Saturday, October 09, 2010
CANADIAN LABOUR GATINEAU QUÉBEC:
SECOND ORGANIZED WAL-MART IN NORTH AMERICA:
A recent Labour Board decision has certified a Wal-Mart in Gatineau Québec as the second unionized Wal-Mart on the North American continent. The only other location now represented by a union is also in Québec in St. Hyacinthe. Previous attempts to unionize Wal-Mart in Québec and in locations as far afield as Texas and Weyburn Saskatchewan have been beaten back either legally or by the expedient of simply closing the outlet affected.
The latter is both a favoured threat and a favoured action on the part of Wal-Mart management. The largest example of this was when Wal-Mart decided to withdraw from the whole German market rather than tolerate unions in its stores in that country. The only country where Wal-Mart is happy to coexist with a unionized workforce is...China. In China's case the "union" is, of course, the official government controlled federation which takes its marching orders from the Communist Party. Nothing could be plainer in pointing out the ideological affinity of neo-conservative managerialism and it communist counterpart. Two sides of one coin.
This Board decision may benefit the workers involved only marginally as the wage increases stipulated were only minimal, and the biggest issue, the use and abuse of the part time system, remained outside the Board's decision. Still it shows that even the Wal-Mart colossus is not invulnerable. It is a shame that the unions involved in Wal-Mart organizing are not imbued with at least a minimum of the internationalism and industrial unionism of the anarcho-syndicalist unions or revolutionary syndicalist unions such as the IWW. Things would go much better then.
Be that as it may if you want to follow the misdeeds of Wal-Mart in more detail Molly can suggest the following sites: Wake Up Wal-Mart and Wal-Mart Watch. It`s almost a classic 'Perils of Pauline' series complete with evil top-hatted capitalist. A refreshing old fashioned morality play in an age when the corporate rulers more often than not adopt fuzzy "progressive" and "new age" public personae. Here`s the story from the CBC.
WMWMWMWMWM
Quebec Wal-Mart workers get rare union deal
Only one other North American Wal-Mart has a collective agreement
CBC News
The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau in Gatineau. (CBC) Workers at a Wal-Mart store in Gatineau, Que., have won a new collective agreement, only the second at any Wal-Mart store in North America — but not everyone is celebrating.
A government arbitrator imposed the agreement, after negotiations between the union and retailer were judged to be going nowhere.
The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau. It took three years for the United Food and Commercial Workers to unionize the store, and another two years to get the contract.
"We had a first assembly last night to present the first collective agreement that was imposed by the Labour Board of Quebec," said union member Matthieu Allard.
He said the collective agreement gives employees a grievance process, recognizes statutory holidays and considers seniority in determining working hours.
Wages will go up 30 cents an hour this year, and another 30 cents next year. None of the employees, however, would say how much an hour they make now.
The arbitrator modeled it on the contract at the Wal-Mart in St-Hyacinthe, Que., the only other store with such an agreement.
"It might not have been as much as we could have gained in a normal negotiation process, but it's a definite step forward," Allard said.
Some employees at the store think otherwise.
In the parking lot outside the store, Denise Barre said she and her coworkers are disappointed with a 30-cent-an-hour raise, especially when it means paying union dues.
She said only 13 of the 150 employees went to Wednesday night's meeting with the union, which she says shows employees aren't interested.
Barre said she doesn't need this contract.
She said Wal-Mart treats her well and gives her benefits.
In a statement, the company also pointed out that the arbitrator found its wages competitive with other retailers, and adopted the wage scale Wal-Mart proposed.
The union said employees at the store were concerned by Wal-Mart's previous actions at unionized stores, but the Gatineau location is busy, and they hope Wal-Mart will not close it
In 2005, Wal-Mart closed a store in Jonquiere, Que., days before an arbitrator imposed a contract for its employees. The employees took Wal-Mart to court over the closure but lost their case.
In 2008, Wal-Mart also closed a tire shop on Maloney Boulevard in Gatineau after its employees received union certification.
The new agreement has a start date back in 2008, which means the union will be back to negotiating next year.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/10/08/ottawa-wal-mart-deal.html#ixzz11vWkUx1U
Quebec Wal-Mart workers get rare union deal
Only one other North American Wal-Mart has a collective agreement
CBC News
The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau in Gatineau. (CBC) Workers at a Wal-Mart store in Gatineau, Que., have won a new collective agreement, only the second at any Wal-Mart store in North America — but not everyone is celebrating.
A government arbitrator imposed the agreement, after negotiations between the union and retailer were judged to be going nowhere.
The contract covers more than 150 employees at the store on Boulevard du Plateau. It took three years for the United Food and Commercial Workers to unionize the store, and another two years to get the contract.
"We had a first assembly last night to present the first collective agreement that was imposed by the Labour Board of Quebec," said union member Matthieu Allard.
He said the collective agreement gives employees a grievance process, recognizes statutory holidays and considers seniority in determining working hours.
Wages will go up 30 cents an hour this year, and another 30 cents next year. None of the employees, however, would say how much an hour they make now.
The arbitrator modeled it on the contract at the Wal-Mart in St-Hyacinthe, Que., the only other store with such an agreement.
"It might not have been as much as we could have gained in a normal negotiation process, but it's a definite step forward," Allard said.
Some employees at the store think otherwise.
In the parking lot outside the store, Denise Barre said she and her coworkers are disappointed with a 30-cent-an-hour raise, especially when it means paying union dues.
She said only 13 of the 150 employees went to Wednesday night's meeting with the union, which she says shows employees aren't interested.
Barre said she doesn't need this contract.
She said Wal-Mart treats her well and gives her benefits.
In a statement, the company also pointed out that the arbitrator found its wages competitive with other retailers, and adopted the wage scale Wal-Mart proposed.
The union said employees at the store were concerned by Wal-Mart's previous actions at unionized stores, but the Gatineau location is busy, and they hope Wal-Mart will not close it
In 2005, Wal-Mart closed a store in Jonquiere, Que., days before an arbitrator imposed a contract for its employees. The employees took Wal-Mart to court over the closure but lost their case.
In 2008, Wal-Mart also closed a tire shop on Maloney Boulevard in Gatineau after its employees received union certification.
The new agreement has a start date back in 2008, which means the union will be back to negotiating next year.
Read more: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2010/10/08/ottawa-wal-mart-deal.html#ixzz11vWkUx1U
Labels: Canadian labour, CBC, current events, Gatineau, labour., managerialism, Quebec, tactics, UFCW, Wake Up Wal-mart, Wal-Mart, Wal-Mart Watch
Monday, September 27, 2010
INTERNATIONAL POLITICS:
SWEDEN TURNS RIGHT:
Last week's national elections in Sweden returned the present right wing government to power and, most disturbingly, the extreme right made unprecedented gains. The following report from the Swedish anarchosyndicalist website Anarkisterna says it all, and it raises some important points.
Molly would add her two cents worth by noting the following. Despite the antique Marxist fantasy followed by all too many anarchists and non-Marxist socialists the advent of 'hard times' seems to have not led to any resurgence of left wing class based movements that fundamentally challenge the present social order anywhere in at least the developed world. If anything the right seems to be 'on the march' worldwide. Where left wing social movements opposed to further tightening of the screws have arisen the main thrust seems to have been an attempt to hold on to what little the lower classes already have, and a more or less implicit (sometimes quite explicit) endorsement of social democratic policies and parties. This despite the fact that in many countries, Spain and Greece come to mind, it is actually "socialist" parties that are doing the dirty work.
Meanwhile the general electorate remains quite cynical, perhaps rightfully so, and opts to vote in many cases for parties whose desire to shift wealth from the lower classes is explicit rather than implicit. This goes hand in hand with an increase in what may best described as the "political superstition" that somehow "immigrants" are responsible for the difficulties that ordinary people face in these hard times. How this can possibly be true is best left to the fevered imaginations of conspiracy theorists. Even if minorities are not "blamed" it may at least feel satisfying to work up a hate for something that can be so easily identified. The left, in general, offers no such easy fantasy. Its social democratic wing has long since abandoned any pretence to having so crude a thing as "enemies". Its orthodox communist wing has not only been disgraced by its history of being worse than the old order. Its idea of the enemy as the 'top-hatted capitalists' ( excluding government bureaucrats of course ) rings hollow in the modern world.
Too much of the rest of the left beyond the social democrats and commies spends its time tilting at the windmills of "isms" having abandoned all hope of a rational road to a better society. It takes a developed taste for either masochism or the 'one downmanship' of identity politics to find this sort of "politics" satisfying...especially as "the enemy" can easily be defined as something approaching 98% of the population. This is not politics. It is psychology gone cancerous.
The Swedish comrades end their article with some questions rather than with assertions. This is undoubtedly the best way to proceed. As an anarchist I am convinced that the anarchist tradition contains many of the ideas that are necessary to oppose the rightward drift of most of the developed world. I am not, however, so unrealistic as to suppose that either I or any wing of the anarchist movement today have a magic pocketful of 'solutions". What is sure is that the main opposition to the right has no practical plan. For anarchists the balancing act is an age old one, one of walking the fine line between collaboration (leftism under an anarchist name) and irrelevancy( either 'purism' or defining away the concerns of ordinary people to focus on 'psychoboo' ). Where the tightrope is depends upon both time and place. Let's hope there are enough political acrobats in our ranks.
