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

[tangentlama]

Your later post (1466) was spot on - its covers the real issues both those workers and plenty of others face

ta very much, mate

 

[tangentlama]

Not when we are seeing record rises in unemployment in the UK.

This is happening all over Europe. Spain is currently at 15% unemployment, yes?

 

[Spion]

How would you feel about this level of 'support' - endless condemnation and reinforcement of medias lies?

And your form of support is to uncritically defend a strike that has resulted in workers sharing crumbs from the bosses table. Instead of winning jobs for all who need them the existing contract has been shared out and Italians who were going to get jobs are not now. That's the Socialist Party putting their socialist theory into practice is it?

 

[lewislewis]

Plaid Cymru statement on the protests:
http://leannewoodamac.blogspot.com/2009/02/statement-on-oil-refinery-protests.html

 

[JimW]

And your form of support is to uncritically defend a strike that has resulted in workers sharing crumbs from the bosses table. Instead of winning jobs for all who need them the existing contract has been shared out and Italians who were going to get jobs are not now. That's the Socialist Party putting their socialist theory into practice is it?

I thought their form of support was to be there, do something and win, rather than make a wrong call right from the off and then keep digging like a cunt - smearing working class people from the sidelines and carrying water for the bosses. Your "socialist theory" is your middle class ultra-liberalism.

 

[Spion]

IYour "socialist theory" is your middle class ultra-liberalism.

If jobs for all who need them, regardless of nationality, paid from the bosses' profits is middle class ultra liberalism I'll keep it and you can stuff your parochial, petty bureuacrat brand of trade unionism right up your arse.

I've quite clearly said I would have been on the picket line arguing to change the chauvinist elements of the strike's demands. But I don't expect you to have read that while you're so busy waving your pitchfork around.

Good day to you

 

[JimW]

If jobs for all who need them, regardless of nationality, paid from the bosses' profits is middle class ultra liberalism I'll keep it and you can stuff your parochial, petty bureuacrat brand of trade unionism right up your arse.

I'm sure you will keep it - you show no signs of understanding history or learning from events. The alternative to "petty bureaucrat" trade unionism isn't Fantasy Island attempts to sound more radical than thou after the event - during which you pissed about or were an active distraction at best, hostile and spreading capitalist press smears at worst.

 

[tangentlama]

I'm sure you will keep it - you show no signs of understanding history or learning from events. The alternative to "petty bureaucrat" trade unionism isn't Fantasy Island attempts to sound more radical than thou after the event - during which you pissed about or were an active distraction at best, hostile and spreading capitalist press smears at worst.

Talking about yourself again, JimW?

I thought Spion's contribution was constructive criticism. All he did was make support conditional on an international approach/link up to ensure no calls of protectionism, chauvinism, xenophobia, etc could be levied at strikers.

If and when these strikes occur again, officially this time and with support from europe's unionists, then the strikers will need the people of this country behind them, supporting them, so dealing with constructive criticism now will lessen any chance of divisiveness from govt/bosses later one.

 

[Spion]

I thought Spion's contribution was constructive criticism. All he did differently was make support conditional on an international approach/link up.

Spot on.

I would have said the same thing about some of the strike's aims if I'd worked there and been there on the picket line.

 

[tangentlama]

Why are you so desperate to defend him and his 'conditional support'.

'Cos I've taken on board what he said including his constructive criticisms, and seen how future strikes could and would be undermined in the media and by the govt.

I know you're personally offended by his conditional support, but realistically, these criticisms have to be absorbed and cause change, to safeguard and ensure future successes. Solidarietá, non segragazione!

It ain't over yet, so it's best to take those criticisms on board.

Future Public support is vital, as is support of other unionists across Europe at a time when unemployment is greater than Uk.

The public as you know can be fickle and easily swayed once the Mail/Sun wade in with their commentaries, and the right-wing are quick to seize and exploit civil unrest to recruit for their narrow nationalisms, whilst both left and right groups try to exploit the situation to recruit. We need to pull together and work together and ensure that internationally, every worker is on board!

 

[Nigel]

Strikers attacking Neo-Liberal Agenda

Interesting article in Morning Star(31/01/09 P.9) Undermining Labour: Brian Denny

"......total is exploiting EU law which demands the free movement of capital, goods,services & labour, a neo liberal model which facilitates a race to the bottom in wages and conditions."

