Winnipeg Wobbly

The Good Fight: The story of the Abraham Lincoln Brigade during the Spanish Civil War.

2011-05-09T13:27:00.000-07:00

Solidarity Federation - No Platform for Fascism

2011-03-24T09:21:00.000-07:00

This piece is from UK anarcho-syndicalist organization Solidarity Federation. While it deals with the neo-fascist British National Party, the lessons of how to deal with fascism is universal. Here in Canada, bonehead neo-nazis have yearly tried to organize "white pride" marches in Calgary, Alberta. And the people of Calgary have came out and proclaimed "¡No pasarán!"- They Shall Not Pass!

Building a direct acition union is building an anti-fascist union. There can be no room for racism, sexism, homophobia and hate in our society, in our communities and in our workplaces. Build the IWW - Build links with members of threatened communities - No Platform for Fascism!!

No Platform for Fascism

The British National Party is a fascist party and must be treated as such. Don’t be fooled by their growing electoral success. Don’t think that because “ordinary” people, and even non-racists, are voting for them and joining them that the party has somehow changed. Elected positions and an influx of “moderate” members will not transform the party.

In the BNP, power and policy flow from the top down and the party is run by veteran fascists who won’t deviate from their long held agenda. Whatever they say in public, these people are committed to creating an authoritarian regime, to severe limits on individual and collective freedom in every sphere of life, to racial segregation and eventual removal of non-white people. On top of this, the BNP has a stated commitment to maintaining capitalism and free enterprise, contradicting its claims to be an “alternative”, radical or even revolutionary party.
electoral politics

Yet the BNP will push its electoral strategy to the limit, seeking to capitalise on any and every source of voters’ fear and discontent. These range from local community concerns to disgust over MPs’ expenses, from fears about the economic crisis to concerns over immigration, radical Islam and terrorism. The BNP don’t care what the issue is, or whether people’s fears are justified; they just tailor the message in an attempt to win people over. This is what fascists have always done. They will use the electoral system, democratic “freedoms” and the notion of freedom of speech to put across their poisonous message, For as long as they can, they’ll portraying themselves as a democratic party, acting within the law and seeking to gain power by legal means. Ultimately, their aim is to silence all opposition.
strategy of tension

Yet BNP leaders know that there are limits to their electoral support, even in cases like the recent Euro poll, where the voting system, low turnout, economic uncertainty and popular anger at the “political class” all played into their hands. They know that there will always be a majority opposing them.

How then, can they get around this? In the past, fascists have played the parliamentary game while also exacerbating tensions in society which they hoped would drive people into their camp. In Italy, in the 1920s and as recently as the 1980s, fascists sought to use class conflict, the strength of the left and the perceived threat of revolution to persuade powerful sectors of society, inside and outside of government and industry, to opt for an authoritarian “solution”. In the ’20s this “strategy of tension” worked, with Mussolini’s minority fascist party attacking the left and being hoisted to power by its influential conservative friends. In the ’80s it failed, but only at the cost of many lives, as fascist gangs and their allies in the state structure engaged in armed actions and bombings.

In Britain today, the organised working class has taken a battering and, despite some encouraging signs lately, cannot be painted as being about to seize control. How-ever, this won’t stop the BNP denouncing opposition to it as “red mobs” in an attempt to whip up fears of political violence on the streets. Two days after his election, BNP leader, Nick Griffin, was calling on police to “get a grip” on anti-fascist protestors – the first step in the authoritarian solution he advocates for all Britain’s ills. But the BNP’s main arena will be race and immigration. It will be here that they try to whip up fears of impending social conflict, of the destruction of “traditional” British values and institutions and of the “indigenous” population becoming a persecuted minority in its own country. Here, the BNP will be helped not just by the undercurrent of racism still present in British society, but by those sections of the media and the political elite which feed it on a daily basis with scare stories about everything from asylum seekers, immigrants and Islamists to the EU. Though these media outlets do not support the BNP, their expressions of nationalism and xenophobia inevitably play into the party’s hands.

But for fascists, even this fetid mix of fear and paranoia is not enough. They are already seeking to spice it up with racial violence on a frightening scale. The BNP argument will be helped enormously if they can point to actual conflict between ethnic groups, and moves are already afoot to provoke this. While the BNP itself will seek to retain its democratic and legalistic image, other far right groups, some linked to the party, some not, are already taking to the streets trying to ignite violence. The BNP will deny any ties with them, but will seize upon any resulting clashes to argue that multiculturalism doesn’t work, that black and Asian youth are attacking whites, and that the “indigenous” population can no longer tolerate this state of affairs.

On May 24th, groups calling themselves “March for England” and “United People of Luton” supported a protest in the Bedfordshire town over an earlier Muslim demo against troops returning from Afghanistan. Though some of the organisers denied this was a racist march, around 400 people, some masked, and including known fascists, assembled and roamed the streets waving British and English flags. Asian-owned shops and cars were attacked and police intevened to prevent the mob descending on the Bury Park area, a centre of the town’s Asian community. “March for England” have said they are planning future events.
new phase of conflict

This was barely reported by a mainstream media still playing down the BNP’s potential at the Euro elections, but it is a portent of what is to come and a clarion call to anti-fascists. We are entering a new phase of conflict with the far right and we must be absolutely clear about what we are doing and why. Fascism is about far more than racism, and a reinvigorated far right will not just focus on its perceived racial enemies. Its activists are already targeting radical bookshops, social centres and those on the left. Should the economic crisis deepen, especially in conjunction with the collapse of parliamentary “legitimacy” in the eyes of many and increased racial tension, elements of the state, business and conservatism will begin to contemplate supporting the BNP. By any assessment, this scenario is still far down the road, and circumstances may never bring it into being. But we can ensure that this cannot happen by attacking the BNP and its ilk now, by preventing them from organising and developing their strength, and thereby eliminating them as a potential or actual ally of other anti-working-class forces in society.

Defeating fascism is an integral part of building a revolutionary movement. It increases our combativeness, forces us to communicate our ideas to ever wider circles of potential sympathisers and exposes as false the liberal arguments that fascists have a right to “free speech”, that parliamentary democracy is a defence against the far right, and that relying on the forces of the state is the best way to protect working people from oppression and violence. We must close down fascism as a first step to ridding our class of all of the parasites currently exploiting us and living off our backs.
what is to be done?

Build SF – we have a great tradition of anti-fascism and must recruit on the basis of that and of our work today. We are the revolutionary alternative.

Support wider militant anti-fascist campaigns – that means Antifa (www.antifa.org.uk/) which already has many anarchist adherents. It’s the only national anti-fascist organisation with a policy of “no platform” for fascism, of not allowing the BNP to organise, speak or campaign without physical opposition. If there are like minded people in your area, form an anti-fascist group and get affiliated to Antifa.

New links with those threatened by fascism – the BNP seeks to “divide and rule”, preferring to defeat us piecemeal than to take on a united, militant anti-fascist movement. Anyone who agrees with “no platform”, whether part of organised anti-fascism before or not, now needs to organise around it. A primary responsibility for anti-fascists is to make direct links with communities which fascists will target. This does not mean going to “community leaders” (unless they genuinely back a no platform approach), but making efforts to draw in disaffected and angry members of those communities which militant anti-fascism has often previously struggled to connect with. We can much more quickly raise the numbers we need to swamp fascism by dramatically and imaginatively broadening our networks of supporters. New times call for new tactics and we must look outwards and break down barriers between people willing to confront the BNP.

No platform for fascists – don’t be conned by liberal notions of free speech or of appearing “anti-democratic” by preventing the BNP from organising or speaking. No measure of electoral success can be allowed to legitimise fascism. Organise direct action against all fascist manifestations – stalls, leafleting, meetings, venues, marches. We have made a good start with this. Griffin and Andrew Brons were forced from public view outside Westminster the day after the election. In Manchester the next day, they were boxed into a run down pub owned by a BNP supporter, only fending off protestors with the aid of the police. These protests were organised mainly by Unite Against Fascism, linked to the SWP and reformist trade unions. It has in the past sought to prevent direct action so it remains to be seen whether the BNP’s electoral success will prompt it to take “no platform” more literally.

Keep up the pressure – Griffin says of anti-fascists that “in the end they will get bored”. He clearly intends to put across the party’s message in Britain, rather than jet off to Brussels and fiddle expenses. This will be a crucial contest of will with a BNP desperately trying to be an accepted and permanent feature of the political landscape, to “normalise” and “decontaminate” itself in order to rise up the greasy political pole. Anti-fascists must wreck this strategy at all costs.

Strike looms at University of Winnipeg - Build Student Solidarity!

2011-03-09T17:26:00.000-08:00

Around the world, the powers-that-be are telling us that we are the ones who are to 'take the hit' for the crisis they created. The fight for higher wages by faculty members is the same fight for lower fees and tuition freezes by students. Rather then strangle more and more profit out of the workers of the Knowledge Factory, it's time to stand by our union and say "ENOUGH!" Teachers and students are saying it in Madison, it's time to do it here in Winnipeg, home of Canada's labour movement and the Winnipeg General Strike.

Tommorow will be student solidarity pickets with the UWFA. Here's the information:

Students Supporting the UWFA on Strike

Time	Thursday, March 10 · 8:00am - 12:30pm

Location	Picket Lines, The University of Winnipeg



More Info	If a strike ensues tomorrow morning, ALL student supporters who wish to publicly demonstrate our support with UWFA should meet at 8 am in front of Wesley Hall (Portage Avenue) and join the picket lines alongside our professors. Remember, we have to find a faculty member in an ORANGE VEST and let them know that we are picketing with them. In the event of a strike (the deadline remains firm for Thursday, March 10th at 12:01 a...m), students of the University of Winnipeg who choose to participate, plan to join the picket lines alongside our professors in order to support them and stand in solidarity with them. Students and workers unite! ****If students wish to participate in picketing, they must report to a picket captain (faculty member wearing an orange vest) on any one of the designated picket lines/locations. The sites include Ellice Avenue, Wesley Hall (in front of the UW), Buhler Centre (Portage and Memorial) and the new science/environment building near the residences. The goal of the strike is to express the right to freedom of expression and association while educating the public about UWinnipeg's labour issues. Anyone who supports the UWFA and who is willing to obey laws/rules on picketing is welcome! The goal is to communicate the inequities that U of W employees experience both to the public and to the employer (administration). Judging by the amount of students who participated in Monday's (March 7th) UWFA Solidarity March with faculty members and professors at the University of Winnipeg, it appears that many students support UWFA in their fight for equal wages (to professors with similar education levels across the province of Manitoba and across Canada) and fair treatment in the workplace. In this time of tension between the University of Winnipeg administration and members of UWFA, I believe it is important for students to show their support for the decision to take strike action. It is important that students and workers maintain unity amongst one another. We must take a stand by supporting our professors on the picket line (if you choose to do so, or by simply standing in solidarity and expressing support for the faculty) as we believe that our professors deserve equal treatment! They do not deserve to be one of the lowest paid faculties in Canada. That is an injustice and we will not support such an injustice. A strong student presence on the picket lines is critical to shaping public opinions about the strike. Students who choose to do so, will be demonstrating our disapproval of the University of Winnipeg’s poor treatment of our valued educators by standing alongside them on the picket lines. We will stand united with our professors as we support quality of education for all Canadians and the basic principles of fairness for all workers. As students and supporters of UWFA, let’s make a statement and demonstrate our support for faculty members on strike! Here are the rules of picketing: http://strike.uwfa.ca/storage/Picket%20Captain%20ManualPickets.pdf Supporters are encouraged to join the picket line in support of UWFA but they must follow all rules and the direction of the picket captains at all times. Picketing tentative schedule: http://strike.uwfa.ca/storage/march8picketschedule.pdf Winnipeg Police Labour Relations Brochure: http://strike.uwfa.ca/storage/PolicePamphletLaboutRelations.pdf UWFA Strike Page: http://strike.uwfa.ca/picketing/ UWSA Strike Information: http://theuwsa.ca/about/uwnegotiations UWFA Labour Talks: http://www.uwinnipeg.ca/index/uwfa-labour-talks

As a strike looms by the University of Winnipeg Faculty Association at the University of Winnipeg, the Winnipeg IWW makes the

:::WOBBLY OFFER::::

Any University of Winnipeg Faculty on strike, any students at the university, our blog is an open forum for you! Share your experiences on the picket line, the morale, share the fight with the world: email winnipegiww@iww.org and have your voice heard.

CNT Solidarity Statement to Wisconsin's Workers

2011-02-28T06:00:00.000-08:00

from madison.iww.org

CNT Solidarity Statement to Wisconsin's Workers

Confederación Nacional del Trabajo
Adherida a la Asociación Internacional de los Trabajadores
Secretariado Permanente del Comité Confederal
C/ Historiador Domínguez Ortíz, 7 local – 14002 - Córdoba
Tel: 636 426 777 – Fax: 942 940 983 – exteriores@cnt.es

The National Committee of Confederación Nacional de Trabajo CNT, Spain would like to take this opportunity to greet the American workers who have taken a stand against aggressions to their rights as laborers and especially to their right to organize. We believe the workers' struggle has to take place in their own midst, not dictated from above by their bosses, not from the upper hemispheres by their governmental “representatives” and not from their union “leaders”. As Madison is showing, the workers' can defend themselves just fine, all by themselves, are not lacking in solidarity and know how to react when attacked.

As anarchosyndicalists we believe in that the workers need to join and fight together, pick their own battles, decide how to fight those battles and, ultimately, control their own jobs and work-places. Our revolutionary aims – the overthrow of capitalism and its faithful servant the state and the establishment of anarchy – do not prevent us from standing with and behind any grass-roots workers' struggle, anywhere in the world as and when they arise and we would like to do so now, with the public servants of Wisconsin who have rightly rejected Governor Walker's poorly veiled assault on the rights they earned through more than a 100 years of battles in the streets and in the shops.

We hope that this battle succeeds in stopping the Governor's plans and that it rides the momentum to go one step further and ask for more, take more, take what is rightfully its own. To do that, you don't need leaders telling you what to do, not leaders in the big establishment unions, not leaders on the capitol. You just need each other, you need horizontal organization, mutual aid and self-management. The right to organize is the right to control over our own work and, fundamentally, the right to a free human society.

Buenventura Durruti said in 1936 that the workers weren't worried about “the ruins, because we're destined to inherit the earth and we carry a new world in our hearts...a world that is growing right now.” All of our solidarity in your struggle to plant the seeds for that new world.

Salud y apoyo mutuo.

http://madison.iww.org/sites/default/files/CNT%20solidarity%20with%20Madison.pdf

General Strike Madison! Solidarity!

2011-02-22T15:25:00.000-08:00

Order Winnipeg IWW shirt Online!

2011-02-21T17:25:00.000-08:00

Show your prairie union pride with an official T-shirt of the Winnipeg General Membership Branch. Proceeds benefit the Winnipeg GMB!

Visit the IWW Online store and order yours today!

The Coming Insurrection at the University of Manitoba

2011-02-14T13:46:00.000-08:00

rumbles of strikes are coming from the bastions of higher education. The following piece was originally featured in the Winnipeg Wobbly Newsletter.

As always when ever the class struggle flairs up, the here at the Winnipeg IWW make the Wobbly Offer: For all workers at the university of Winnipeg, if you need a uncensored voice, we have space to you! Gripes about management, conditions, news Email us at winnipegiww@iww.org

The Coming Insurrection at the University of Manitoba
By X359910

It is likely that this fall will see a wave of strikes and/or lockouts at the University of Manitoba. Contracts for all the major unions on campus (Canadian Auto Workers local 3007, CUPE 3909, the Association of Employees Supporting Education Services, and the University of Manitoba Faculty Association) expire within only a couple months.

While poor working conditions are often the norm at the University, with CAW 3007 in particular having to go on strike at nearly every contract negotiation, labour relations on campus have been even worse than usual as of late. As an indication to just how bad they have gotten, the security staff affiliated with AESES-Security Services were locked out after rejecting a pro-posed contract in August. Already under-staffed for campus the size of the Univer-sity of Manitoba, the university administra-tion was trying to reduce staffing levels even further – despite safety concerns such as a stabbing last year. As AESES has not been on strike since the 1970s, the univer-sity administration called in scabs, and the University was able to force concessions onto AESES-Security, this is an indication that we‘re in for an offensive by the univer-sity administration at a level unseen in a long time.

Another major irritant in terms of labour relations at the University of Manitoba is the ROSE/OARS project, meant to increase ―efficiency‖ in university operations. Of course, we all know what administration means by ―efficiency‖ – reducing staffing, reducing services, and contracting out to private corporations which are more expen-sive than keeping staff on hand. ROSE/OARS must be seen for what it is: an em-ployer offensive and an attempt by admini-stration to force cutbacks onto students and workers.

In short, the university is affected not just by the neoliberal agenda of the outside world which has resulted in governments under-funding post-secondary education for dec-ades, but also internal ideologies of neoliberalism in miniature which permeate the University administration. We can see these ideas at play in various attacks on University workers, as well as privatization of university services such as the contracting out of education for international students to Navitas, a large multinational corporation, under the guise of the International College of Manitoba a few years ago. If the univer-sity administration were simply trying to do their best with limited funds, they wouldn‘t be doing things such as contracting out ser-vices which unionized, full time staff can do more efficiently.

A battle is brewing at the university. On one side, we have the unions on campus, allied with UMSU. How effective they are in defending their membership will in large part come down to how united they are. As there is very little to speak of in terms of politicization and social move-ments on the U of M campus, this will also be a test for UMSU of how well the leadership will able to overcome the various forces that push the student un-ion bureaucracies towards fuzzy, inof-fensive institutional politics and how well they will be able to mobilize their mem-bership in support of striking workers. If no one blinks, there is a good chance that a broad student-labour alliance can create some meaningful resistance to the neoliberal agenda of the admini-stration and possibly avert a long, paralyzing strike.

On the other side, we have the Univer-sity administration, led by David Bar-nard. Barnard is generally considered to be an administration hatchet-man, given his implementation of ROSE/OARS not too long after being appointed. It is beyond doubt that the university administration would love to ―discipline labour at the university, which will likely involve an aggressive position during collective bargaining and the hiring of scab labour, used during the AESES security strike this year and the CAW strike in 2007.

The University administration will undoubtedly try to play students and workers against each other, by blaming workers salaries for tuition increases and employer offensives on tuition not being high enough. While clearly workers and bosses have nothing in common, it is just as important for students not to identify with the administration. They aren‘t some neu-tral body trying to make the best decisions they can to increase the quality of education, they see us as revenue generating units – numbers on a balance sheet, which the university often tries to squeeze more cash out of (such as their attempts to increase tuition in 13 faculties this summer, of which 11 were defeated). Fortunately, unlike the Manitoba Federation of Labour, the cam-pus locals are more or less supportive of the student unions positions on tuition.

At the end of the day, the battle will come down to one of unity and mobilizations. If a student-labour alliance is able to hold together and mobilize resistance, we have a shot at blocking the egregious attacks on University workers. But if the admini-stration is successful at driving a wedge between students and workers, or if we fail to mobilize resistance to neoliberal agendas, both within the University and in broader society, we will both be in for a massive defeat.

X359910 is a student at the University of Manitoba

300 migrants in hunger strike in greece

2011-02-06T19:42:00.000-08:00

On 25th of January 2011 migrants started a hungerstrike in Athens and in Thessaloniki. Solidarity actions will be heald across Europe on Feburary 11th in support of migrant rights.

300 migrants in hunger strike in Greece

We are migrant men and women from all over Greece. We came here due to poverty, unemployment, wars and dictatorships. The multinational companies and their political servants did not leave another choice for us than risking 10 times our lives to arrive in Europe's door. The West that is depriving our countries while having much better living conditions is our only chance to live as humans. We came (either with regular entry or not) in Greece and we are working to support ourselves and our families. We live without dignity, in the darkness of illegalness in order to benefit employers and state's services from the harsh exploitation of our labor. We live from our sweat and with the dream, some day, to have equal rights with our Greek fellow workers.

During the last period our life has become even more unbearable. As salaries and pensions are cut and everything is getting more expensive, the migrants are presented as those to blame, as those whose fault is the abjection and harsh exploitation of greek workers and small businessman. The propaganda of fascist and racist parties and groups is nowadays the official state discourse for issues of migration. The far right discourse is reproduced through media when they talk about us. The "proposals" of the far right are announced as governmental policies: wall in Evros, floating detention centers and European army in the Aegean, repression in the cities, massive deportations. They want to convince greek workers that, all in a sudden, we are a threat to them, that we are to blame for the unprecedented attack from their own governments.

The answer to the lies and the cruelty has to be given now and it will come from us, from migrant men and women. We are going in the front line, with our own lives to stop this injustice. We ask the legalization of all migrant men and women, we ask for equal political and social rights and obligations with greek workers. We ask from our greek fellow workers, from every person suffering from exploitation to stand next to us. We ask them to support our struggle. Not to let the lie, the injustice, the fascism and the autarchy of the political and economic elites to be dominant in their own places too; all these conditions that are dominant in our countries and led us to migrate, us and our children, in order to be able to live with dignity.

We don't have another way to make our voices heard, to make you learn about our rights. Three hundred (300) of us will start a Hunger Strike in Athens and in Thessaloniki, in the 25th of January. We risk our lives, as, one way or another, this is no life for people with dignity. We prefer to die here rather our children to suffer what we have been through.

January 2011
Assembly of migrant hunger strikers

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Winnipeg IWW meeting time change

2011-01-17T12:13:00.000-08:00

This is an important notice to all those interested in getting involved with the I.W.W. We have moved our regular meeting date from the second Thursday of each month to the second Friday of each month, still at 5:30.

We look forward to seeing you out next month and to build the One Big Union for radical change!

Honoring MLK Day: Union Victory at starbucks

2011-01-15T22:23:00.000-08:00

While we don't celebrate MLK Day in Canada, it's important to recognize the contributions to human freedom and the struggle against oppression that his memory represents and the important victory in Starbucks of getting this day recognized by the boss.