Here's the article from Sweden.
@@@@@@@@@@
Where do we go from here?
On how to challenge rightwing racist class politics
Lördag 25 September
The elections of September 19th in many ways mark a sad turning point in Swedish history. Since of that date, Sweden joins the growing number of EU member states run by rightwing governments with the participation of the extreme right.
For the first time, a rightwing government was re-elected in Sweden. For the first time, a populist racist party, Sverigedemokraterna (Sweden Democrats) – with roots in the extreme right scene – entered the Parliament. And for the first time a Nazi party gained entrance into a municipality. The leader of Svenskarnas Parti (Party of the Swedes) – formerly Nationalsocialistisk Front – got a chair in the small town of Grästorp.
The reaction to the election was swift: demonstrations in Malmö, Gothenburg and Stockholm the following day gathered thousands of people, in Stockholm up to ten thousand. Numerous demonstrations have since taken place in different places and many more actions are planned for the coming weeks and especially for the grand opening of the Parliament.
Many people are appalled and outraged at the results of the elections. Bit by bit, the right wing government has been dismantling the welfare state, labour laws and social security systems, replacing them with the freedom of the individual consumer – thereby paving the way for the extreme right. But so have the Social Democrats, the Left and the Greens: By not challenging the politics of the government and putting forward a concrete red and green vision, the stage was set for the racists, posing as the sole alternative to the status quo.
The Sweden Democrats have rather successfully spread the myth of immigration as the one political issue none but them dares to address. This being far from true (quite the opposite, by being tough on immigration any politician comes across as determined and energetic), it nevertheless gained them a lot of attention. And even though being false, it still was a simple answer to a number of important questions: Why is society not as solidaristic as it used to be? Why are so many – especially young – people unemployed? Why is all this downsizing occurring?
Everything was played out to be the fault of “mass immigration”.
These questions are relevant to a lot of people in everyday life today, and so is addressing them. The anxiety is real, it is the result of precarious labour, money that is never enough, climate change that is being neglected, insecurity, frustration, violence and welfare cuts – in other words the results of political decisions. The question radical social movements have to ask themselves is how to address these issues and challenge these politics?
How do we turn protests against the Sweden Democrats into resistance against the racist class politics of the right wing government? And how do we transform our resistance into a constructive force – self organizing local communities and building strong popular movements?
Where do we go from here? Share your experiences with us!
Labels: anarchism, Anarkisterna, communism, conservativism, international politics, leftism, right wing politics, social democracy, Sweden, tactics
Sunday, September 26, 2010
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR SPAIN:
INTERNATIONAL SUPPORT FOR SPANISH GENERAL STRIKE:
On Thursday, September 29, there will be a general strike in Spain protesting the Spanish government's austerity measures, mislabelled "reforms". All of Spain's labour federations are supporting this action, some more than others. As Molly has mentioned before on this blog there is some suspicion that the major union groups (CCOO- controlled by more or less "ex" communists and the Socialist Party UGT) deliberately set the date far enough into the future to allow for backroom political maneuvers after a less than stellar turnout for the previous public sector general strike earlier in the year.
The months have come and gone, and the government seems even less willing to compromise than it did earlier in the year. While the CCOO and the UGT have been rather tepid in their promotion of this strike Spain's third largest union federation the anarchosyndicalist CGT has thrown a tremendous amount of work into promoting the general strike. The smaller anarchosyndicalist unions such as Solidaridad Obrera, the CNT Joaquin Costa (aka the CNT-Catalunya) and the CNT-AIT have also been prominent in their support. The first two unions have entered into an informal alliance with the CGT so as to present an unified libertarian front. The CNT-AIT has decided to go it on their own.
Whether it is politically wise to put such emphasis on what, given the still solid control of the CCOO and UGT over the majority of Spains unionists, may be a potentially embarrassing show of weakness rather than strength is an open question. The anarchosyndicalist unions have all emphasized that this one day general strike can be only a beginning. The ability to go forward, however, depends upon just how popular or unpopular the work stoppage turns out to be, and just how much the ordinary workers feel that the policies of the CCOO and UGT, limited and cowardly as they are, are the only realistic course. in my mind the prospects aren't bright. In a preliminary libertarian demonstration in Barcelona on September 18 held by the alliance of the CGT, Solidaridad Obrera and the CNT Catalunya the turnout was only about 1,000 people. The CNT-AIT which didn't participate would probably have been only able to add another 100 or so people to the crowd.
Put this in context of the Barcelona demonstration for increased Catalan autonomy last July where the turnout was about 1.1 million. What is probably happening is that many average Spaniards have adopted an attitude of resigned fatalism to the severe economic crisis that Spain faces. The libertarian unions have a hard row to hoe if they hope to push this general strike beyond a token gesture of (weak) opposition.
The Spanish general strike is supposed to be part of an Europe wide 'Day of Action' on the 29th. This event has been called by the European Trade Union Confederation, and its main event will be a demonstration in Brussels, the seat of most of the activities of the European Parliament. Despite some rather cocky chest thumping at the Facebook site of the event (ahem- "towards the 1st European General Strike or even the World General Strike") the "action" proposed by the ETUC consists of little more than a series of demonstrations which national unions may or may not support with whatever attention they may or may not think it deserves. The only country in which there may have been another general strike ie Greece will be a no show this time around. One doesn't have to invoke treachery to explain this. After 6 (or is it 7 ?) one day general strikes this year with no results in terms of modifying government plans the main union federations in Greece are pretty well down to the last dime of their political capital.
Outside of the mainstream unions, however, there is a growing libertarian labour movement. While Spain may be most prominent in this regard this movement is not restricted to the land of Don Quixote. In response to the CGT's efforts towards the Spanish strike numerous groups have sent messages of solidarity with the Spanish workers. The following statement with signatories attached was recently published in an English translation at the Anarkismo site. Since then many others have added their names to the statement. You can see an updated list of the signatories (now over 80) here at the Huelga General event site by the Spanish CGT. This Spanish language site also has a wealth of information and will allow you to follow the strike as it happens.
@L@L@L@L@L
International support for the General Strike in Spain on 29 September
Of all the European Union countries, the Spanish State is facing one of the most difficult economic situations of all, with 20% of the potential workforce unemployed. The measures proposed by the government to fill the State's coffers and stimulate the economy place all the burden on the popular classes in the form of lower wages, consumer taxes, pensions cuts, cuts in unemployment benefits, more privatization and the introduction of more obstacles to workers organizing (such as making it easier for employers to lay off workers and more restrictions on collective agreements).
International support for the General Strike in Spain on 29 September
Of all the European Union countries, the Spanish State is facing one of the most difficult economic situations of all, with 20% of the potential workforce unemployed. The measures proposed by the government to fill the State's coffers and stimulate the economy place all the burden on the popular classes in the form of lower wages, consumer taxes, pensions cuts, cuts in unemployment benefits, more privatization and the introduction of more obstacles to workers organizing (such as making it easier for employers to lay off workers and more restrictions on collective agreements).
Ever since the crisis broke, the more militant sectors of the trade union movement [including the CGT, CNT, SO, etc.] have been demanding that a general strike be called to oppose these unpopular measures, but because they were confined only to certain sectors and geographic areas, they were unable to achieve it alone, until a general strike for 29th September was eventually - and reluctantly - called by the big unions, the Comisiones Obreras (CCOO) and the Unión General de Trabajadores (UGT).
It is very important for the General Strike to be a success and for the 29th September to see as many people as possible opposing the policies of the Zapatero government, outside the workplace and on the streets. If the strike should fail, it be not only a failure on the part of those that most of the public considers to be the unions that called the strike - the CCOO and UGT. It will be a failure on the part of the entire working class. On the other hand, the more successful the strike, the greater the success of the workers, as it will provide a clear demonstration of the strength that lies in our unity and will therefore be a step forward in our consciousness and in our levels of organization.
There follows the text of an international statement produced by the CGT and signed by various organizations of a libertarian nature.
----------------------
International statement of support
We, the signatories to this statement, wish to demonstrate our support for the general strike called by the CGT on 29th September 2010 in the Spanish State.
The widespread crisis is affecting the working class badly, in particular the most precarious sectors of the class. And though the Spanish State is particularly badly affected, this situation is shared by many different countries.
We agree with the reasons why our comrades in the CGT have called this strike, that is to say in order to defend the labour, social, economic and environmental freedoms and rights of all workers and all sectors of the working class in the face of the attacks from the multinationals and financial institutions.
We believe that Zapatero's attempt to force this new labour reform package on the workers, together with his plans for reducing the deficit and reforming the pension system, are completely unacceptable. These measures are extremely unjust, since they shift the burden of the crisis onto the backs of the masses and not the real culprits of the crisis. It is unacceptable that the very institutions that generated the crisis are those who are forcing their proposals to get out of it on everyone else, as it involves a reduction in the rights of the working class and an increase in profits for the capitalist system in general.
