AMERICAN LABOUR CHICAGO:

SECOND PLANT OCCUPATION WINS IN WINDOW FACTORY:

About four years ago workers at what was then Republic Windows and Doors kept their workplace open by occupying the plant. This led to a reprieve which enabled an alternative operator to be found. At the time there was discussion about re-opening as a producer co-op, but this suggestion was lost in the shuffle, and a buyer 'Serious Materials' was found. The new owner, however, was rather lackadaisical about finding markets, and the factory was once more in financial difficulty. Serious decided to close and loot the plant. The workers responded once more by occupying the premises, ensuring the machines stayed where they are. In the end management relented and agreed to a 90 day extension in which it is hoped a new operator will be found.

The workers were joined by other UE, members and others from Occupy Chicago, and they called the bluff of a group of police sent to evict them. This demonstrates once again the effectiveness of workplace occupation as a tactic to bring stubborn bosses to the bargaining table. Such actions should be much more common than they are today. It is also an obvious conclusion that the most stable and enduring resolution of such disputes would be the establishment of producer co-ops. This would hopefully become a goal for labour in ordinary times and not just when a firm is in financial crisis.

For now here is the story of what happened from Labor Notes.

*************************
UE Occupies Chicago Window Plant Again, and Wins Reprieve

Members of the United Electrical Workers won another reprieve for a Chicago window factory, re-occupying the plant they famously held in 2008.

UE Local 1110 members took over the Serious Materials plant yesterday after being told by local management that the factory would close immediately.

When they were confronted with the same news in 2008, workers voted unanimously to occupy their workplace, guarding the machines at the former Republic Windows and Doors for six days until the major creditor, Bank of America, released $1.75 million in wages and benefits owed the workers.

Republic sold the plant to Serious and workers celebrated as the first sit-down strike in years won a favorable settlement in the teeth of the great recession.

This week’s plant closing came with no warning. The union got a call from the boss that he wanted a meeting, but he wouldn’t say why. Officers and UE staff were summoned to the offices of the notorious union-busting law firm Seyfarth and Shaw at 9 a.m. yesterday.

There executives said they would close the plant, effective immediately. Workers would be put on leave while management dismantled the window-making machinery and shipped it to the company’s other plants in Pennsylvania and Colorado.

Workers would be paid what they were owed under the WARN Act, which requires employers to provide notice 60 days ahead of plant closings and mass layoffs. (The penalty for violations is up to two months of pay and benefits.)

But the provisions typically only apply to businesses that would lay off 50 or more.

Illinois has a stronger law, which requires notice when 25 or more full-time employees will lose their jobs, and gives the director of the state labor department the right to investigate the company’s books.

Management provided nothing in writing to back up its promises.

Union officers—Armando Robles, Ricky Maclin, and Vicente Rangel—and staffers spent three hours arguing with management that the closure was unacceptable. Serious had a legal and moral obligation to do more to try to save the jobs, they said.

“We wanted to find a buyer,” said UE rep Leah Fried, “but they were not interested. They said it was not an option.”

Meanwhile, the Serious workers were building windows inside the plant.

February is not a big time for demand for windows, and their numbers were down to 38 after a recent layoff. Only 75 of the original 240 workers had ever been called back after Serious bought the plant from Republic.


All Out

President Robles and Fried left the meeting with management Thursday and began calling laid-off workers, asking them to come to the plant. At 2 p.m., the end of the shift, 50 workers met to discuss their options.

Robles presented them soberly: Do nothing, or fight—stay and occupy the plant again. Without much hullabaloo, matter-of-factly, the members voted unanimously to occupy.

They had no food, no sleeping bags. Workers and leaders immediately started to phone fellow workers, allies, and the media. They called the local alderman and asked others to alert the mayor’s office. Occupy Chicago came with tacos. Stand Up Chicago arrived.

Workers from other UE locals, including recently organized railroad van drivers, were there. Republic workers who’d never been called back to Serious but who still came to union meetings were there. The crowd inside grew to 65 and outside to 100.