Honoring MLK Day
Union Victory at Starbucks

By DANIEL GROSS

Three years ago, union baristas at Starbucks made a simple demand of the world's largest coffee chain: respect the federal holiday honoring Martin Luther King Jr. by paying baristas the same time-and-one-half holiday premium that you pay on six other federal holidays. It was an emotional and symbolic demand to make for two reasons. Many baristas are deeply inspired by Dr. King's legacy on racial equality, and King was murdered while supporting sanitation workers who were on strike for the very right to form a union. This is the same struggle facing millions of Americans today who desire union membership but are denied by the prospect of relentless union-busting and terribly flawed labor laws. Calling for holiday pay on MLK Day also made sense for workers' pocket books- with the low wages and inadequate work hours that Starbucks offers, holiday compensation is certainly welcomed to help make ends meet.

Starbucks' treatment of MLK Day as a second-class holiday was particularly hypocritical. The company and its billionaire CEO Howard Schultz pay an incredible amount of lip-service to the idea of "embracing diversity." Yet, their lack of respect for Dr. King's holiday was typical of the company's real orientation towards racial equality. For example, Starbucks employees of color are disproportionately represented in the lowest-paid entry-level jobs at the company, and while the company brands its coffee as ethically-sourced, farmworkers in the Global South growing coffee for Starbucks find themselves living in grinding poverty on the low prices that the coffee giant insists on paying.

Given the empty nature of Starbucks' commitment to "embracing diversity", the company was put into a difficult position when the IWW Starbucks Workers Union (SWU) called on it to honor Dr. King's holiday starting in 2008. The company had never spoken publicly about its substandard treatment of MLK Day. When the Union made Starbucks' MLK Day policy public, the company was faced with two options, neither of which it liked: a) refuse to pay the premium and allow a glaring hypocrisy to fester in the public arena, or b) pay the premium and concede an important victory to the SWU which it is fighting tooth and nail to delegitimize and to destroy.

For three full years, the company chose the former approach and resisted. The SWU's campaign forced the company for the first time to discuss publicly its denial of holiday pay on MLK Day and offer a defense for the indefensible. Starbucks argued that the policy was justifiable in light of the (abysmally low) prevailing standards of the food service sector. It's interesting that when Starbucks markets itself to prospective workers and prices products for its customers, it's fanatical about distinguishing itself from its fast food competitors. But the Burger Kings and the Taco Bells of the world are where Starbucks runs for safety to cover up the huge gap between the company's public relations hype and the reality on the ground for baristas.

In response to the company's refusal to meet its demand, the SWU along with Industrial Workers of the World members around the country embarked on a determined effort to win time-and-one-half holiday pay for every worker that does a shift on MLK Day. Shop floor actions, pickets, rallies, massive e-mail actions, as well as creative media advocacy started takings its toll on the company. But instead of doing the right thing and ending the second-class status of MLK Day, the company chose more rhetoric- statements about its respect for MLK and promoting volunteer service unrelated to social or economic justice on his holiday. That's the strategy of big business, the corporate non-profits, and the mainstream media: divorce Dr. King from his powerful actions for economic justice, racial equality, and peace in favor of a generic, non-confrontational charity model of "change" or "service".

The elites don't want us to know that the workers King was supporting during those fateful days in Memphis weren't hosting a charity car wash, they were withholding their labor and demonstrating against a violent, racist government that was denying them the very right to freely associate in the form of a labor union. They don't want us to know that King spoke out passionately for a living wage and against so-called right-to-work laws. They don't want us to recall Dr. King's words on the relationship between racism and union-busting: "...the labor-hater and labor-baiter is virtually always a twin-headed creature spewing anti-Negro epithets from one mouth and anti-labor propaganda from the other mouth."

As Starbucks and its public relations firm Edelman ruthlessly carry out a large-scale anti-union operation, they certainly don't want baristas to associate MLK Day with Dr. King's positive view on labor unions:

"The labor movement was the principal force that transformed misery and despair into hope and progress....The captains of industry did not lead this transformation; they resisted it until they were overcome."

Baristas persevered and continued carrying out creative and energetic actions year-after-year. After three years of struggle, Starbucks finally conceded to the Union's demand and informed workers in November that the company will pay the holiday premium to employees who work this Monday and every Martin Luther King Day. It's a moving and emotional victory for the Union to be able to honor Dr. King's legacy in our own modest way.

While there is still a long way to go to win good jobs at Starbucks, the victory is significant for the tens of thousands of Starbucks employees who will end up with some well-deserved additional money on their paychecks. And it's a great win for the solidarity unionism organizing model where rank & file workers organize their own unions and lead their own campaigns around workplace justice issues. Other fast food workers are following suit. IWW workers at the Jimmy John's sandwich chain in Minnesota initiated a demand this holiday season for a time-and-one-half premium on Christmas Eve and New Year's Day.

By one estimate, the holiday wage premium on MLK Day means Starbucks will pay something in the neighborhood of an additional one million dollars to employees each year. While a million dollars a year might not sound like a lot for a large corporation like Starbucks, it's a tremendous figure to win for a grassroots labor organization forging an innovative path to justice in the massive and unorganized fast food sector.

In these times of economic hardship and escalating attacks on workers' rights, I hope we can all pause on Dr. King's holiday to assess how we can honor his true legacy of movement action for social justice and the ultimate sacrifice he made to rise up in solidarity with the striking sanitation workers of Memphis. No one will do it for us, least of all the corporate executives and their social responsibility rhetoric. Another world is inevitable; if we do the hard work together to achieve it.

Daniel Gross is a former Starbucks barista and a member of the IWW Starbucks Workers Union, online at www.StarbucksUnion.org. He is the co-author with Staughton Lynd of "Labor Law for the Rank and Filer: Building Solidarity While Steering Clear of the Law" and "Solidarity Unionism at Starbucks," (artwork by Tom Keough), both available at www.pmpress.org.

A Movement in Trouble and a Perspective for Change

2011-01-11T17:39:00.000-08:00

From the blog section of our friends at New Socialist Group. There are some good ideas presented, and one must note that the IWW practices allot of perceptions in this piece, especially when it comes to union education, the IWW's Organizer Training program is something to look towards as a positive example. It's very much based in the struggles that workers have faced organizing primarily low-wage service sector workers. The OT program is one of the best things to come out of the IWW recently, which has pushed the IWW as well as broader working class organization forward.

Re-publication here does not necessarily imply political endorsement of NSG or the analysis of this piece.

A Movement in Trouble and a Perspective for Change

By David Camfield

The fall of 2010 saw millions of private and public sector workers and students in France take to the streets, walk out on strike and blockade roads and oil refineries.
The central focus of this highly-popular, weeks-long movement was the attack by President Nicolas Sarkozy's government on the country's public pension system. However, it also opposed the unjust policies of a government led by what many call a "president of the rich."

For weeks the top officials of France's array of union federations remained united in support of mass protests. Many grassroots union activists and the most militant union officials did what they could to broaden and escalate direct action. The protests and strikes didn't manage to stop the attack on pensions. But the outcome wasn't a defeat because the movement inflicted a lot of political damage on the government and strengthened the working-class movement.

The contrast with the workers' movement in Canada and Quebec today is glaring. Unions here are in trouble. There's no evidence that unions here are becoming more capable of building a mass movement against governments that make ordinary people pay for the global economic crisis.

It is true that the number of unionized workers hasn't been shrinking and that the decline in overall union density (the percentage of workers who are unionized) has been slow in recent years. This is not as bad as the situation in the US, where both union numbers and density have been falling for years. Union institutions remain generally stable, though some unions have lost large numbers of members and therefore income (for example, job losses reduced the CAW's membership from 265 000 in 2005 to 225 000 in 2009). This relative stability has contributed to complacency in some quarters about the state of unions in Canada and Quebec.

Signs of Decay

But such complacency is misguided. Membership numbers and density don't translate directly into dynamism and power. Even more disturbing than the slow erosion of union density are the signs that it is becoming more difficult for workers to use unions as organizations through which they can act collectively in their own interests. (I say more difficult because workers in Canada and Quebec have faced significant difficulties on this front ever since the 1940s, when workers' struggles won new rights for unions that came with new restrictions on union activity.)

"The movement has turned more inward, so lobbying becomes the actions," is how one union insider describes the situation. The union officialdom (officers and staff) today is often preoccupied with defending unions as institutions. A Hospital Employees Union staffer put it this way: "I think there's just a real lack of solidarity, and any real focus on representing workers and the working class, as opposed to how do we get through this and survive. So I see a lot of the survival of the union, the institution is at the top of people's minds instead of workers' rights being advanced."

This has many damaging repercussions. For example, unions pay even less attention to what most non-unionized wage-earners experience. About 20% of men and 32% of women whom Statistics Canada classifies as employees do not have full-time permanent jobs. This underestimates the problem because some people classified as "own-account self-employed" rather than employees are, in fact, wage-workers. Some union officials give lip service to the plight of such precariously-employed workers, but action is rare. Only 23% of part-time workers are unionized, compared to 31% of full-time wage-earners.

People of colour are significantly under-represented among unionized workers, at a time when the percentage of wage-earners that experiences racism is larger than ever before -- and growing. This has created a greater distance between unions and the non-unionized working class. So too has the decline of union density in the private sector, where most wage-earners are employed, to 16%. The dominance of older members within unions has also created a greater distance between many other workers and their unions.

Faced with increasingly aggressive employer demands, most of the union officialdom has come to accept concessions as inevitable (rather than seeing them as repugnant but sometimes forced on workers). This has a significant impact. As CAW Local 199 Vice President Bruce Allen has argued, "Workers did not form unions to go backwards" but "to defend their dignity, to defend what they have and to move forwards whenever possible." Union appeal suffers when unions become associated with giving concessions to employers without a struggle.

A related problem is that union officials, concerned about getting workers to accept give-backs, can undermine union democracy to ensure workers agree to the "right" decision. Union democracy has suffered in recent years as a result of concession-selling officials asserting their control.

Another worrying sign is how often union political action involves campaigning for whichever politicians are seen as the "lesser evil." This often results in giving uncritical backing to parties (Liberals, the NDP in some provinces, the PQ and BQ in Quebec) and candidates (such as former Toronto mayor David Miller) that get support from capitalists. Union political action today is rarely about trying to develop the working class as a force to change society. The rock-bottom standard of backing the "lesser evil" mirrors the low hopes that most workers have for what unions can accomplish through collective bargaining; both are evidence of how working-class expectations have been lowered by over three decades of attacks from business and government.

As the union officialdom has become more inward-looking, divisions between it and social justice activists outside the unions have deepened. This was visible in the mobilization against the G-20 summit in Toronto in June 2010. Perhaps most obvious was the way Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) President Ken Georgetti quickly condemned attacks on property by some protestors, while CLC criticism of the arrest of some 1100 people was muted and failed to challenge the state's efforts to criminalize dissent.

Taken together, these changes amount to a process of the decay of unions as working-class movement organizations. The process is uneven, but it is real.

This matters a lot, for two simple reasons. First, wage-earners and the unwaged are facing capitalists and governments whose determination to expand corporate profits and power has never been greater. All that workers currently have to defend themselves against this threat are unions and much smaller community-based organizations. Second, these are the only existing organizations which give workers any possibility of changing society in ways that reflect their needs and interests.

What Kind of Change?

How, then, does the working-class movement need to change? People who want workers' organizations here to mobilize like those in France did in the autumn of 2010 should work towards changes like these:

More democracy. If members do not control their own unions and other organizations, other people whose interests are not the same as theirs -- full-time officers and staff or, even worse, employers -- will. The power of working-class organizations, as Mike Parker and Martha Gruelle argue, "lies in the participation of members, and it requires democracy to make members want to be involved." Democratically running an organization teaches people new skills and boosts self-confidence. This makes them more likely to use their collective power. A culture in which people are encouraged to speak up, raise tough questions and debate issues in a respectful way is essential in the movement. Mistakes are inevitable, but in democratic organizations people can learn from mistakes and then make changes. The title of Parker and Gruelle's book on changing unions hits the nail on the head: Democracy is Power.
More activists. For the movement to become stronger, it needs more people to become active. Fernando Gapasin, who has been active in movements in the US for many years, believes "that there are two keys to developing activism. First, people have to come to the belief that change is necessary and second, that by their action they will contribute to the desired outcome." Effective activists are organizers, who can learn to organize others. They "understand that organizing is about organizing one person at a time. This means organizing people to organize other people."
Better activists. Most union education aims to help workers handle grievances and arbitration cases and negotiate contracts -- the stuff of contract unionism. Working-class movement activists, whether they are involved in unions or other organizations, need more than this. Rank and file activists need to be able to think and act for themselves, to be less dependent on full-time officers and staff. A lot of what activists need to learn about mobilizing democratically can only come from first-hand experience, through trial and error. Lessons learned through struggles need to be shared.
There is also much that cannot be learned just from personal experience (or which is much harder to learn this way), including a basic understanding of how capitalism works, what employers and governments are up to, different forms of oppression and the movement's history. All this calls for a different kind of education for activists than what most union education programs offer.
Grassroots leadership that reflects the working class. The activist layer in workplaces and neighbourhoods should be as diverse in terms of gender, ethno-racial identity, sexuality and occupation as the working class.
More militancy. Militant methods are active and assertive ones, like determined strikes, sit-ins and other kinds of direct action. Militancy is not -- contrary to how the term is often used in the corporate media - the same as violence. Militancy refers to the means people use to press for what they want, while radicalism refers to the ends people are trying to achieve.
More radicalism. Sam Gindin has suggested that "The other side has come to understand that... the choices are polarized. To defend their privileges, they've concluded that they must become more radical. We need to learn that same radical lesson, but, of course, from our own perspective." Being radical does not mean being violent or irrational. It means identifying the root causes of the problems people face and working towards fundamental change in how society is organized.
More independence. Workers need to become more aware that their interests are different from -- and opposed to - the interests of the dominant class. Because their interests are different, workers' organizations should try to be as independent as possible from employers, the legal system and the existing political parties.
A commitment to mobilizing and organizing the entire working class. As Winnie Ng puts it, "we cannot allow the artificial divide of unionized versus non-unionized workers [to] stop us from re-imagining and re-building a community where no one needs to stand alone: a movement of hope, justice and solidarity." A focus only on one's own union, unionized workers, low-income people, wage-earners or any other particular section of the working class is too narrow. The working class is broad, diverse and fragmented. Building a movement of and for all workers should be the aim. This cannot be done through unions alone. It is essential for unions to support and work with community-based organizations, including workers' centres whose priority is low-paid precariously-employed wage-earners.
Deeper and broader solidarity. Because the working class is divided in many ways, solidarity must be actively built. The old union slogan that "An injury to one is an injury to all" needs to become more than just rhetoric. Some divisions stem mainly from how employment is structured. The split between public and private sector workers is an example. Other divisions are rooted in racism, sexism and other forms of oppression. Workers who belong to groups in society that are privileged rather than oppressed have a special responsibility to extend the hand of solidarity. For example, white workers do not experience racism. To build unity between white workers and people who are directly affected by racism, white people need to educate themselves about racism and challenge it. Building solidarity also involves unionists supporting social justice struggles by people who are not consciously organizing as workers (although most of them probably are part of the working class). Examples include campaigns to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, end violence against women and win permanent resident status for non-status immigrants. Solidarity also needs to extend to struggles against oppression by people who are not part of the working class - for example, indigenous people who live off the land defending their traditional territories from encroachment by corporations. Lastly, solidarity must also be international, in support of people in the US and Mexico and on other continents.

What these changes add up to is more than a renewal of the movement in its current form. Making these changes would reinvent the working-class movement.

Today, few people even on the left endorse this goal. But those of us who do need to start having serious discussions about the state of the movement and how to do whatever we can to contribute even in small ways to reinventing it. It's crucial that our efforts start from how workers are organizing and resisting today, not the vision of a different kind of movement sketched above. Tiny steps taken by radicals working with other people who want to fight back more effectively have much more potential than initiatives by radicals alone.

This article draws on the author's book Canadian Labour in Crisis: Reinventing the Workers' Movement, which will be published by Fernwood in 2011.

Abolish temporary work! Campaign from FAU-IWA

2011-01-01T19:33:00.000-08:00

Statement by German anarcho-syndicalist union FAU on the situation of temporary employment in Germany and recent developments between unions and employers' organisations.

Abolish temporary work! Campaign from FAU-IWA

Since social-democrat and green politicians broke down all restrictions on temporary employment in 2003, the number of people paid by temporary work agencies increased from 300.000 to 900.000 in 2010. Many of them have been forced by legal employment agencies to offer themselves to the slave-traders. Temporary workers earn 30% less than their colleagues. Collective labour agreements, as those which have been negotiated by the Christian unions umbrella association for temporary work and personnel-service-agencies CGZP (Tarifgemeinschaft Christlicher Gewerkschaften für Zeitarbeit und Personalserviceagenturen) are crucially responsible for that. Now, the federal German labour court (BAG) rendered CGZP's labour agreements ineffective. No labour contract signed by the CGZP unions is valid any longer.

Legitimate Claim on “Equal Pay”
Each contract signed between CGZP unions and employer's organizations, such as AMP (Arbeitgeberverband Mittelständischer Personaldienstleister) or BDV (Bundesverband Deutscher Dienstleistungsunternehmen e.V.), are generally ineffective now. All temporary workers, who have been paid by CGZP contracts so far, have a legitimate claim to receive the money lost by these contracts over the last three years. They can also legitimately claim for all bonuses and extra pays which have been paid to their colleges as there is a German labour law which prohibits different treatments of worker's in the same company.

Lower courts in Berlin and Berlin-Brandenburg have already neutralized CGZP contracts. CGZP's appeal on a point of law that followed has now been turned away by Germany's federal court. In an official press release, the court justifies its decision by arguing that labour contracts can only be negotiated by a union which has the legitimate ability to do so. Due to several criteria, the CGZP has not.

200,000-300,000 Temporary Workers hope for back pay
When ineffective CGZP labour contracts have been used, each temporary worker needs to be back paid for the time he worked under these conditions. He needs not be treated different from other workers. According to German labour law on the transfer of personnel (AÜG) §10 (4), workers can now demand repayment from the temporary work agency they work for. The sum is adjusted on comparable employees working for the company which lent the temporary worker.

As each CGZP contract has been rendered ineffective, each limitation period is ineffective too. Conclusively workers can demand repayment for the last three years. Temporary workers should immediately check their contracts for links to CGZP labour agreements and lodge an action if necessary.

Bad Tricks
Since January 01, 2010 there exist other fake-unions like the CGZP. The CGM, DHV and GÖD did also sign labour agreements for temporary work. If these agreements are affected by the court's actual decision remains unknown so far. Their contracts remain probably untouched by the decision.

CGZP and DGB
The Christian union negotiated labour agreements with 1600 companies which are members of the employer's organizations AMP and BVD and with some smaller organizations. 200.000 to 300.000 workers work under their condition. In 2008, there have been 1.383 CGZP's union members, while there have been 800.000 temporary workers at all. 500.000 temporary workers are not affected by CGZP labour agreements but by deals negotiated between Germany's big union umbrella association DGB and the slave-trading employer's organizations iGZ (Interessenverband Deutscher Zeitarbeitsunternehmen) and BZA (Bundesverband Zeitarbeit). The DGB unions labour agreements are slightly better than those of CGZP: some cent more. But there are only a few temporary workers inside DGB anyway.

Minimum Wage – the Solution?
The federal German labour court's decision on CGZP labour agreements does not affect members of the DGB. This year, the union renewed its labour agreements guaranteeing dumping wages. So there is no reason for the DGB unions and its bureaucrats to applaud the actual judicial decision. After the renewing of its labour agreements, DGB cannot put pressure on the temporary work industry for “equal pay” and “equal treatment”. Their labour agreements are valid for the rest of time. Now DGB claims minimum wages for temporary workers, trying to compensate their own mistakes. But legally enacted minimum wages for temporary workers will always undercut wages and conditions of regularly employed workers. This is the opposite of equal pay. It is just another name for mass discrimination.

The FAU unions say: commercial slave-trading is a crime and temporary work needs to be abolished now.
For more information see (German): www.leiharbeit-abschaffen.de

Winnipeg Wobbly Newsletter #6

2010-12-28T21:43:00.000-08:00

Check out the newest edition of our newsletter, the Winnipeg Wobbly! Included in this edition:

Postal Worker's Wildcat
Student Protests in U.K.
Filipino fight for Justice
Women fighting violence against women
IWW BDS
Jimmy Johns workers here to stay!

Click Here For The Winnipeg Wobbly Vol. 1 Issue 6

IWW Ottawa Panhandlers Union straight talks about police harassment, business lobby influence

2010-12-28T18:18:00.000-08:00

This isn't isolated to Ottawa. The same thing is happening in Winnipeg and in most major cities in Canada. City hall continues to try and push though bills that punish panhandlers that violate the human rights of the poor and destitute.

BIAs, police 'class cleansing' Ottawa streets

Panhandlers union claims downtown harassment common

By Don Butler, Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/BIAs+police+class+cleansing+Ottawa+streets/4031782/story.html#ixzz19SlIT6KA

Wrap your head around this, if you can: Stacy Bonds's treatment is symptomatic of "class cleansing" by Ottawa police in the service of powerful business interests who want to eliminate street people from the ByWard Market and Rideau Street.

That's the view of the Ottawa Panhandlers' Union, which claims to represent about 80 of the city's estimated 300 to 400 panhandlers.

Spokesman Andrew Nellis, a former street person and self-described anarchist, says business improvement areas, which represent merchants in a given district, have a disproportionate amount of power, both with the police and at City Hall.

He charges that police have effectively become "private security guards" for BIAs, responding to business complaints regardless of whether any laws are being broken.

"The police are under instructions from business in this city to basically lock down Rideau Street, to eliminate anyone who looks poor, to engage in a kind of class cleansing," he alleges.

This amounts to criminalizing people who are poor, he says. "The police, the city and the BIAs are all working together to remove any area where poor people actually gather."

Peggy DuCharme, executive director of the Downtown Rideau BIA, scoffs at Nellis' claims. "If anything, we've always been of the opinion, where are the police? We never see them," she says. "As far as we're concerned, we have been under-serviced."

The merchants she represents are "fairly tolerant" of most panhandlers, Du-Charme says. The most problematic are those who lay claim to a piece of sidewalk and settle in for the long haul, spreading their belongings and detritus in the path of pedestrians, says DuCharme.

Most panhandling complaints come from people who work in the Rideau Street area, she says.

"They're the ones who are dealing with it every single day. They can't even go and get a coffee without being approached by the same individual three or four times. It's very annoying and frustrating."

