Rebuilding the Unions - the biggest task for the working class and the left?

[poster342002]

That's the poorest excuse for scabbing that I've ever heard of.

I'm not excusing it. I'm pointing out that majoroty-scabbing is happening, the campaign is being ignored and nobody on the left seems to have the first clue about what to do about it other than to downplay it or - worse - stand their like the former Iraqi information-minister insisting the battle's going fabulously along the lines of; "Never! We are winning this war! Our forces are standing solid!".

 

[KeyboardJockey]

So if you feel that way, why not leave the union?

Would you dump an insurance policy just because you haven't yet claimed on it? Of course not.

At the moment I'm trying to get my ideas for building up the branch accepted by a bunch of people who go whats the point.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm not excusing it. I'm pointing out that majoroty-scabbing is happening, the campaign is being ignored and nobody on the left seems to have the first clue about what to do about it other than to downplay it or - worse - stand their like the former Iraqi information-minister insisting the battle's going fabulously along the lines of; "Never! We are winning this war! Our forces are standing solid!".

Hmmm, so it's all the fault of the "Left" again. Pity folk have such an aversion to responsibility these days. It's always someone else's fault.

 

[nino_savatte]

Would you dump an insurance policy just because you haven't yet claimed on it? Of course not.

At the moment I'm trying to get my ideas for building up the branch accepted by a bunch of people who go whats the point.

Er, what does an insurance policy have to do with striking or solidarity? It sounds like selfishness to me. This is what Thatcher inculcated in people: fuck your friends, family and colleagues, look after number one.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Hmmm, so it's all the fault of the "Left" again. Pity folk have such an aversion to responsibility these days. It's always someone else's fault.

The shouty left play a part in putting people off involvement it can't be denied. If people feel that their point of view will not be heard then they will not be involved.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Er, what does an insurance policy have to do with striking or solidarity? It sounds like selfishness to me. This is what Thatcher inculcated in people: fuck your friends, family and colleagues, look after number one.

If you had read my previous posts I stated that the majority of people treat union membership like an insurance policy should they need help with a grievance matter.

Solidarity does not exist. Fantasising that it does will not make it happen. This is why I say that new and more creative ways of getting people involved should be tried rather than the same old tired guff.

 

[nino_savatte]

The shouty left play a part in putting people off involvement it can't be denied. If people feel that their point of view will not be heard then they will not be involved.

Who is this "shouty left" of which you speak? Didn't this "shouty left" risk all in the 19th and early 20th centuries to fight for the rights that many of us enjoy...the rights that are currently being eroded? Someone has to be "shouty", we can't all be mousey submissives who cower at the thought of taking difficult decisions.

 

[poster342002]

The shouty left play a part in putting people off involvement it can't be denied. If people feel that their point of view will not be heard then they will not be involved.

People are put off by the shouty left - who insist everything's fine, solidarity-wise, and the fossilised right who bring their own problems to the TU movement.

 

[nino_savatte]

If you had read my previous posts I stated that the majority of people treat union membership like an insurance policy should they need help with a grievance matter.

Solidarity does not exist. Fantasising that it does will not make it happen. This is why I say that new and more creative ways of getting people involved should be tried rather than the same old tired guff.

Solidarity doesn't exist because there are too many selfers. Furthermore, this is all part of the Thatcherite legacy: gimme, gimme, gimme. No one appears to have recognised this but have instead, placed the blame on the "left".

 

[nino_savatte]

People are put off by the shouty left - who insist everything's fine, solidarity-wise, and the fossilised right who bring their own problems to the TU movement.

The "shouty left" fought for the rights that are being taken away from us today.

 

[poster342002]

Solidarity does not exist. Fantasising that it does will not make it happen.

Spot on. THIS is precisely the point I'm trying to make. I would love theire to be the levels of solidarity that the trots keep blithely insisting is all around us. The fact is, I've never ever seen it.

