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

[durruti02]

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.

spot on

 

[Talkie Toaster]

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

Well, I really can't see how the article fails to support the workers.

Your assertion that there is only one valid socialist w/c response seems somewhat purist to me. There is rarely one valid response to anything in this world. Nothing is so black and white in my very humble opinion, as much as we'd often like it to be.

 

[durruti02]

Well, I really can't see how the article fails to support the workers.

Your assertion that there is only one valid socialist w/c response seems somewhat purist to me. There is rarely one valid response to anything in this world. Nothing is so black and white in my very humble opinion, as much as we'd often like it to be.

for these reasons

1) the article assumes the strike is nationalist/racist when it is not

2) it brings in, idiotically, Mosley and the NF forcing asian out of jobs when these things are almost totally irrelevent

3)it says there has been an attempt to play the race card .. there has NOT

4) it says 'but what is less clear is why the unions .. .. have focused their attention on foreign workers..' when this is simply NOT true!!! and then responds to this false story!!

5) it says workers should demand equal wages etc .. as if they are NOT .. when clearly they are

and purist? yes .. and the reason imho for 3- years of defeats is we have moved away from this position

 

[Talkie Toaster]

Yes, you've posted them before, but feel free to ignore my response.

 

[Nigel]

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

However it would make unscrupulous companies accountable, under British Law, rather than have this neo-liberal onslaught thrust upon us.

 

[Spion]

However it would make unscrupulous companies accountable, under British Law, rather than have this neo-liberal onslaught thrust upon us.

Feel free. I'm not really interested in scrapping through the courts and trying to get the UK state to protect me. I want to see the bosses stopped in their tracks in the workplace by workers taking action

 

[Nigel]

Feel free. I'm not really interested in scrapping through the courts and trying to get the UK state to protect me. I want to see the bosses stopped in their tracks in the workplace by workers taking action

Well they did take unofficial action, through Wildcat strikes, negotiated and agreed on a deal in which none of the foreign workers lost their jobs and you are still slagging them off
".....British workers will be offered 102 out of 198 new jobs in the contract awarded to an Italian company at the Lindsey oil refinery in north Lincolnshire. None of the 300 Italian workers at the plant will lose their jobs under the agreement."
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/u...itish-strike-for-british-workers-1546392.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/oil-workers-end-strike-after-job-offer-1546709.html

 

[Spion]

Well they did take unofficial action, through Wildcat strikes, negotiated and agreed on a deal in which none of the foreign workers lost their jobs and you are still slagging them off

Nice dodge

No new jobs were created. 100 jobs that were set to go to Italians have gone to British workers. That's not slagging anyone off - it's just a fact. 'British jobs' went to British workers

"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

 

[belboid]

No new jobs were created. 100 jobs that were set to go to Italians have gone to British workers. That's not slagging anyone off - it's just a fact. 'British jobs' went to British workers

How do you know where the jobs were going? You dont. Stop taking the bosses word for things.

Most workers want to work close to home. They dont actually want to travel thousands of miles for a job - one that is paid LESS than local workers have agreed (did you see the posts about the italian worker saying he got paid 1000 euro's less than his brit counterparts?).

Sourcing workers as locally as possible has always been a demand of workers in the industry, not to provide 'british jobs for british workers', but to give workers anywhere preferable working conditions. That happens in itally as well as in britain.

 

[Spion]

How do you know where the jobs were going? You dont. Stop taking the bosses word for things.

I'm not:

"The stewards explained that Shaw had lost a third of the job to IREM who would be employing their own core Portuguese and Italian workforce, numbering 200-300."

 

[Nigel]

Nice dodge

No new jobs were created. 100 jobs that were set to go to Italians have gone to British workers. That's not slagging anyone off - it's just a fact. 'British jobs' went to British workers

The fact that the Italliens at Lindsey have not been chased out with torches and pitchforks but managed to keep their contracts is not a favourable situation and that not more workers from other countries are coaxed to work in these unfavourable conditions, living on a ship in an Estuary cut off from anyone is not a good thing.

This is hardly reactionary and Xenophobic.

 

[belboid]

I'm not:

"The stewards explained that Shaw had lost a third of the job to IREM who would be employing their own core Portuguese and Italian workforce, numbering 200-300."

that refers to the original 300 jobs, not these ones

 

[treelover]

Ten Days That Shook New Labour: Lessons of the Dispute So Far.
Large numbers of workers taking spontaneous direct action have not only shocked this New Labour Government but have also disoriented some sections of the Left.