Staff Sgt. Murray Knowles, who's responsible for the central east district of the city, acknowledges that dealing with panhandlers consumes a lot of police energy.

Though his officers issue tickets for violations of the Safe Streets Act, which prohibits aggressive panhandling at places such as bus stops, ATM machines and red-light intersections, enforcement is frequently ineffective because many panhandlers have addictions or mental health problems, Knowles says.

As a result, he says officers regularly try to connect panhandlers with social agencies or get those who are homeless into shelters.

"We have a lot of people downtown who are in need of help. There's all kinds of gaps that people are falling through. So any given day, we're trying to close some of those gaps as best we can."

The problem is, few panhandlers want the help. To them, the police attention is unwanted and feels like harassment.

Knowles understands that. If an officer sees someone giving money to a panhandler, he says, he might well advise the donor that his money would be better spent on a homeless shelter.

"If I was a panhandler and a cop came up to one of my clients and said that," says Knowles, "I probably would look at that as harassment."

Rideau Street, with its profusion of bus stops and other gathering points, is a hard place to panhandle legally, Knowles acknowledges. "If you follow the Safe Streets Act, there's so many areas there that are a no-go zone." But most panhandlers know that and avoid the street, he says.

Police have a special 12-officer "beat squad" that patrols Rideau Street and Montreal Road. Nellis charges that this group goes out of its way to rough up and harass panhandlers and includes "the real hard cases, the ones who like to use their fists."

That helps to explain the treatment of Bonds, a black woman who was arrested for public drunkenness on Rideau Street and later mistreated in custody, Nellis says.

"What happened to Stacy Bonds is not unique," he says. "This sort of thing happens on a regular basis to our people on Rideau Street."

But Knowles says the yellow-jacketed beat squad, which also polices public demonstrations, is made up of "good solid officers who work hard, know their laws and can interact with that segment of society."

"They go into all the shops and talk to people, they visit all the shelters," he says. "A good part of their day is spent saying hello. It's not with the ticket book out."

Nellis disputes that. Ticketing is common, he says. And after a panhandler has received a few tickets, police often issue a summons, requiring a court appearance.

If a panhandler doesn't show up in court, which is typical, judges will issue bench warrants for arrest, which leads to two weeks or so at the Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre, Nellis says. That has created a "revolving door" for panhandlers at the detention centre.

Knowles agrees that happens, but says it's not unique to panhandlers. "That's a regular court process for any provincial offence." If some-one's not getting the message, he says, "it's the next ante. It's 'OK, now tell the judge why'."

To support his allegation of undue business influence over the police, Nellis produces minutes from a 2003 meeting between the Down-town Rideau BIA and Vince Bevan, then Ottawa's police chief.

The minutes say the Rideau and ByWard Market BIAs paid the rent for a community police office on Dalhousie Street in the 1990s. But police felt the arrangement interfered with their independence and it ended.

To Nellis, this is something of a smoking gun. "It shows the BIAs literally paid the police." But he admits he doesn't know if similar arrangements exist today.

Knowles says they don't, to his knowledge. And DuCharme says her BIA provides no financial support to the police.

That's not to say BIAs don't have influence with the police. They do, depending on the issue, Knowles says. "They know how to use the process. When they set their minds on something, it's usually well-researched and well-presented."

But their influence, he insists, is not disproportionate, and is weighed against what police hear from others in the community.

Many panhandlers would rather eschew begging and sell crafts and other goods on the street instead, Nellis says.

"No one likes to stand out there with their hand out. It's humiliating. They would rather do something that makes them feel good. But the BIAs have shut us down at every turn."

If everyone who wants to be a vendor could be one, Nellis says, "there would be so few people out panhandling that no one would mind."

DuCharme is skeptical. "That's not the impression that we get out of the shelters," she says.

If panhandlers are keen to earn money as vendors, DuCharme says, "there are plenty of opportunities for them to do that all over the city. Nothing's stopping them."

But few act, she says, because "they don't want to pay for a permit and they don't want to follow any rules or regulations."

DuCharme says her BIA has "all kinds of work" -- removing posters, painting street furniture and shovelling snow -- that it would happily give to panhandlers. "We're always trying to find bodies," she says.

dbutler@ottawacitizen.com
© Copyright (c) The Ottawa Citizen

Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/BIAs+police+class+cleansing+Ottawa+streets/4031782/story.html#ixzz19Sl8MOtt

Sacco & Vanzetti Documentary

2010-12-13T13:42:00.000-08:00

Nicola Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were Italian anarchists accused of murder in 1920 and put to death in 1927 after a famously biased trial. The pair came to symbolize the bigotry directed toward immigrants and dissenters in America. Their struggle is retold in this probing documentary.

First two parts are here, for the other 12 parts click "Read More>>" at the bottom.

CSAAWU At the Labour Court, 6-12-2010

2010-12-09T21:09:00.000-08:00

The Commercial Stevadoring Agricultural and Allied Workers Union (CSAAWU) is supporting 50 workers against an illegal lockout by Robertson Abbatoirs, that started on Tuesday 30th November 2010. On the 3th of December the workers were dismissed.

CSAAWU has been engaging the employer (who is also a commercial farmer) for a while in order to stop the illegal practice of demanding that workers work excessive number of hours as overtime under conditions that bear resemblance to slavery. At times workers had to work from 6am till midnight – “the company treated black workers not as human beings but as an extension of machinery”. According to pay slips some have had to work as many as 39 hours overtime in a week, in contravention of the basic Conditions of Employment Act of 1995 (BCEA) that stipulates that the maximum overtime a worker can be expected to work is 10 hours per week or 2 hours per day. The Department of Labour in Worcester has failed to enforce compliance with the law. The workers at the Abattoir were paid R350 a week by the employer. Each worker is responsible for supporting and feeding, on average, 6 people. Now 50 households are facing hunger and starvation.

Monday the 6th December the workers and CSAAWU took action and dragged the employer to the Labour Court.

Holidarity Forever!

2010-12-04T11:14:00.000-08:00

Holidarity Forever!

Time

Thursday, December 16 · 7:00pm - 10:00pm

-----------------------
Location

Black Sheep Diner
540 Ellice
Winnipeg, MB

-----------------------
More Info
It's that time of year again...

Time to spend some quality time with your fellow workers and comrades. Time to reminisce about the struggles of the past year, and hope for revolution in the new. Time to dust off the old little red songbook and sing classic IWW carols.

Yes, it's Holidarity Forever, the annual get-together for folks interested in social justice (and by "social justice" we mean smashing capitalism, patriarchy, racism, homophobia, colonialism, etc.). Come down and enjoy the company of your comrades in the struggle!

There will be food, beer and songs.

IWW supports Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement in support of Palestinian rights

2010-12-02T09:49:00.000-08:00

12/2/2010

The Industrial Workers of the World (IWW or Wobblies) has officially voted to support the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement in support of Palestinian rights. The “Resolution in Support of the Workers of Palestine/Israel” was adopted in an overwhelming vote both at the IWW’s convention in Minneapolis and by the membership via referendum. This vote makes the IWW the first union in the US and the third union in Canada to officially support the Palestinian United Call for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions.

Inspired by the struggle against apartheid in South Africa, the BDS movement calls for boycott, divestment and sanctions against Israel until such time as fundamental Palestinian rights are recognized. The BDS call is supported by a broad cross-section of Palestinian society, including Palestinian unions.

The resolution to support the BDS campaign comes out of the work of the IWW’s International Solidarity Commission and the IWW Friends of Palestinian Workers Group, a grassroots network of Wobblies supportive of the Palestinian, Israeli and international struggle against Israeli apartheid. Support for the BDS campaign was also stressed by all the Palestinian workers who met with members of the IWW on the IWW delegation to Palestine, particularly the Independent Workers Federation of Palestine, with whom the IWW shares a close bond of solidarity.

“For a union concerned with international solidarity, supporting the BDS movement is the right thing to do”, said IWW member Nathaniel Miller, who serves on the International Solidarity Commission and attended the IWW delegation to Palestine. “By officially supporting this BDS call, the IWW stands shoulder to shoulder with Palestinian workers in a global picket line against Israeli apartheid.”

“Our support of the BDS movement is in line with traditional wobbly principles of anti-racism and international solidarity”

The IWW Friends of Palestinian Workers Group resolves to continue to advance the cause of Palestinian rights inside and outside of the IWW.

Founded in 1905, the IWW is a union with a long tradition of solidarity and anti-militarism, and has been central to some of the most important struggles in US working class history. More recently, the IWW has been successful organizing at Starbucks and in the fast food industry, among workers long thought to be unorganizable. The IWW is an international union, with members across North America, Europe, Australia, and South Africa.

*************************************

IWW Friends of Palestinian Workers Group

(email) nathaniel@iww.org

(phone) 610-209-1447 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 610-209-1447 end_of_the_skype_highlighting

http://www.iww.org/projects/isc/palestine

Black Mask Interview: Direct Action and CUPW Winnipeg Local 856

2010-11-25T09:05:00.001-08:00

Thanks for Fellow Worker Garth Hardy and Black Mask| The Frequency of Resistance for this great interview.

The Workers Struggle with the Modern Post: Direct Action and CUPW Winnipeg Local 856

Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Download: [ mp3 ]

An interview with Canadian Union of Postal Workers Winnipeg Local 856 Vice President, Marc Roy, and shop steward Darren Steinhoff on recent direct actions taken by postal workers in Local 856 to make gains in their workplace.

Solidarity message from the Winnipeg IWW

2010-11-24T05:54:00.000-08:00

Solidarity message from the Winnipeg IWW

The Winnipeg General Membership Branch of the Industrial Workers of the World supports your struggle against Canada Post. We believe in a postal system and a world where workers aren't forced to do unsafe work by a domineering management. It's sad that we as workers need to seemingly refight old battles just to defend what we've won in the past in terms of wages, benefits and working conditions. The actions of Canada Post management thoughout this dispute have been incredibly shameful. Your struggle against the Modern Post is a shining example of solidarity in action. Victory to the posties!

An injury to one is an injury to all! Solidarity forever!

In solidarity,
your fellow workers in the Winnipeg IWW

------------------------

As always, continue to follow the Workers Struggle with the Modern Post blog.

Winnipeg Workers Refuse Unsafe Delivery Model - Employer Responds With Discipline

2010-11-22T12:10:00.000-08:00

More info on the continuing wildcat in multiple Canada Post Depots here in Winnipeg.

Winnipeg Workers Refuse Unsafe Delivery Model - Employer Responds With Discipline

After weeks of struggling to work under the employers' new delivery model, Winnipeg letter carriers have reached the breaking point. The multiple bundle delivery method imposed by the boss has resulted in many members sustaining injuries and has made the work dangerous and unsafe.

Over assessed routes and the refusal to provide proper time values for all of the work performed has resulted in many carriers being forced to work overtime to complete delivery. So far, the employer has refused to take any concrete measures to resolve the concerns of the membership.

This morning at the South West Depot, wave 1 letter carriers decided that the safest way to perform their work was to sort the sequenced mail into their cases and deliver with 1 bundle on the street. Members were ordered by the boss to cease the sequenced mail sortation and when 1 temporary letter carrier refused to comply, he was advised that he was being suspended. Other members in the depot left the workfloor in support of the disciplined worker and refused to work as dictated by the boss. After a brief coffee meeting in the parking lot, the members then went home.

The second wave for South West reported for work and learned of the earlier events and made the decision to support one another, refuse the dangerous work method and go home for the day.

Meanwhile, in the other corner of the city, wave 1 letter carriers in the Transcona depot also made the decision to sort their sequenced mail into their cases. The employer did not prevent them from doing so and those workers then left and commenced their delivery. When wave 2 reported for duty, they attempted to sort in their sequenced mail and were advised by the employer that they could not do so and would face a 5 day suspension if they disobeyed. These members then invoked their right to refuse the unsafe work method and are still in the office. The employer has not issued any further instructions or orders to them. Our stewards are working with those members in the article 33 process.

Will the employer escalate the situation and respond with heavy handed discipline or will they realize that its time to put the health and safety of workers ahead of the unworkable new delivery model?

It's time for all us to stand up and demand a safe workplace and a 1 bundle delivery method.

An Injury to One is An Injury to All.

Solidarity,

Darren Steinhoff
Winnipeg Local

This is just the beginning! Solidarity with the Wildcat Posties!

2010-11-22T09:16:00.000-08:00

Pretty big news here in Winnipeg as the struggle against the "transformation" (ie speedups, layoffs, neo-liberal restricting, etc) ramps up! The Winnipeg Wobbly blog and the Winnipeg IWW would like to send out a message of support to our brothers and sisters who have stood up and said "ENOUGH!"

For more information on the current struggle with the "modern" post, check out the following blog done by a friend of the branch: http://theworkersstrugglewiththemodernpost.blogspot.com/

Canada Post employees walk off job

A number of Canada Post employees in Winnipeg walked off the job Monday to protest a change in the mail sorting procedure.

Canada Post's website says the corporation is undergoing a "postal transformation," with Winnipeg being the first location where new sorting equipment and delivery methods are being rolled out before the changes are implemented across the country.

The new, automated way results in postal carriers having to carry three bags along their routes. Under the old sorting method, done by hand, carriers eneded up with two bundles because the sorters were able to combine flyers with mail destined for each house.

A man who was sorting the mail the old way on Monday at the Wilkes Avenue facility was suspended, according to Bob Tyre, head of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers' Winnipeg local.

That prompted 40 other employees at the facility to walk out in solidarity.

"They [Canada Post] suspended him on the spot. And the other carriers decided that that was the line in the sand and they left, too," Tyre said.

About 60 carriers at the downtown sorting plant then left their jobs for similar reasons, but only walked out for about a half-hour, said Tyre.

He noted seven carriers at the Transcona plant were also threatened with suspension for sorting mail the old way.

Tyre said the new procedure is causing an increase in workplace injuries and is slowing down the delivery of mail.

Carrying the three bags "makes walking treacherous [and is] hard on their necks and their backs," he said, adding "there's been a skyrocketing increase in injuries."

"And [the carriers] have tried to, and the union has as well, talk to Canada Post about the delivery method, how it's causing injuries and it's not safe and it slows the delivery down on the streets, so they're all working overtime. They've been working that way now for about six weeks.

"And they've gotten nowhere with Canada Post so they just decided that they can't work that way and they went home."

Last week, Winnipeg Liberal MP Anita Neville said she has been inundated with complaints from people in her Winnipeg South Centre riding because mail has been arriving late or not at all.

One seniors residence with 183 units had no mail for three days, she said.

Canada Post has not immediately returned phone calls requesting an interview.

The Winnipeg Municipal Elections: “if voting changed anything, it would be made Illegal"

2010-10-27T19:39:00.000-07:00

With the mayoral election over, it's more of Same ol' Sam. While no progressive Winnipegger wanted to see Katz win, the question remains on how much real 'change' would Judy have really brought?

While the Opposition on the City Council may a little stronger, BUT we need to build real opposition on the street, in our communities. Remember: direct action gets the goods, not dropping a piece of paper into a box.

The piece originally appeared in Winnipeg Wobbly #5.

The Winnipeg Municipal Elections: “if voting changed anything, it would be made Illegal"

Winnipeg‘s mayoral election takes place on Oct. 27, 2010. While the race has been closing, incumbent mayor and tool of the business community Sam Katz is expected to win re-election against left-leaning candidate and former NDP MP Judy Wascylycia-Leis. Beyond that, there is a battle between an alliance of the center-left for council against the right, with the left hoping to pick up enough seats to be able to exercise some control over council instead of being consistently shut out and out-voted approximately 11-5 on almost all serious issues. It has been a lacklustre campaign, nearly devoid of any serious issues or defining moments.

Much of the Winnipeg left has hitched their hopes to the candidacy of Wascylycia-Leis, in some ways understandably so given the record of Sam Katz. Katz‘ pro-business, neoliberal agenda has threatened many city workers and has opened up Winnipeg‘s wastewater system to privatization at the hands of Veolia, a multinational corporation known for poor records in other jurisdictions. Veolia is also involved in transportation projects supporting Israeli apartheid in the West Bank, and their practices around the world have caused Stockholm city council to reject their bids for a project. Also, Katz‘ record on transit is appalling.

Judy, on the other hand, has not promoted serious alternatives and in some ways has been trying to reach out more to the business community than actual working people – see her Tory blue campaign signs, or her promise to create a business advisory council. Still, her position on property taxes might be a small concession to reality compared to Sam Katz.

While there is much excitement around Wascylycia-Leis in some quarters of the left, it seems as though aside from a panel hosted by the New Socialist Group a few months
back, there is little in the way of serious discussion of overall strategy. The Winnipeg Citizens Coalition, an alliance of NDPers and Liberals, seems to be solely focused on electing Judy, defeating Katz‘ allies on council, and divvying up the seats among themselves. The Manitoba NDP, now officially endorsing candidates in the municipal election, is not much different. All of this is based on classic parliamentary liberal/social democratic strategies – electing enough "good people" that they can take care of issues for you (although they will need you as fodder for their election machines). Sometimes this strategy is tinged with some lip service towards grassroots organizing – the idea of electing people who will be more receptive to lobbying efforts.

Changing how Winnipeg is run will require a shift in our politics. We need to get away from the liberal politics of elect and lobby, and into radical, community-based extra-parliamentary organizing. The politics of lobbying are all too often based on manipulating any grassroots initiatives so an elite within the movement can enjoy a chat with politicians – and more often than not get blown off. This also changes the structure of movements, resulting in a centralization of creative efforts and the "important" work of lobbying in the hands of a trusted few who can stay "on message". In the long run, this is a self-defeating strategy, as it is disempowering and is based on some rather silly notions of how society works (that liberal capitalist "democracy" is actually democratic, for one).

But as we can‘t talk tactics without talking strategy, we can‘t talk strategy without seriously discussing how society works. Do we live in a democracy, where the will of the people rules, or do we live under capitalism, where the owners of capital rule consistently, regardless of any changes of face at the political level?

We need to start seriously organizing and rocking it out. Organize in our communities, in our workplaces, on our campuses, and in the streets, and maybe one day there will be a second Winnipeg General Strike.

There also needs to be some serious conversation in Winnipeg about dealing with issues like urban sprawl. In addition to making our city require more roads, sewers, and pollution-spewing cars, as well as making it more difficult to provide decent transit service to all city residents, urban sprawl has serious effects on the political culture of Winnipeg. It isolates communities from each other and promotesa suburban mentality, which is something that needs to be overcome. Yet, this is an issue not being touched by any of our political elite, left or otherwise.

While Judy will likely be marginally better than Sam, we shouldn‘t fall into the trap of electoralism. At the end of the day, if voting ever changed anything, they would have made it illegal.

.X359910

John Brown: Man with a Dream

2010-10-14T10:31:00.001-07:00

On October 16, 1859, abolitionist fighter John Brown began the raid on Harpers Ferry. With twenty-one other men in the hopes of seizing the federal armory at Harper's Ferry, the holding place for approximately 100,000 rifles and muskets, hoping to arm slaves and create a violent rebellion against the south.

However, after thirty-six hours the revolt was suppressed by federal forces led by Robert E. Lee (later General of the Confederate Army) and Brown was jailed.

The raid resulted in thirteen deaths, twelve rebels and one U.S. Marine. After being found guilty of murder, treason, and inciting a slave insurrection, Brown was hanged on December 2, 1859.

John Brown should stand as a symbol of those who continue to struggle against oppression and immoral systems. Those who fight against wage-slavery. As Eugene Debs once wrote, "Old John Brown is not dead. His soul still marches on, and each passing year weaves new garlands for his brow and adds fresh luster to his deathless glory."

The Following is a piece from one of the most famous supporters of the I.W.W., Carl Sandburg (under the pseudonym "Jack Philips"), on the similarities between John Brown and I.W.W. founder Big Bill Haywood, as well as a music video of the song John Brown by David Rovics.

For past coverage on John Brown Click Here

HAYWOOD OF THE I. W. W.

By JACK PHILLIPS

[ISR 18.7 (Jan. 1918): 343]

Old John Brown of Ossawattamie was arrested by officers of the United States government, legally indicted, legally tried, and legally shot, as a traitor to the nation.

A few short years afterward millions of marching men, soldiers of the United States Army, with Abraham Lincoln for commander-in-chief, marched singing a song with every verse and every chorus glorifying John Brown. And "John Brown's Body Lies A Mouldering in the Grave" is today the most popular folk song of the American nation. Let the fact be recorded at this time that John Brown was tried on the charge of treason and shot to death because of presumed guilt of treason.

What was it John Brown did that caused him to be remembered and glorified in a national marching song? He was a man with a dream. His mind conceived the vision that if the southern black slaves could be armed wtih rifles they would fight their way to freedom from their white masters. Therefore, reasoned John Brown, the thing to do is to raid a government arsenal and seize the guns wanted by the black slaves. So he and his sons and followers raided the federal arsenal at Harpers Ferry, were hunted, captured, and as hereinbefore noted, legally indicted, tried, shot.

So Big Bill Haywood, nearly sixty years later, appears in history, another man dominated by a dream. Haywood has a vision of industrial democracy established, a hope of security and justice for all the workers of the world, the shackles of capitalist wage slavery struck off. How is this vision to be attained? Thru a world wide general strike of the working class, thru mass action of the working people of the world, without violence necessarily, without death penalties, revenges and punitive indemnities. Merely thru a folding of arms, a refusal to make or transport the goods of the world, till all autocracies yielded to a newer order. Such was to be the working of the plan when its details could be arranged.

As wild a dream, perhaps, as the dream of John Brown that arming the southern blacks would lead to the abolition of chattel slavery. As vague and chimerical a vision as that of the "traitor" after whom the nation's most famous marching song was written.

What it leads to is the question: Will there be marching songs written to Bill Haywood some day as the same kind of a "traitor" as the John Brown who was legally indicted, legally tried, legally shot?

Let Claude Porter, special assistant attorney general in charge of the prosecution of the I. W. W. think about these things.

We wonder today when we look back and read the savage and ruthless charges brought against John Brown by the prosecutors. They called for his blood with tongues that today are dust.

One day Claude Porter's accusing tongue will be dust. And Big Bill Haywood will be dust. Which of the two will be remembered?

Nobody remembers today who it was that tongue-lashed John Brown in the prosecution of him for treason. But everybody knows the story of John Brown.