We also support the theme chosen by the CGT for this General Strike: "For the distribution of work and wealth". Distributing work means that everyone works less so that everyone can work, by reducing the working day (without a loss of wages) and the retirement age, preventing massive unfair layoffs, as well as overtime, piecework, etc. We understand the distribution of wealth not as a dividend or as shares amongst the population, but using that money on welfare and wage benefits for all the unemployed and a redistribution of resources on the basis of solidarity.
The crisis is affecting everyone, so our militant organizations will continue to work so that the mobilizations will continue everywhere.
Signatories to date:
1.USI - Unione Sindacale Italiana (Italy)
2.IP - Inicjatywa Pracownicza (Poland)
3.CNT-f - Confédération nationale du travail (France)
4.IWW - Industrial Workers of the World (UK)
5.ESE - Sindicato Libertario Griego (Greece)
6.SAC - Sveriges Arbetares Centralorganisation (Sweden)
7."La Voz de los Zapotecos Xiches en Prisión", part of the Otra Campaña (Mexico)
8.Colectivo 20 de Junio (Zaachila Oaxaca) (Mexico)
9.María Antonieta Robles Barja, Trabajadora Social, Baja California (Mexico)
10.Julio Cesar Rincón, (Mexico)
11.Coordinadora Valle de Chalco (Mexico)
12.LA KARAKOLA, Espacio social y kultural (Mexico)
13.La Otra ciudad de Chihuahua, (Mexico)
14.Nicte-Há Dzib Soto, Niñas y Niños en La Otra Campaña-DF (Mexico)
15.Edilberto Bautista Dìaz, Gen. Sec. of the Sindicato Democrático de Trabajadores de la Procuraduría Social del Distrito Federal (Mexico)
16.La Red vs la Represión en Chiapas (Mexico)
17.Frente Popular Darío Santillán (Argentina)
18.SNAPAP Sindicato Nacional Autónomo del Personal de la Administración Pública (Algeria)
19.Asel Luzarraga (Chile)
20.Frente Popular Francisco Villa Independiente-UNOPII (Mexico)
21.Colectivo Radio Zapatista (Mexico)
22.Federazione dei Comunisti Anarchici (Italy)
23.Hombre y Sociedad (Chile)
24.Colectivo Socialista Libertario (Uruguay)
25.Periódico Rojo y Negro (Uruguay)
26.Organisation Socialiste Libertaire (Switzerland)
27.Federación Anarquista Uruguaya (Uruguay)
28.Unión Socialista Libertaria (Peru)
29.Grupo Antorcha Libertaria (Colombia)
30.Union Communiste Libertaire (Canada)
31.Red Libertaria de Buenos Aires (Argentina)
32.Organización Revolucionaria Anarquista - Voz Negra (Chile)
33.Estrategia Libertaria (Chile)
34.Melbourne Anarchist Communist Group (Australia)
35.Alternative Libertaire (France)
36.Federação Anarquista do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil)
37.Federação Anarquista de São Paulo (Brazil)
38.Miami Solidarity & Autonomy (USA)
39.Organización Anarquista por la Revolución Social (Bolivia)
40.Frente Autentico del Trabajo (Mexico)
41.Moez Jemai, journalist-syndicalist (Tunisia)
42.Fédération SUD service public, Vaud canton (Switzerland)
43.CUB, Confederazione Unitaria di Base (Italy)
44.Votán Zapata (Mexico)
45.UNICOBAS (Italy)
46.Instituto Nacional Sindical (Colombia)
47.Columna Libertaria Joaquin Penina (Argentina)
48.Libertære Socialister (Denmark)
49.Centro Internacional de Estudios Sociales (Uruguay)
50.Red Libertaria Popular Mateo Kramer (Colombia)
51.Centro de Estudios Sociales Manuel González Prada, Huancayo (Perú)
52.Tendencia Estudiantil Libertaria (Perú)
53.Movimiento Manuel González Prada (Perú)
54.Sociedad de Resistencia - Santiago (Chile)
55.Workers Solidarity Movement (Ireland)
For more information on the strike, see:
Related Link: http://huelgageneral.info/
Labels: anarcho-syndicalism, CGT, CNT Catalunya, CNT-AIT, European Day of Action, general strike, international labour, labour., Solidaridad Obrera, Spain, Spanish general strike, tactics
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
INTERNATIONAL LABOUR FRANCE:
GENERAL STRIKE IN FRANCE DRAWS OVER TWO MILLION:
Today's one day general strike in France in protest over the government's proposed pension "reforms" drew considerably larger crowds in the demonstrations than the previous effort in June. Once more there are considerably different estimates from different people, with numbers ranging from 1.1 million (government figures) to close to three million (union sources). Even if you take the lower figure this is a considerable increase from the about 800,000 who took part in June. What this means, however, for either the workers or the Sarkozy government is unclear. Here's a brief report of the demonstration from the BBC.
FSFSFSFSFS
PENSION RALLIES HIT FRENCH CITIES
More than one million French workers have taken to the streets to protest against austerity measures planned by President Nicolas Sarkozy's government.
The rallies came as a 24-hour national strike disrupted flight and rail services, and closed schools.
Activists are angry at government plans to overhaul pensions and raise the retirement age from 60 to 62.
Union leaders say more strikes and protests are possible if the government fails to give an adequate response.
"If they don't respond and they don't pay heed, there'll be a follow up, and nothing is ruled out at this stage," Bernard Thibault, leader of the large CGT union, told a rally in Paris.
France's retirement age is lower than many countries in Europe, but analysts say the issue is polarising politics in the country.
Labour Minister Eric Woerth introduced the pensions bill to the National Assembly, warning of dire consequences if it did not pass.
"If we don't modify our pension plan, then tomorrow there will be no money left to pay the French pensions," he told parliamentarians.
Commuter woe
Under current rules, both men and women in France can retire at 60, providing they have paid social security contributions for 40.5 years - although they are not entitled to a full pension until they are 65.
The government says it will save 70bn euros (£58bn) by raising the retirement age to 62 by 2018, the qualification to 41.5 years, and the pension age to 67.
President Nicolas Sarkozy says reforms are needed to cope with an ageing population and the country's budget deficit.
EUROPE'S RETIREMENT AGES
France - 60
UK, Italy - 65 for men, 60 for women
Germany, Netherlands, Spain - 65
Greece - 65 for men, 62 for women
The government is also looking to find 100bn euros of savings in three years, and is planning cuts in the civil sector.
Some secondary-school teachers went on strike on Monday, protesting against plans to cut 7,000 jobs in education.
State railway operator SNCF said fewer than half of its TGV high-speed services were running, and there was a greatly reduced service on many other lines.
Eurostar said its trains between France and London would operate normally.
Some air-traffic controllers walked out, forcing the cancellation or delay of about a quarter of flights from Paris airports.
Air France said it was operating all of its long-haul flights as planned, but short and medium-haul flights had been affected.
Migrant laws
Amid the disruption caused by strikes, the Interior Ministry said 1.1 million people had joined Tuesday's protests but unions claimed the figure was more than double official estimates.
The figures make Tuesday's protest bigger than a previous one in June, where more than 800,000 people took part.
Huge crowds braved stormy weather across southern parts of France, while demonstrators in Paris and the north enjoyed autumn sunshine.
In Paris, protesters shouted through loud-hailers: "Slave-driving? No, no, no. Working more? No, no, no. Fair reforms? Yes, yes, yes."
Protester Michel Prouvier told AFP news agency: "We're going to have old people living in the street."
Activists were also keen to maker a wider point, angry at the recent deportation of about 1,000 Roma (Gypsies) and a host of proposed laws which they say unfairly target immigrants and minorities.
"Pensions are a pretext for protesting against the Sarkozy system," said Adji Ahoudian, a Socialist Party activist.
Among those concerns is a proposal banning the full face veil worn by Muslim women, which was passed by the lower house in July but is now up for debate in the Senate.
Senators are also expected to debate a controversial new security law which would see recent immigrants stripped of French citizenship if they committed serious crimes such as killing a police officer.
The law would also allow electronic tagging for foreign criminals facing deportation.
FSFSFSFSFS
Here's how this strike was seen by the British Lib Com site.
FSFSFSFSFS
Mass strikes in France over proposed increase to retirement age
7th September 2010 - In response to the government's proposal to raise the pension age from 60 to 62, French workers have held widespread strikes that brought severe disruption to the French economy.
French unions have claimed that up to three million people have taken part in street protests amid a national strike against France's economic policies.
Police gave an estimate of 1.2 million people at rallies nationwide.
Schools have been closed and public transport disrupted, with demonstrations held in about 200 towns.
Unions are demanding more is spent to protect workers in the recession. Unemployment has reached two million and is expected to rise further.
Union members marched towards the Place de la Nation in Paris behind a banner that read: "United against the crisis, defend employment, spending power and public services."
"They have a profound sense of social injustice," said Jean-Claude Mailly, head of the large Force Ouvriere union, "and that, I think, is something that neither the government nor the employers have understood."
Benoit Hamon, a spokesman for the French Socialist Party spokesman said France was experiencing similar problems to other countries, but that the situation was being made worse by President Nicolas Sarkozy.
"We have a president who aggravates the crisis by making the wrong economic and social choices, by his deafness regarding the general dissatisfaction," said Mr Hamom.
