Unite General Secretary Election
- Thread starter magneze
- Start date
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
Wise move. A vote for Hicks would be a waste; but enough to push Bayliss FPTP. I've voted for McCluskey.
I voted McCluskey, he's a bureaucrat but on the left, and Hicks is a fucking wrecker and dummy spitter.
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
Hicks is a 'wrecker and dummy spitter'? For what, being the only proper rank-and-file activist candidate, and arguing for the kind of change which would see Unite actually become a genuine organ of working class democracy?
...?
...?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
lol, fucks sake, he's is doing no such thing. He would take the average workers wage, but that would hardly turn the union into a 'genuine organ of working class democracy,' dont be silly.
The two contenders are Bayliss - who has attacked the BA strike, says its lost and has been for a year, and has never carried out significant negotiations in his life, and McCluskey, who has been at the forefront of supporting BA workers, and most of the significant struggles from te T&G side over the last eighteen months.
Being a rank & file candidate is not enough.
The two contenders are Bayliss - who has attacked the BA strike, says its lost and has been for a year, and has never carried out significant negotiations in his life, and McCluskey, who has been at the forefront of supporting BA workers, and most of the significant struggles from te T&G side over the last eighteen months.
Being a rank & file candidate is not enough.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
A large union like Unite is a bureaucracy. Therefore, whoever becomes GS becomes part of that bureaucracy, ergo a bureaucrat; though, a GS will also need a number of other skills.
I’d contend that Bayliss doesn’t have the prerequisite industrial negotiating skills – this is borne out by his comments on the BA strike; and, I’d also state Hicks isn’t skilled in bureaucracy – after all the largest group he’s ever represented is about 120 workers at RR in Bristol.
I’d contend that Bayliss doesn’t have the prerequisite industrial negotiating skills – this is borne out by his comments on the BA strike; and, I’d also state Hicks isn’t skilled in bureaucracy – after all the largest group he’s ever represented is about 120 workers at RR in Bristol.
Das Uberdog
remembers the alamo
i've no illusions that Hicks has a chance of winning, but the scathing contempt for someone who has so selflessly put himself on the front line for so many years is what's really unnecessary here. for whatever it's worth, Hicks is the kind of candidate that the leadership of all major unions should be made up of - and if we're not in a position to have candidates like him elected, then that needs to be recognized as a problem in itself. if i had a vote i might not vote for him this time around, but i'd definitely lend my support to his campaign and recognize that he's in it for the long haul.
I wish there was a good rank and file candidate standing (on a platform of taking a workers wage, and building a genuinely fighting rank and file organising steward controlled union), but there isn't.
I do agree that people like that need to be elected to positions of influence at branch and national level, and eventually GS level, but there are no candidates capable of leading on that in this ballot, there is however a scummy, scabby rightwing candidate who needs to be kept out, and a reasonable best we can hope for right now candidate opposing him.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
If Len McCluskey does get elected he will at best be another Woodley or at worst become another Simpson. Remember that Simpson had the support of a lot of the left as a so called left candidate when he first ran.
If Woodley types are the best we can get over the next few years when we'll face massive cuts then the union movement is pretty much fucked.
If Woodley types are the best we can get over the next few years when we'll face massive cuts then the union movement is pretty much fucked.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
So you think that Woodley type general secretaries and their strategies would be enough to fight off the cuts? Their politics and strategies will never beat the cuts that are coming. And do you seriously think McCluskey is going to be much better than Woodley?
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
'Scathing contempt'? Calling Hicks a ‘fucking wrecker’ and ‘dummy spitter’ is hardly scathing contempt. No, it is quite accurate.
When Hicks stormed out of a democratically convened United Left hustings almost 14-months ago he did so with the intention of splitting the burgeoning broad left within Unite; that’s kind of tantamount to the actions of a ‘wrecker’ in most people’s minds.
I’ve heard Hicks described far far worse than anything on this site; and, should McCluskey lose to the rat Bayliss on the back of the votes won by Hicks, I think it is safe to say we’ll all be fucked; but, Hicks will not only be fucked, he’ll be widely reviled within Unite.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
You evidently neither know McCluskey nor have a clue about my union.
Yes, Simpson did have the support of the Amicus left when he became GS. Actually, one of those is now Hicks' election manager. What does that tell you?
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
Whether that is true or not about Hicks, it still doesn't say anything about Woodley type candidates like McCluskey. Woodley, McCluskey and any other general secretaries don't have the strategies or politics to beat the upcoming cuts and are no answer to the crisis we're about to face as a workers movement. As said if that's the best we can get we're fucked.
It tells me that candidates who are essentially bureaucrats with some warmed up soft left social democratic politics often get the support of socialists and that shows the dire state the workers movement and unions are in.