So be it. Such is the history and the drama of destiny.

WINNIPEG: Anti-Muslim and Anti-Migrant Racism

2010-10-12T05:11:00.000-07:00

Our friends at the New Socialist Group are putting on the following event, with Bilan Arte, who recently was featured in the Winnipeg Wobbly newsletter. Definitely one to check out!

WINNIPEG: Anti-Muslim and Anti-Migrant Racism

Time	Thursday, October 14 · 7:00pm - 9:00pm

Location	Magnus Eliason Recreation Centre, 430 Langside (just south of Ellice)

Created By	Winnipeg New Socialists

More Info	Anti-Muslim and Anti-Migrant Racism: What They Are -- and How to Fight Them This event will feature three presentations followed by an open discussion. Speakers: Bilan Arte -- on Quebec's Bill 94, which would prevent Muslim women wearing either the niqab or burqa from accessing public services like health care and education Zac Saltis -- a socialist analysis of anti-migrant and anti-Muslim racism, how it relates to the current economic crisis and who benefits from it Lisa Stepnuk -- on the politically-motivated panic about Tamil migrants in BC and anti-migrant racism generally Childcare subsidy available with advance notice. For more information, please e-mail winnipeg [at] newsocialist.org Organized by the Winnipeg New Socialist Group

Winnipeg Wobbly Newsletter #5

2010-09-25T16:08:00.000-07:00

Fresh for the Radical Bookfair, check out the newest edition of our newsletter, the Winnipeg Wobbly! Included in this edition:

The Coming Insurrection at the University of Manitoba
Winnipeg Municipal Elections: "If voting changed anything it would be illegal"
Jimmy Johns Workers Join IWW in Increase Minimum wage pay
IWW Convention 2010 Report
No to Bill94

Click Here For The Winnipeg Wobbly Vol. 1 Issue 5

First in America, Jimmy Johns Sandwich Workers Join Union to Increase Minimum Wage Pay

2010-09-03T12:20:00.000-07:00

Good on these Fellow Workers!

Jimmy John's is a franchised sandwich restaurant founded in 1983. According to the Jimmy Johns website, there only Canadian franchises are in Alberta....

Visit the Jimmy Johns Workers Union here.

First in Nation, Jimmy Johns Sandwich Workers Join Union to Increase Minimum Wage Pay

Fast Food Chain Rocked by Work Stoppages in Sign of Mounting Economic Frustration among US Workers

Press Conference and Rally: 4pm September 2, Block E Jimmy Johns, Minneapolis

MINNEAPOLIS- Service was anything but 'freaky fast' at Jimmy Johns today as workers walked off the kitchen floor in an unprecedented move to demand improved wages and working conditions at nine Minneapolis franchise locations. Announcing the formation of the IWW Jimmy Johns Workers Union, the workers are seeking a pay increase to above minimum wage, consistent scheduling and minimum shift lengths, regularly scheduled breaks, sick days, no-nonsense workers compensation for job-related injuries, an end to sexual harassment at work, and basic fairness on the job.

“I have been working at Jimmy Johns for over two years and they still pay me minimum wage and schedule me one-hour shifts,” said Rikki Olsen, a union member at the Block E location. “I'm working my way through school and can barely make ends meet. I'd get another job, but things are just as bad across the service industry. Companies like Jimmy John's are profitable and growing, they need to provide quality jobs for the community.”

The Minneapolis franchise, owned and operated by Miklin Enterprises, Inc., pays the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr, offers no benefits, and has no full-time positions outside of management. Jimmy Johns corporate website lists $264,270 as the average yearly net profit for operating a franchise. Union members estimate that Rob and Mike Mulligan, owners of Miklin, Inc. made an annual profit of at minimum $2.3 million in the last year alone. The Miklin franchise plans to open four new locations this year at an estimated cost of over $1.2 million.

Jake Foucault, a delivery driver at the Riverside store, said, “ If Mike and Rob Mulligan have the money to open four new stores, then they have the money to pay us more than minimum wage. We hope Rob and Mike do the right thing and come to the negotiating table.”

A negotiating committee of Jimmy Johns workers plans to meet with the Mulligans at the central office of the franchise to begin discussions at 4:00pm today.

The fast food workers' move to unionize is emblematic of mounting frustration amongst US workers with the sluggish pace of recovery from the Recession. With unemployment rates hovering around 9.5%, many workers view low wage service jobs as their only option. Employment in the food service industry is expected to grow 8.4% from 2008 to 2018, higher than the 7.7% rate predicted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for all industries. Wages and working conditions in the fast food industry are widely regarded as substandard; in 2009, about 17% of food workers earned at or below $5.15 an hour after taxes, the highest percentage of any occupational group.

The union campaign at Jimmy Johns could hold deep implications for other companies in the fast food industry, a sector known for the lowest rates of unionization- and lowest wages- in the United States. Only 1.8% of food service workers were represented by a union in 2009, far below the nation-wide figure of 12.3%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The question of unionization of the food and service industries looms is assuming greater focus as employment in these non-union sectors increases, while manufacturing, the traditional stronghold of unionization, slides further into decline.

The Jimmy Johns Workers Union, open to employees at the company nationwide, is affiliated with the Industrial Workers of the World labor union. Gaining prominence in recent years for organizing Starbucks workers, the IWW is a global union founded over a century ago for all working people.

Sad health news from Anne Feeney ... can you help?

2010-08-11T13:47:00.000-07:00

These kinds of stories really show how pathetic the US for-profit private healthcare system truly is...

********************************************************************

Anne Feeney is a long time member / supporter of the IWW

How much one conversation with a doctor can change your life!

This time last week I thought the next time I'd be writing to you would be with my exciting September news and Labor Day special...

This time last week I thought I'd be in Sweden tonight packing to go to Ireland to meet up with all my wonderful tourmates.

Instead, here I am in Pittsburgh packing to go Shadyside Hospital. On August 3rd, in Sweden, a lung specialist advised me that I have an 11 cm tumor on my lung that is stressing both my heart and lungs in dangerous ways. As terrifying as this diagnosis is, it is in many ways a relief to get an explanation for the several mysterious and troubling symptoms I've had for the past few months... including increasing fatigue, shortness of breath, terrible coughing, and bizarre heart rhythms.

I could have stayed in Sweden for the bronchoscopy, biopsy and surgery ... my health insurance would have covered everything in Sweden that it covers here. But even the best case scenario here will involve a protracted recovery period and probably at least six months out of work. It was also hard to think about being so seriously ill so far away from my children, and my lifelong network of friends in Pittsburgh.

So here I am, at home in Pittsburgh, surrounded by friends and family.

Luckily, Tom Pigott and I have been able to arrange full and wonderful coverage for both the Ireland tours in August. The wonderful Charlie King will be joining the August 10-19th tour, and Tom will be hosting the August 22-31st tour with some of my favorite folks in Ireland. Both tours will continue uninterrupted, but, alas, without me this year.

My friend Jan Boyd has set up a Caring Bridge page for those of you who want regular medical updates on my condition. The URL is http://www.caringbridge.org/visit/annefeeney ... (The only reason you have to log in to the site is to keep spam robots from posting stupid messages...)

I hope to be posting updates on Facebook as well as soon as I feel up to it.

I'm pretty sure it will be difficult for me to talk on the phone for a while. I would love it if you'd post get well wishes, stories & jokes for me on my guestbook... http://annefeeney.com/guestbook.html ... (It's a moderated guestbook, so what you write won't appear on the guestbook until I read it and approve it--- otherwise I'm pretty sure the guestbook would be nothing but ads for viagra and such..)

This diagnosis has wiped out most of my meager folksinger's savings. I've had to cancel a lot of work that I was counting on, and incurred a lot of unexpected travel expenses. Although most of my medical bills will be covered (now that I've come up with the $6000 in deductibles and copay), it seems unlikely that I'll be able to return to my hectic tour schedule, or any full time work, for several months.

If you want to help me out with what are going to be fairly staggering expenses by folksinger's standards... I'm hoping to find 1000 folks who'll pony up $50 ... I really *don't* want any larger donations ... I don't want anyone to dig deep for this... and if $50 is hard for you to come by, PLEASE don't think about sending me a cent. I know I have enough dear friends who are doing okay that those of you who are struggling shouldn't spend a second worrying about my finances.

You could send a check to me:

Anne Feeney
2240 Milligan Ave
Pittsburgh PA 15218

or you can send a donation via Paypal to getwellanne@annefeeney.com. If you're not sure how to do that... there's also a "donate" button you can click about 4 inches down on the right hand side of this page.. clicking on that "donate" button will also allow you to make a safely encrypted online donation.

I'll have a lot more to say and share about health care... especially the amazing Swedish health care system, when I'm not so tired.

I hope that you'll spread the word to any of our friends that may not subscribe to the Fellow Travelers' Advisory.

As I'm wandering around the sweet little house I get to spend so little time in, I keep finding boxes and boxes of thank you cards that I have purchased and never mailed. So many of you reading this are on my list of people to write and thank ... You're a generous group and there are no words to thank you for the countless things you do to make this a better world for all of us. My heart overflows with gratitude to all of you for your daily work for justice, art and truth - for your steadfast support of the many projects I've brought to you in the past... I am so honored to call you my friend.

Many of my oldest and dearest friends are gathering here with me at the house to help me prepare for the coming ordeal. I cherish them, and you, and hope to be in touch with all of you soon.

http://fellow-travelers-advisory.blogspot.com/2010/08/sad-health-news-from-anne-feeney-can.html

Union busting at care home

2010-08-10T19:43:00.000-07:00

This seems like a pretty clear case of union busting, and it is a classic tactic of bosses to prevent workers from organizing. Hopefully, the labour board will rule in the nurses favour, however, damage has already been done. The employer has already inflicted hardship and stress on the nurses with these firings.

If you or someone you know is one of these nurses, we would like to hear from you! email us at winnipegiww@hotmail.com.

Remember, Labour Law is only the bare minimum, but the sky's the limit when it comes direct action!

Union busting at care home

CBC News - Manitoba - Union busting at care home

The Manitoba Nurses Union is accusing a Winnipeg care home of union busting and is taking its case to the provincial labour board.

Last November, a group of nurses at the Kildonan Personal Care Centre joined a union. Their positions were recently eliminated but the company has now reposted the jobs.

However, the jobs are now classified as management positions, which makes them ineligible for union representation, according to MNU president Sandy Mowat.

"They reposted them, adding some little added duties to them to make them what they believe are management-type positions now," she said.

"And then they're saying that because they're manager positions they don't belong in the union."

If all position are filled as management, there will be 13 managers overseeing 14 nurses at the facility, Mowat said.

The labour board will hear the case in November.

The 120-bed personal care home is located on Henderson Highway in North Kildonan.

Back from the Occupied Territories: Part 2 of Inteview with FW Latour on Black Mask

2010-07-31T19:10:00.001-07:00

Part 2 of Black Masks interview with Fellow Workers Ethan and Brian, member of CanPalNet-Winnipeg and the Winnipeg IWW, who recently returned from Israel/Palestine.

Click Here to listen to part 2 of the Interview

Back from the Occupied Territories: FW Latour on Black Mask radio

2010-07-27T17:39:00.000-07:00

Fellow Worker Brian Latour has recently returned from a solidarity tour of the Palestinian Occupied Territories organized by Independent Jewish Voices. The following is an interview by Fellow Worker Ethan Osland from Black Mask radio (also a Wobbly) on Brian's experiences.

Click here to listen to the interview

Developing Workers Autonomy: An Anarchist Look At Flying Squads

2010-07-23T12:10:00.001-07:00

>An interesting article about union flying squads from an IWW member in Toronto. Care of NEFAC:

Developing Workers Autonomy: An Anarchist Look At Flying Squads

by Jeff Shantz, Punching Out Collective (NEFAC-Toronto)

Recently much interest and discussion has been generated by the emergence of union flying squads in Ontario. Flying squads -- rapid response networks of workers that can be mobilized for strike support, demonstrations, direct action and working class defense of immigrants, poor people, and unemployed workers -- present a potentially significant development in revitalizing organized labor activism and rank-and-file militancy.

Here are organizations with rank-and-file participation working to build solidarity across unions and locals and alongside community groups, engaging in direct action while striving to democratize their own unions. No wonder then that the re-appearance of flying squads in Ontario, in a context of halting resistance to a vicious neoliberal attack, notably among some sectors of the labor movement, has been cause for much excitement.

Militant anti-capitalists of various stripes, recognizing the crucial roles played by workers within production relations, have viewed the flying squads as important in the development of workers' organization against capitalist authority and discipline. Anarchists, maintaining the necessity of working class self-organization and autonomy from bureaucratic structures, have been encouraged by the possible emergence of active networks of rank-and-file workers bringing collective resources to defend broad working class interests.

At the same time the struggles over the make up and control or direction of flying squads has reflected struggles between rank-and-file members and union bureaucracies more generally. Most accounts have been so caught up in the excitement generated by the emergence of the flying squads that they have not addressed critically the obstacles and difficulties faced by flying squads as they attempt to build on a truly rank-and-file basis. Similarly, these hopeful accounts fail to take stock of the current, diminished, status of the flying squad movement in Ontario, substituting promise for reality.

Rank-And-File Groups

The flying squad is a rapid response group of members who are ready to mobilize on short notice to provide direct support for pickets or actions. It may or may not be a recognized body of the local. The flying squad structure may consist of little more than phone lists and meetings but, significantly, should maintain its autonomy from the local and national union executives. Generally flying squads should be open only to rank-and-file members since they must be free to initiate and take actions that the leadership may not approve of. Some flying squads refuse even a budget line item so that they are in no way dependent upon leadership. In Canada, flying squads have offered crucial support to direct actions around immigration defense, tenant protection, squatters rights, and welfare support by mobilizing sizeable numbers of unionists who are prepared for actions without regard to legality. Flying squads take direct action to interfere with bosses' abilities to make profits. Not limited in their scope of action by specific collective agreements or workplaces, flying squads mobilize for community as well as workplace defense.

Working groups are generally recognized bodies that are established to deal with specific areas of need. They step beyond the limitations of traditional unionism to assist both members and non-members. Rank-and-file and community alliances offer one example of how to make the connections which are crucial to developing militant working class solidarity. They can bring anti-capitalist activists, community members and unionists together to work on a day-to-day basis.

Rank-and-file committees and flying squads can become important parts of struggles over a broad spectrum of issues affecting working class community life, including those which the mainstream unions ignore such as housing and unemployment. They can offer spaces for building bridges between workers, across unions and industries and between union and community groups. Autonomous from traditional union structures and organized around militant non-hierarchical practices, rank-and-file working groups and flying squads can provide real opposition to conservatism within the unions as well. They provide a better approach than the more common model of the "left caucus" which tries to reform union policy, usually, again, through resolutions at conventions (Clarke, 2002). The rank-and-file committees actively and directly challenge the leadership within their own locals and across locals.

Flying squads of various types have long been an important part of labor militancy internationally. In Britain, community flying pickets successfully mobilized to defend hospitals in working class neighborhoods against closure in the 1970s. In India several farmers' unions recently formed flying squads to confront officials at purchase centers to ensure that their demands for proper payment for their crops were satisfied. Members of the Carpenters Union in southern California, who were primarily immigrants, many of them undocumented, used flying squads and direct action effectively during the framers' strike of 1995.

While some type of rank-and-file organizing, along the lines of what we now call flying squads, has been a constant in labor movements, the contemporary flying squads in Ontario are inspired by the flying pickets that emerged during the CIO strikes of the 1930s. Flying squads played an important part in the 1945 UAW strike against Ford in Windsor. That strike, which won the rights associated with the Rand Formula (union recognition, dues check off and closed shop) for workers in Canada, turned when strikers organized an incredible vehicle picket in which the entire Ford plant was surrounded and shut down by several rows of vehicles. Flying squads were used effectively to mobilize people for actions throughout the strike and to spread information throughout the community.

Not coincidentally, the contemporary flying squads in Ontario made their reappearance in several Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) locals in Windsor during the mid-1990s as a mobilization force for actions against the newly elected neoliberal provincial government (See Levant, 2003: 20). The network within the CAW spread during organizing of the Ontario Days of Action, rotating, city-by-city one-day mass strikes against the Tories. In the midst of a lengthy strike against Falconbridge mining, during which picketers were subjected to ongoing violence by company goons and security thugs, members of CAW local 598 initiated a regional Northern Flying Squad to reinforce and defend the lines and step up the struggle against the company. They helped to organize a solidarity weekend that brought flying squads from across Ontario for militant actions against Falconbridge, actions that many consider to have been the high point of the strike.

My union, CUPE 3903, inspired by the CAW flying squads and the direct action movements against capitalist globalization, formed a flying squad three years ago to support OCAP's direct action casework around immigration defense and welfare support as well strike solidarity and organizing direct actions within mass anti-capitalist demonstrations. The flying squad is currently made up of more than 80 members who are ready to mobilize on short notice to provide direct support for pickets or actions. Significantly, the flying squad maintains its autonomy from the union executive, refusing even a budget line item. 3903 has already made it known that it is willing to do direct action training and to hold workshops on forming and developing flying squads.

In early September, 2001, OCAP along with the 3903 flying squad went directly to Pearson International Airport to demand an end to threats of deportation against three families. Leaflets were given to passengers alerting them to the situation and a visit was paid to the Immigration Canada deportation office in the basement of Terminal One. OCAP demanded and received a meeting with the airport's Immigration management and gave a deadline of the end of the business day for management to issue stays of removal in all three instances. All three deportations were eventually cancelled. This unusual result, in which the removal dates were cancelled prior to a Federal Court challenge, is a testament to the powers of direct action.

It must also be stressed that the presence of flying squads has been crucial in the success of this and other actions. Clearly government officials, security and cops respond differently when confronted with a room packed with workers holding union flags and banners than when confronted with a smaller numbers of people that they are willing to dismiss as activists. Through such actions, the flying squad demonstrates how organizations of rank-and-file workers can step out of traditional concerns with the workplace to act in a broadened defense of working class interests. The expansion of union flying squads, with autonomy from union bureaucracies, could provide a substantial response to the state's efforts to isolate immigrants and refugees from the larger community. The emboldened aggressiveness of Immigration Canada after September 11 makes such actions in defense of working class people absolutely crucial.

In addition 3903 is home to vital working groups with real links to community struggles. In November, 2001, 3903 provided an office and resources for OCAP to work along with members of the 3903 Anti-Poverty Working Group. The working group moves beyond the limitations of traditional unionism to assist people (members and non-members) experiencing problems with collection agencies, landlords, bosses and police and to help anyone having difficulties with welfare or other government bureaucracies. The new office provides a possibly significant example of a rank-and-file initiative that forges community alliances while fighting the local implementation of the global neoliberal agenda. This type of alliance offers one example of how to make the connections which are crucial to growing our movements. Indeed, it brings anti-globalization activists and unions together to work on a day-to-day basis.

Bureaucracy Against The Flying Squads

The national and local executives of some unions in which flying squads have emerged have clearly shown concern about this development. This has played out particularly badly within the CAW.

During the summer of 2001, people in cities, reserves and towns throughout Ontario were gearing up for a campaign of economic disruption which would directly confront and interfere with the political programs and economic practices of the government and their corporate backers. This effort suffered something of a setback when the CAW leadership decided to withdraw support from the campaign in June. The decision came following a mock eviction of the Finance Minister from his constituency office by OCAP, students and members of CAW and CUPE flying squads. The National President of the CAW, Buzz Hargrove, was so upset by the action that he agreed to meet with the Labor Minister to discuss union support of OCAP. In an inexplicable act of collaboration, Hargrove sat down to establish union policy with the man who had only months before introduced legislation gutting the Employment Standards Act and extending the legal workweek from 44 to 62 hours.

Significantly, not only did Hargrove cut OCAP's largest source of funding, but he also clamped down on the CAW flying squads which were only beginning to grow. CAW flying squads were brought under control of the National by requiring approval of the National or of local presidents prior to any action. The National even tried to prohibit use of CAW shirts, hats and banners at actions not sanctioned by the National. Thus the CAW leadership cynically used the excuse of the eviction to camp down on a rank-and-file movement that it saw as a possible threat to its authority. The strangling of the flying squads by the bureaucrats may be one of the sharpest blows rank-and-file activists have suffered recently and will deeply hurt fightback efforts in Ontario.

These actions effectively derailed actions in major industrial centers like Windsor, where activists, recognizing the vulnerability of just-in-time production in Windsor and Detroit, had initially planned to blockade the Ambassador Bridge, the main U.S.-Canada node in the NAFTA-superhighway. Stopping traffic on the bridge for even a short period of time would have caused millions of dollars in damages because of the reliance on just-in-time production in the factories on both sides of the border. This possibility was not lost on Hargrove, who let it slip during a meeting with representatives of OCAP Allies when he angrily voiced his concern that in Windsor some members were talking about shutting down production at "our plants."

At this point it seems that the CAW bureaucracy's clampdown on the flying squads is complete. At a panel discussion on creative tactics that I took part in at this year's Labor Notes conference, Michelle Dubiel, a CAW "Ontario Chapter" flying squad representative, stated with great satisfaction that marshals had finally been instituted in the CAW flying squads. Dubiel noted that there had been much discussion and some resistance to this but happily concluded that members were eventually brought to see the necessity of marshals.

The impact of this takeover of the flying squads has been lethal in some areas. A comrade in Sudbury recently told me that the northern flying squads were virtually extinct. Similarly the rank-and-file, cross-local flying squad in Windsor has not been able to get off the ground.

Leninist Reformism: Flying Squads As Left Opposition

Some Leninists and their Trotskyist sidekicks have viewed the flying squads primarily as a means of union reform, a companion piece of the left caucus' loyal opposition to the union leadership. A prime example of this approach is expressed by Alex Levant, (who has put much work into building my union's flying squad and is currently a vice president in the local), in a recent article in 'New Socialist' magazine (March/April, 2003).

Levant poses the problem for rank-and-file activism largely as one of "conservative leaders who practice 'business unionism'" (Levant, 2003: 22). Levant (2003: 22) suggests that flying squads "pose a threat to such union leaders' positions by fostering membership activism, which bolsters left opposition currents in these unions." Business unionism, far from being a preference of specific leaders, however, is a structured relationship, legally and organizationally, within unions and between unions and bosses. Levant (2003: 22) is correct to suggest that such locals "contribute to the crisis of working-class self-organization by discouraging members' self-activity", but this crisis will not be overcome by replacing conservative leaders with leftist ones. Nor should we accept that social unionism is not still a form of business unionism. This is shown clearly in the case of the CAW, which has long practiced "social unionism."