"He refuses to give answers regarding layoffs, regarding the cost of living, regarding the way to objectively avoid the rise in job losses in the public sector or in the public health system."
Marches were also being held in Marseille, Lyon, Grenoble and many other towns and cities.
Noel Kouici, demonstrating in Marseilles, said protesters had a "grudge" against the government.
"Of course we are angry against the government when you see the way they serve the banks and leave the people starving and losing their jobs," he said.
But the deputy mayor of Marseille, Roland Blum, told the BBC the government had done a lot to help people.
"Of course I understand the distress of people who've lost or are going to lose their jobs, but what I think is necessary is that we all work together," he said.
There protests were largely peaceful but minor scuffles were reported in several cities later in the evening.
In Paris, police used tear gas to disperse small groups of youths who were setting fire to rubbish bins and throwing bottles.
It is the second time in two months that major demonstrations have been held, following a similar display in January which drew about a million protesters.
Beleaguered industries
The strikes began on Wednesday evening on transport networks.
An employee assists commuters at Gare Saint-Lazare train in Paris (19 March 2009)
French commuters face a limited rail service because of the strike
The national rail operator, SNCF, cancelled 40% of high-speed trains and half of regional services.
A third of flights out of Paris's Orly airport have been cancelled, while a tenth of France's electricity output has been shut down with workers on strike.
However, buses and the Metro rail system in Paris were running normally, thanks to a new law enforcing a minimum transport service during strikes,.
But with many schools and public buildings shut for the day, the number of workers travelling into the capital was reduced.
Private-sector firms were also expecting a depleted workforce, with staff from the beleaguered car industry, oil and retail sectors taking part in the strike.
FSFSFSFSFS
It is, of course, easy to expect too much from such ephemeral wonders. A one day general strike is, after all, nothing but a do it yourself opinion poll with a lot of noise. It has exactly zero immediate effect other than a brief loss of production which, in the case of public enterprise, is often a gain rather than a loss of revenue. As the following article from The Economist points out such symbolic actions have forced the government to back down on the issue of pensions at least once in the past (1995). Whether that will be the case this time is uncertain. President Sarkozy has sunk to record levels of unpopularity, but the reasons are not confined to this one issue or even to a collection of issues related to his neo-liberal agenda. Like most conservative ideologues who preach "morality for the masses" his government has more than its fair share of sleaze and scandal, and this has weighed heavily on his administration.
On the other hand, as the following points out, Sarkozy is constrained by political considerations to at least appear to "give a little". In this he has unlikely allies in the form of the larger union federations, the CFDT and the CGT, both of which are quite happy with their present position in French society and who are unlikely to want to toss the dice in the air in terms of a fundamental rearrangement of same. All the ingredients are there for a compromise whereby both sides declare victory while hoping for electoral gains in 2012. Talk of further general strikes are merely bargaining chips for these unions to "appear" to be useful for their members and in the case of the CFDT for its bedfellow the Socialist party. If the unions were serious about pushing their advantage they would definitely set a general strike for September 29 to coincide with the one planned in Spain and lobby their fellow continental unions for a European wide general strike on that day. Not just talk about it and bluster.
The French anarcho-syndicalist union the CNT (CNT Vignoles) participated in the general strike, but they see the limitations of such actions. Recognizing the ephemeral nature of such protests they have recommended a gradual build up of general assemblies at workplaces. Such general assemblies, independent from the union bureaucracies, would not be tied to any institutional benefits from the state and would be much more effective organs of resistance. They lack the flash and noise of one day demonstrations but unlike the mayfly-like lifespan of such protests they are enduring methods for people to resist the government and its corporate masters.
Something to consider. In any case here is The Economist article.
FSFSFSFSFS
French politics
The retiring type
Sep 8th 2010, 9:27 by The Economist PARIS
FRANCE is bracing itself for more disruption after 1.1m-2.7m demonstrators took to the streets, in hundreds of towns across the country, as part of a 24-hour national strike against President Nicolas Sarkozy’s pension reform. The turn-out was better than trade-union leaders had hoped for, and far higher than a previous day of action in June. Train drivers, teachers, post-office staff, air-traffic controllers, and other mostly public-sector workers, some wheeling children’s buggies, others banging festive drums, took part. Flush with their success, union leaders are now hoping to press the government for further concessions.
Mr Sarkozy wants to raise the minimum legal pension age from 60 to 62 years. This is a relatively modest change by the standards of some other European countries, which are pushing the retirement age up to 65 or even 67. The government forecasts that retirement at 62 will reduce by €18.6 billion the €42 billion state pension-fund shortfall expected by 2018. Tax increases, including a raise in the top income-tax rate from 40% to 41%, will make up a further €4 billion; the rest will come from general government spending.
Yet the reform is symbolically important. France has not touched the legal retirement age since the early 1980s, when it was cut to 60 years. Previous governments have tinkered with contribution rules to try to make the numbers add up, but never dared to meddle with retirement at 60. Back in 1995 Alain Juppé, prime minister under President Jacques Chirac, was forced to withdraw a more modest pension reform after weeks of chaos on French streets.
Union leaders and the opposition Socialist Party, which is also against the reform, argue that the government cannot afford to appear deaf to such this week's show of public opposition. Martine Aubry, the Socialist boss, called the reform “unfair”, and called on the government to “go back to square one”, and withdraw the legislation, which is currently going through parliament. “If we are not listened to, there will be further protests,” declared Bernard Thibault, leader of the powerful Confédération Générale du Travail. Union chiefs now need to decide whether to call another national strike this month. Some are talking about another one-day strike later this month, when parliament is due to vote on the reform.
Mr Sarkozy is in an awkward corner. His popularity has dropped to record lows. His own political camp is restless, and some deputies fear he has lost his political touch. The Socialist Party is freshly confident, and has started to believe in its chances of election at the next presidential poll in 2012. Mr Sarkozy says he will not budge on the retirement age. But he will be tempted to give some ground, in order to thwart further disruption. Certain concessions at the margin, over issues such as special rules for those who have done hard labour (pénibilité), would not necessarily make for a bad deal. But to go too far would only save him trouble in the short run. It would do nothing to restore his credibility as a reformer and a leader ready to take unpopular decisions, without which he has no chances of re-election in 2012.
Labels: anarcho-syndicalism, CNT-F, current events, France, French unions, general strike, international labour, labour, Sarkozy, social democracy, strike., tactics, unions...
Monday, September 06, 2010
ANARCHIST THEORY:
ANARCHIST THOUGHTS ON LABOUR DAY:
It's 'Labour Day' in the anglosphere. Elsewhere most of the world ,and many in English speaking countries as well, celebrate May Day as the real Labour Day. Be that as it may here's an interesting and timely article from Linchpin. Linchpin is the site and magazine of the Ontario platformist group Common Cause. Unlike many of the self-congratulatory messages that will be coming forth today this article sees that there are indeed problems with the way labour is organized today, and it points to some possible solutions. I find little to disagree with in what follows though I have to admit that I haven't gone through it with my usual nit-picking comb. What is especially valuable is the suggestion that workers should form organizations seperate from but in sympathy with the unions. Well disposed union leaders may see this as a Godsend as it will "let them off the hook" for actions that are necessary but either outside the scope of unions or perilous for them to undertake. as to those who are not well disposed, well more's the pity. Here's the article.>>>
@@@@@@@@@@
It’s the class struggle, stupid!
Organized labour’s confused response to the McGuinty Liberals' attack on Ontario’s working-class
By Ajamu Nangwaya and Alex Diceanu
Organized labour in Ontario will continue to put forth a weak and ineffective response to attacks from the ruling class as long as it continues to ignore the reality of class struggle. A perfect example is its current response to a proposed two-year wage-freeze that the Dalton McGuinty-led Ontario government plans on imposing on unionized public sector workers. The provincial Liberals would like to save $750 million per year from a wage-freeze, so as to help manage the $19.3 billion budget deficit. Readers need not be reminded that this deficit is the result of the risky financial speculations of the captains of finance, industry and commerce that created the Great Recession of 2008.
But it is the 710,000 unionized members of the working class and 350,000 non-unionized managers and other employees who draw pay cheques from the government[1] and the users of state-provided services (and private sector workers) who are being asked to bear the burden of paying for the actions of the corporate sector. At the same time as this attempt to take income from the pockets of government workers, the McGuinty Liberals’ have granted a $4.6 billion tax-cut to the business sector.
The leader of the Ontario New Democrats, Andrea Howarth, has signaled her support for public sector workers’ acceptance of a pay cut. She asserts, "I'm quite sure when they get to the bargaining table they will do their part like everyone else does ... there is a collective bargaining process that has to be respected."[2] Wow! Who said that the working-class needs enemies with “friends” like the New Democratic Party (NDP) and its leader Andrea Horwarth?
However, it is the tame and even puzzling reaction of some of Ontario’s major labour leaders that should be of concern to workers in the public sector. The government called labour leaders and employers from the broader public sector to “consultation” talks on the wage freeze on July 19, 2010. Coming out of the talks, this was what CUPE-Ontario president Fred Hahn had to say, “This is not like the early ’90s, this is not about sharing the pain. That’s all just not true”.[3] He was referring to former NDP premier Bob Rae’s unilateral opening of public sector workers’ contracts and the imposition of public sector wage-cuts accompanied by tax increases for the corporate sector. Was Brother Hahn implying that a wage-freeze would be tolerable, if accompanied by the cancellation of the $4.6 billion corporate tax-cut?