UE regional president Carl Rosen called Serious’s CEO Kevin Surace at headquarters in California and asked, “Do you really want to go this route? If it comes to it, we’ll be dragged out and arrested.”

Fried wondered if Serious understood who they were dealing with. “These are people who won’t take this lightly,” she said. “They take this personally. They need jobs. And the political climate has changed. Now there’s a whole Occupy movement that was inspired by us. We’re sort of ground zero of Occupy.”

Meanwhile, local management called the police. A half dozen cops informed the workers that they had five minutes to decide whether to leave peacefully or get arrested.

They didn’t make good on the threat, but they refused to let the pizzas provided by Stand Up Chicago inside until a local pastor intervened, as local TV news cameras whirred. “Let the workers eat!” chanted the crowd.

The cops backed off but wouldn’t let anyone leave and then go back inside.

By 5 p.m. a crowd had gathered outside. Occupy Chicago started to raise tents, showing how a culture to prepare and stick it out has developed since the last occupation, Fried said. The cold rain started to freeze.

Inside, workers played dominoes and tried to watch the coverage on an old, snowy TV. They had plenty of donated food—enough to share with their supporters outside.

Negotiations shifted when corporate decision makers got on the phone. Management in California took over, apparently deciding they didn’t want a big showdown.

At 1 a.m., a tentative agreement was reached that met all of the workers’ concerns. The plant will remain open, making windows, for 90 days. That’s in writing.

Serious is committed to finding new ownership. Local union leaders are also interested in the possibility of a worker-run enterprise and are talking with consultants who specialize in converting factories to co-ops.

Serious said it had never been able to get a foothold in Chicago and Midwest markets. Workers for years had offered help and suggestions, to no avail.

“We started the morning with the plant closing and ended the day with work and a chance to save our jobs,” said Robles. “We are committed to finding a new buyer for the plant or if we can, buy the place ourselves and run it. Either way, we are hopeful.”

IMAGES:

THE CORPORATE RESPONSE:

ART:

POLICING:

As in keeping "someone's peace.

CANADIAN POLITICS:

THE REAL LAST MAN STANDING:

It turns out that I was wrong about Winnipeg being the last Occupy camp in Canada. Recently the authorities have evicted a camp in Fredricton New Brunswick. This leaves one more still up and running ie Occupy Newfoundland in St. Johns. The Newfoundland authorities say that they have no plans to move on this encampment.

Sighhhhh ! My local patriotism is shot to hell. Still it is gratifying to learn that at least one group continues to brave the Canadian winter. The weather here on the prairies has been weirdly balmy, but it is still cold enough to freeze the balls off a polar bear. Meanwhile down in the one town I have ever seen that has an entire street devoted to bars our fishy comrades hang on in a damp place where zero there equals minus 15 out here. I raise a glass of Screetch and toast them.

Hey all you readers ! Drop Occupy Newfoundland a line to tell these tough buggers that they ain't forgotten. Aside from the website link above you can reach them at their Facebook page.

THE NEW YEAR'S SPECTRE:

Perhaps the ghost of New Years Yet To Come ?

LOCAL NEWS:

THE LAST MAN STANDING:

Last Wednesday December 21 the Province of Manitoba finally moved to evict Occupy Winnipeg from Memorial Park at, of course, 7:00 am. According to what I read Occupy Winnipeg was the last Occupy camp to be evicted in Canada. Not bad strategy on the part of the City and Province actually, especially considering the dispute about who is responsible for "peace"-keeping on Provincial land within the City. In the end Manitoba Conservation and the Winnipeg City Police outnumbered the hardy souls, three in number, who were still braving the cold in the early morning by 10 to one. Once more the mosquito was swatted with a sledgehammer.

Unlike other cities Winnipeg (along with the Province) elected to let cold and the street demons deal with their problem which they did in the end. Other jurisdictions elected to apply the iron fist much earlier. As can be seen this delaying tactic was, from the point of view of authority, much less damaging to said authority than showing off earlier. The final decision to evict was because of what I believe was fire number three at the site. The most likely arsonists are the street demons, especially those who were previously booted out.