In all my working life, every strike I've ever been on has just comprised of the union reps plus myelf and a small handfull of others - with the vast majority of pople walking into work as usual. I then read how the given strike was a "massive success" in complete contradiction of my own experiences.

 

[poster342002]

The "shouty left" fought for the rights that are being taken away from us today.

True - but they're not succeeding in preventing those losses from occuring now. However, rather than face up to this and work out a strategy to overcome this, they resort to silly, stupid and empty hollow triumphalist hyperbole. This helps NO-ONE and does NOT further the success of the cause one jot.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Who is this "shouty left" of which you speak? Didn't this "shouty left" risk all in the 19th and early 20th centuries to fight for the rights that many of us enjoy...the rights that are currently being eroded? Someone has to be "shouty", we can't all be mousey submissives who cower at the thought of taking difficult decisions.

FFS this is NOT the 19th century. I understand that people in the past stood up but what worked then is not going to work now. BTW I've taken a shed load of difficult decisions both in my professional and my voluntary life which is a lot more than a lot of people can say.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Solidarity doesn't exist because there are too many selfers. Furthermore, this is all part of the Thatcherite legacy: gimme, gimme, gimme. No one appears to have recognised this but have instead, placed the blame on the "left".

Why not be realistic and place the blame on both ineffective unions, Thatcherite legacy, and individual choice. The death of the closed shop showed up just how many people would CHOOSE to be union members.

 

[belboid]

funny how on all of these threads its always the same two people who come on and, rather than offering any practical suggestions about how things might be improved (and the whole point of the thread is that things do need to be improved, no matter what our two nay-sayers claim), they just go 'its shitey shitey shite shite' and effectively say there's no point in bothering.

Fine, you don't bother, but fuck off stopping anyone else not as depressed as the pair of youse.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

funny how on all of these threads its always the same two people who come on and, rather than offering any practical suggestions about how things might be improved (and the whole point of the thread is that things do need to be improved, no matter what our two nay-sayers claim), they just go 'its shitey shitey shite shite' and effectively say there's no point in bothering.

Fine, you don't bother, but fuck off stopping anyone else not as depressed as the pair of youse.

Before you stick your head back down the hole to avoid reality because its a bit more comfortable. I at least am trying to get some more life into the union branch to get people invovled. And you know what the biggest objections aint comeing from the union members or management its coming from the branch. They are the ones who are naysaying any new ideas.

OK lets have a big ideas shoot out

You first

 

[audiotech]

dp

 

[audiotech]

funny how on all of these threads its always the same two people who come on and, rather than offering any practical suggestions about how things might be improved (and the whole point of the thread is that things do need to be improved, no matter what our two nay-sayers claim), they just go 'its shitey shitey shite shite' and effectively say there's no point in bothering.

Fine, you don't bother, but fuck off stopping anyone else not as depressed as the pair of youse.

Will they be showing solidarity to the postal workers? Who voted by over 77 percent for industrial action?

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Will they be showing solidarity to the postal workers? Who voted by over 77 percent for industrial action?

More than likely I will.

 

[poster342002]

Will they be showing solidarity to the postal workers? Who voted by over 77 percent for industrial action?

Of course. I hope they win. But what I'd also ask is what the ballot turnout was and what levels of membership are (although I understand the postal service to be one of the last properly unionised areas left)?

I mean was it 77% of ballots returned or 77% of eligible members? If the former, I wouldn't get too carried away just yet.

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Of course. I hope they win. But what I'd also ask is what the ballot turnout was and what levels of membership are (although I understand the postal service to be one of the last properly unionised areas left)?

I mean was it 77% of ballots returned or 77% of eligible members? If the former, I wouldn't get too carried away just yet.

I think IIRC that the amount of the eligble members was well over 60% which was higher than the vote for the pcs debacle.

 

[audiotech]

Of course. I hope they win. But what I'd also ask is what the ballot turnout was and what levels of membership are (although I understand the postal service to be one of the last properly unionised areas left)?