No credible union or union leader should contemplate a zero-wage increase over two years - even if the government rescinds the $4.6 billion tax-cut. There should not have been a tax-cut for the capitalist class. Restoring the tax should not be used as a bargaining chip to escape a wage-freeze on public sector workers.
Not to be outdone was the president of the Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union, Warren (Smokey) Thomas. We will leave it to you to decipher the implicit message in the following statement by Smokey Thomas. “Just because he [Minister of Finance Dwight Duncan] wants something doesn’t mean he’s going to get it. It’s not a social contract. He can propose (a wage-freeze) but he has to bargain it. He can’t legislate it. He’ll lose.”[4] Is it just us or does that sound like a labour leader who is not really in a fighting spirit and just wants to make a deal?
A simple matter of misguided policy?
However, the critical issue for Ontario’s public sector workers is the extent to which many of our labour leaders seem to be completely unaware of the state and employers’ motives for disciplining labour through wage concessions. Ismael Hossein-zaded of Drake University made the following observation, which is quite applicable to the posturing of labour leaders in Ontario:
Quote:
Viewing the savage class war of the ruling kleptocracy on the people's living and working conditions simply as “bad” policy, and hoping to somehow—presumably through smart arguments and sage advice—replace it with the “good” Keynesian policy of deficit spending without a fight, without grassroots‟ involvement and/or pressure, stems from the rather naive supposition that policy making is a simple matter of technical expertise or the benevolence of policy makers, that is, a matter of choice. The presumed choice is said to be between only two alternatives: between the stimulus or Keynesian deficit spending, on the one hand, and the Neoliberal austerity of cutting social spending, on the other.5
Based on some of the statements coming from labour leaders, they may not have gotten the memo that the attack on the working-class (through the slashing of social programme spending, attacks on private sector pensions and wage freezes) is not about good or bad economic policies. Hossein-Zedad must have been inspired to write his paper after reading the following Keynesian-inspired comment by Ontario Federation of Labour president Sid Ryan; “From a policy perspective, it makes no economic sense whatsoever. You’ve got a government saying we need to stimulate the economy. The best way of stimulating the economy is through public-sector workers who spend every single penny of their disposable income in their local communities,”[6] But it’s not about the economy, per se. It’s the class struggle, stupid!
Canada’s economic and political elite have clearly given up the ghost of Keynesian economics, which calls on government to either stimulate or restrict the demand for goods and services based on the state of the economy. In the case of the 2008 crisis in capitalism, these neoliberal players felt forced by the magnitude of the impending financial collapse to pump money into the economy. A not-too-insignificant fact was lost on many observers and commentators who gleefully cheered on the capitalist class’ “Road-to-Damascus” moment. The capitalist state in Canada and other imperialist countries will do everything within their power to maintain a business environment that facilitates the accumulation of capital or profit-making, as well as legitimize the system in the eyes of the people. That is all in a day’s work for the state…no surprise here for class conscious trade unionists and other activists!
Labour’s “Response”
We ought to note that the recent crisis in the economy caught organized labour off-guard and ill-prepared to mobilize the working-class against that monumental failure of capitalism. For decades, Western corporations and governments have been force-feeding the public a steady diet of tax-cuts. Lower taxes on businesses, high-income earners and the wealthy, the widespread slashing of social services and income support programmes, a massive reduction in state oversight and regulation of corporations and the enactment of anti-union policies and legislation have been the all rage since corporations and Western governments abandoned their class-collaborationist pact with organized labour in the 1970s. Yet at the very moment when capitalism experienced a crisis of confidence resulting from a set of policies that had been hailed as perfect ingredients for economic and social progress, organized labour was caught with its pants down. Its leaders didn’t have a class struggle alternative to Keynesian economics – an economic tendency that was never intended to be used as a tool to end wage slavery and the minority rule of bankers, industrialists and the managerial and political elite.
Presently, the labour movement is ideologically and operationally ill-prepared to effectively face down the two-year wage-freeze demand from the McGuinty Liberals. Unfortunately, labour’s leaders have, in the main, focused on narrow economic demands rather than seeking to politically develop union activists and their broader membership behind a class struggle labour movement platform. Union members have been politically deskilled and demobilized in favour of a social service model of trade unionism. These labour leaders have failed to use their unions’ courses, workshops, week-long schools, publications and other educational resources to educate members of the fact that they are a part of a distinct class with economic and political interests that are different from that of the rulers of capitalist society.
Even the most casual of observers understand that organized labour’s raison d’être is to champion the material concerns of the working-class. And yet, ideologically-speaking, most labour leaders in Canada have cast their lot in with capitalism - albeit a more Scandinavian version. This is why a coherent critique of capitalism is notably absent from most union-organized workshops and events. It should therefore not come as a surprise that many union members have swallowed the employers and politicians’ message that Canada is a largely middle-class country and that our collective aspiration should be to remain a member of this class. If the labour leaders, academics and the media say that the majority of Canadians are a part of the middle-class, it must be so. The development of a working-class consciousness becomes very difficult (but not impossible) in this kind of political environment.
The great majority of Canadians are members of the working-class. They sell their labour, exercise little to no control over how their work-life is organized, have no say over how the profit from their labour is distributed and are so alienated from work that the aphorism “Thank god it’s Friday” has its own acronym. One should never define middle-class status as one’s ability to purchase consumer trinkets, live in a mortgaged home or even own a summer cottage. Middle-class status ought to be defined by one’s exercise of power and control and/or the possession of high levels of human capital found among administrative/managerial elites in the private and public sectors, academic elites and independent professionals.
Labour’s Credibility Crisis
The narrow economic obsession of labour leaders was on plain display when Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan revealed the March 2010 Budget. When it became known that the McGuinty Liberals would be seeking a two-year wage-freeze from public sector workers, this news was all that consumed the attention of most labour leaders. Many labour functionaries scrambled around in search of external and internal legal opinions, requesting briefs from senior staff on the impact of a wage-freeze on bargaining in specific sectors and sending out correspondence to members assuring them to “just act as if nothing had happened”, because they’re “already covered by a collective agreement”. Many labour union offices’ and unionized workplaces’ anxiety was centred entirely on the desired wage-freeze by the McGuinty Liberals. Nothing else!
But today we hear labour leaders talking about keeping money in workers’ pockets to stimulate the economy and that their primary concern is maintaining public services at adequate levels. Why didn’t organized labour deploy its resources to educate and mobilize the public against the $4.6 billion corporate tax-cuts, slashing of $4 billion in transportation infrastructure spending from Metrolinx’s $9.3 billion budget7] and the scrapping of the special diet allowance that benefited over 160,000 members of the working-class for the unprincely sum of $250 million per annum and a mere monthly average of $130 per person[8]? The provincial government anticipates that the two-year wage-freeze across the public sector will net a savings of $1.5 billion – yet the previous $8.6 billion effectively stolen from the working class failed to push organized labour into action.
The leaders of organized labour did not have the imagination to energize their members and the broader citizenry in alliance with other social movement organizations over the Budget. They could have exposed the class priorities of the McGuinty Liberals. The government’s main concerns clearly have nothing to do with those of us who are poor, live from pay cheque to pay cheque and do not patronize the golf courses where McGuinty and his friends hang out when they are not screwing the public. Listen up public sector labour leaders: the people will not be fooled by your claims to be advocating for the general interest. The broader working-class just have to simply see where you direct the labour movement’s resources and they will clue into the issues that are being prioritized. Take a look at the poor, working-class and/or racialized areas that are likely to be affected by the $4 billion cut to Metrolinx’s budget:
Quote:
…the austerity moves could affect five planned projects: rapid transit lines for Finch Ave. W., Sheppard Ave. E. and the Scarborough RT, along with the Eglinton Ave. cross-town line and an expansion of York region’s Viva service.[9]
Are we to believe that a class-struggle and anti-oppression informed public education, organizing and mobilization campaign in defense of public services, the social wage and a livable wage would not have had some level of traction with the people of Ontario?
An alternative economic plan or a different labour movement?
In some quarters of the trade union sector, there are talks of presenting an alternative plan to the slash-and-burn neoliberal policies of the provincial government. But, the presentation of Keynesian economic proposals by labour leaders is useless in a climate where the ruling class doesn’t feel threatened by a politically mobilized population, especially without “compelling grassroots pressure on policy makers”.[10] We implied earlier that labour unions have a credibility gap with the broader public if they now assert a desire to “broaden the debate, educate community members and local politicians with a view to engaging in actions that protect public services and build strong communities” as outlined by one union. What would be the purpose of the alternative plans of these labour leaders? The status quo of the 1930s to the 1960s that gave rise to the welfare state is not a transformative option.