".....the process began back in 1987 with Margaret Thatcher's Single European Act, which Tory MP John Bercow later boasted was about imposing a single market to acheive "Thatcherism Of Europe"

This can be illustrated by the Bruges Speech by Margaret Thatcher 1988
".....by getting rid of the barriers, by making it possible for companies for companies to operate on a Europe wide scale, we can best compete with the USA, Japan,& other new economic powers of Europe"(meanig Eastern Europe I suppose)
http://brugesgroup.com/mediacentre/index.live?article=92#britain

".....Four recent judgements by the European Court of Justice known as Laval, Viking, Ruffert and Luxemberg have also enshrined the race to the bottom in the ECJ case law and gives huge new powers to employers to bring in contract labour anywhere within the EU."

This is illustrated by the Institute Of Economic Research;NEO-LIBERALISM AND NEW LABOUR'S LABOUR LAWS:
RETROSPECT AND PROSPECTS

www.ier.org.ils/systems/files/Morton+paper+FINAL.doc

 

[tangentlama]

They made mistakes in the beginning, but showed their capable handling by moving away from their initial angry reaction. I think the majority both in UK and abroad will be able to see this. *There's still some room for more refinement of both understanding and aims though*

The fash were very opportunistic to join in, yet quickly marched away, for which we're all thankful for. Still, they're going to be stirring it in other European countries, so that's a message to be "en guard", d'accord?

*As a movement*, it's quite new, and I think that the constructive criticisms made from many quarters can only make the movement stronger.

Now I think one thing to be explored is the companies involved. Does Alstom hate French unionists already? I think so. More exploration on the contract/agency problems.

How do EDF, RWE, ConocoPhillips, and other large European companies operate in UK?
Lets explore further the way they operate in other European states (and non-European states too).

Also, I don't want Brown exploiting unemployment fears and selling the public including the construction workforce his crazy nuclear package when CHP units are guaranteed to be more efficient, quicker to build, and safer to run and maintain.

good post

cheers chilango.

wonder if we need a separate thread to explore the contract/agency probs?

 

[Spion]

Strikers attacking Neo-Liberal Agenda

By putting forward a protectionist one.

There needs to be an internationalist working class alternative in the face of job cuts and European bosses' shennanigans

 

[tangentlama]

Spion - can you explain what protectionism is and why it's objectionable (for the uninitiated, please!).

 

[Spion]

Spion - can you explain what protectionism is and why it's objectionable (for the uninitiated, please!).

Protectionism is the closing down of economies into their national units by use of tariffs and the like which seek to protect 'our' capitalists from foreign competition. Its opposite is free trade, which seeks to lessen tariff barriers between countries - the EU is an example of the latter.

Supporting BJ4BW can be seen as the trade union version of supporting our capitalists. The Morning Star has lots of form in this regard

IMO, the only clear path for w/c activists is not to favour 'our' or another set of capitalists but to fight against them all by forcing them to pay for the jobs, housing, society we need.

 

[Nigel]

By putting forward a protectionist one.

There needs to be an internationalist working class alternative in the face of job cuts and European bosses' shennanigans

I could'nt agree more, industrial dispute such as Liverpool Dockers etc. had a phenominal effect.

However this dispute was different( i should imagine) based on gut feelings of working people of betrayal by their political representatives plus unaccountable and undemocratic institutions which probably the majority of people in this country are opposed to (we don't know because their has'nt been a refferendum since Heath). Which is based on a bosses, neo-liberal agenda for a free flow of Capital & Labour throughout EU countries based on free market capitalism at he expense of Labour.

'Internationalist' is the right word to use: integration of various nation states respecting there self determination.

 

[ymu]

Protectionism is the closing down of economies into their national units by use of tariffs and the like which seek to protect 'our' capitalists from foreign competition. Its opposite is free trade, which seeks to lessen tariff barriers between countries - the EU is an example of the latter.

Supporting BJ4BW can be seen as the trade union version of supporting our capitalists. The Morning Star has lots of form in this regard

IMO, the only clear path for w/c activists is not to favour 'our' or another set of capitalists but to fight against them all by forcing them to pay for the jobs, housing, society we need.

I think you'll find that capitalists like protectionism when it prevents competition for their goods and services, and dislike it when it prevents competition for jobs and wages. It's a huge error to equate protection of employment conditions with trade protectionism.

Local jobs for local workers is badly expressed, IMO - it means local jobs on locally negotiated terms and conditions, ie no ability to profit by bussing in a poor and exploited workforce from outside the area (which, let's face it, isn't usually gonna happen unless the bussed in workers are cheaper or more pliant than the locals).

There's a reason why the CBI objects to caps on immigration - it's the same reason why the UK government allow immigration but keep immigrants in legal limbo for years on end - and it's the reason behind this strike. Unions and collective bargaining mean absolutely nothing if workers who are not covered by local agreements can be temporarily imported to do the job instead.