The wife and I actually visited the site only three times, twice to bring food and once for a failed offer to cook Christmas dinner for them. On the last evening visit I saw evidence of the security patrols that they had instituted to try and prevent further arson, though Molly thinks that a weapon is better to clear thugs than a dragged along kid (for sure). If Occupy here and elsewhere want to attempt this tactic again in the Spring instead of moving on to new things as many have done they're going to have to be a lot better at security next time around. That, however, may be beside the point as many (most ?) locations are already doing new things. For local updates you can still check out the Occupy Winnipeg Facebook page.

INTERNATIONAL POLITICS:

2011: A YEAR OF REVOLUTION:

2011 was a remarkable year. As revolutions sparked throughout the Arab world the "lower" classes of many other countries also rose up as evidenced in Europe, North America and South America and now even in Russia. In sum there hasn't been so much opposition to power for decades. It's hard to say where this will all lead. As the following article says the year has been quite remarkable, and few (nobody ?) could have predicted its events.

The following article is from the online magazine 'The Indypendent'. The reader should note that "Molyneux" is NOT "Mollymew"

**************************
2011: A Revolutionary Year
By John Molyneux
December 11, 2011 2011 will go down in history as a revolutionary year akin to 1848 and 1968: a year in which ordinary people round the world rose up against their governments and ruling elites – their respective 1%s.

Politically speaking, the year began on 17 December 2010 when a young vegetable seller called Mohamed Boazzizi set fire to himself in the southern Tunisian city after police confiscated his stall. What followed was unpredicted by any commentator, left, right or centre. The tone of the first Reuters report make this clear:

Police in a provincial city in Tunisia used tear gas late on Saturday to disperse hundreds of youths who smashed shop windows and damaged cars, witnesses told Reuters.There was no immediate comment from officials on the disturbances. Riots are extremely rare for Tunisia, a north African country of about 10 million people which is one of the most prosperous and stable in the region.

Twenty two days later on 14 January, after riots, demonstrations, violent clashes with security forces and finally mass strikes had spread across Tunisia, the country’s dictator, Zinedine Ben Ali, who had ruled for 23 years with full support from the West, fled to Saudi Arabia. The Arab Spring had started.

Eleven days later on Tuesday 25 January vast numbers of Egyptians poured onto the streets of Cairo, Alexandria and Suez. They were, of course, met with brutal repression but they fought back. It was the beginning of the Egyptian Revolution. All the commentators agreed that the Egyptian dictator, Hosni Mubarak, would not be a push over like Ben Ali.

However, by Friday 28th, after three to four days and nights of intensive street fighting and many deaths, the hated police were defeated: in Cairo where the people claimed and held Tahrir Square; in Suez where the main police station was burned down, and across Egypt. The police fled the streets. Mubarak was on the rocks.

Then on Wednesday 2 February Mubarak and his regime counter attacked. They mobilised thousands of ‘supporters’ – in reality paid thugs and plain clothes police – to launch an all out assault, on horses and camels, with machetes, iron bars, whips and rocks, on the people of Tahrir. It became known as ‘the Battle of the Camel’, but once again the people, thanks to great courage and great numbers won the day.

Still Mubarak clung on, infuriating the people with speeches in which, despite rumours that he would resign, he insisted he would continue. Street demonstrations became ever larger – it has been estimated that, all told, 15 million people took part. Then on 9-10 February, the Egyptian workers began to go on mass strike. This was the coup de grace. On 11 February the military dumped their leader. It was only 18 days after the start of the revolution, four less than it took to remove Ben Ali.

On 16 February protests against Gaddafi began in Benghazi and quickly turned into an uprising. On the 25 February there were mass protests – ‘Days of Rage’ – in cities right across the Middle East., including in Sana’a in Yemen, in Bahrain, in Iraq (where six were killed), in Jordan and also back in Tunisia and Egypt. At this moment the march of the Arab Spring seemed unstoppable and it has to be said that if the rest of 2011 had continued the way it began we would all be living in a very different world today.

