me of "intimidation" - the fantasist). The only people who have ever used that term to me in the past are fash.

i'm not accusing you of that Spoin - but it shows you know fuck all

You know exactly what you're accusing me of you scumbag

 

[Spion]

You didn't and still don't understand the nature of the dispute or the class issues that were clearly underlying

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the demand that 'locally skilled' labour be employed before European labour is a 'class' demand

 

[dennisr]

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the demand that 'locally skilled' labour be employed before European labour is a 'class' demand

you don't want to understand

tithead

 

[Knotted]

If I had been for the strike I would still have opposed the BJ4BW and 'locally skilled' demands tooth and nail.

Why didn't you support the strike? Even if it had been 'nationalist', what sort of leftist opposes striking workers?

 

[dennisr]

You know exactly what you're accusing me of you scumbag

just crawl back under your stone, idiot

 

[Spion]

you don't want to understand

tithead

You simply can't answer it so you resort to insults

 

[dennisr]

Why didn't you support the strike? Even if it had been 'nationalist', what sort of leftist opposes striking workers?

well one would in certain situations (as a leftist like) - the problem was this was not one of those situations - just superficially and completely misread on his part

 

[snadge]

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the demand that 'locally skilled' labour be employed before European labour is a 'class' demand

that is because you are a capitalist lackey, you missed out an extremely important part in the above.

I'm still waiting for an explanation of how the demand that 'locally skilled' labour payed at the previously agreed NAECI rate be employed before cheaper, union busting European labour is a 'class' demand

if the above is true, there is no need to employ foreign workers as it would become more cost effective to use local labour and only using foreign workers if needed due to skill shortages.

You are blindly ignoring a huge part of the issue.

 

[dennisr]

You simply can't answer it so you resort to insults

that's right

 

[dennisr]

that is because you are a capitalist lackey, you missed out an extremely important part in the above.



if the above is true, there is no need to employ foreign workers as it would become more cost effective to use local labour and only using foreign workers if needed due to skill shortages.

I wouldn't bother waring yourself out snage

you don't think this self appointed expert is going to start listening instead of knowing after so many hundreds of posts?

s/he's just desperatly trying to cover her/his own mistakes - more interested in how s/he is perceived than showing solidarity with the workers s/he condemns

 

[Knotted]

well one would in certain situations (as a leftist like) - the problem was this was not one of those situations - just superficially and completely misread on his part

Once strike action has been taken its not only the demands of workers but their organisation that is at stake. Even if action is taken for the wrong reasons, if it is successful then the workers will be in a position to put forward progressive demands.

I don't understand where Spion's instincts are coming from.

 

[dennisr]

Where is this from?

Just a general copy and paste mate:
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/6854

Actually the writer is based in Milan I think (unless she has moved again)

 

[Spion]

s/he's just desperatly trying to cover her/his own mistakes - more interested in how s/he is perceived than showing solidarity with the workers s/he condemns

If I had come out in favour of the strike I would still have fought tooth and nail against the nationalist elements of the strike's demands and the BJ4BW sentiment among the mass of strikers.

What evidence do we have that you did? You just pretended it didn't exist, that it was all a media lie.

 

[Spion]

Once strike action has been taken its not only the demands of workers but their organisation that is at stake. Even if action is taken for the wrong reasons, if it is successful then the workers will be in a position to put forward progressive demands.

I don't understand where Spion's instincts are coming from.

"A trade union led by reactionary fakers organizes a strike against the admission of Negro workers into a certain branch of industry. Shall we support such a shameful strike? Of course not. But let us imagine that the bosses, utilizing the given strike, make an attempt to crush the trade union and to make impossible in general the organized self-defense of the workers. In this case we will defend the trade union as a matter of course in spite of its reactionary leadership."

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/idom/dm/04-again.htm

 

[chilango]

Just a general copy and paste mate:
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/6854

Actually the writer is based in Milan I think (unless she has moved again)

okay.

I've not heard anyone talking about these strikes here.

But, I would imagine that the response would be as you say.

However, the Lega Nord et al can happily forment anti-foreigner stuff up here without any help from this...


Good that there is some contact with Rifondazione though....

 

[dennisr]

Once strike action has been taken its not only the demands of workers but their organisation that is at stake. Even if action is taken for the wrong reasons, if it is successful then the workers will be in a position to put forward progressive demands.

I don't understand where Spion's instincts are coming from.