I have been off the scene largely because of the 3rd Runway announcement two weeks ago. When the Government announces that 10,000 members of your community are about to lose their homes and you are their MP you have a responsibility to focus your attention on their deep felt cares and concerns. So in the last couple of weeks I have thrown myself into organising meeting after meeting in my constituency, speaking to over 1500 people and contacting by various means nearly 20,000. Their response has been feelings of fear, insecurity, anxiety, anger and sheer determination to fight back.

t is these same feelings of insecurity, turning to anger and determination to resist that has motivated the workers involved in the strikes at the energy companies around the country. No worker can feel safe in their jobs as the recession slips into a depression. People are inevitably fearful for their futures.

They also have no confidence in the existing political structures and process being able or willing to do anything to protect them. The party that they voted into power has turned out to be the very Government that has promoted the privatisation, contracting out, outsourcing, and off-shoring, which have stripped away their basic protections at work, undermined their employment security, intensified their exploitation, cut their wages and forced them into debt dependency.

People have also learnt that working through the official structures of their trade union has been rendered largely ineffective by the persistence of Thatcher’s anti trade union laws under this Government. Increasingly they have also come t know that they cannot rely upon many of their trade union leaderships who have delivered up their unions in support of New Labour and who less than 2 years ago installed Brown as Labour leader, the evangelist for globalisation, free markets and flexible labour.

more

http://www.johnmcdonnell.org.uk/

Here is John McDonnell's view of the strike and the way forward, John and the LRC by only publishing this now, certainly missed the opportunity to speak to millions about this strike, but in the article he clearly see the problems ahead and offers some ideas.

 

[Spion]

that refers to the original 300 jobs, not these ones

So these 102 jobs for the British lads are extra to that 300? if so, source please

 

[belboid]

ffs, get yer head out yer arse and read the article again, it's fairly clear, unless you deliberately wish to mis-read it.

And you've got fuck all to say on the rest of my post I see.

One might think that you have no interest whatsover in actually discussing what happened and why, and just want to slag the strikers off.

 

[Spion]

ffs, get yer head out yer arse and read the article again, it's fairly clear, unless you deliberately wish to mis-read it.

Which article? There are half a dozen linked to on this page

And you've got fuck all to say on the rest of my post I see. .

Plenty of time, grasshopper. There'll be plenty of opportunity to discuss everyone's new found enthusiams for 'local jobs for local people'

One might think that you have no interest whatsover in actually discussing what happened and why

That's rich. I've simply asked for your source, for some definitive information on the outcome of the strike and all I get from you is a load of abuse. It looks like you're the one avoiding discussion to me.

 

[belboid]

are you being deliberately dim? Or are you actually that stupid? I refer to the article you just quoted, as was obvious to anyone who wasn't deliberately trying to hide their head in the sand.

You refuse to discuss anything, and simply repeat your one line mantra over and over despite many people showing you how you are (deliberately) misinterpreting what is going on.

Shameful.

 

[Nigel]

Statement From Unite

Rightly stating that this is also about discrimination of British workers to apply for tese contracts.

"The UK needs to upgrade and build new power stations and there are huge opportunities to create thousands of well paid and highly skilled jobs. It will be a disgrace if UK workers are not even allowed to apply for jobs to build British power stations."
http://www.amicustheunion.org/Default.aspx?page=9993

 

[tangentlama]

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 ..

You're completely wrong. That incomplete history you described above is missing complicity of Histadrut Union who had an Israeli-Jewish jobs for Israeli-Jewish workers policy. That is ultra-nationalist. That is a type of protectionism, and under that policy, rampant privatisation of once-state businesses/institutions comparable to UK privatisation of transport, energy, and communications sectors have taken place, as has neoliberalisation of welfare state -pensions, health, welfare. FYI, it has never been the state alone who has dealt unequal blows to both Jewish and Arab 'foreign' workers, there has been complicity from Unions.

( apparrently israeli rail unions are on wildcat tonight)

That's about fraud allegations towards the northern chapter's committee was not a labour dispute. The Histadrut is now going to remove them all from their positions as a result, so it gained nothing.