There is no such thing as a “contextless” context. Where is the necessary political environment that would force the state to make concessions to the working-class out of fear that they maybe inclined to embrace revolutionary options? When some labour leaders are loosely talking about coming up with an alternative (Keynesian economic plan?) stimulus proposal, they would do well to understand the political implications of the following statement:
Quote:
Keynesian economists seem to be unmindful of this fundamental relationship between economics and politics. Instead, they view economic policies as the outcome of the battle of ideas, not of class forces or interests. And herein lies one of the principal weaknesses of their argument: viewing the Keynesian/New Deal/Social Democratic reforms of the 1930s through the 1960s as the product of Keynes’ or F.D.R.’s genius, or the goodness of their hearts; not of the compelling pressure exerted by the revolutionary movements of that period on the national policy makers to “implement reform in order to prevent revolution,” as F.D.R. famously put it. This explains why economic policy makers of today are not listening to Keynesian arguments—powerful and elegant as they are—because there would be no Keynesian, New Deal, or Social-Democratic economics without revolutionary pressure from the people.[11]
However, when labour leaders shy away from speaking openly about class-struggle and the nature of our economic system, we have a serious problem. It means that they are not in a position to facilitate a class-struggle, democracy-from-below and self-organizing form of trade unionism.
In order fight this attack on the working-class of Ontario, the labour movements’ rank-and-file activists, progressive leaders and principled labour socialists must engage in shop-floor education, organizing and mobilizing that is centred on a class-struggle, anti-racist and anti-oppression campaign. This approach to labour activism must be done in alliance with progressive or radical social movement organizations among women, racialized peoples, indigenous peoples, youth, students, LGBT community, climate/environmental justice, independent and revolutionary labour organizations, anti-authoritarian formations, and radical intellectuals. It must be an alliance based on mutual respect, sharing of approaches to emancipation and resources and a commitment to the value that the oppressed are the architect of and the driving force behind the movement for their emancipation. It is essential that organized labour open up and transform its leadership and decision-making structures to accommodate the full inclusion of its membership, in all their diversity.
In most of our unions and locals, this means starting from the beginning and we can use this current crisis to take those first steps. There is a lot of frustration among union members and community activists over the inaction of labour’s leadership in the face of this attack - and a desire to do something about it. That frustration and desire can be channeled into building cross-union “fight back committees” that bring together trade union and community activists in a city or town, such as members of the Greater Toronto Workers Assembly have already begun to do in that city. The “fight back committees” can give us a capacity to act independently from organized labour’s leadership. And probably our first acts should be to organize general assemblies in our locals and town hall meetings in our communities to promote a working-class view of the economic crisis and to mobilize our fellow workers and neighbours around militant, grassroots resistance to the McGuinty government and all the forces promoting a new round of austerity for the working-class.
Nothing less than a self-organizing, class-struggle approach to trade unionism will put labour in a position to fight in the here-and-now, while building the road we must travel on our way to the classless and stateless society of the future.
Alex Diceanu is a member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3906 and a graduate student at McMaster University. Ajamu Nangwaya is a member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Locals 3907 and 3902 and a graduate student at the University of Toronto. Both authors are members of the Ontario anarchist organization, Common Cause.
________________________________________
[1] Walkom, T. (2010, March 26). Liberals aim at easy targets. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/ontariobudget/article/785616--walkom...
[2] Brennan, R. J. & Talaga, T. (2010, March 26) Hudak cut wages deeper. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/ontariobudget/article/785343--hudak-cut-wages-deeper
[3] Benzie, R. (2010, July 20). Dwight Duncan’s wage-freeze pitch gets frosty reception. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/837872--dwight-duncan-s-wage-freeze-pitch-gets-frosty-reception
[4] Benzie, July 20
[5] Hossein-zaded, I. (2010, July 23-25). Holes in the Keynesian Arguments against Neoliberal Austerity Policy—Not “Bad” Policy, But Class Policy. Retrieved from http://www.counterpunch.org/zadeh07232010.html
[6] Benzie, July 20.
[7] Hume, C. (2010, March 29). Transit still not a priority. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/ttc/article/787317--transit-still-not-a-...
[8] The Canadian Press. (2010 April 1). Ontario asked to restore special diet allowance. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/04/01/diet-allowance.html
9] Goddard, J., Rider, D. & Kalinoski, (2010, March 26). Miller outraged as budget sideswiped GTA transit. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/785573--miller-outraged-as-budget-sideswipes-gta-transit
[10] Hossein-zaded, I, Holes in the Keynesian arguments against neoliberal austerity policy.
[11] ibid
It’s the class struggle, stupid!
Organized labour’s confused response to the McGuinty Liberals' attack on Ontario’s working-class
By Ajamu Nangwaya and Alex Diceanu
Organized labour in Ontario will continue to put forth a weak and ineffective response to attacks from the ruling class as long as it continues to ignore the reality of class struggle. A perfect example is its current response to a proposed two-year wage-freeze that the Dalton McGuinty-led Ontario government plans on imposing on unionized public sector workers. The provincial Liberals would like to save $750 million per year from a wage-freeze, so as to help manage the $19.3 billion budget deficit. Readers need not be reminded that this deficit is the result of the risky financial speculations of the captains of finance, industry and commerce that created the Great Recession of 2008.
But it is the 710,000 unionized members of the working class and 350,000 non-unionized managers and other employees who draw pay cheques from the government[1] and the users of state-provided services (and private sector workers) who are being asked to bear the burden of paying for the actions of the corporate sector. At the same time as this attempt to take income from the pockets of government workers, the McGuinty Liberals’ have granted a $4.6 billion tax-cut to the business sector.
The leader of the Ontario New Democrats, Andrea Howarth, has signaled her support for public sector workers’ acceptance of a pay cut. She asserts, "I'm quite sure when they get to the bargaining table they will do their part like everyone else does ... there is a collective bargaining process that has to be respected."[2] Wow! Who said that the working-class needs enemies with “friends” like the New Democratic Party (NDP) and its leader Andrea Horwarth?
However, it is the tame and even puzzling reaction of some of Ontario’s major labour leaders that should be of concern to workers in the public sector. The government called labour leaders and employers from the broader public sector to “consultation” talks on the wage freeze on July 19, 2010. Coming out of the talks, this was what CUPE-Ontario president Fred Hahn had to say, “This is not like the early ’90s, this is not about sharing the pain. That’s all just not true”.[3] He was referring to former NDP premier Bob Rae’s unilateral opening of public sector workers’ contracts and the imposition of public sector wage-cuts accompanied by tax increases for the corporate sector. Was Brother Hahn implying that a wage-freeze would be tolerable, if accompanied by the cancellation of the $4.6 billion corporate tax-cut?
No credible union or union leader should contemplate a zero-wage increase over two years - even if the government rescinds the $4.6 billion tax-cut. There should not have been a tax-cut for the capitalist class. Restoring the tax should not be used as a bargaining chip to escape a wage-freeze on public sector workers.
Not to be outdone was the president of the Ontario Public Service Employees’ Union, Warren (Smokey) Thomas. We will leave it to you to decipher the implicit message in the following statement by Smokey Thomas. “Just because he [Minister of Finance Dwight Duncan] wants something doesn’t mean he’s going to get it. It’s not a social contract. He can propose (a wage-freeze) but he has to bargain it. He can’t legislate it. He’ll lose.”[4] Is it just us or does that sound like a labour leader who is not really in a fighting spirit and just wants to make a deal?
A simple matter of misguided policy?
However, the critical issue for Ontario’s public sector workers is the extent to which many of our labour leaders seem to be completely unaware of the state and employers’ motives for disciplining labour through wage concessions. Ismael Hossein-zaded of Drake University made the following observation, which is quite applicable to the posturing of labour leaders in Ontario:
Quote:
Viewing the savage class war of the ruling kleptocracy on the people's living and working conditions simply as “bad” policy, and hoping to somehow—presumably through smart arguments and sage advice—replace it with the “good” Keynesian policy of deficit spending without a fight, without grassroots‟ involvement and/or pressure, stems from the rather naive supposition that policy making is a simple matter of technical expertise or the benevolence of policy makers, that is, a matter of choice. The presumed choice is said to be between only two alternatives: between the stimulus or Keynesian deficit spending, on the one hand, and the Neoliberal austerity of cutting social spending, on the other.5
Based on some of the statements coming from labour leaders, they may not have gotten the memo that the attack on the working-class (through the slashing of social programme spending, attacks on private sector pensions and wage freezes) is not about good or bad economic policies. Hossein-Zedad must have been inspired to write his paper after reading the following Keynesian-inspired comment by Ontario Federation of Labour president Sid Ryan; “From a policy perspective, it makes no economic sense whatsoever. You’ve got a government saying we need to stimulate the economy. The best way of stimulating the economy is through public-sector workers who spend every single penny of their disposable income in their local communities,”[6] But it’s not about the economy, per se. It’s the class struggle, stupid!
Canada’s economic and political elite have clearly given up the ghost of Keynesian economics, which calls on government to either stimulate or restrict the demand for goods and services based on the state of the economy. In the case of the 2008 crisis in capitalism, these neoliberal players felt forced by the magnitude of the impending financial collapse to pump money into the economy. A not-too-insignificant fact was lost on many observers and commentators who gleefully cheered on the capitalist class’ “Road-to-Damascus” moment. The capitalist state in Canada and other imperialist countries will do everything within their power to maintain a business environment that facilitates the accumulation of capital or profit-making, as well as legitimize the system in the eyes of the people. That is all in a day’s work for the state…no surprise here for class conscious trade unionists and other activists!