Unfortunately, as well as ordinary people, there are also rulers and ruling classes and they fight back. The Gaddafi regime, in particular, fought back with terrible ferocity. In Tripoli his armed forces remained loyal and he simply mowed the Libyan revolutionaries down in the Square. By 20 February over 230 were dead. The rebels gained control of Benghazi and other cities but Libya was divided and in the civil war that followed Gaddafi’s superior conventional forces gained the upper hand to the point where they were threatening Benghazi. Meanwhile the Bahrainis of Pearl Square, like the Egyptians of Tahrir before them, were in the process of overwhelming their local police force.

At this point the forces of Western Imperialism, fronted by Sarkozy, took the initiative. In mid-March, under the guise of a ‘humanitarian intervention’, they mounted a sustained air assault on Libya which eventually had the effect of destroying the Gaddafi regime and handing power to the Transitional National Council, while simultaneously taming and putting a pro- western stamp on the Libyan Revolution. Meanwhile the Saudis, in what was probably a coordinated move, marched into neighbouring Bahrain and crushed the revolution.

Nevertheless the Arab Spring was by no means exhausted. Mass struggles escalated in Yemen and then in Syria, struggles which continue, at the cost of thousands of martyrs, to this day. In both cases the dictators, Saleh in Yemen and Azzad in Syria, clung on with great brutality and determination, and in both cases the popular movement has shown immense courage and resilience with the result that in both there has been a kind of deadly stalemate. At the time of writing the regimes appear to be slowly disintegrating, but so far the revolutions have not yet seen the mass strikes that were decisive in Egypt. At the same time there are rumblings of revolt in Saudi Arabia itself.

On 15 May things took a different turn. The spirit of Tahrir Square leaped across the Mediterranean to Spain when thousands of protesters set up camp in Puerta del Sol in Madrid, proclaiming that ‘They (the politicians) don’t represent us!’ and demanding ‘Real democracy now’. When the police beat the protesters the movement took off like wildfire and squares right across the Spanish state were occupied, with hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, mobilised in their support. As they said ‘Nobody expected the Spanish Revolution’.

Next, less surprisingly, the revolt started to interact with the already high level of workers’ resistance in Greece. More mass demonstrations, riots, and general strikes followed as the crisis of Greek capitalism rapidly intensified.

Another unexpected development in the Summer was outbreak of mass protests over housing and other issues in Israel. Then in September the struggle made the leap across the Atlantic in the shape of Occupy Wall St. Again it was police repression, especially the arrest of 700 demonstrators on Brooklyn Bridge on 1 October, which fuelled the flames and led to ‘Occupies’ across America. Crucially organised labour identified with and actively supported the struggle, producing the highpoint of the Oakland General Strike of 2 November.

In Britain the struggle has also been rising. The past year has seen mass student protests, a 750,000 strong trade union anti-cuts demo in March, a big public sector strike on 30 June, the August riots, and now an even bigger strike on November 30. With 2 million workers out this was the largest strike since 1926, won huge popular support [61% according to a BBC poll] and was accompanied by unprecedented demonstrations nationwide, eg 20,000 in Bristol, 10,000 in Brighton, 10,000 in Dundee. In Northern Ireland there was the important development of 10,000 or so Catholic and Protestant workers uniting in Belfast. The week before there was the small matter of a general strike in Portugal.

While all this has been happening the Egyptian revolution has deepened and developed. From a struggle against Mubarak it has become a struggle against the military, the independent unions have grown and – so far- all attempts to crush the movement by force have been heroically repelled.

The explanation for this global tidal wave of revolt is essentially very simple. The international capitalist system is in profound crisis and the 1%, the ruling class, everywhere is trying to make the rest of us pay for it and in place after place people are fighting back. From Tahrir to Oakland we are feeding on the inspiration of each other’s resistance. Confidence is rising and for the first time in a generation revolution is back on the agenda.