I mean was it 77% of ballots returned or 77% of eligible members? If the former, I wouldn't get too carried away just yet.

Turnout of 67% and an overwhelming majority for strike action.

Ballot results
Royal Mail Yes – 66,064 (77 percent), No – 19,199

Post Office Ltd (Counters) Yes – 2,740 (73 percent), No – 993

Cash In Transit Yes – 545 (66 percent), No – 283

 

[nino_savatte]

True - but they're not succeeding in preventing those losses from occuring now. However, rather than face up to this and work out a strategy to overcome this, they resort to silly, stupid and empty hollow triumphalist hyperbole. This helps NO-ONE and does NOT further the success of the cause one jot.

So sitting back and letting the bosses fuck you over is the answer? I agree that much of the current union leadership is a shower but unions are only as good as their members too.

 

[nino_savatte]

FFS this is NOT the 19th century. I understand that people in the past stood up but what worked then is not going to work now. BTW I've taken a shed load of difficult decisions both in my professional and my voluntary life which is a lot more than a lot of people can say.

I never said it was "the 19th century" but you get nothing by rolling over an taking it up the arse from the bosses either.

Shrinking violets change nothing, they moan about things and wring their hands.

 

[nino_savatte]

Why not be realistic and place the blame on both ineffective unions, Thatcherite legacy, and individual choice. The death of the closed shop showed up just how many people would CHOOSE to be union members.

Like I've said, unions are only as good as their members. It isn't correct or fair to blame the parlous state of the unions solely on the leadership.

The media has also played its part in smashing the unions.

 

[poster342002]

So sitting back and letting the bosses fuck you over is the answer? I agree that much of the current union leadership is a shower but unions are only as good as their members too.

No, I don't think "sitting back" is the asnwer either. I really don't know what the answer is, tbh, but a stronger does of the smae medice being proffered by much of the left at the moment isn't going to work.

I mean, their talk of rebuilding the unions seems to view PCS as the curent yardstick - if not pinnacle - of what they hope to acheive.

 

[poster342002]

you get nothing by rolling over an taking it up the arse from the bosses either.

I agree. Try telling that to most of the membership, though. Believe me - I've tried and tried and tried all my working life - only to see everyone scab, scab and scab again whenever any action is called. Then they whinge about crap pay rises and ask "why isn't the union doing anything?".

 

[KeyboardJockey]

Like I've said, unions are only as good as their members. It isn't correct or fair to blame the parlous state of the unions solely on the leadership. .

Up to a point I agree with you. An apathetic membership is partially to blame because they don't get involved and then moan when a bunch of unrepresentative swappies end up in high positions. However, there is much that the middle and lower end of the union heirachy could do to get more people involved.

The media has also played its part in smashing the unions.

Agree there as well.

 

[nino_savatte]

No, I don't think "sitting back" is the asnwer either. I really don't knwo whatthe answer is, tbh, but a stronger does of the smae medice being proffered by much of the left at the moment isn't going to work.

I mean, their talk of rebuilding the unions seems to view PCS as the curent yardstick - if not pinnacle - of what they hope to acheive.

Well, you either create new, smaller unions or you try to stuff the unions with as many likeminded people as one can. I don't think that the latter is a goer but then when folk like Harrington to set up unions like "Solidarity", you have trouble on your hands. If anything, his version of the union smacks of national syndicalism...which seems to be very popular with some folk.

 

[nino_savatte]

Up to a point I agree with you. An apathetic membership is partially to blame because they don't get involved and then moan when a bunch of unrepresentative swappies end up in high positions. However, there is much that the middle and lower end of the union heirachy could do to get more people involved.


Agree there as well.

As i said earlier, I was a temp when I went out on strike at Islington. There were fulltimers who would say "You can't go on strike, you're a temp". They seemed baffled that I was a member of UNISON and that I was also prepared to lose a day's pay.

If my union calls a strike, I strike. I also support striking workers in other sectors too. Scabs seem to be all too common these days.