"The Histadrut will not allow committee members to take wildcat action, without the Histadrut's permission and in defiance of its instructions, that also causes unnecessary harm to the public," he said. http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1062136.html

Now imagine what would happen if the unions here began action to remove every single shop steward involved in the wildcat strike here - e.g. Unite shop steward Kenny Logan, one of the unemployed at the picket line at LOR. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/england/humber/7869873.stm)

Back to Histadrut Union, they always had a policy that boycotted of Arab (foreign) produce. Histadrut was at the very forefront of the Buy Israeli (Burn Arab) produce campaigns. For it's first 40 years it barred Arabs from working alongside it's membership. 30 years ago, Histadrut created a separate Arab ('immigrant') section and collected union dues (without permission) from their wages, but did not represent Arab workers to the bosses nor did it allow access to members benefits, pensions, welfare. It continuously sided with bosses against Israeli Arab workers (who it treated as immigrants). Now Histadrut has improved maybe a little, but basically it supports protectionism and has a frightened and complicit workforce to represent and this makes it's workforce accept all manner of shit from business and union-tops, whilst union-tops participate and support demonisation and fail to fight for 'the immigrant other'.

The only union in Israel that does promote equal opportunities for Arab workers is WAC-Ma'an. A (right-wing) govt-linked organisation tried to take control of WAC-Ma'an and a quiet battle barely mentioned or supported by British TU's has been fought these last few years. http://www.workersadvicecenter.org/campaign/Campaign-press-release.htm

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

Maybe go and study the rise of neoliberalism and rampant privatisation since 1977 in Israel and you will alter your agreement with durruti02. Look since 1967 if you want to see effect in territories on indigenous Arab workers.

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 don't understand what you write at the best of times. There is a pressing need to reach out to other European Trades' Unions and maybe join the Federation ICEM and ensure information is posted with them. The way the strikers were perceived abroad was not favourable so there is much work to be done to increase ties.

LJFLW/BJFBW is a slippery slope to intolerance for 'the other' (migrant) worker. British Unions need to reach out fast to other unions. I recommend to start with CC.OO (Confederacion Sindical de Comisiones Obreras) as the largest Spanish union, mainly due to Spain having the highest unemployment and the perception of UK Unions that these strike actions will have in Spain and also contact the CGTP of Portugal plus extended contact with ICEM seems paramount importance to participation in ICEM's study of Contract and Agency Labour (CAL.ICEM).

In 2007 (UK), the Labour Govt. announced a neoliberal plan to reward industry/bosses for taking on long-term unemployed, which is basically a revision of the pilot Israeli-style wisconsin plan "Mehalev" and seems identical to the Israeli "Lights towards Employment" (Wisconsin II) which will basically see Govt. reward the firms (bosses) if they employ unemployed Israeli (most likely Jewish) workers. Israel is a pilot - certainly a 'light to all nations', in that what it can get away with, will be happening in UK shortly afterwards. It is a pattern repeated over and over. Look and you will see this pattern.

How do you think it feels for an overseas migrant worker to hear Unite shop stewards call for a type of protectionism in LJFLW ? How do you think Brit workers feel if they work on contracts elsewhere in Europe?

It seems UK Govt. is engaged in some very bad stances with regard to Euro-national workers' rights and my fear is that by supporting LJFLW, the UK will alienate itself from other Euro-TU's and play into Govt/Bosses hands. They already set traps by promises of BJFBW and also the Winsconsin II plan announced back in Sept. 2007 by Prime Minister Brown.

In UK, neoliberalism has not been fought adequately by unions, so now welfare, pensions and health are either privatised or close to privatisation - the incoming 'Wisconsin II' plan, announced by Brown in Sept 2007 (financial incentive paid to employer to employ long-term unemployed). UK Unions need to buck their ideas up and become more internationalist in their outlook and strengthen their ties with European and International Trades' Unions. And we should beware also of the right-wing unions that do exist who are complicit with bosses, trade-off their existence for workers' rights and exist as cushions for neoliberal work practices rather than a force for positive change.

 

[strummerville]

How do you know where the jobs were going? You dont. Stop taking the bosses word for things.

Most workers want to work close to home. They dont actually want to travel thousands of miles for a job - one that is paid LESS than local workers have agreed (did you see the posts about the italian worker saying he got paid 1000 euro's less than his brit counterparts?).

Sourcing workers as locally as possible has always been a demand of workers in the industry, not to provide 'british jobs for british workers', but to give workers anywhere preferable working conditions. That happens in itally as well as in britain.