Taking the left opposition perspective, Levant is unable or unwilling to openly or directly criticize bureaucrats in the CAW for their ongoing efforts to control that union's flying squads. In his article Levant quotes CAW representative Steve Watson approvingly while making no mention of his role in the CAW breaking of the rank-and-file aspects of the flying squads. Notably, at the above-mentioned anti-deportation action at the airport, it was Watson who intervened at the last minute to keep CAW flying squads from participating, even though many workers at the airport are CAW members, and could have played an important part in stopping the deportation.

Similarly, while Levant is rightly critical of the Ontario Federation of Labor Solidarity Network, which required permission of the OFL bureaucracy to undertake any action, he has been less critical of similar developments within our own flying squad. At a meeting in July 2003 it was determined that the flying squad would be coordinated by no more than 3 members who have a number of responsibilities including, crucially, the responsibilities of maintaining the membership list and calling and organizing the flying squad's actions. Ideally all members should have access to the membership list and be able to initiate calls for actions. Creating coordinator positions with this authority is a troubling and potentially dangerous development. During an earlier meeting where the coordinator structure was challenged by members who favored getting the lists to every member and canceling the coordinator positions, several members who take the Trotskyist approach and supported the coordinator structure walked out, purposefully blowing quorum just before the vote.

I do agree with Levant that the flying squads have a tremendous potential in building rank-and-file militancy and self-organization. However, that potential can only be met if autonomy from the leadership is established and defended with vigilance. Flying squads do NOT "work best" when they "respect" the roles of the leadership as Levant advocates. Flying squads work best when they understand the roles the leadership plays, including the role of taming and reigning in members' self-organizing initiatives.

Notes On The Buearucracy

For all of their potential power, the trade unions are restricted by a leadership that cannot allow decisive force to be unleashed. To understand the difficulties facing rank-and-file resistance we must understand the roles and structures of leadership beyond a focus on conservative or progressive union leaders. In Ontario, during the 1930 and 1940s waves of union organizing, wildcat strikes and occupations pressed a tactical retreat on the bosses and their state, leading to the extension of new rights to workers' organizations.

In place of open class war, a process of limited and uneven concession granting was established. This truce had the effect of regulating and compartmentalizing workplace struggles to keep them below the level of serious disruption. Each industry, workplace or section of workers was viewed as having its own issues to attend to or, indeed, to bargain over. A new layer of union functionary emerged to broker and execute this deal. These union executives needed to placate membership with regulated contract gains while simultaneously ensuring labor force stability and an environment conducive to accumulation for the bosses. Negotiation is presented as a reasonable and effective solution to most problems. Bureaucrats strive to get the best possible deal for labor power rather than attack or end the overall system of exploitation. Emphasis is placed on bargaining power within the capitalist labor market.

Strike action became a last resort to be deployed only under very limited and legally defined conditions. Wildcat strikes and varieties of worker-initiated shopfloor actions are negotiated away and prohibited within contracts. Workers who engage in such actions are open to sanction, a point the union leadership often reinforces within the membership.

While limited outbursts were permitted, leaders were obliged to police the deal and restore order in the ranks of the workers when the bosses deemed necessary. Bosses are not going to negotiate with people who can't or won't deliver what is agreed to. The bureaucracy developed centralized structures and methods of control and direction which fit its role and function. In times of mobilization the union leaders, rather than helping to overcome hesitation, view those who are mobilizing as a threat to be isolated or stopped entirely. Critically, all of this is related to structural pressures on the union leadership based on their role within capitalist relations of production rather than on personal characteristics or perspectives as the left reformists would have it.

At times bureaucrats will call on the services of left militants when a show of strength is tactically advantageous only to abandon, isolate or purge them when things have gone as far as the leadership deems necessary. This is a crucial lesson that must be kept in mind when we consider flying squads with marshals under the direction of national and local executives. Militant activists must reject the role of "left critics" of the bureaucracy, refuse the terms of the compromise with the bosses and directly challenge those who seek to enforce it. It is necessary to build a rank-and-file rebellion in the unions that actually works to break the hold of the bureaucracy.

Conclusion: Rank-And-File Autonomy

Real rank-and-file autonomy means being prepared and willing to fight independently of the bureaucracy and against it when required. As anarchists we must be upfront, open and direct about confronting the bureaucrats and conservatives within our unions. We should not put any gloss on efforts to contain rank-and-file militancy or excuse it for any reason. We must contest reformist and Leninist approaches to rank-and-file movements which would position them as conscientious pressure groups.

None of this is meant to imply that the leadership is holding back an otherwise radical membership. That is romantic silliness. Rather, the point is that developing militancy within union movements requires a clear recognition of the necessity for developing experiences of effective struggle that go beyond what the bosses or governments would permit and, at the same time, viewing honestly how the current unions leadership impedes this.

Rank-and-file movements offer a space for radicalizing workers to come together and focus our energies. When people engage in struggles, whether strikes or demonstrations against neoliberalism, we develop at least some sense of collective power, confidence and an experience of doing things differently. This can encourage an openness to more radical ideas and practices with which to address to problems we find ourselves facing. Mainstream unions, even where some resources are given to political education, are generally not going to present and develop radical alternatives. Certainly the leadership of mainstream unions cannot be expected to do so. As anarchist workers this is one area in which we can and should be active. Putting forward radical alternatives, agitating for those alternatives and working to make them real should be part of the work we do within rank-and-file networks.

These are merely first steps in a long process of building rank-and-file opposition. They are initiatives for working class self-activity that should not be limited to being a democratic complement to the bureaucracy. We need to think beyond this to see something more in the emergence and growth of autonomous rank-and-file networks. The need to build a resistance that includes rank-and-file unionists, non-organized workers, non-status workers and migrants is critical.

The capitalist offensives of the last decade in Ontario have broken down working-class organization and resistance. Dismantling employment standards, freezing the minimum wage, eliminating rent controls and deepening cuts to social assistance for unemployed workers have made life more precarious for broadening sections of the working class.

This situation is not just a matter for deep humanitarian concern but a serious warning to the workers' movement. If the working class is reaching such a level of polarization and a section of it is experiencing such misery and privation, we are in a profoundly dangerous situation.

The working class is potentially a force for moving struggles beyond rebellion to fundamentally transform social relations and actually create society anew. This force must, however, break down many of the constraints and limitations that keep its development from realizing this anti-capitalist potential. Currently unions are largely defensive organizations geared to protect and improve workers' wages and conditions of work. They are not revolutionary, or even radical, organizations. At the same time, radical movements do emerge within existing unions.

Many workers are becoming tired of engaging in struggle only to find themselves under attack, not only by the boss, but by the officials of their own unions. The questionable actions of the OFL, especially during last year's Tory convention when the OFL organized a separate action and then left the scene when activists were attacked by police, have convinced some grassroots activists and rank-and-file workers alike of the need to make end runs around the unions officialdom and develop real alliances. Certainly this is a healthy development, one which anarchists must take seriously. This means meeting with rank-and-file workers and having serious discussions about what sort of assistance anti-capitalist movements can offer in their struggles against conservative leadership, policies and structures in their own unions.

Too often the measure of labor involvement in coalitions in Ontario has been the amount of money given to a campaign, the forcefulness of rhetoric from high profile leaders, or the winning of a motion at this or that convention. The only way that any sort of credible resistance movement is going to be forged in Ontario, however, is through a redoubling of efforts to make connections between grassroots community groups and rank-and-file workers. Indeed direct action workshops are something anarchist activists can and should offer. We should also be ready to provide picket support, help build flying squads or industrial unions among unorganized workers, as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) have done among squeegee workers in Vancouver and involve ourselves in the creation of joint union-community anti-racism and anti-poverty working groups. Anarchist workers must play an active part in building truly rank-and-file flying squads and working groups whether we are in a union, in unorganized workplaces, or unemployed.

===============

REFERENCES

Clarke, John. 2002. The Labor Bureaucracy and the Fight Against the Ontario Tories. Unpublished Manuscript.

Neill, Monty. 2001. "Rethinking Class Composition Analysis in Light of the Zapatistas." In Auroras of the Zapatistas: Local and Global Struggles of the Fourth World War, edited by Midnight Notes. Brooklyn: Autonomedia, p.119-143.

===============

Jeff Shantz is a member of the Candian Union of Public Employees local 3903, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), and Punching Out Collective (NEFAC-Toronto).

Winning the class war - An anarcho-syndicalist strategy

2010-07-19T18:25:00.001-07:00

We here at Winnipeg Wobbly Blog have been a little behind in our posting. Truth is, July isn't a good month to get anything done. Hot long days combined with the Winnipeg Folk Festival means all work comes to a hault. So, just to have something up, here is peice of anarcho-syndicalist history.

Winning the class war - An anarcho-syndicalist strategy

The Direct Action Movement's 1991 pamphlet on strategy, setting out a vision of networks of militant workers seeking to create explicitly revolutionary workplace and community based groups capable of initiating collective direct action - revolutionary unions. The DAM became Solidarity Federation in 1994.

"One must try to increase as much as possible the theoretical content of all our activities, but without the 'dry and shriveled doctrinalism' which could destroy in part the great constructive action which our comrades are carrying forward in the relentless fight between the haves and the have nots. Our people stand for action on the march. It is while going forward that we overtake. Don't hold them back, even to teach them `the most beautiful theories' ..."

Francisco Ascaso, from Durruti — the People Armed

Throwing down the gauntlet

Major social changes have taken place these last few years in Britain and throughout the world, and changes continue to take place at an increasing rate. 'Thatcherism' has, over the past decade, made a decisive move away from the mixed economy and welfare state of the so-called post-war political concensus, stridently bearing the standard of free-market capitalism and anti-trades unionism. It is becoming increasingly apparent to everyone that our fate is very much tied in with international economics and politics. The events in eastern Europe will have major repercussions on the whole world, and the balance of power within it, as will the creation of the Single European Market in 1992.

The working class needs to take stock of the new situation in which it finds itself, and needs to organise itself as a class if it is to fight for its interests against the bosses.

The once all-powerful British trades unions have, faced with a hostile Tory Government and with employers not prepared to accept the gains made by workers over past decades, failed, and failed miserably. How many times since the steelworkers' strike of 1980 have we seen sections of workers left to fight on their own with the TUC leaders merely mouthing words of support?

The trades unions are not going to fight for workers' interests in the 1990s and beyond. In the past the unions paid lip-service to the emancipation of the working class and to Socialism (meaning Labourism). They don't even pay lip-service now.

Originally, unions were an inevitable reaction by workers to the realities of life in a class society. The workers needed to defend themselves against the opposing interests of the bosses and organised themselves into combinations and trade unions in order to do this, realising that workers' strength lay in the organisation of their large numbers.

The unions in this country accepted the legitimacy of the existence of social classes. They did not want to put an end to an exploitative social system but to get the best for workers within it, which, in practice, means collaborating with the bosses and the capitalist system. The class collaboration of the unions has led them to become more and more a part of the system. It now means that they not only fail to defend workers' interests but often go firmly against them. Their priority if getting 'recognition' at any price (recognition from the bosses, of course, not the workers). Getting back to the good old days of beer and sandwiches at Number 10 is what they are interested in, not fighting the class struggle.

All the time we hear workers and left-wingers accusing the trade union leaders of selling out and being bureaucratic. This is, of course, true, but we view this as inevitable in organisations that aim to collaborate with capitalism rather than to destroy it.

The reality is that if the working class doesn't take things to the heart of the matter and destroy the class system and take control of society, we are doomed to a perpetual struggle to live: we fight — they give a bit — they take it back — we fight ...

Workers' gains might last for some time (for example, the conditions won by printworkers, which have now largely gone out of the window) or only a short while (until management reinterpret the agreement they made the week before) but, sooner or later, the struggle starts all over again.

What is needed is a long-term perspective that goes beyond wages and conditions, that looks to winning a decisive victory in the class war.

Only workers through organisations they themselves run can gain that victory. For years, political solutions have been put, by trade unionism, in the hands of the Labour Party, supposedly fighting for us in the bastions of power and privilege. What have workers got to show for it all? Neil Kinnock? The answer is not to put our faith in more radical or 'revolutionary' political parties. The answer is having faith in ourselves, in our class to fight our own battles. The slogan of the First Workers' International has stood the test of time: "the emancipation of the workers is the task of the workers themselves". The workers themselves, not the 'professional revolutionaries' and the intellectuals who follow in the footsteps of the dictators Lenin and Trotsky.

We must recognise no power over the working class, and likewise we can allow no institutionalised power within our own organisations. The apathy and powerlessness the present unions create in their members cannot be allowed to continue. The decision-making process must be under the control of the workers. Real workers' organisations have no need for full-time officials. They become superfluous when we take our destinies into our own hands.

Working class organisations should seek to unite our class (and that includes those not in work) rather than fighting for petty sectional interests. Look at the trade unions: fighting each other to 'unionise' workplaces that haven't even been built, like they are bidding for a contract — lowest offer wins. Instead of this, SOLIDARITY must again become the morality of the workers' movement. An injury to one is an injury to all.

But the most important thing of all is that workers' unions should not only fight for immediate improvements in our lives but should have the aim of creating a free and classless society, based on workers' control and the satisfaction of human needs.

Since the trade unions are not in any way designed to carry out these aims and, indeed, are themselves an important part of capitalism, our objective cannot be to reform them (still less to elect 'better' leaders), but has to be to create a new and altogether independent workers' movement.

After years of dominance by social-democratic trade unions and Labour Party what we are advocating — revolutionary unionism — is certainly a bold step. However, what we want is not entirely new and untried. With the failure of trade unionism and the collapse of Marxism-Leninism the old traditions of revolutionary unionism and anarcho-syndicalism inspire and teach us as we build a new workers' movement.

Finally, this pamphlet is not a blue-print for the creation of such a movement. The precise directions of a living movement cannot and should not be laid down in advance in pillars of stone. It represents, rather, a first step in the process of bringing about a revolutionary workers' movement.

The phoney war

Surely if nothing else the Thatcherite eighties have exposed the bankruptcy of reformist trade unions. In the very first year of the decade the planned attacks on the organised sections of the working class began with the brutal closure of steel mills resulting in the loss of thousands of jobs and the destruction of whole communities. It was to set a dreadful pattern repeated throughout the decade as groups of workers from miners, print workers through to ambulance workers were left, with honourable exceptions, isolated to slug it out with rampant management backed by the full force of the state. A by-product of these long hard disputes is the now common sight of groups of workers being forced on to the streets in order to collect money just to survive. Indeed, as the decade came to an end with the ambulance dispute, union leaders, having now dropped totally the idea of class struggle and the need to spread disputes to other groups of workers, came to see street collecting not as a weakness but part of the strategy for winning. The idea being that it is not collective strength that wins disputes but convincing the 'general public' via the media that you have a 'just' case, and of course large amounts of money collected can be offered up as a sign of so-called public support. The archetype of this new union thinking being the leader and main spokesman during the ambulance dispute, Mr Media himself Roger Poole, who even went so far as to employ a media consultant as an advisor. If as workers we are are not going to be left to the mercy of these PR men masquerading as trade unionists it is essential that we start looking at why the struggles of the '80s were lost and at the very nature of reformist trade unions. We must look at what the unions' aims are, how do they function and what role do the cliched rank and file have within them? We also have to look at the 'lefts' traditional response to the unions and the role they play within them. In short we have to start by asking what lies behind the myth of British trade unions?

Let us start by looking at the basic building block of any union — the branch. The first thing to note is that the vast majority of branches exist and function away from the point of struggle, that is the workplace. The only contact with the workplace the branch has, and therefore the union, is through the workplace activists who attend and the workers who bring problems encountered in their daily working lives to the branch to solve. This they only do on rare occasions and it is safe to say that most workers only attend branch meetings on a handful of occasions throughout their working lives, if at all. Indeed, surveys show that at any given point only 5% of union members attend branch meetings. Nor is it necessarily the case that even those who attend on a regular basis have much in common. Many unions organise meetings on the basis of where members live, these meetings can consist of groups of people who may not work in the same workplace or even the same industry, the only thing in common being that they happen to belong to the same union. This type of meeting can even be reduced to members just turning up to pay dues. Even those in unions that do organise on an industrial basis union meetings are still dominated not by workplace matters but internal union business. The staple diet of such meetings being the endless correspondence, various motions and the countless elections and nominations to the various committees, conferences and union positions. Which may be all well and good if the views expressed at branches were treated for what they are — the views of the tiny number of activists. But they are not. What happens at union meetings is that you have tens of people acting for hundreds and occasionally hundreds acting for thousands. The culmination of this charade being the block vote where union leaders get up at various conferences casting votes on behalf of hundreds of thousands of members on policies and for people that the overwhelming majority of members will never have heard of let alone voted for.

We should also dispel the idea that all branch activists are also involved in the workplace struggle against the bosses. For a start, in many unions branch secretaries are full-timers so never see the workplace. And even when they are not officially full-time they can become so through the back door method, by sitting on so many committees and holding so many positions they do not have the time for something as mundane as work. Then there are those who are active in the union but have no base in the workplace. These people can even be on the so-called 'left' of the union who will argue for all sorts of motions to be passed from 'troops out' to bringing down apartheid, all of which will be achieved by strongly worded letters from the union, but do little to organise in the workplace and would not dream of organising strike action in defence of basic rights. Indeed it could be argued that unions act as a check on militancy even at branch level. How often do angry workers turn to the branch for support and advice over incidents that have happened at work only to have all that anger deflected away from taking effective action by branch officials promising to 'get something done' by contacting head office or bringing in the full-timer. If then, branch meetings are hardly hives of activity where the mass of workers meet, argue and exchange ideas, it can be said that they so at least retain some links with mass of the membership.

Which is more than can be said about most union bodies above branch level. We now enter that strange world of the full-time union official whose working lives consist of endless meetings with other union officials, management and union activists. The only time these people come across ordinary union members is when they are called in, often by management to 'resolve' a problem. The higher up the union structure the more remote they became, ending with union leaders who only come across ordinary working class people on a day to day basis when they have a friendly chat with their chauffeur or the office cleaner.

It is safe to say then that the unions exist in the main outside the workplace with the bulk of union activity taking place above the members heads. The ordinary members commitment being limited by paying subs and perhaps seeing the need to 'support the union'. Looking to the union in return for help if trouble does arise as individuals or collectively.

Given that the unions organise away from the point of struggle, let us turn to their aims and how they set about achieving those aims. The main aim of any union is to maintain its power within as part of the wider trade union movement and also to exert pressure and maintain influence on the state, management and society as a whole. They seek to do this in various ways, one of the most important being maintaining as high a membership as possible. This is of prime importance not least in the TUC pecking order. This has now reached the point where it seems to matter little how remote it inactive that membership is or maybe just as long as the dues are coming in and membership figures are up. Getting to the bizarre stage where unions sign up members, in single union deals for factories that are not yet even built. As for their role within the state and government, this has all but been eliminated under Thatcher. But the desperation of the unions can be seen for instance in the willingness of the 'mighty' TUC, in return for being allowed some involvement with what was the Manpower Services Commission, helping to administer youth schemes like the YTS that not only pay slave wages but encouraged dangerous working conditions for thousands of working class young people. But of all the areas that the unions seek to have influence in by far the most important is its dealing with management, for it is from this area that all their power flows. They must retain the right to negotiate wages and conditions with management. It is by having the power to negotiate on behalf of workers that they retain their influence within the workplace and ultimately attract and retain members.

In turn it is having that control and influence in the workplace that they are of use to the boss class. The unions offer stability in the workplace, they channel workers anger, shape and influence their demands and, if need be, act to police the workforce. Perhaps this is best summed up by a quote from the boss class themselves: a manager when asked by a reporter why his multi-national had recognised unions in South Africa replied "have you ever tried negotiating with a football field full of militant angry workers?" And it was this threat of an uncontrollable militant, if not revolutionary workforce, that first persuaded the capitalist of the need to accept reformist unions, seeing them as a way to control the workforce.

Not that this position between workforce and management has been easy to maintain for the unions. On the one hand they have struggled to control workplace oriented strikes at times of workers militancy, often refusing to make strikes 'official'. They have even lowered themselves to issuing threats of the removal of union cards in the days of the close shop, thus endangering workers' jobs, if the workers refused to go back to work. On the other hand, in times of recession and reduced workers militancy, union bosses are face with a management freed from the need to control the workforce, to a degree anyway, so the union has a reduced or no role at all, leaving them with no option but to call strikes to defend their position. No better example of this can be found than in the 1989 railworkers strike. British Rail having virtually ignored the union for years decided to go the whole hog and withdraw national pay bargaining. The panic-stricken NUR leaders had no choice than to call a national strike, for only the first time since 1926, apart from the one-day fiasco in 1962.

Because of the union weakness in the workplace, they had to lump a number of issues together, call for the most acceptable action possible, and organise tours of workplaces to try to get the message across. Needless to say, even with a highly successful strike the action was soon called off and all other issues dropped once management conceded national pay bargaining.

But then strikes have always been the last resort for unions and then only for short-term gains. In the long term they seek the election of Labour governments, under which the leadership could sit down with capitalists and the state to administer society for the supposed benefit of all. The control over the workforce would be their guarantee of power. However, the Thatcher years have meant that the unions have had to redefine how they maintain their position. Whereas in the past their power has been based on their ability to both control and at times promote workers militancy, now much more emphasis. is being placed on the old enemy, the law, to guarantee their position. Under a Labour government's so-called 'positive workers right' not only will the unions right to recruit workers be made law, but a new system, guaranteeing negotiating rights, based on the European-style Workers Councils, will be introduced. There is no doubt as we enter the '90s that the trade unions are looking for the Northern European style of unions, with their emphasis on individual rights, as opposed to the collective rights with binding arbitration, and co-operation as opposed to strike action as the way forward. To quote that rising star of the TUC and assistant to Willis, John Monks: "We still represent 40% of the workforce. Social partnership is the norm in Europe. It is Britain that is out of step." And even without a Labour government, with 1992 and the European Social Charter, Mr Monks may still have his way.