For us in Ireland this raises a question. We have been hit harder than most by the crisis and attacks of the 1%, so why has there not so far been mass revolt? In February we saw an expression of mass discontent at the ballot box with the election of 5 United Left Alliance TDs but there have not yet been masses on the streets. The answer seems to lie in the interaction of three factors- the legacy of the Celtic tiger, the years of trade union/government social partnership and the shameful refusal of the union leaders to initiate resistance – which together have led to a certain mood of bitter resignation.

But here we need to remember that in any wave of struggle, 1848, 1968 or 2011, there are always places or times when little seems to be happening – not just Ireland but Sweden and Russia for example (though there is unrest growing in China) – and this can easily change.[Since this was written, as if to prove the point, mass protests against Putin have erupted from Moscow to Vladivostok} ‘Nobody expected,’ Tunisia or Egypt or Spain or Occupy Wall St. And resignation is not agreement, it suddenly turn into its opposite when an unforeseen spark gives people the confidence that what they do will make a difference.

One thing is certain the year and years to come will see many such sparks. The economic crisis of capitalism, merging with the crisis of climate change is rapidly becoming a crisis of the whole of humanity. So the great slogan of Tahrir Square ‘Revolution until Victory!’ has the potential and need to become a slogan for us all.

PERSONAL:

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT PART FIVE:

One thing I am certain of about the Occupy Movement (much more certain than how it will all end up) is that it has finally leapfrogged over the leftist concerns of the last few decades and their petty territorial politics. Those who are not leftists will be puzzled by this formulation. Others who are comfortable in leftist ghettos will be offended. Many of us who identify with a "left tradition"will be more than happy that someone has broken the silence.

What do I mean by the puzzling formulation above ? I mean that the "left" in the past few decades has surrendered any hope of reaching the majority and has become quite comfortable with drawing academic income (or worse quango income). For its personal comfort it has abandoned any idea of large scale social change and has become satisfied with the- let's call them for what they are- "opportunities for corruption". All that is required is to continue to pump out the same old propaganda about the "unique oppression" of social group a to m.

Yeah it makes money for some, but that's all it does. Suddenly there comes a political movement out of nowhere that deliberately tries to address the vast majority of the population and their concerns. WOW; it's like being transported 70 years into the past.

Will it last ? Your guess is as good as mine. The Occupy Movement walks a tightrope between the hell of political co-option and the opposite hell of ineffective militancy. It's a golden mean. Wish them luck.

PERSONAL:

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT PART 4:

As the various Occupy camps fall one after another (a proof of the need for organization ?) to the various authorities it is perhaps about time to reflect on why these protests have gathered the sort of support that "the left" has failed to gather for decades. There are a lot of reasons, and I hope to comment on them in the future. For now, however, let's examine one of the key factors behind the success of the protests.

One of the key reasons behind the success of Occupy is that they have chosen a path of non-violence. This doesn't mean that they are automatically morally superior. It does, however, mean that they are rational enough to chose the most effective tactics. This really comes under the heading of good advice such as, "don't fart loudly in Church". In other words there is a time and place for everything. It should be obvious, but for some it is not.

I only feel this is noteworthy because I have seen otherwise sensible people disparage the Occupy movement because (rhetoric coming now) "it can't defend itself, as evidenced by the police crackdowns". Such a statement ignores two things. One is the obvious structure of reality that some seem to have been detached from particularly in North America. The simple FACT is that the so-called "self defense" tactics as advocated by that defend the actions of something like the Black Block have failed every single time over and over and over. Not once, not twice, not even 50 times but 100% of the time every time they are tried. At its worst the police let the BB vandalize things for a short period of time for the necessary propaganda value. Then the BB disappears and lets their allies take the heat. At its "best" the BB always loses for at the end of the spectacle the police still control the streets. Proving that you're crazy and you want to lose endless fights is not "self-defense". Some have defined this sort of behavior as a characteristic of insanity.