Absolutely right. There is nothing xenophobic about employing locally, as many workers could be from other countries anyway. Where I live in Brighton, the local football club got planning permission to build its new stadium partly by saying it would create 100's of jobs for the local community. It is being built very near Moulscombe and Whitehawk, two of the poorest estates in the country. Spion's arguments remind me of the Thatcherites in the 80's arguing for the sort of economics that decimated local communities then.

 

[strummerville]

And those communities have people from Eastern Europe and Africa living there as well as the white working class. Still xenophobic to employ locally?

 

[Nigel]

Absolutely right. There is nothing xenophobic about employing locally, as many workers could be from other countries anyway. Where I live in Brighton, the local football club got planning permission to build its new stadium partly by saying it would create 100's of jobs for the local community. It is being built very near Moulscombe and Whitehawk, two of the poorest estates in the country. Spion's arguments remind me of the Thatcherites in the 80's arguing for the sort of economics that decimated local communities then.

All you need now is a decent football team

 

[Spion]

are you being deliberately dim? Or are you actually that stupid? I refer to the article you just quoted, as was obvious to anyone who wasn't deliberately trying to hide their head in the sand.

You refuse to discuss anything, and simply repeat your one line mantra over and over despite many people showing you how you are (deliberately) misinterpreting what is going on.

Shameful.

That's rich. It's not me that's closing down discussion with insults and teenage petulance.

Anyway, let's see. I quoted two articles on this page.

This one:

"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

And this one:

"The stewards explained that Shaw had lost a third of the job to IREM who would be employing their own core Portuguese and Italian workforce, numbering 200-300."

The first one tells us that the jobs that the strike won were to be given to Italians but will now go to British workers. You told me that was untrue and that I was 'taking the bosses' word' for it. So, I quoted the second one, which shows the SP saying that there were 200-300 jobs meant to go to the Italians.

So, so far, it looks like the strike did not create any new jobs but took jobs that were set to go to Italians and gave them to British workers. In other words, the slogan British Jobs for British Workers was successful. But, if you know better and have hard facts to back that up please carry on. I'm sure it'll be easier for you than getting yourself so worked up

 

[Spion]

Spion's arguments remind me of the Thatcherites in the 80's arguing for the sort of economics that decimated local communities then.

That's right. Advocating strikes to make the bosses pay for jobs and training for all that need them regardless of nationality is a well known Thatcherite principle

 

[CyberRose]

Why don't we introduce UEFA's "6 + 5 rule" into the rest of the working world?!

 

[snadge]

That's right. Advocating strikes to make the bosses pay for jobs and training for all that need them regardless of nationality is a well known Thatcherite principle

What about the people who live "locally" that ALREADY have the skills.

 

[Spion]

What about the people who live "locally" that ALREADY have the skills.

which bit of 'all that need them' do you not understand exactly?

 

[snadge]

which bit of 'all that need them' do you not understand exactly?

Nobody NEEDS them, they already have them, you're barking up the wrong tree again.

 

[TremulousTetra]

And those communities have people from Eastern Europe and Africa living there as well as the white working class. Still xenophobic to employ locally?

I'm going to avoid the word xenophobic, I don't think that's really anything to do with the discussion. What I'm concerned about is the words unity and division. Do the slogans promote division or Unity?

Calling for one group of workers to be privileged, to be given preferential treatment in hiring, does not promote unity, does it? I think of the example of Northern Ireland, workers were recruited locally, but the protestants were privileged above the Catholics, and this sowed division amongst working class people.

The other thing is, the 'solution'local jobs for local people, is an illusion. Every single job in this country if it were legislated tomorrow to be given to local British living people, would do nothing to resolve the concerns of those workers about lack of jobs. The responsibility for the shortage jobs does not lie with the mobility of workers, it lies with the bankers at this moment in time, and the capitalist system in general. It is not that we can't have full employment, it is that the capitalists have chosen to rein back investment, because of the lack of profit.

The one thing I will say about xenophobia, is regardless of whether the workers were or were not xenophobic, the dispute in the way it has been presented as certainly engendered a great deal of support from the xenophobes. All the fascist bulletin boards are loving it.

 

[belboid]

That's rich. It's not me that's closing down discussion with insults and teenage petulance.

no you close it down by ignoring every counter point put, and simply repeating what you first wrote. you are not interested in discussion.

and now i've given you far more time than you deserve.