 

[Nigel]

Protectionism is the closing down of economies into their national units by use of tariffs and the like which seek to protect 'our' capitalists from foreign competition. Its opposite is free trade, which seeks to lessen tariff barriers between countries - the EU is an example of the latter.

Supporting BJ4BW can be seen as the trade union version of supporting our capitalists. The Morning Star has lots of form in this regard

IMO, the only clear path for w/c activists is not to favour 'our' or another set of capitalists but to fight against them all by forcing them to pay for the jobs, housing, society we need.

European Union legislation, especially since Thatcher has always been used against working class. A good example of this would be ECHR ruling against Wapping Printers Dispute. Negotiations with Companies and Employers based in Britain would be al lot easier to make them accountable than overseas.

The idea that European Union is some sort of enlightened and proggresive institution is debatable, for instance the 'Fortress Europe' policies agianst migrants.

 

[Spion]

Negotiations with Companies and Employers based in Britain would be al lot easier to make them accountable than overseas.

If we left the EU tomorrow that wouldn't make all companies operating here UK ones would it?

 

[tangentlama]

To be fair, I think some of us who aren't contributing to the thread at present could take on a small research project to discover if "foreign-based contract labour" is being brought into other EU countries with the effect of excluding or undercutting these countries' indigenous workers.

We'd need to explore Spain, Portugal, Germany, Italy, and France for starters. We already know of the Laval affair, so lets see what's happening elsewhere. Who is with me?

 

[Spion]

I think you'll find that capitalists like protectionism when it prevents competition for their goods and services, and dislike it when it prevents competition for jobs and wages. It's a huge error to equate protection of employment conditions with trade protectionism.

Which is why I didn't do that. But let's be clear, BJ4BW was clearly aiming to protect UK workers' jobs at the expense of foreigners, and that was the result of the strike. It's quite possible the losing bidders for the contract IREM won will be quite pleased with the outcome also.

Local jobs for local workers is badly expressed, IMO - it means local jobs on locally negotiated terms and conditions, ie no ability to profit by bussing in a poor and exploited workforce from outside the area (which, let's face it, isn't usually gonna happen unless the bussed in workers are cheaper or more pliant than the locals).

You're making a lot of assumptions here, not least of which is that businesses are choosing winning bidders simply on labour cost when other factors might include expertise, established processes which deliver efficiency and therefore cost savings in other ways etc. I'm not saying labour costs aren't ever an issue but, for example, in the Staythorpe power station case the union was arguing that UK workers were cheaper.

Now, we can discuss whether he's got his facts right but he is clearly saying here that he thinks the bosses should use local labour because it is cheaper:

'Union spokesman David Smeeton said: "Workers who are brought in are paid £12,000 to £15,000 more for their accommodation and flights home. It is economic madness not to use as many local workers as you can."'

So, we have cases where the union was saying UK workers would be cheaper and we have cases where the union was saying foreign workers were undercutting UK ones. The only answer to that can be to fight for equal pay and conditions for all, regardless of nationality, not for preference of one over another.

 

[Spion]

To be fair, I think some of us who aren't contributing to the thread at present could take on a small research project to discover if "foreign-based contract labour" is being brought into other EU countries with the effect of excluding or undercutting these countries' indigenous workers.

We'd need to explore Spain, Portugal, Germany, Italy, and France for starters. We already know of the Laval affair, so lets see what's happening elsewhere. Who is with me?

Good idea

 

[tangentlama]

Info: A 4 page round up of European unemployment figures (as of Feb 3rd)
http://uk.reuters.com/article/marketsNewsUS/idUKL34525020090203?pageNumber=1

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Decent Seamus Milne article today:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/05/strikes-foreign-workers

 

[becky p]

Protectionism is the closing down of economies into their national units by use of tariffs and the like which seek to protect 'our' capitalists from foreign competition. Its opposite is free trade, which seeks to lessen tariff barriers between countries - the EU is an example of the latter.

So you have finally come out in support of free trade.

Maybe you should have attended the picket line with a placard Calling on " Workers to support Free Trade"

 

[durruti02]

None of your points actually address the question I asked.

It does not.
Not irrelevant, just pointing out that the slogan used by Brown was also used by some pretty dodgy characters.
This is clearly a reference to the paragraph above and not aimed at the strikers.
The article is somewhat unclear here as it contradicts itself a few paragraphs down. Still, this is not an "attack" on the strikers.
Just because they're saying that workers should demand this, the implication that they are not is only in your mind.

Seems that you just want to see what you want to so you can witter on about the SWP. I read the article as a way of moving the debate away from "British Jobs for British Workers", which many can see the downsides of, on to a more concrete footing of the bosses fucking over all the workers regardless of nationality. It managed to do this without attacking the workers as far as I could tell.