As the movement in the unions away from strikes gathers pace, we must consider how little trade unions have used the strike weapon in any case. To do this it is important to distinguish between two types of strike: the first are those organised by the union which may or may not have the backing of the workforce; and secondly those organised in the workplace by the workers themselves and which are not supported by or made official by the union. It is the latter which forms the bulk of strikes and which have in fact been the mainstay and backbone of workers militancy in Britain. The Donovan Report, which came out of the Royal Commission into the unions and was set up by a Labour government, found that no less than 95% of post-war strikes were unofficial. The people often at the centre of these strikes were shop stewards who, being based in the workplace and having the support of the people they worked with daily, were in a position to organise quick and effective strikes which resolved problems and made gains.

But by acting as the focal point of workers struggles, not only did shop stewards come into conflict with management, they also came into conflict with the unions who did everything they could, in the main unsuccessfully, to contain them, To quote Bill Jordan of the AEU, commenting on why the unions 'social contract' with the Labour government went wrong, states: "We reverted to type, as if fighting a 19th century class war. We failed to respond because of the rise and rise of the power of the shop stewards. The power of the full-time officials was passed into the factory ... when national officials were asked to deliver their side of the social contract they couldn't." In other words the unions could not keep their side of the bargain with the state because workers were ignoring the unions' call for class collaboration and had taken matters into their own hands.

The question must be asked, why after decades of militancy, workers were unable to organise a general fight back against Tory government attacks? And with hindsight it is not hard to see some of the fundamental faults which existed. One of the most basic being that workers still restricted themselves, through the unions, to economic struggles. No wider political perspective was put forward linking the day-to-day struggles with the need for an alternative to capitalism. This was not so much a problem in the post-war boom, but come the recession in the late '70s where management were opening their empty order books to workers and blaming the international slump for redundancies, then there was a crying need for an organisation committed to putting forward an alternative to capitalism. A role the reformist trade unions were unwilling and unable to take on.

Again we had workers in conflict with and feeling betrayed by the unions whilst no alternative was put forward. Few national workplace organisations were built where workers could come together to discuss problems and plan actions. This left them dependent on the unions for an overall view of their industries. Whilst direct links with workers in other industries were not made, meaning that relations with other groups of workers was conducted through inter-union bodies and the TUC. These factors tended to leave groups of workers isolated with their efforts concentrated on the immediate day-to-day issues. As the Donovan Report found, the vast majority of strikes were over local issues only lasting for a few days.

The above problems were to prove fatal when Thatcher came to power. For what the '80s have shown was not that workers were not prepared to fight, after all group after group of workers have attempted to take on the state, but that workers have no organisation that could co-ordinate and plan a class-wide offensive. Having few direct links with workplaces outside of their own industries, strikers were forced to appeal for support through other unions and the TUC. These bodies, in the majority of cases, did not even try to mobilise support. On the few occasions when unions did back workers from other unions, links with their own members had become so weak that they were unable to get them to take action. No better example of this is the miners' strike of 1984-85, when the TGWU ordered its members to boycott coal, only to be ignored by the vast majority of members.

On the other hand, when workers did take solidarity action, it was often the case that because of the nature of their jobs that they had strong links with the people they were supporting. For example, some of the most effective solidarity action during the '80s was taken by railway workers during both the steel and miners strikes, it cannot be mere coincidence that the railworkers gave such tremendous support to two groups of workers with whom they had strong historical links, by working together on a daily basis.

That is not to say that the 'left' has not tried to get over the problems posed by the dominance of the reformist trade unions. Since the war they have attempted to organise 'rank and file' groups in the unions. These have taken various forms, for example Flashlight and Building Workers Charter have set up around the National Rank and File Movement of the '70s, and of course there is the broad left. But the very nature of these groups, and of the politics of those who have tried to organise them, has meant that these groups were also doomed to failure.

Since the war this has taken the form of trying to build rank and file groups within the unions. This task has been undertaken by various political groups from those set up by the CP in the 1950's and 60's, eg Flashlight and Building Workers Charter through to the SWP-dominated rank and files of the 70's and of course the militant-dominated Broad Lefts. Needless to say, such Marxist groups were not slow to manipulate rank and files for their own ends, even if this was to the detriment of those rank and files and the workers involved.

For instance, Building Workers Charter, which and widespread support in the building industry failed to appear in the massive and bitter building workers' strike in the early 70's due to the manoeuvering of the CP. Thus they not only failed to provide an alternative lead to the reformist unions in a crucial strike but so demoralised supporters of Building Workers Charter that it led to its eventual collapse.

Again in 1973 when the IS (now the SWP) tried to set up a national rank and file movement, the CP-dominated rank and files boycotted the conference organised to launch the movement with the Morning Star denouncing the whole event as an IS plot.

The conference itself was so bogged down with the manoeuvering of various sects that the movement never got off the ground. The manoeuvering of the Marxists should come as no surprise because they all saw rank and files not only as recruiting grounds but also as a way of increasing their influence in the unions. This followed from their political theory, that the unions were the place where workers organise at an economic level, whilst the 'more advanced' would wish to organise on a political level and join their organisation. With this outlook the Marxists deliberately set out to limit the rank and files to the basic day-to-day economic struggle. Though there were variations between rank and file groups, with some making vague references to the nationalisation of industry, they were, in the main, devoid of revolutionary politics. You will search in vain for any attempt to link the day-to-day struggles with the need to transform society. The links between the Labour Party and the unions were never challenged, in fact attacks on the Labour Party were restricted to the 'right wing'. Their aims were limited to reforming the unions and defending pay and conditions through the use of industrial action.

It would be a mistake, however, to put down the lack of politics simply to the Marxist influence. Instead we should look at the nature of rank and file groups themselves. They were not made up of masses of ordinary workers but trade union activists who were members of political groups with axes to grind, sinking their political differences to the lowest common denominator, that is militant trade unionism. Perhaps a quote from the paper of one of the more successful rank and files of the 70's, the NALGO Action Group, will illustrate this. An editorial stated: 'the future development of NALGO Action Group remains as it always has, in the hands of its supporters whose political persuasions are less important than their common desire to work for greater democracy and militancy within NALGO and larger trade union movement'.

Indeed as rank and files were made up of activists, often of different political persuasions, it was vital that differences did not surface. Where faction fighting did occur there were all sorts of problems. For instance a number of attempts to start a rank and file in the rail industry in the 70's failed due to political in-fighting. Again, in Building Worker (at the time of writing, still a functioning rank and file) progress has been hindered by differences. To use just one issue of their paper as an example, the 3 main articles consisted of one arguing for the need for a revolutionary party; one for the need to support reform of the Labour Party; and the other for the need for building workers to join the T&G.

The attitude of the post-war rank and files towards the trade unions, all without exception never sought to challenge the reformist nature of the unions. Instead of developing a revolutionary alternative in the workplace they concentrated on trying to reform union structures, often seeking to do little more than making unions more democratic and accountable to 'ordinary members', which in reality, as we have seen above meant little more than the tiny minority that attended branch meetings. This meant that much time and energy was spent working within the union structures outside the workplace. This ranged from caucuses before union meetings; building support for motions to national conferences; and standing for positions at branch level right up to national level. Some even put forward people for TUC elections.

It is true to say that rank and files did some excellent work around various disputes, but by acting as a group standing somewhere between the union and the workplace they also played a negative role. By constantly arguing for changes to the union structure; the need to make branches more democratic; the need for the leadership to be more accountable etc, they not only offered false hope but channeled energy and discontent away from the real problem — the social democratic nature of reformist trade unions.

Class mobilisation

At the turn of the twentieth century, Britain had a large revolutionary (syndicalist) union current. It was still widely believed that the trade unions were, to some extent, malleable; that they were still reformable to a revolutionary position. But following the Russian Revolution, this current was largely seduced by Bolshevism and so became irrelevant to the growth of any real mass working class organisation. Many activists were busy trying to build the Communist Party, rather than a revolutionary class organisation.

Internationally this was not necessarily the case. Anarcho-syndicalist unions were fighting to destroy capitalism and the state either as the majority workers organisations in that particular country, i.e. Argentinean FORA and Spanish CNT; or as minorities, i.e. the Italian USI and the SAC in Sweden.

But eventually revolutionary unionism lost out everywhere to repression from democratic, fascist or Stalinist states, and to the charms of consumer and welfare capitalism.

The economic crisis which has developed since the 1960s, and the failure of reformist unions to fight anti-working class legislation, has led to a regeneration to revolutionary unionism in many parts of the world.

Groups have developed to promote the ideas in Britain, Japan, most of Europe, and in places such as Spain there has been the re-formation and growth of the older established anarcho-syndicalist unions.

Elsewhere we have seen the development of 'independent' unions, for instance in Poland, South Africa and the Philippines. But these lack, have lacked, a clear revolutionary perspective which consequently leads to problems.

In Poland workers are now governed harshly by 'Solidarity; in South Africa unions are being taken over by middle class politicians of the ANC. Independent unions are not in themselves revolutionary. Clear revolutionary political goals are also vital for any real change to develop.

So, what does constitute revolutionary unionism? How is such a union organised? What does it do? What does it believe in?

First and foremost, a revolutionary union has to be more than purely economic in its outlook. It has to be political. Not in a party political sense, but in the knowledge that it is aiming for a completely different kind of society. No doubt members of liberal-social democratic unions will claim that they want something completely different. Well, perhaps they do want something different to Thatcherite freedom and collectivist self-management. They simply want an arena in which they can be involved with the bosses in the running of welfare, pseudo democracy, where they will get the chance to govern come election day with their soul-mates in the Labour Party.

A political outlook cannot develop merely out of the election of politicians. It develops out of an involvement in political decision making. This is a learning experience. Politics and economics are not to be artificially divided. Social democratic unions are bankrupt of any credibility because of their insistence on this divide. When we take economic action through strikes and boycotts, for instance, we should also be learning self-management and solidarity. There is also the opportunity of becoming internationally aware — for instance, the miners strike saw for the first time workers meeting fellow workers and learning from each other, instead of from the pages of some tatty newspaper, or through stereotypes of Spaniards and Germans.

What we want is a libertarian communist society, built by organising in the workplace and the community. What we want is nothing less than the complete overthrow of capitalism, in whatever malign or benign guise it may adopt.

Our union must be based on mutual aid and solidarity. Such fundamental principles are not negotiable. They involve fighting the class war. A phrase so out of fashion with chic, middle class lefties. We know that the class war is ceaseless. We defend our immediate and future needs, whether as part of the union or not. For instance, health and safety at work is vital for all workers as is the wage struggle. Where we differ from the liberals is that we fight for our gains and take them. We totally reject collaboration with the exploiting class. What they deign to give us, they may take back. What we take is ours, and we will not allow them to steal from us again.

So, whilst fighting the class war for immediate gains, we never lose sight that without an end to capitalism, gains are only transitory. We only have to look at how improvements in the conditions of mineworkers and printers were savagely destroyed in the '80s to be aware of this. Even the 'right to strike' is being taken away by Tory legislation, and the Labour Party intends to maintain much of such legislation. What we call for is not the 'right to strike', it is our duty to take industrial action. The end of welfare is evidence that we cannot, and should not, depend on the state for our -well being. Welfare has been used as a weapon against our class, by threats of its withdrawal, and not only threats, so lulling us into servile acquiescence.

Our union must be a combatative, pro-active revolutionary organisation, which uses direct action to achieve its goals.

Its structure is totally different to any reformist or existing working class organisation. However the difference of structure is in itself not enough. The activity and involvement of the union members is still the most important part of any anarcho-syndicalist union. The difference between anarcho-syndicalist and present unions is this basic point: the structure of an anarcho-syndicalist union with its power and decision making at its base, its system of federation and networking means that it can fully utilise what is actually the real power of any working class organisation — vitality and initiative and the day to day involvement of the members.

Current unions squander this vitality. As any active member will show, activity is not based on workplace matters, but wastes time at meetings, futile campaigns, electioneering, and matters arising outside the workplace.

The decision making base of an anarcho-syndicalist union is the workplace. There is only one branch of the union in any workplace as trade divisions are just that — divisive. So anarcho-syndicalism is based on industrial rather than trade divisions. These then link together with other workplaces of the same industry.

This in turn links to a national industrial federation. Workplace unions may link with other unions of any trade in local and area federations for greater local and cross-union solidarity. This would also help create community bases and ties. The locals form the backbone of the union. Together with industrial federations they form the Confederated Union.

An anarcho-syndicalist union has no permanent full time paid officials. Decision making is done via delegates, whilst the running of the union is done by recallable elected people with limited terms. If, as has been known at various times, the workload is so great, a wage may be agreed but only at the holder's previous wage. The practice of an anarcho-syndicalist union, though, is to be as non-bureaucratic and decentralised as possible.

This structure enables effective tactics to be discussed and worked out in the workplace. But the tactics themselves are based on the principles of Anarcho-Syndicalism. Such tactics would t e become relevant with co-ordination for maximum solidarity within the Confederation.

How often have we heard the irrelevant cries from the left to ask the TUC to call a General Strike whenever a group of workers is in struggle. And conversely, how pathetic is the TUC in its tokenistic posturing, calling for 15 minutes 'dignified' stoppages, days of action, birthday parties for the NHS.

People taking industrial action know what is best for their workplace. There are classic examples of effective action, from work to rules to go slows, sabotage, selective and all-out strikes, sabotage.

During the 1989 local government workers' strike there were instance of computers being sabotaged and essential files being locked away to stop any scabs doing the work. French railway workers sabotaging tracks, ambulance workers occupying stations, miners blocking motorways, solidarity actions where, for instance, miners supported nurses, railway workers refused to carry scab coal, and so it goes on. The best methods are those suited to the prevailing situation, and no-one knows that better than the workers involved.

Faced with a violently hostile government, prepared to spend a fortune to win industrial disputes, the all-out and stay-out approach is as archaic as the reformist trade union movement itself. As shown by the miners, P&O Seafarers and the News International printers, holding out month after month was no substitute for class solidarity. Glorious defeats will not change society or overthrow capitalism. We have to use our experience and imaginations to do whatever is necessary to win. To allow the imagination to flourish, workers must be in control of our own destinies, not pawns in some union leader's power game.

So what is required is the imagination of the workforce coupled with a flexible approach, workforce control and immoveable principles, if we are to ensure effective activity.

We also recognise that concerns at work do not end at the factory gates, there have to be links with the communities in which' we live. Toxic emissions concern not only workers, but the people living downwind from such plants; poisoned food is eaten by everyone including the workers who produce it; housing matters concern workers and tenants and the homeless; we cannot leave concerns to a few individuals and small sections of workers, or we end up with such debacles as Sellafield, where people have been dying for years whilst government experts say there is nothing wrong, and workers choose to hide their heads in the sand rather than confront the bosses.

This also extends into our international approach. All workers suffer the yoke of capitalism. The environment, multinationals, maldistribution of food, the third world debt, militarism, concerns every one of us and calls for international working class action.

We can no longer, nor could we ever, depend on political leaders to improve our society or our world. The time has come for a radical form of organisation based on internationalism, solidarity and the class war. We can live without the bureaucrats of whatever persuasion.

It is our struggle, it is up to us to organise to win the war now.

On the offensive

Having stated how we perceive an anarcho-syndicalist union and why we see such a development as necessary, the union cannot be built out of thin air or with paper membership, nor can it be linked by economic militancy alone. An anarcho-syndicalist union is not just an economic fighting force, but also an organisation with a political context. To build such a union requires a lot of work and experience. As a step in this direction the DAM is initiating what it calls Industrial Networks.

The idea of an industrial network is a break from the past where rank and file efforts to organise have been within the constraints of the existing social democratic organisations and practices. There have been others that have grown up mainly out of struggle and displayed healthy methods of organisation but as a consequence of their purely reactive nature and limited political content have faded away once the focus of struggle has moved.

An industrial network would initially be a political grouping in the economic sphere, aiming to build a less reactive but positive organisation within the industry. The long term aim of industrial networks is, obviously, the creation of an anarcho-syndicalist union.

In accordance with this aim, and in keeping with the principles of anarcho-syndicalism we must build a framework from which such a union can be built. To do this the industrial networks must be organised at the grassroots and work through mutual federation with other networks in the same industry to create a national federation within that industry. Also to federate on a local level with networks in other industries to create a locally based organisation. Federation is basically very simple, but because of its flexibility it would be unwise to lay down rigid guidelines as to how to put them into practice. Solidarity and mutual support are the essence of federalism.

It would be a futile leftist prank, of the kind the working class has seen far too much of in the past, if an industrial network was merely a network of contacts. We see no point in industrial networks unless they provide a framework for militant workers to begin to be able to set their own agenda and independence of action. By this we mean that we should be able to choose our own issues and set of demands. Anything short of outright revolution can only negotiate temporary gains under capitalism. The boss class is forever changing the rules, changing its demands, taking away hard fought for benefits. We believe that we should adopt a reciprocal attitude to the bosses. One day we might fight for National Pay Agreements, the next for local ones, the contradiction doesn't bother us. We should fight for what we want, when we want it and not allow the bosses or reformist unions to decide for us what is and is not permissible. This is what we mean by setting our own agenda, even though it may include, from time to time, fighting for the same things as the reformists.

Initially industrial networks are likely to be groupings not necessarily based within the same workplace as this would limit activity, but the issues may be able to be generalised. Local and industry wide issues can be tackled, and being based locally and within the workplace, the members of a Network are ideally positioned to stimulate debate. Network members are also in an excellent position to help break the isolation felt in many workplaces as to the situation in the rest of the industry. The reformist unions maintain an iron grip on information which, especially during disputes, is vital. Workers need an overall view and reliable sources other than the media or union if they are to take effective action. This, along with encouraging workplace organisation, holding local meetings and trying to stimulate solidarity, independence and flexibility of action gives industrial networks a key role to play during disputes.

Networks will always be seeking to grow through activity and action, based upon our principles. Not for its own sake, nor as a mere opposition force to the social-democratic union structures —but as an independent force aiming to become an anarcho-syndicalist union. This obviously brings us on to how we see the relationship an industrial network and its militants have with the existing trade unions.

We make no bones about our attitude to the trade unions. We may be members of them, we may fight for union rights, but we are totally against the present unions, not just their leadership, but also their structures and aims. We intend to use the unions to suit our own interests, so we defend union rights solely to fight for the rights of the workers. We do not intend to fight for positions within the unions, nor should networks be pushed through branches. To become absorbed within the union, particularly within its hierarchy, is to nullify militancy and flexible thought, with endless meetings that bear no relevance to the workplace or to the members of the union. To us the only organisation capable of representing the workers' interests, has to be workplace and industrially based, especially if it is syndicalist in its outlook. That is, it sees workers' organisations as the only legitimate bodies of expressing the opinions and interests of workers, that bureaucrats and intermediaries are surplus to the requirements of workers as they only serve to control militancy and their own dubious positions.

We have no intention of isolating ourselves from the many workers who make up the rest of the rank and file membership of the unions. We recognise that a large proportion of trade union members are only nominally so as the main activity of the social democratic unions is outside the workplace. Though the industrial networks are fairly specific in so far as they are anarcho-syndicalist and aim to create an anarcho-syndicalist union, they aim, in accordance with anarcho-syndicalist principles, to encourage general workplace activity ie workplace meetings, strike committees, etc, outside of the sphere of influence of the unions and other 'interested' bodies, like political parties.

We would see these activities as broad based, and whilst obviously respecting the consensus, industrial networks would maintain their independence and identity. But it is part of our political/economic outlook to fight vigorously for these kinds of bodies outside of the TU control. We aim to unite and not divide workers.

It has been argued that social democratic unions will not tolerate this kind of activity, and that we would be all expelled and thus isolated. So be it. We, however, don't think that this will happen until there is a threat to the TUs themselves. To present such a threat would imply a degree of success in stimulating workplace activity and building of anarcho-syndicalist networks of militant workers. This in turn would imply that workplace militants had found a voice independent of the TUs and so they become less useful to us anyway. Our aim is not to support social democracy, but to show it up as irrelevant to the working class.

We have claimed that the idea of industrial networks and their combined economic / political outlook are new. And in the history of the last few decades they are. But to be honest, these are only reconstructed ideas from the days when the working class had a bit of clout, before social democracy entwined itself around and strangled our ideas and organisations. They were effective then and can be more so now that social democracy has shown itself for the bankrupt system that it is.

The ambulance workers dispute of 89/90 showed how fully social democracy is willing to sell out workers for short term gains. The trade union was willing to sacrifice the right of workers to strike in return for a settlement. Roger Poole, the union's stitch up man was forever claiming each deal that he got was the best that could be expected, and the final sell out was so far removed from the workers' demands that Poole had to actively go out and try to sell it to the workers. To us this is utterly absurd.

The railway workers' dispute of 89 was another example of trade unions placing their own interests above those of the workers to protect the positions and egos of the leaders. Knapp gloried in the media attention whilst controlling the effectiveness of the actions taken so that he could settle for an extra 0.1% without a deal on conditions. This kind of increase on the original offer without fulfilling the demands on conditions, some of which were basic demands, shows the ineptitude of the unions' powerbroking and the self inflated importance of the leadership.

Contrast this with the London Underground workers who took action on their own accord and did very well until the trade unions kidnapped the dispute. The workers never really regained the initiative and were thus forced to accept the unions negotiated sellout. A further example of unions nullifying militancy. The last decade or so has been full of similar examples of unions selling deals to its members, counteracting any militancy, total inflexibility and the complete abdication of class interests as they wrangle and cajole to get their feet under the bosses table.

Rank and filism which we have experienced in the recent past is no longer acceptable to us as it entails either political subordination to its inventors, who act as external influences on the organisation, the Socialist Workers Party, Communist Party and Workers Revolutionary Party being particularly noteworthy examples of external manipulators, or else the Rank and File Groups lack any political outlook and ends up as a permanent critic of the leadership, and nothing more.

We want to encourage genuine grassroots activity, on its own initiative and with its own aims and agenda. But we also want a politically conscious and motivated network of militants both to encourage this and to learn and develop its own independence. Not all members of an anarcho-syndicalist organisation have to be anarcho-syndicalists, they have only to accept the organisational framework and principles. For us this is the only way forward for the class. We must stop the dependence on the petrified corpse of Trade Unionism and stop abdicating political responsibility to the middle class in its Labour Party garb.