Agree - an activist would hardly cross a picket line even if they opposed demands in their entirety. They would be on the picket line arguing their case

In defense - Spion did argue that's what s/he would have done (theorecticaly) - after spending the previous god knows how many posts showing how all these strikers were reactionaries to anyone who would listen (and plenty who gave up listening...). Which - given the actual position Spion is in was siding with boss media lies

 

[Divisive Cotton]

a thought occurred to me last night, aren't/weren't the strikers essentially asking for the introduction of the equivalent of a docks labour scheme (as abolished by thatch in 89) for refinery workers?

Kind of, it reminds me of the old print unions and how they sent unemployed workers on their books to jobs - both are from a time when unions exercised real power.

So what do people think of the outcome?

100 extra jobs created without the sacking of any foreign workers - looks like a good result to me.

It feels though that this is just the beginning of much stronger and wider movements across Europe this year.

 

[dennisr]

"A trade union led by reactionary fakers organizes a strike against the admission of Negro workers into a certain branch of industry. Shall we support such a shameful strike? Of course not. But let us imagine that the bosses, utilizing the given strike, make an attempt to crush the trade union and to make impossible in general the organized self-defense of the workers. In this case we will defend the trade union as a matter of course in spite of its reactionary leadership."

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/idom/dm/04-again.htm

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh - a (secondhand) quote from Trotsky - you must be right then - I bow before your intellectual prowess

Yep, the situation at the refinary was exactly the same as the US in the 1930s

you sad feck

 

[Spion]

Agree - an activist would hardly cross a picket line even if they opposed demands in their entirety. They would be on the picket line arguing their case

In defense - Spion did argue that's what s/he would have done (theorecticaly)

*falls off chair* *gets back up* Yes, that's spot on

- after spending the previous god knows how many posts showing how all these strikers were reactionaries

No I did not. I said there were some reactionary demands among the strike's aims and sentiments. I did not say 'they were all reactionaries'. I'd call you thick, but I don't think you are, you are simply misrepresenting me to cover your position which is to take the 180 degree opposite of the 'they're all reactionaries' by trying to paint the strikers as 'they're all anti-racists'. It's clearly more complex than either of those silly caricatures

 

[Spion]

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh - a (secondhand) quote from Trotsky - you must be right then - I bow before your intellectual prowess

Yep, the situation at the refinary was exactly the same as the US in the 1930s

I didn't say it was. It was an answer to Knotted's question about how can leftists ever oppose strikes when that might mean their organisation might be destroyed. You really are dense and dishonest aren't you?

 

[Knotted]

"A trade union led by reactionary fakers organizes a strike against the admission of Negro workers into a certain branch of industry. Shall we support such a shameful strike? Of course not. But let us imagine that the bosses, utilizing the given strike, make an attempt to crush the trade union and to make impossible in general the organized self-defense of the workers. In this case we will defend the trade union as a matter of course in spite of its reactionary leadership."

http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/idom/dm/04-again.htm

Exactly!!

Presumably this includes defending the trade union (or in our case the strikers) against slanders in the media rather than perpetuating those slanders ourselves.

 

[dennisr]

If I had come out in favour of the strike I would still have fought tooth and nail against the nationalist elements of the strike's demands and the BJ4BW sentiment among the mass of strikers.

What evidence do we have that you did? You just pretended it didn't exist, that it was all a media lie.

Sorry - remind me again about 'honesty'. You really are a sucker for exposing your own idiocy arn't you?

You have convienently forgotten that SP members were on the that picket line - even on the elected committee. They did fight tooth and nail to overturn backward slogans and put forward a class position - they played a key role in turning that strike around and their demands were adopted by the strikers along with an additional one the strikers called for themselves (our members were not 100% confident they would be willing to take up) of reinstating a victimised worker who is and SP member - and as a result there are 100 new jobs with no job losses and ongoing discussions on how to turn this movement into united EU wide workers action. But hey, thanks for the sage like 'advice' on how to win.

Far from pretending there was no dodgy elements - I have personally alluded to this in christ knows how many posts on this thread alone as part of expalining and putting across solutions to this reactionary element. Unlike you I did not simply try and make out again asnd again and again that the entire workforce were reactionary BNP leaning racists - dickhead

 

[dennisr]

You really are dense and dishonest aren't you?

and you are the voice of 'truth' and 'reason'

 

[dennisr]

It's clearly more complex than either of those silly caricatures

not complex enough to support ehh?

and so unwilling to fall for 'silly caricatures' that you spend countless posts - repeatedly - would you like someone to list them for you - doing precisely that

 

[Spion]

Exactly!!

Presumably this includes defending the trade union (or in our case the strikers) against slanders in the media rather than perpetuating those slanders ourselves.

It means defending the union from destruction of its ability to operate. Not fooling ourselves that there are not reactionary elements to the strikers stated aims just because that might be similar to something the mdeia says. That's just straighforward self-deception