... I'd still like to hear treelovers response to the question posed ... but he/she seems to somewhat disappear whenever I post it up again.

e2a: I'm not some kind of SWP fan, but I read the article and felt that treelover's posting of was unrepresentative of my reading of the same article - hence why I asked him to clarify.

well i disagree, BUT look, NO one on here, i would think, does not think it is important to discuss tactics and language etc etc BUT this SWP article gets it all wrong .. the only socialist w/c reponse is to suppport the strike in banner headlines .. the SWP utterly fails to support these workers

 

[durruti02]

A Short Report from italy:

But Giorgio Cremaschi, a left leader of the metal workers' union Fiom attacked neo-liberal "social dumping" policies that try to foment a "war amongst the poor".

"If the Italian workers are being paid less than the British workers and their conditions are worse, this strike is a just one" he said. "We have to fight for equal conditions".
[/I]

yes

 

[durruti02]

"The proposed deal gives British workers 102 jobs out of a total of 195 on the bulk of the new desulphurisation plant contract, including 67 skilled positions — welders, electricians and platers.

It does not involve any Italian redundancies as only 100 posts have so far gone to the foreign workers based on a hostel barge moored in Grimsby docks.

The British jobs will come from the second tranche, which would almost certainly have gone to Italian staff had the row not erupted. But no contracts have been issued by the Italian subcontractor IREM for the 95 posts still to be filled"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/04/tradeunions

If that's the case BJ4BW was successful as a strike aim. It's good that people get jobs but someone else that was set to get them has lost that chance and the end result is the w/c has fought for crumbs from the boss's table rather than fighting for jobs for all. A zero-sum game has been played

lol .. this was NOT a revolutionary strike .. this was NOT a political strike .. this was a simple flare up trade union strike .. trade unionism is ( INITIALLY ) by its very nature parochial, insular, defensive, exclusive, selfish ..

( are yoy real this ignorent of what trade unionism is???)

BUT!! ALL proper socialist/marxists/ w/c @s etc understand that the basis of w/c power is based in these insular defensive actions .. THEY MUST BE SUPPORTTED UNCONDITIONALLY .. as without this basis there is NO other w/c struggle .. no generalisation .. no pan european unions.. no effective internationalism etc etc and certainly no revolution

 

[durruti02]

Are you supportive of Israeli unions who refuse to work alongside Palestinians and didn't allow them to join their unions and get a decent wage-the same wage-rate as Israeli-Jews were being paid? (This was ongoing issue for decades, until Pals were squeezed out of Israeli workforce and now work illegally for peanuts). Are you pro IJJFIJW (Israeli-Jewish Jobs for Israeli-Jewish workers) ? DO you understand what the effect will be if all European Unionists decide to adopt a similar stance to BJFBW ?

Do you realise that this BJFBW is an ultra-nationalist stance, and although Brown is responsible for reviving a National-Front slogan, it is a trap that we all would prefer could be navigated swiftly away from before solidarity with Euro Unionists becomes impossible. This slogan BJFBW serves to disunite the European w/c - it is an trap set by Brown in Sept 2007, and basically is a spectacular own-goal. No-one here blames the striking workforce for rising to Brown's Bait - they are just pointing out that it's going to cause harm if demands aren't refined and consideration of state-of-play in European states isn't considered. Solidarietá, non Segragazione!

the politics of israel/palestine are entirely differrent to what is being discussed here .. in israel palestine there is ( ayk) a history of state war/terrorism against the arabs, of arab using asymetric terrorism, and of ethnic cleanising against arabs and the creation of an arab threat to divide what would otherwise be string united unions .. ( apparrently israeli rail unions are on wildcat tonight)

in england when ( and i do NOT support demands for BJFBP ) people talk about employing british OR local it is NOT in that context but in the context of empowering unions and attacking neo liberal employment laws etc .. there are those who fall inot nationalism and every socilaist worth their salt should oppose that .. BUT this was NEVER the case in these disputes AND where the best tactic was always to support the workers anyway

 

[frogwoman]

the politics of israel/palestine are entirely differrent to what is being discussed here .. in israel palestine there is ( ayk) a history of state war/terrorism against the arabs, of arab using asymetric terrorism, and of ethnic cleanising against arabs and the creation of an arab threat to divide what would otherwise be string united unions .. ( apparrently israeli rail unions are on wildcat tonight)

in england when ( and i do NOT support demands for BJFBP ) people talk about employing british OR local it is NOT in that context but in the context of empowering unions and attacking neo liberal employment laws etc .. there are those who fall inot nationalism and every socilaist worth their salt should oppose that .. BUT this was NEVER the case in these disputes AND where the best tactic was always to support the workers anyway

I cant think of anything to disagree with in this post.