A call to arms

The 1990's herald a new decade, we are told that this will be a decade of hope for the future, for freedom and democracy. How easily these assumptions are pulled out of a public relations stock phrase book.

It is difficult to predict the future particularly with the world of capital realigning itself and the very market-hungry forces within it all set to capitalise on the political realignment in Eastern Europe. With the submerging of competing nations to form economic blocks, about to become more formalised in 1992 and the apparent elimination of socialism from the political arena, it is obvious that the world is changing rapidly. But this changing world is the world of capital readjusting itself in its time honoured fashion of averting perpetual crisis by carving more profit for itself. The avaricious tentacles of capitalism ingesting power and capital and excreting an homogenous culture of coca cola, big macs and prime time TV so destroying working class identity cultures and language in its pursuit of total world capital. Now it seems that this relentless devastation of the planet and the people that live on it can continue unchecked.

The much hailed collapse of socialism, or rather the Marxist-Leninist interpretation of socialism, has added further fuel to the fire of those who see the sole aim of the trade unions and the Labour Party is to accommodate the working class within capitalism rather than destroying capitalism itself. We see nothing in the Marxist-Leninist interpretations of socialism and revolution that is of benefit to the working class. Its combination of historical determinism and elitism led it on an inevitable course of centralisation and rigidity and unashamed dictatorship. The effects of this on the working class of the countries that came under its influence is well documented. We want revolution but not the false idea of some mythical homogenous mass rising to fulfill its historical destiny. This is pure fatalism of the kind that destroys any chance of a genuinely creative force capable of destroying capitalism once and for all. We seek and desire a revolution of the individual and community in harmony, where every member of society feels a part of that society and so plays an active part in it, rather than being a mere cog in a vast machine outside of their control. Capitalism needs to be totally eradicated. To allow ourselves to be accommodated within it as the likes of Kinnock and Willis would have is to destroy our humanity and lose all social responsibility.

The 'Social Charter' advocated by our so-called representatives within the EEC is part of that process of assimilation which highlights their lack of understanding of the needs of the working class. It is solely a tool to enhance the all-powerful super-state and economy of Europe, and as usual leaves us with as little as possible in the attempt to buy us off and accept capitalism. It displays the absolute bankruptcy of the trade unions and the so-called parties of the working class. They no longer have any connection with the day-to-day needs of the working class let alone any desire for revolution and the overthrow of capitalism. A cosy seat on the boardrooms of Europe would seem to be the height of ambition for our brave trade union leaders, the 'fighting organisations of our class'.

The need for an organisation capable of fighting the bosses and of furthering revolution is so starkly obvious that its absence can only further demoralise any rebellious spirit. We want to see a workers' organisation that is both political, economic and internationalist. Any divisions between these are totally artificial. We want the organisation to be controlled by its members, and for it to be a creative force in society.

The idea of class and revolution are deemed antiquated by those in power, particularly those on the left as they have most to lose. The left wing middle class cosy in their homes discussing socialism over quiche and perrier, keeping it for themselves as a nice academic exercise whilst maintaining their control over our class within their positions as union or political leaders or in their university trained occupations.

But we see revolution and class analysis as being more valid than ever. The time has come for the working class to fight back. As the field seems to have been cleared of opponents to capitalism —the trade unions, the Labour Party, and the Marxist-Leninists have all shown their cowardice and inadequacies, so now anarcho-syndicalism will be the potent force for fighting back. It contains all the strengths needed to defeat capitalism and bring about a libertarian communist world.

As we said earlier, the 90's have been heralded as the decade of caring, of hope, of freedom and democracy, but these must be on our terms and we'll have them — BUT NOT WITHOUT A FIGHT

The Principles of Revolutionary Syndicalism

Revolutionary syndicalism is based on the class struggle and holds that all workers must unite in economic combative organisations. These organisations must fight for liberation from the double yoke of capital and the state. Its goal is the reorganisation of social life on the basis of libertarian communism, which will be achieved by the revolutionary action of the working class. Considering that only the economic organisations of the proletariat are capable of reaching this objective, revolutionary syndicalism addresses itself to workers in their capacity as producers, as creators of social wealth, so that it will take root and develop among them in opposition to the modern workers' parties, which it declares inept for the economic reorganisation of society.
Revolutionary syndicalism is the pronounced enemy of all economic and social monopoly. It aims at the abolition of privilege by the establishing of economic communes and administrative organs run by the workers in the fields and factories, forming a system of free councils without subordination to any power or political party. Revolutionary syndicalism poses as an alternative to the politics of states and parties, the economic reorganisation of production. It is opposed to the governing of people by others and poses self-management as an alternative. Consequently, the goal of revolutionary syndicalism is not the conquest of political power, but the abolition of all state functions in the life of society. Revolutionary syndicalism considers that the disappearance of the monopoly of property must also be accompanied by the disappearance of all forms of domination. Statism, however camouflaged, can never be an instrument for human liberation and, on the contrary, will always be the creator of new monopolies and privileges.
Revolutionary syndicalism has a twofold function. It carries on the revolutionary struggle in all countries for the economic, social and intellectual improvement of the working class within the limits of present day society. It also seeks to educate the masses so that they will be able to competently manage the processes of production and distribution through the socialisation of all wealth. Revolutionary syndicalism does not accept the idea that the organisation of a social system based exclusively on the producing class can be ordered by simple governmental decrees. It affirms that it can only be obtained through the common action of all manual and intellectual workers, in every branch of industry, by self-management, in such a way that every region, factory or branch of industry is an autonomous member of the economic organism and systematically regulates, on a determined plan and on the basis of mutual agreement, the production and distribution processes according to the interests of the community.
Revolutionary syndicalism is opposed to all organisational tendencies inspired by the centralism of the state and church. These can only prolong the survival of the state and authority and they systematically stifle the spirit of initiative and any independence of thought. Centralism is the artificial organisation which subjects the so-called lower classes to those which claim to be superior. Centralism leaves the affairs of the whole community in the hands of a few — the individual being turned into a robot with regulated movements and gestures. In the centralised organisation, the necessities of society are subordinated to the interests of a few, variety is replaced by uniformity and personal responsibility is replaced by unanimous discipline. It is for this reason that revolutionary syndicalism founds its social conception on a wide federalist organisation, an organisation which works from the bottom to the top by uniting all forces in the defence of common ideas and interests.
Revolutionary syndicalism rejects all parliamentary activity and all collaboration with legislative bodies. It holds that even the freest voting system cannot bring about the disappearance of the clear contradictions at the centre of present day society. The parliamentary system has only one goal: to lend a pretence of legitimacy to the reign of falsehood and social injustice.
Revolutionary syndicalism rejects all arbitrarily created political and national frontiers and declares that what is called nationalism is the religion of the modern state, behind which is concealed the material interests of the ruling classes. Revolutionary syndicalism recognises only economic and regional differences and demands for all groups the right to self-determination without exception.
It is for these reasons that revolutionary syndicalism fights against militarism and war. Revolutionary syndicalism advocates anti-war propaganda and the substitution of permanent armies which are only the instruments of counter-revolution at the service of capitalism, by workers' militias which, during the revolution, will be controlled by the workers' syndicates; it demands, as well, the boycott and embargo of all raw materials and products necessary to war, with the exception of a country where the workers are in the midst of a social revolution, in which case it is necessary to help them defend the revolution. Finally, revolutionary syndicalism advocates the preventive and revolutionary general strike as a means of opposing war and militarism.
Revolutionary syndicalism supports direct action and supports and encourages all struggles which are not in contradiction to its own ends. The means of struggle are: occupations, strikes, boycotts, sabotage, etc. Direct action is best expressed through the general strike. The general strike must, at the same time, from the point of view of revolutionary syndicalism, be the prelude to the social revolution.
While revolutionary syndicalism is opposed to all organised violence of the state, it realises that there will be extremely violent clashes during the decisive struggles between the capitalism of today and the free communism of tomorrow. Consequently, it recognises as valid that violence which can be used as a means of defence against the violent methods used by the ruling class during the social revolution. As expropriations of the land and the means of production can only be carried out and brought to a successful conclusion by the direct intervention of the workers' revolutionary economic organisations, defence of the revolution must also be the task of the economic organisations. Defence of the revolution is not the task of a military or quasi-military body developing independently of these economic organisations.
It is only through the economic and revolutionary organisations of the working class that it will be possible to bring about the liberation and necessary creative energy for the reorganisation of society on the basis of libertarian communism.
The international bond of struggle and solidarity which unites the revolutionary syndicalist organisations of the world is called the International Workers' Association (IWA).

Ends and Objectives of the IWA

The IWA has as its aims:

To organise and press for revolutionary struggle in all countries with the aim of destroying once and for all the present political and economic regimes and to establish a libertarian communist society.
To give a regional and industrial base to the economic syndicalist organisations and, where that already exists, to strengthen those organisations which are determined to fight for the destruction of capitalism and the state.
To prevent the infiltration of any political party into the economic syndicalist organisations and to combat with resolution every attempt at political domination within the unions.
Where circumstances demand it, to establish through a given program which is not in contradiction with the above, provisional alliances with other revolutionary and working class organisations, with the objective of planning and carrying out common international actions in the interest of the working class. Such alliances must never be with political parties and with organisations that accept the state as a system of social organisation.
To unmask and combat the arbitrary violence of all governments against revolutionaries dedicated to the cause of social revolution.
To examine all problems concerning the world proletariat in order to consolidate and develop movements which defend the rights and new conquests of the working class the world over.
To undertake shows of solidarity in the event of important economic struggles against the declared or concealed enemies of the working class.
To give moral and material support to the working class movements whose management is in the hands of the workers themselves.

The International only intervenes in the affairs of a union when its affiliated organisation requests it or when this submits to the general decision of the International.

P.O. Box 29 5W PDO Manchester 15

DAM-IWA Aims and Principles

The Direct Action Movement is a working class organisation.
Our aim is the creation of a free and classless society.
We are fighting to abolish the state, capitalism and wage slavery in all their forms and replace them by self-managed production for need, not profit.
In order to bring about the new social order, the workers must take over the means of production and distribution. We are the sworn enemies of those who would take over on behalf of the workers.
We believe than the only way for the working class to achieve this is by independent organisation in the workplace and the community and federation with others in the same industry and locality, independent of and opposed to all political parties and trade union bureaucracies. All such workers' organisations must be controlled by the workers themselves and must unite rather than divide the workers movement. Any and all delegates of such workers' organisations must be subject to immediate recall by the workers.
We are opposed to all states and state institutions. The working class has no country. The class struggle is worldwide - and recognises no artificial boundaries. The armies and police of all states do not exist to protect the workers of those states, they exist only as the repressive arm of the ruling class.
We oppose racism, sexism, militarism and all attitudes and institutions that stand in the way of equality and the right of all people everywhere to control their own lives and environment.
The Direct Action Movement is resolved to initiate, encourage and wholeheartedly support the creation of independent workers' unions based on the principles anarcho-syndicalism.
The Direct Action Movement is a federation of groups and individuals who believe in the principles of anarcho-syndicalism: a system where the workers alone control industry and the community without the dictates of politicians, bureaucrats, bosses and so-called experts.

Cuba: dialogue ... and debate

2010-07-09T19:22:00.000-07:00

We present the no. 16 issue (July 2010) of CUBA LIBERTARIA, edited by
GALSIC (Grupo de Apoyo a los Libertarios y Sindicalistas Independientes en
Cuba). You may obtain a .pdf file of this edition in Spanish here

-------

It can not be denied that there are meaningful changes taking place in Cuba, though they are few, slow and hard to implement. But they are “changes” nevertheless, that unlike in the past, don’t seem to be the result of simple concessions to external pressure but rather due to the imperatives of domestic needs.

The “dialogue” with the Catholic Church hierarchy is proof that the Castro regime is the mover in a match in which they have decided to forgo check mate and settle for a tie. A tie that means renouncing the monopoly of social representation and stigmatization of the opposition (or at least of a certain opposition) in order to negotiate the resolution of internal
conflicts which also means a sharing of the management of society. Such management doesn’t mean that the regime wants to go towards a decisive democratization, returning to the people the power of decision-making, for we know full well that the Church doesn’t want this either.

In any case, these changes are a fact that can’t be ignored by those of us who have struggled for the Cuban people’s right to decide and build the future of Cuba. We must not because those changes are part of a dynamic of protest caused by the growing social malaise in the midst of Cuban society after many years of being silenced and made to suffer. This spontaneous
underground dynamic finds public expression in the demand for dialogue on all levels and before which the Castro regime is incapable of responding satisfactorily, but also incapable of repressing efficiently as in the past.

However, the dialogue, in order to be more than a formality, must by necessity transform into a debate, a debate on what is wrong, but also on why things are wrong. In other words: a debate on how to get out of the dead end where the so-called Revolution finds itself in order to return to
the Cuban people the freedom, the sovereignty to have an equal say on the future they want for themselves.

-- Libertarian Socialism or Capitalism?

What could be more normal than to have in this debate a meeting of proposals ranging from Marxism to Anarchism, that claim Libertarian Socialism as an alternative to authoritarian socialism or capitalism? This debate is very old, but its unquestioned timeliness is evident in the
contributions we publish. We present to the readers of CUBA LIBERTARIA works by Pedro Campos, a member of the Cátedra Haydeé Santamaría and the Observatorio Crítico, and Gustavo Rodríguez, militant in the Movimiento Libertario Cubano. The reader can judge for him/herself the coincidences and discrepancies in these proposals by the Cuban democratic and
revolutionary Left.

-- To see in the Internet:

Cátedra Haydeé Santamaría - elblogdelacatedra.blogspot.com
Red Observatorio Crítico - observatorio-critico.blogspot.com
Movimiento Libertario Cubano (MLC) - www.mlc.acultura.org.ve
Blog del MLC (in Spanish & English) - movimientolibertariocubano.entodaspartes.net
Polémica Cubana (in French) - www.polemicacubana.fr
Other editions of CUBA LIBERTARIA - www.nodo50.org/ellibertario/cubalibertaria.html

IWW Montreal: Violence !

2010-06-29T09:32:00.000-07:00

Here is an unofficial statement by the online editor of the Montreal IWW's website on the "violence" decried by the media, and the real violence (and hypocrisy) of our corrupt political-economic system.

Violence!
Alors que les libertés civiles et l’habeas corpus ont été suspendu à Toronto pour la durée du sommet, que la police a multiplié les arrestations et les perquisitions sans mandat, les éditorialistes et les commentateurs politiques montent aux barricades pour défendre un système pourri de l’intérieur contre la « violence » des méchants casseurs.

Mais cette dénonciation cache la réalité d’un système qui carbure à la violence, à l’oppression, à l’exploitation. Si elle est spectaculaire, la casse matérielle n’est rien comparée à la violence quotidienne du capitalisme. Ce n’est pas une violence que l’on voit parce qu’elle ne fait pas les manchettes, mais elle fait beaucoup plus de victimes que les quelques vitrines et automobiles qui ont fait les frais de la colère populaire à Toronto en fin de semaine.

Ceux que les éditorialistes et les faiseurs d’opinions des monopoles médiatiques oublient quand ils dénoncent les manifestants, ce sont les 2 canadiens par jour qui meurent au travail, la plupart du temps suite à une négligence des patrons; ce sont les milliers de blessés au travail, qui sortent souvent de cette expérience ruinés et détruits; ce sont les syndicalistes colombiens que Coca-Cola fait assassiner; ce sont les immigrants qui triment à 3$ l’heure dans des emplois précaires et inhumains, traqués par la police de l’immigration; ce sont ces femmes qui, viellies prématurément par des années de travail trop dur et sous-payé, à supporter les caprices des boss et leur insolence, finissent leur vie sur l’aide sociale parce que plus personne ne veut d’elles; ce sont les travailleurs chinois d’Apple, qui se suicident pour échapper à leur sort misérable; ce sont ces familles qui perdent leur maison aux États-Unis, en Espagne, en Irlande, parce que des banques rapaces les ont plumés comme des poulets; ce sont ces millions de travailleurs, partout sur la planète, qui vivent dans la peur du lendemain, du chômage, de la pauvreté abjecte; ce sont ces enfants qui, le premier juillet, se retrouvent sur le troittoir ou dans des taudis, faute de logements abordables; ce sont les travailleuses domestiques phillipines, à qui les agences qui les placent disent qu’il est normal de se faire violer, et qui se voient refusées jusqu’à la CSST; ce sont ces travailleurs migrants qui cueillent nos tomates, font les récoltes dans nos champs, et qui sont bafoués, volés, humiliés par des entreprises sans scrupules; ce sont ces milliards d’humains qui, sur terre, triment toute leur vie pour que quelques-uns aient tout, et tous les autres, rien.

C’est ça, la violence. Ça fait partie du capitalisme, et ça ne disparaîtra qu’avec lui.

Les Péladeau, les Desmarais, les Rémillard – bref les propriétaires des média – n’en ont rien à foutre de ces gens qui subissent la violence quotidienne de leur système; ce sont des gens qui n’ont pas intérêt à ce que le système change, à ce qu’une plus grande justice s’installe. Ce sont eux qui ont tout, qui décident tout, avec leur amis des classes dominantes. Ils ne veulent pas que l’on remette en question leur pouvoir, leurs revenus, leurs richesses.

Alors ils achètent des gens, des « intellectuels », qui produisent un discours pour servir leurs intérêts, pour convaincre les gens que le problème, ce n’est pas la violence quotidienne du capitalisme, qui tue, mutile, torture et exploite.Ils veulent que l’on croit que le problème, ce sont les casseurs, les manifestants, ceux qui sont indignés par l’injustice et qui la trouve intolérable.

Ces gens ne veulent pas que l’on voit les rencontres du G20 pour ce qu’elles sont: des réunions antidémocratiques, cyniques, dans lesquelles les riches et les puissants se partagent le monde en fonction de leurs seuls intérêts.

Ces réunions sont tellement anti-démocratique que la constitution et la charte des droits, que les éditorialistes chérissent en paroles quand elle garanti le droit de propriété, ne s’applique plus pour limiter l’arbitraire policier, pour garantir la liberté de circulation, la liberté d’expression. Le Canada n’est un État de droit que dans la mesure ou aucune opposition ne menace leurs maîtres, où rien ne conteste réellement leur pouvoir.

Un dernier mot sur la stratégie
Certains ont critiqué la stratégie – si s’en était une – de la Convergence des luttes anticapitalistes, qui a appelé les gens à venir manifester à Toronto. Ces critiques soulignent que le résultat était prévisible, certains déplorent que la casse nuise à la conquête de l’opinion publique, d’autres pensent qu’il faut tenter de développer les forces de changement social sur un terrain plus local, mais mieux enraciné.

Toutes ces critiques ont du vrai. En particulier je pense que les militants et les militantes devront tenter de construire des forces de changement social là où leur travail peut aller en profondeur, là où ils peuvent s’enraciner dans leurs lieux de travail, leurs communautés, leurs milieux de vie.

Mais le débat sur la stratégie et la tactique ne doit pas occulter la question politique de fond derrière les récents événements de Toronto. Par leurs actes, les manifestants ont d’abord et avant tout fait résonner la voix des sans voix, et ils en paient maintenant le prix.

Et c’est là l’essentiel.

—————-

À l’heure d’écrire ces lignes, je n’ai pas pu consulter les membres du syndicat au sujet de la position que nous souhaitions adopter face aux événements de Toronto et aux manifestations contre le G8/G20. Comme le sujet est d’importance, j’ai pris sur moi, en tant qu’éditeur responsable du site, de réagir à chaud. La position exprimée ici est donc personnelle, bien que je crois qu’elle respecte les politiques des IWW et l’esprit général qui nous anime.

===============
While civil liberties and habeas corpus were suspended in Toronto for the duration of the summit, the police have stepped up arrests and searches without a warrant, editorial writers and political commentators mount the barricades to defend a rotten system of inside against the "violence" of evil thugs.

But this masks the reality denunciation of a system that thrives on violence, oppression, exploitation. If it is spectacular, the material damage is nothing compared to the daily violence of capitalism. This is not violence that we see because it does not generate headlines, but it is far more victims than the few shop windows and cars that have borne the brunt of popular anger in Toronto this weekend .

Those editorial writers and opinion makers of media monopolies forget when they denounce the demonstrators, they are the 2 Canadian per day who die at work, mostly due to negligence of employers, are the thousands of injured work, which often come out of this experience ruined and destroyed, it is the Colombian trade unionists as Coca-Cola is killed, they are the immigrants who toil for $ 3 an hour in precarious and inhuman, hunted by the police of the immigration, it is these women, premature aging by years of working too hard and underpaid, to support the whims of bosses and their insolence, ending up on welfare because nobody wants them; Chinese workers are Apple, who commit suicide to escape their plight it is those families who lose their homes in the United States, Spain, Ireland, because banks raptors have plucked like chickens; what are these millions of workers around the world who live in the fear of uncertainty, unemployment, abject poverty, it is these children who, on July 1, are found on sidewalks and in slums, lack of affordable housing are the phillipines domestic workers, to whom the agencies that place say it is normal to be raped, and who are denied until the CSST these are migrant workers who pick our tomatoes are crops in our fields, and who are abused, robbed and humiliated by unscrupulous companies, are the billions of humans on earth, toiling all their lives so that few had any, and all the others, nothing .

That's violence. That is part of capitalism, and it does not disappear with him.

The Peladeau, the Desmarais, Remillard - brief media owners - do not give a damn about those people who suffer daily violence in their system, they are people who have no interest in seeing that the system changes , to that greater justice moves. It is they who have everything, who decide everything, with their friends of the ruling classes. They do not want to call into question their power, their income, their wealth.

So they buy people, intellectuals, producing a discourse to serve their interests, to convince people that the problem is not capitalism's daily violence that kills, maims, torture and want exploite.Ils is believed that the problem, what are the rioters, protesters, those who are outraged by injustice and who finds it intolerable.

These people do not want you see the G20 meetings for what they are: anti-democratic meetings, cynical, in which the rich and the powerful divide the world according to their own interests.

The meetings are so anti-democratic constitution and bill of rights, the editorialists cherish words when it guaranteed the right of ownership, no longer applies to limit the arbitrary police, to guarantee freedom of movement, freedom of expression. Canada is a rule of law to the extent that any opposition threatens their masters, where nothing really deny their power.