I'm in UNISON so don't claim to know the ins and outs of UNITE but I've seen it all before in UNISON and many other unions.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
What does it tell you about Hicks that his campaign manager was a lead person in Simpson's election machine?
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
Slating Hicks won't solve the problem of McCluskey being a candidate that doesn't have a strategy or the politics to beat the massive cuts we are facing.
The unions need to be built up from the grass roots, where most branches are totally disfunctional, and that won't be helped by having leaders who are bureaucrats. The current bunch of union leaders we've got, especially in the bigger unions are totally useless. Also have little respect for any candidate that is happy to take a 200k+ salary while their members are getting pay cuts and getting the sack.
The unions need to be built up from the grass roots, where most branches are totally disfunctional, and that won't be helped by having leaders who are bureaucrats. The current bunch of union leaders we've got, especially in the bigger unions are totally useless. Also have little respect for any candidate that is happy to take a 200k+ salary while their members are getting pay cuts and getting the sack.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
What does it tell you about Hicks that his campaign manager was a lead person in Simpson's election machine?
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
he has a better strategy than Hicks, who doesn't really have one at all
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
Slating Hicks won't solve the problem of McCluskey being a candidate that doesn't have a strategy or the politics to beat the massive cuts we are facing.
The unions need to be built up from the grass roots, where most branches are totally disfunctional, and that won't be helped by having leaders who are bureaucrats. The current bunch of union leaders we've got, especially in the bigger unions are totally useless. Also have little respect for any candidate that is happy to take a 200k+ salary while their members are getting pay cuts and getting the sack.
As for Hicks campaign manager, I know nothing about him. Even if he and Hicks campaign is not any good that doesn't make McCluskey any better.
The unions need to be built up from the grass roots, where most branches are totally disfunctional, and that won't be helped by having leaders who are bureaucrats. The current bunch of union leaders we've got, especially in the bigger unions are totally useless. Also have little respect for any candidate that is happy to take a 200k+ salary while their members are getting pay cuts and getting the sack.
As for Hicks campaign manager, I know nothing about him. Even if he and Hicks campaign is not any good that doesn't make McCluskey any better.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
If Hicks has no strategy at all, that's not a very good benchmark to judge McCluskey by. And it doesn't change the fact that a bureaucrat with warmed up soft left social democratic politics is no answer for us.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
No what you are saying is meaningless gibberish. You haven't acutally said at all how McCluskey's politics or strategies will be good enough to fight the cuts or revive UNITE. You must know they won't, just as Woodley's don't.
His politics are soft left social democracy, and I don't believe, from seeing your posts, that you support that.
His politics are soft left social democracy, and I don't believe, from seeing your posts, that you support that.
articul8
Dishonest sociopath
But this is the consequence of a stupid voting system -you might be right that Hicks has more far-reaching positions re union fightback. But you also know he won't win and voting for him helps Bayliss who is the worst possible of the candidates to win.
Given the rules, it has to be McCluskey but at the same time a fight to strengthen shop stewards networks and the like to maiximise pressure on him.
Given the rules, it has to be McCluskey but at the same time a fight to strengthen shop stewards networks and the like to maiximise pressure on him.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
Well, I do know about Hicks' campaign – I should do, his manager has unlawfully used my personal contact details to send unsolicited materials to my home address and email address.
Further, Hicks has spent his campaign criticising ongoing disputes; taking part in anti-trade union TV programmes; and, giving interviews in the Murdoch press. Not content in running against the democratically nominated Left candidate; he has spent a large part of his campaign slagging off McCluskey in an attempt to win a few more votes.
Hicks, like Bayliss, has run a negative campaign all too often playing the man (McCluskey) and not the ball (his own manifesto). I reiterate; if Bayliss wins it’ll be largely thanks to the self-styled ‘working class hero’ Jerry Hicks – people with missions who feel they have the right to office and work alone outside of the mainstream are in fact the antithesis of trade unionists.
One_Stop_Shop
Well-Known Member
Why do people keep bringing it back to Hicks? I'm not talking about him, I'm talking about McCluskey. And the fact is that whatever the strengths or weaknesses of Hicks, McCluskey represents soft social democratic politics and strategies, something that has always failed workers and will fail even more than usual in the current climate and massive cuts we face. On top of that he is happy to take 200k+ a year while his members are shafted. Which is of rather more help to anti-trade union programmes, as is the shit strategy that has been used in the BA dispute where members are currently being sold down the river and are being left in a worse situation than they started with.
If McCluskey and the politics he represents is all we can get, we're fucked.
If McCluskey and the politics he represents is all we can get, we're fucked.
Urbanblues
Was that it, life?
Look pal. When you get your shit sorted out in Unison; then, and only then might you have the right to comment on another union. So, why not spend your time more profitably; and, sort out your own mess. We in Unite will endeavour to look after ourselves; ok?
Similar threads
- Poll