Labour’s “Response”
We ought to note that the recent crisis in the economy caught organized labour off-guard and ill-prepared to mobilize the working-class against that monumental failure of capitalism. For decades, Western corporations and governments have been force-feeding the public a steady diet of tax-cuts. Lower taxes on businesses, high-income earners and the wealthy, the widespread slashing of social services and income support programmes, a massive reduction in state oversight and regulation of corporations and the enactment of anti-union policies and legislation have been the all rage since corporations and Western governments abandoned their class-collaborationist pact with organized labour in the 1970s. Yet at the very moment when capitalism experienced a crisis of confidence resulting from a set of policies that had been hailed as perfect ingredients for economic and social progress, organized labour was caught with its pants down. Its leaders didn’t have a class struggle alternative to Keynesian economics – an economic tendency that was never intended to be used as a tool to end wage slavery and the minority rule of bankers, industrialists and the managerial and political elite.
Presently, the labour movement is ideologically and operationally ill-prepared to effectively face down the two-year wage-freeze demand from the McGuinty Liberals. Unfortunately, labour’s leaders have, in the main, focused on narrow economic demands rather than seeking to politically develop union activists and their broader membership behind a class struggle labour movement platform. Union members have been politically deskilled and demobilized in favour of a social service model of trade unionism. These labour leaders have failed to use their unions’ courses, workshops, week-long schools, publications and other educational resources to educate members of the fact that they are a part of a distinct class with economic and political interests that are different from that of the rulers of capitalist society.
Even the most casual of observers understand that organized labour’s raison d’être is to champion the material concerns of the working-class. And yet, ideologically-speaking, most labour leaders in Canada have cast their lot in with capitalism - albeit a more Scandinavian version. This is why a coherent critique of capitalism is notably absent from most union-organized workshops and events. It should therefore not come as a surprise that many union members have swallowed the employers and politicians’ message that Canada is a largely middle-class country and that our collective aspiration should be to remain a member of this class. If the labour leaders, academics and the media say that the majority of Canadians are a part of the middle-class, it must be so. The development of a working-class consciousness becomes very difficult (but not impossible) in this kind of political environment.
The great majority of Canadians are members of the working-class. They sell their labour, exercise little to no control over how their work-life is organized, have no say over how the profit from their labour is distributed and are so alienated from work that the aphorism “Thank god it’s Friday” has its own acronym. One should never define middle-class status as one’s ability to purchase consumer trinkets, live in a mortgaged home or even own a summer cottage. Middle-class status ought to be defined by one’s exercise of power and control and/or the possession of high levels of human capital found among administrative/managerial elites in the private and public sectors, academic elites and independent professionals.
Labour’s Credibility Crisis
The narrow economic obsession of labour leaders was on plain display when Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan revealed the March 2010 Budget. When it became known that the McGuinty Liberals would be seeking a two-year wage-freeze from public sector workers, this news was all that consumed the attention of most labour leaders. Many labour functionaries scrambled around in search of external and internal legal opinions, requesting briefs from senior staff on the impact of a wage-freeze on bargaining in specific sectors and sending out correspondence to members assuring them to “just act as if nothing had happened”, because they’re “already covered by a collective agreement”. Many labour union offices’ and unionized workplaces’ anxiety was centred entirely on the desired wage-freeze by the McGuinty Liberals. Nothing else!
But today we hear labour leaders talking about keeping money in workers’ pockets to stimulate the economy and that their primary concern is maintaining public services at adequate levels. Why didn’t organized labour deploy its resources to educate and mobilize the public against the $4.6 billion corporate tax-cuts, slashing of $4 billion in transportation infrastructure spending from Metrolinx’s $9.3 billion budget7] and the scrapping of the special diet allowance that benefited over 160,000 members of the working-class for the unprincely sum of $250 million per annum and a mere monthly average of $130 per person[8]? The provincial government anticipates that the two-year wage-freeze across the public sector will net a savings of $1.5 billion – yet the previous $8.6 billion effectively stolen from the working class failed to push organized labour into action.
The leaders of organized labour did not have the imagination to energize their members and the broader citizenry in alliance with other social movement organizations over the Budget. They could have exposed the class priorities of the McGuinty Liberals. The government’s main concerns clearly have nothing to do with those of us who are poor, live from pay cheque to pay cheque and do not patronize the golf courses where McGuinty and his friends hang out when they are not screwing the public. Listen up public sector labour leaders: the people will not be fooled by your claims to be advocating for the general interest. The broader working-class just have to simply see where you direct the labour movement’s resources and they will clue into the issues that are being prioritized. Take a look at the poor, working-class and/or racialized areas that are likely to be affected by the $4 billion cut to Metrolinx’s budget:
Quote:
…the austerity moves could affect five planned projects: rapid transit lines for Finch Ave. W., Sheppard Ave. E. and the Scarborough RT, along with the Eglinton Ave. cross-town line and an expansion of York region’s Viva service.[9]
Are we to believe that a class-struggle and anti-oppression informed public education, organizing and mobilization campaign in defense of public services, the social wage and a livable wage would not have had some level of traction with the people of Ontario?
An alternative economic plan or a different labour movement?
In some quarters of the trade union sector, there are talks of presenting an alternative plan to the slash-and-burn neoliberal policies of the provincial government. But, the presentation of Keynesian economic proposals by labour leaders is useless in a climate where the ruling class doesn’t feel threatened by a politically mobilized population, especially without “compelling grassroots pressure on policy makers”.[10] We implied earlier that labour unions have a credibility gap with the broader public if they now assert a desire to “broaden the debate, educate community members and local politicians with a view to engaging in actions that protect public services and build strong communities” as outlined by one union. What would be the purpose of the alternative plans of these labour leaders? The status quo of the 1930s to the 1960s that gave rise to the welfare state is not a transformative option.
There is no such thing as a “contextless” context. Where is the necessary political environment that would force the state to make concessions to the working-class out of fear that they maybe inclined to embrace revolutionary options? When some labour leaders are loosely talking about coming up with an alternative (Keynesian economic plan?) stimulus proposal, they would do well to understand the political implications of the following statement:
Quote:
Keynesian economists seem to be unmindful of this fundamental relationship between economics and politics. Instead, they view economic policies as the outcome of the battle of ideas, not of class forces or interests. And herein lies one of the principal weaknesses of their argument: viewing the Keynesian/New Deal/Social Democratic reforms of the 1930s through the 1960s as the product of Keynes’ or F.D.R.’s genius, or the goodness of their hearts; not of the compelling pressure exerted by the revolutionary movements of that period on the national policy makers to “implement reform in order to prevent revolution,” as F.D.R. famously put it. This explains why economic policy makers of today are not listening to Keynesian arguments—powerful and elegant as they are—because there would be no Keynesian, New Deal, or Social-Democratic economics without revolutionary pressure from the people.[11]
However, when labour leaders shy away from speaking openly about class-struggle and the nature of our economic system, we have a serious problem. It means that they are not in a position to facilitate a class-struggle, democracy-from-below and self-organizing form of trade unionism.
In order fight this attack on the working-class of Ontario, the labour movements’ rank-and-file activists, progressive leaders and principled labour socialists must engage in shop-floor education, organizing and mobilizing that is centred on a class-struggle, anti-racist and anti-oppression campaign. This approach to labour activism must be done in alliance with progressive or radical social movement organizations among women, racialized peoples, indigenous peoples, youth, students, LGBT community, climate/environmental justice, independent and revolutionary labour organizations, anti-authoritarian formations, and radical intellectuals. It must be an alliance based on mutual respect, sharing of approaches to emancipation and resources and a commitment to the value that the oppressed are the architect of and the driving force behind the movement for their emancipation. It is essential that organized labour open up and transform its leadership and decision-making structures to accommodate the full inclusion of its membership, in all their diversity.
In most of our unions and locals, this means starting from the beginning and we can use this current crisis to take those first steps. There is a lot of frustration among union members and community activists over the inaction of labour’s leadership in the face of this attack - and a desire to do something about it. That frustration and desire can be channeled into building cross-union “fight back committees” that bring together trade union and community activists in a city or town, such as members of the Greater Toronto Workers Assembly have already begun to do in that city. The “fight back committees” can give us a capacity to act independently from organized labour’s leadership. And probably our first acts should be to organize general assemblies in our locals and town hall meetings in our communities to promote a working-class view of the economic crisis and to mobilize our fellow workers and neighbours around militant, grassroots resistance to the McGuinty government and all the forces promoting a new round of austerity for the working-class.
Nothing less than a self-organizing, class-struggle approach to trade unionism will put labour in a position to fight in the here-and-now, while building the road we must travel on our way to the classless and stateless society of the future.
Alex Diceanu is a member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Local 3906 and a graduate student at McMaster University. Ajamu Nangwaya is a member of the Canadian Union of Public Employees, Locals 3907 and 3902 and a graduate student at the University of Toronto. Both authors are members of the Ontario anarchist organization, Common Cause.