This disparagement of the Occupy movement is written from an emotional viewpoint, and the best that I can do is advise holders of such opinions to go outside their social circles and see with their own eyes how the vast majority looks on those who appear to be innocent victims of police violence as opposed to gangs fighting the cops and always losing. To their credit the majority of people involved in Occupy recognize that they are doing politics and not psychotherapy. Some may be under delusions about how nasty the police can be. Others may have "moral arguments" for their non-violence, but I really think that at least a large minority and possibly a majority recognize that the picture of police attacking non-violent people is "the shortest way to the goal of gathering public sympathy".

PERSONAL

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT PART 3

As I've mentioned before, both here and on my Facebook page, the very fact that the movement has refused to set up a list of demands to the power elite is a source of strength not weakness. What the Occupy movement is is a widely based challenge to the very power of that elite to direct society. It is not a delegation ,cap in hand, for whatever meagre reforms the elite my offer. The very lack of clarity that the movement is accused of is actually a formidable strength.

A consequence of this refusal to limit the movement's meaning to a shopping list is the amazing fact that the Occupy movement has touched the "Populist Chord" that the traditional left has been unable to play upon for decades. Looking at the participants one sees a broad cross section of society, and the "99%" slogan has caught on with a population not yet ready to camp out themselves. I have noticed a truly remarkable absence of the usual lefty private language and even the fractious "anti-isms" that doom most leftist movement. Those who have taken up this struggle obviously understand the value of unity, and they act accordingly. This has hardly been the case amongst the left of the last few decades, and it is a welcome breath of fresh air.

This lack of particular demands is actually quite unifying. The Occupy movement doesn't just demand a larger slice of the pie for groups a, b, and c. It says there is a whole different and better way to cook pies.

PERSONAL

WHAT I LIKE ABOUT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT (PART 2):

The first part of this series was published over at my Facebook page a little while ago. Yet a movement such as the 'Occupy' protests deserves far more than one comment. There is little doubt that this has become the most extensive political movement of the last century even if the number of participants says that it is not as intensive as many others. Yet, without plan, direction or control a worldwide movement has arisen that directly challenges class society worldwide. While anarchists, especially in Spain, have been at the forefront of this movement and while anarchist methods of organizing have become the accepted standard of the protesters it would be utterly false to say that this is solely an "anarchist movement". The central themes of the movement have been those that anarchism shares with a broad left consensus. The only "point of pride" is that anarchists have shown the way to a much broader constituency that actually extends far beyond the traditional left. This is "propaganda of the deed" at its best, without self-destructive violent acts, without the illusion of provoking an immediate uprising and without the arrogant supposition that the so-called "revolutionary vanguard" (cough, cough) are the posessors of all truth. In other words the Occupy movement is amazingly morally clean for a protest movement.

But one thing I would like to point out now is how what seems to external observers as a fault is actually a virtue. I am hardly the first to point this out, and I would like to refer the reader to the Bureau of Public Secrets website for a much more thorough discussion. What I refer to is a very frequent so-called "criticism" of the Occupy movement as to its lack of "specific demands" and it seeming to be a collection point for a wide spectrum of grievances. All that I can say to this criticism is that it is "true" but it misses the point entirely. The Occupy movement has arisen as a broad protest against the inequalities and injustices of our present class societies. OF COURSE every interest group and demand will attach themselves to such a broad based movement. Perhaps even some of their activists will recognize the fact that their grievances cannot generally be solved under the present socioeconomic system.

Thus they attach themselves to a movement that (metaphorically) goes for the jugular because of the insufficiencies of their single interest group/issue groups. Make no mistake about it, the Occupy movement has "gone for the jugular". What it presents in a world diluted manner is the challenge to the representative "democracy" that revolutionary movements have laid out for almost 150 years (since the Paris Commune) ie the challenge of "direct democracy". This goes far beyond any simple reforms. It is not the question of whether the billionaires will pay their fair share of taxes. It is a question of how ordinary citizens can have enough influence to prevent any such perversions of law occuring.

The Occupy movement merely seems incoherant because its goals are far removed from what is usually considered "politics" in our societies. Its basic message is not this or that reform but rather a totally new way of "doing politics". The Movement Is The Message.