________________________________________
[1] Walkom, T. (2010, March 26). Liberals aim at easy targets. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/ontariobudget/article/785616--walkom...
[2] Brennan, R. J. & Talaga, T. (2010, March 26) Hudak cut wages deeper. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/ontariobudget/article/785343--hudak-cut-wages-deeper
[3] Benzie, R. (2010, July 20). Dwight Duncan’s wage-freeze pitch gets frosty reception. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/ontario/article/837872--dwight-duncan-s-wage-freeze-pitch-gets-frosty-reception
[4] Benzie, July 20
[5] Hossein-zaded, I. (2010, July 23-25). Holes in the Keynesian Arguments against Neoliberal Austerity Policy—Not “Bad” Policy, But Class Policy. Retrieved from http://www.counterpunch.org/zadeh07232010.html
[6] Benzie, July 20.
[7] Hume, C. (2010, March 29). Transit still not a priority. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/ttc/article/787317--transit-still-not-a-...
[8] The Canadian Press. (2010 April 1). Ontario asked to restore special diet allowance. Retrieved fromhttp://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/04/01/diet-allowance.html
9] Goddard, J., Rider, D. & Kalinoski, (2010, March 26). Miller outraged as budget sideswiped GTA transit. Toronto Star. Retrieved from http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/785573--miller-outraged-as-budget-sideswipes-gta-transit
[10] Hossein-zaded, I, Holes in the Keynesian arguments against neoliberal austerity policy.
[11] ibid
Labels: anarchism, anarchist theory, Canadian labour, Common Cause, labour, Linchpin, Ontario, platformism, tactics
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
CANADIAN LABOUR QUÉBEC:
CONSTRUCTION STRIKE IN QUÉBEC ?:
As August 30 draws nearer so does the deadline for a general strike in Québec's construction sector. As of today no further talks have been scheduled before the deadline. Whether the strike will actually happen or if it will be called off by a last minute deal like last May's construction strike in Manitoba is still in doubt. In the interim the unions involved (part of a five union common front) are mainly engaged in the tried and true tactics of on the job action such as work to rule, refusing overtime and taking all allowed breaks.
In the end these tactics may exert more pressure than the threat of a general strike which, as the writer of the piece below notes, would be rapidly legislated back to work. The delay since the opening of negotiations last fall in coming to a contract may possibly be due to employer intransigence. This suspicion is reinforced by what is also noted below, that any new contract will not be retroactive. In other words every minute of delay adds more to the construction company profits, and the companies involved would only soften their stance at the last possible moment to avoid serious disruption.
What can be done in such situations ? It may make me unpopular amongst "radical" circles, but it seems obvious to me that the possible general strike is almost certain to fail due to back to work legislation. That fact should be clearly pointed out, and the usual leftist cheerleading for "general strikes" should be muted. Not every such strike is a victory, and they often result in great defeats. And no such defeats do not necessarily "build militancy", let alone radicalism. At the same time the die has been cast, and Québec construction workers now have little choice but to go ahead with the strike unless the bosses back down. What should have been done long ago is the present pressure tactics at the actual job sites. A few days of such things actually costs the bosses far more than an ephemeral general strike that is rapidly legislated out of existence.
But that is a lesson for the future not for now. The following article is from the Québec City Voix De Faits blog, the blog of the QC section of the platformist Union Communiste Libertaire. The original French version can be read at that site. Molly takes full responsibility for any translation errors that the following may contain.
QLQLQLQLQL
Outline of the situation in Quebec.
Since January 2010, construction workers in Quebec have been working without a contract . Nevertheless , as many bosses as unions had announced in October 2009 , exemplary negotiations that would be settled by the due date of collective agreements. Practically nine months later , workers in shipyards have yet signed agreements and the situation is becoming increasingly tense .
What we should not lose sight of here is that the concept of " retroactivity " as if logic and common in the public service do not apply . Each day that passes represents several thousands of dollars of economic savings in the pockets of the bosses. In short , for almost nine months, the pressure tactics are one way : towards workers .
Recently , the unions began a common front in negotiations , all five represented in the construction field are involved this time , and began to implement a plan of pressure tactics voted for in a general assembly of the members present . Of course , for anyone coming from other areas of work , it is rather suspicious to see stewards on hand in the workplace asking members to leave. We must not forget, however, that construction is a sector that is excessively scattered over the territory and that is the only effective way to spread the word.
The media always refers to two or three " honest workers "who say they are not aware of all this is happening and that they felt " intimidated " or even " forced " to leave the targeted sites . First , ignorance of the current situation of these workers is their own fault as there are regular union meetings where it is possible for everyone involved to be informed. Then , all construction workers , including supervisors , are unionized and union representatives are equipped with cell phones reachable all week and just waiting to answer questions from their members . In terms of bullying , it is a little or nothing at all. On the site , workers present are not in the habit of being four and a half feet tall and weighing120 pounds . In short , of course, if a " union team " landed on construction sites, they are often large and heavy fellows , but they do not raise their voices except when necessary ( eg confrontation with employers or workers who are anti union ) . In short , we must take cognizance of the existence of these cases , but it is not necessary to make a big deal as in the mass media where one can see the boss' petticoat sticking out .
Employer Demands
The employer demands follow an inexorable logic exceedingly common in the capitalism of the twenty-first century : flexibility and deregulation . We want more hours working on construction sites with less overtime paid accordingly (time and a half , double time , etc. .) . We demand the elimination of many benefits deemed " unproductive " . These benefits can range from those called " team leaders "( a bit like a small foreman ) to work at night or in special conditions .
The bosses also want the best value for their money , otherwise there will be less of it coming into their pockets and that, that is the enemy of the bourgeois class . In this context, they want to cut down on operating costs directly related to the workforce . They want to cut the compensation offered for accommodation on remote sites , stretching the concept of the territorial zone of workers (a worker in the region of Quebec can not go, exceptions , and work in Abitibi) and in the industrial sector , begin to pay the worker only when physically present on the worksite . Thus one is left to go to different checkpoints for minutes or even hours, on his own time .
Basically, the employers' logic is simple: we want to increase competitiveness through deregulation, a reduction of wage costs and increased flexibility of the workforce . In short , they are quietly approached the model of employment in a fast food restaurant . Simply , the rules of collective agreements apply to all of Quebec , so we can immediately ask what the bosses want to really mean by 'competitiveness'.
Union demands
For the workers' representatives , the situation is quite different. They are asking to tighten the rules in connection with the territories of the workers, increase the premiums that employers consider "non-productive ", and to improve the concept of financial compensation for accommodation on remote sites . In short , as usual, the bosses and the workers both pull up the covers of their sides hoping to improve their lots.
It's a bit simplistic , but in terms of brevity and to avoid annoying repetitions , take the demands of the employers listed above and reversing them you get roughly the trade union positions.
The logic of the trade unions is also quite different. It is assumed that the construction market is moving in a "closed" way , that is to say that everyone should work by the same rules in Quebec , which eliminates the logic of competitiveness so dear to employers . In short , when the logic behind the demands are the opposite, do not expect the demands to be in close proximity to each other.
Interestingly , the issue of wages is hardly the order of the day!
Critique of the unions
We live in a system that leaves little room for radicalism , let alone anti-capitalism . So do not be surprised to see the central claim to be merely to improve conditions for workers under the current economic mode of production and no more.
Also , the construction environment is an area where everyone is unionized with no other choice but to settle down in one of five union centrals present . This leads to the perverse effect of disconnecting the unions from the unionized . General meetings are not held and efforts to attract the union members are hardly massive.
The centrals over time and except when negotiating collective agreements or filing grievances , seem like nothing more than service centers . There's even a central that looks more like a general store than a union , but this is not the subject of this text here. Obviously , it is the members who make their unions and it is they who must take action, but the absence of the option of organizing themselves has the perverse result of having an amorphous mass that is more reluctant to pay more for dues than anything else.
Finally, from a libertarian perspective , one could also wonder why one does not seek to change the very framework of functioning and take up, for example, a sort of anarcho -syndicalism, but that would be to live in a bubble, to ignore the society around us and to believe that the current trade unions have any revolutionary fervor .
The general strike?
It is effectively this option that is scheduled for late August , at the same time as it will nine months that construction workers are working without contracts and the bosses have saved millions of dollars in salaries .
This way of action will be hard , but will certainly be short. One of the major employers is the Québec state , especially roads. It should be understood that the four different sectors currently negotiating will return to work at the same time , even if only three out of four have agreements on principle .
This labor solidarity is good to see, but it will also certainly lead to a blow from the state expressed no doubt as a government decree that would force a return to work . In principle , workers should not admit defeat without at least trying to push , but also in principle, the Government will play its role in class struggle and will help its natural ally, the employers.
Meanwhile, workers continue to demonstrate their anger by randomly deserting work sites in the province one day at a time . Thus , legal or not , these means of pressure expressing the workers' anger will continue for a few weeks and , hopefully , will make the employers compliant before the end of the month .
* * *
The author is a construction worker who is active in the UCL and his union.
Labels: Canadian labour, current events, labour, Quebec, strikes.general strikes, tactics, UCL, Voix De Faits, wiork to rule