A final word on strategy
Some have criticized the strategy - if it was - the convergence of anti-capitalist struggles, which called people to come out and show in Toronto. These critics point out that the result was predictable, some were disappointed that the case of harm to the conquest of public opinion, others think that we should try to develop the forces of social change on a site more local, but more firmly.

All of these criticisms were true. In particular I think Activists should try to build forces of social change where they work can go deeper, wherever they may take root in their workplaces, their communities, their living environments.

But the debate on strategy and tactics should not obscure the fundamental political issue behind the recent events Toronto. By their actions, protesters were first and foremost is the resounding voice of the voiceless, and they are now paying the price.

And this is essential.

------

At this writing, I could not see union members about the position we wanted to adopt in dealing with events in Toronto and the protests against the G8/G20. As the topic is important, I took upon myself, as editor responsible for the site, respond to hot. The position expressed here is personal, although I think it meets the policies of the IWW and the general spirit that animates us.

Defend CSAAWU Campaign

2010-06-25T06:37:00.000-07:00

All this information is from the Defend CSAAWU Campaign Facebook page, organized with help by the Cape Town branch in formation. Please take a moment to join the facebook page and see what you can do to support farm workers rights in South Africa.

A Backgroud of South African Farms

There is outright poverty and poverty wages, the social fabric in rural areas is falling apart, there is social decay with increasing alcohol abuse, drug abuse, teenage pregnancy, early school leavers, HIV/AIDS and other social problems as well as the increase of violence against women. Violence in general is a very big problem as there is no culture of respect for human rights from the farmer/farm managers and thus the farm community and workers do not know what it is to live in an environment where you can freely exercise your democratic rights as enshrined in our country’s constitution. If you join a union even the very little you have is under threat by union bashing farmers. What is required is a fundamental change to the very structure or rural society – our mandate is to bring hope to the poor and defenceless on farms, to restore human dignity and confidence amongst the rural working class is central to our campaigns. To empower the rural working class to free themselves!

More than 1.7 million have been evicted from farms since 1994 and evictions continue to be daily occurrences. Apartheid conditions still reign supreme in rural areas and especially on farms. Master-servant relationships and apartheid practice go unchallenged by political parties and especially the state, despite the fact that apartheid was declared a crime against humanity by the world. Intimidation of farm workers by farmers is a powerful weapon which keeps the rural masses in poverty. Intimidation takes many forms including assaults on farm workers, women and children which continue unabated and the police and legal system continue to fail the poor. The use of labour brokers push wages down and poverty to the extreme. Is this not violence against a poor and defenceless people?

The white farmer’s have a mighty organisation in Agri-South Africa, with wealth and influence to back them whilst farm worker organisations remain weak and poor. White farmers own about 87% of productive land, only 3% - 5% of farm workers are organised and the vast majority of black people are landless. These uneven relationships in terms of power and access to land contribute to these inhumane conditions on farms and the confidence of farmers to maintain their apartheid practices. CSAAWU has thrown its full weight into building a strong mass based rural movement (ALARM) with other progressive farm organisations and NGO’s to get the balance right in terms of power and land.

A background of CSAAWU

CSAAWU was formed because of the appalling conditions of farm workers and farm dwellers on South African farms. There is extreme poverty, no benefits for workers and farm workers constitutional and human rights are continuously undermined, including their right to join a union of their choice. Farm workers houses are in very bad conditions (see our pictures) and not fit for human habitat, there are also no toilets and workers and their families have to make use of the bush. This is the case on the majority of South African farms.

CSAAWU was launched 3 years ago and is registered at the Department of Labour as a trade union. CSAAWU membership now stands at 1000 paid-up members and 500 unpaid members. Our members are located in the southern part of the Western Cape and Cape Metro. Our union mandate is to fight for a living wage, better working conditions for all farm workers, land for the landless and a better rural life, free of want and hunger for all farm dwellers. Since CSAAWU’s inception 3 years ago the union has decided not only to focus on labour matters but also on access to land for the landless and community issues: Thus the launching of the ‘TEEN ARMOED VELDTOG’ (TAV) – Anti-poverty campaign. We have since taken up many struggles to unite the community and workers around common issues confronting them.

CSAAWU Demands to address poverty and assist in restoring human dignity by negotiating with farmers for the following:

1. A minimum wage of R 2500 (approximately $ 342) per month for farm workers
2. Property rights: the houses people stay in become their property
3. Families without houses on farms to be provided with houses by farmers
4. Houses to be upgraded as houses on most farms are in terrible condition
5. Transport to be provided to school, hospital and shops
6. In cases where school fees are still paid, to be paid by farmers
7. Compensations to retired farm workers
8. A 13th cheque
9. A good pension fund
10. Crèche facilities
11. Land to be made available to support food security (food gardens)
12. Three months paid maternity leave
13. Five days family responsibility leave
14. Workers must be paid for 45 hours a week if it rains
15. Training and development of farm workers must happen by using the Agri-Seta funds

Union Policy:

1. No union official to earn more than a skilled worker
2. All union leaders are subject to recall
3. Union structures under the discipline of members
4. Members respect union policy
5. Collective decision making and consultation
6. Mandate of members being carried out
7. No secret meetings with the bosses without the knowledge of workers
8. No changing mandate of members without their knowledge
9. Negotiations are not the responsibility of individuals but the collective responsibility of hte entire union leadership
10. A wage conference before wage negotiations
11. Shop Stewards to have a minimum of one meeting a month with members
12. Grievances of members must be brought to management/farmers attention no later than 48 hours after they have been reported to the union
13. Shop Stewards to have monthly meetings with management to address shop floor issues
14. Continued deepening of workers democracy through experience
15. Officials will not be paid overtime as the unions is still developing a mass base
16. Fundraising should be done by all CSAAWU members
17. Union income is minimal considering the task facing it

CNT: Make Spain’s general strike indefinite

2010-06-23T20:41:00.000-07:00

From Libcom.org:

CNT: Make Spain’s general strike indefinite

As a general strike is mooted to coincide with Europe-wide action, the anarcho-syndicalist CNT union is warning that one day outings will not be enough to deter deep public sector cuts

Spain's fifth general strike hasbeen set for September 29th amidst massive public sector cuts and attacks on job security passed by the ruling Socialist Party - an

d the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo is calling for it to be made indefinite.

Following a one day public-sector strike earlier this month the union is warning that “gesture strikes” will not be enough to force the government to change course.

In a statement after the June 8th event they said: “The government’s plans to stabilise the economy through reducing the public deficit by 11% have placed the cost of the economic crisis on the shoulders of the disadvantaged.

“It is evident that the proposals are designed to satisfy banks and employers by compromising with the neoliberal designs that prevail in the EU.”

“If there had been earlier mobilisations the government would not have dared to present the measures announced and would have had to cut elsewhere. It would have had to seek income where the money really is – on the bench, through corporate taxes, inheritance, hedge funds etc.

“We believe it is a mistake to continue ‘negotiating’ labour reform, which is simply a concession to employers. The only possiblility for correcting this situation is to fight this economic aggression through social confrontation, to continue and expand protests to all sectors.”

“These great evils can only be treated with great remedies, and such remedies do not include, of course, a 24-hour general strike which, assuming that UGT and CCOO (the two major reformist unions in Spain) dared to actually convene one, would act only as a giant safety valve for employee discontent.

“An indefinite general strike paralysing the country until the government withdraws anti-worker and anti-social actions would by contrast act as a binder for workers to recover their class consciousness and act together, with an eye to the destruction of the capitalist system through social revolution which is the only truly effective medicine against congenital diseases of the system.

Larger TUC-style unions called the public-sector strike on June 8th, which the left claimed got 75% of public sector workers out (state sources put it 16%) and saw tens of thousands of people on the streets in protest. The public sector accounts for around 2.5 million jobs in Spain. However the measure has made little impact on narrowly-passed plans to slash 5% from public sector pay, part of a 15 billion euro package of austerity measures being implemented in the next few years.

Other measures include the uncoupling of pension payments from inflation, an end to tax breaks for new parents and cuts in public investment and development aid of up to 6 billion euros. The Party is also taking the opportunity to “free up the labour market” by making it easier to hire and fire workers, a measure which would be likely to help drive a general strike outside the public sector.

Its actions, taken as Spain is threatened by international markets over its debt ratio, are widely seen as a betrayal of the electoral promises which put the Socialist Party (PSOE) and Jose Zapatero into power in 2004 on the back of widespread discontent with the right, though anarchist groups in the country have pointed to the situation as emblematic of party politicians’ inability to represent working people.

In an editorial for the periodical CNT, the union noted: “Economic crises are inherent in the capitalist system and will, unfortunately for humanity, regularly occur as long as the system exists.

“At the end of the day, the problem lies in the balance of power between two social classes with conflicting interests - the bourgeois class, which holds exclusive ownership of the means of production and distribution, and the proletarian class, which has no more than their manual and intellectual labour to sell as dearly as possible. The salary of the employee, and therefore the worker himself, is just another cost of production like machinery, electrical power or fuel.

“And when the worker is considered this way, not as a human being but as a cost to be cut without a second thought, you can do with them what you will, without remorse. That is neither more nor less than what capitalists do with us now.

“We can not remain silent before these measures announced by the government, which will result in yet more desecration of labour right to add to a long list of infamies imposed since this pompously-named “democracy” came into existence. Lowering the salaries of officials and freezing or eliminating pensions, among other measures, are not appropriate ways to solve the so-called crisis, and will have the determined opposition of the CNT.”

- Discussion thread on libcom.org

- An edited version of this article first appeared in Freedom anarchist newspaper

Sacco and Vanzetti in Ottawa: How Media and Police are Politicizing the RBC Arson Case

2010-06-23T10:30:00.000-07:00

from Tronto Media Coop:

Sacco and Vanzetti in Ottawa: How Media and Police are Politicizing the RBC Arson Case

BLOG POST posted on June 23, 2010 by Jesse Freeston

On August 23rd, 1927, Ferdinando Sacco and Bartolomeo Vanzetti were executed in Massachusetts. The two were convicted of a double-murder committed during an armed robbery. The trial and media coverage focused on the political ideology of the two men, treating as secondary the material evidence related to the crime itself. The two men were members of the Galleanist Anarchist movement, and the trial was a watershed moment in the campaign to delegitimize the global anarchist movement as a whole.

The politicization of the trial extended to Judge Webster Thayer, who allegedly referred to the defendants as "anarchist bastards." This is one example of the many ways that the pair’s political activities and beliefs were invoked in a way that prohibited a fair trial from proceeding. Some of the most renowned thinkers of the day spoke out against the prejudice surrounding the trial, such as Upton Sinclair and Walter Lippmann. Fifty years later, a Massachusetts government commission confirmed the trial had been unfair and Governor Michael Dukakis declared a "Sacco and Vanzetti Memorial Day."

Sacco and Vanzetti come to Ottawa

On Saturday, Ottawa police announced the charging of three well-known Ottawa activists in connection with the May 18th arson of a branch of the Royal Bank of Canada. What follows is not a comment on the event in question, nor the guilt or innocence of the accused, but a condemnation of the treatment of the accused by the media and Ottawa police.

Much like Sacco and Vanzetti before them, these three are already receiving prejudicial media coverage. An inordinate amount of time and column inches are being dedicated to the activism that the three were known for. The CBC, for example, reported on Claude Haridge’s participation in a Palestinian rights march, and his attendance at the so-called 'Activism Course' hosted by former University of Ottawa professor Denis Rancourt. Rancourt has accused the CBC of insinuating this is evidence against the three.

The RBC arson was clearly a political act, as evidenced by the video that was released with it. Therefore, the politics of any suspect are a relevant discussion. But that discussion should not replace discussion about the material evidence, much less be presented as evidence in and of itself. Nor should it come at the cost of media oversight of the police investigation.

Ottawa Police fan the flames

The Ottawa Police have added to the show-trial appearance of the case. The original statement from the Ottawa Police, during a Saturday morning press conference, was that .50 caliber "sniper-style" ammunition was recovered during a raid of Haridge's home. The police sent out a release later in the day to say that the ammunition was actually 7.62mm. Both kinds of bullets are legal, but 7.62mm ammo is not used in sniper rifles.

It’s difficult to believe that trained firearm users, like police detectives, could confuse the drastically different looking bullets (see picture). Much less believable that such an error could make it into an important press conference. Const. Katherine Larouche, spokesperson for the Ottawa Police, told me that the bullets were found in a case marked “.50 cal,” which led to the erroneous press release. When asked if that meant the police didn't open the case before reporting their findings to the media, she declined to comment.

Many media outlets did correct the error, many didn't. Regardless, the damage has been done. Haridge will be thought of as a potential sniper and few will read the corrections.

During the press conference, the police also made a point of calling the bullets "military-grade". The ammunition expert I spoke to was surprised by the use of this term. Under international law, military ammunition must be 'jacketed' to stop bullets from exploding inside the victim. Thus they are less dangerous than other forms of ammo, such as hunting ammo that is designed to kill an animal as fast as possible. It is unclear why the police would use such a misleading term, but the media ate it up nonetheless.

Adding to the police's influence on the public's perception of the accused--keep in mind that it's the Ottawa public that will eventually form the sitting jury--are statements by Ottawa Police Chief Vern White. White has publicly called for the RCMP to file terrorism charges against the three, referring to the accused as "domestic terrorists." Lawrence Greenspon, lawyer for one of the accused, believes the police chief is acting irresponsibly, given that civilian life was not the target of the attack. Direct or indirect targetting of civilians is a necessary factor in most definitions of terrorism. However, Canada's controversial post-9/11 anti-terrorism law is much more ambiguous on this point.

"The charges are essentially damage-to-property-related charges," Greenspon told the Ottawa Citizen. "There's no talk of terrorism by anybody except our chief of police."

Greenspon also scolded federal Public Safety Minister Vic Toews. Toews held a news conference on Saturday in which he said:

"The dedication and tireless work of police has once again succeeded in making our communities safer."

Greenspon accused Toews of violating the accused's right to the presumption of innocence.

Police and media endangering G-20 protesters

The treatment of the case by media and authorities has not only jeopardized the right to due process, but also the safety of protesters descending on Toronto this week for the G20. In their Saturday evening report on the ammunition discovery, CTV News--Canada's most watched national newscast--reported that "police say (the ammunition discovery) could indicate the kind of violence to expect at next week's summits."

The Globe and Mail--Canada's most-read daily newspaper--ran an article by Colin Freeze which reported that, “the seizure (of ammunition) is stoking police fears about what they could be up against when protesters amass during the G8/G20 summits next week.”

Some are viewing these statements as pre-justification for repression by the Toronto Police. This becomes very worrisome when viewed alongside the force's recent history of brutality, including accusations of murder in the death of Junior Manon on May 5th.

Let's put this into context: thousands of justifiably angry marchers, artists, journalists, parents, children, and others with grievances surrounding the G-8/G-20 summits are being targeted because legal ammunition was found on one man who should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

This narrative was seeded by Ottawa Police Chief White. “I ask Ottawa residents to remain vigilant, before and during the G8-G-20, and continue to report any suspicious activity to police,” reads the lone quote attributed to White in the force's first press release on the arrests. At the police's Saturday press conference, representatives of the Toronto Police were present. A five-hour drive from their jurisdiction, no reason was given for their participation, but the effect was to reinforce the connection between the Ottawa arrests and the activists in the streets of Toronto. A connection that appears in every single report on the arrests that I have encountered.

The irresponsibility of the media lies not in reporting these police statements, but in doing so without a hint of analysis on either the logic or the consequences these statements can have.

Anyone remember Montebello?

While the media and police give credence to an irrational fear of protesters, they ignore the very real security concerns of those in the street. Worries that are founded in recent history.

In 2007, the Sûreté du Québec (Quebec’s provincial police force) were discovered mobilizing rock-wielding agents provocateurs at the Security and Prosperity Partnership meeting in Montebello (see video here, and police admission here. That same day, thousands of peaceful protesters were tear-gassed, shot with rubber bullets, and beaten by hundreds of police officers. No government inquiry was ever opened to determine the source of the order to send rock-carrying officers into the crowd. No member of government or police was ever disciplined. Numerous social justice and civil liberties groups screamed about the precedent the lack of accountability would set for future convergences.

Enter the G-8/G-20, the first conference of international heads of state in Canada since Montebello. Sid Ryan, president of the Ontario Federation of Labour, suggested provocateurs might be used again to incite violence. Violence that might be interpreted by the media as justification for the conference's controversial $1 billion security budget. The head of the Toronto Police Association, Mike McCormack, responded by calling for Ryan's resignation, adding that "(Ryan) should be writing fiction because obviously he isn’t dealing with reality."

The Harper administration has ignored requests for a pledge that provocateurs won't be used this week like they were in 2007.

Tom Morello wearing IWW Vancouver Shirt‏

2010-06-22T20:18:00.000-07:00

In November 2008 the IWW Vancouver branch gave Tom Morello one of our shirts. Well, check out look at this photo of him wearing it at the 25th Anniversary show of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, alongside Bruce Sringsteen, Billy Joel, Jackson Browne, and John Fogerty. Good company.

Pretty cool. Here is a youtube clip of Bruce Stringsteen and Tom (wearing
Vancouvers shirt) rocking out to the Ghost of Tom Joad.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OLFLrTnue9s&feature=related

Polish Syndicalists: Help Chinese workers in Poland‏

2010-06-19T18:16:00.000-07:00

Call for Support (Sending Faxes and E-mails)

Dear Comrades,

ZSP [Polish Syndicalists] Warsaw kindly asks the sections to please send faxes and emails this weekend or Monday morning to the firms Turret Development in Poland and the Alter Group in the US. On Monday we will be visiting the office of Turret Development in Warsaw to demand they pay for plane tickets for 21 stranded Chinese workers and it would be helpful if they already have received faxes and emails before then.

21 Construction Workers Stranded in Warsaw

The workers came from the Xantung province to work in Poland. They paid huge money to an agency for these jobs and one-way tickets to Poland. They were hired by a company called Turret Development. Turret Development is owned by American businessman Michael Alter, president of the Alter Group, one of the ten largest commercial real estate developers in the United States. Alter has been investing in real estate in Poland and using cheap Asian labour for this work.

The people worked last year on the Wola Tower construction site in Warsaw, After that, they were sent by Turret to work in Lodz and in Olawa, doing finishing work in new flats during the winter.

This transfer of the workers was done illegally: Turret has no construction projects in these cities. It is unclear still whether they worked for a subcontractor related somehow to Alter's business (he has 15 companies registered in Poland), or they were subcontracted to another firm.

Turret Development at one point decided that they no longer desired the services of the workers and let them go.

The law in Poland is that work visas for citizens of countries like China expire immediately upon termination of the work contract with the employer who organized it. Upon termination of the contract, workers must leave the country within a few days. If they do not, they are considered illegal in the country and face deportation. Deportation is accompanied by a stamp in the passport which bars the worker from returning to work in the whole European Union for 5 years. Also, the workers may be held in detention for many months.

When Turret fired the workers, the local director decided to inform the Border Police and asked them to deport the workers. This was already some time ago. These people found other jobs but lost them because of problems with the Border Police.

Currently they are in a precarious situation. They are camped out on the lawn of the Chinese Embassy, which is out of Polish jurisdiction. Theoretically, the moment they cross the street, they may be arrested and deported.

Demands

Currently, there is no possibility to be rehired by Turret Development since it has no construction projects this year. Since, according to the law, the workers can only legally work for Turret, and since they already had bad experiences trying to work illegally, they would like to return home to China. We will demand that Turret Development take responsibility for the workers it is using and pay for their tickets home.

We will also be demanding to the authorities that no stamps be put in their passports for overstaying their visas in Poland.

Faxes / Emails

We ask that people send faxes and emails this weekend or before 12:00 local time on Monday.

Addresses:

Tomasz Dabrowski

Prezes

Turret Development
ul. Racławicka 114
02-634 Warszawa
tel: (+48 22) 30 10 156

fax:(+48 22) 30 10 152

e-mail: turret@turret.com.pl

office@turret.com.pl

Michael Alter

President

The Alter Group

5500 West Howard Street

Skokie, IL 60077

tel: (+01847) 568-5902

faxe: (+01847) 676-4302

e-mail: malter@altergroup.com

SAMPLE TEXT (You can change if you like)

Stop Exploitation of Workers! Buy Plane Tickets for Stranded Chinese Workers

Turret Development in Poland hired a group of workers from China to work on the Wola Tower construction project in Warsaw. It then illegally sent them to work in Olawa and Lodz before terminating their contract and contacting the Polish border guards about their deportation. Currently, 21 of these workers are stranded in Warsaw with no money to return home.

Turret Development and Alter Group: You have responsibilities towards the people you invite to work for you! Enough exploitation of cheap foreign labour!

We demand that you help these people return by buying them plane tickets.

Signed

Belgrade 6 Acquitted

2010-06-17T10:06:00.000-07:00

The 'Belgrade Six' were released today, on the first day of their court hearing.

All six were charged for 'International Terrorism', maximum penalty 15 years imprisonment, for an action at Belgrade's Greek embassy which caused 18 Euros worth of damage.

The Belgrade Six have been imprisoned since their arrest in September 2009. They faced blackmail and abuse.

On the 24th of August 2009 a window of Belgrade's Greek embassy was painted with an anarchist A, had a window smashed and had minor smoke damage caused to it.

The action was carried out to protest the Greek State and to express solidarity with Todoris Iliopulos. Iliopulos was in an extremely critical situation, on the verge of death: he had been on hunger strike since July 10. His hunger strike was related to his imprisonment after the uprisings of December 2008 in Greece.

Although prisoners from that time had been released, Iliopulos was facing various charges for the December events on false testimony made by police.

The most known anarchist in Serbia, Ratibor Trivunac from the Anarcho-Syndicalist Initiative (ASI – the Serbian section of the International Workers’ Association) was interviewed in the press the day after the action at the Greek embassy. He stated that he did not know such a group and that this was not the way anarcho-syndicalists usually chose for their struggle.

However, he, just like the others from ASI, refused to condemn this act, which they considered to be nothing in comparison to the damage done by the repressive Greek state.

On September 3-4, six members of ASI were arrested, including Trivunac.

The case of the Belgrade Six has brought back recent memories of the region's dark political past, and their acquittal is seen as a major event in itself.

Activists in Stockholm, Sweden, were amongst the first internationals to find out about the release. Fifteen activists braced the snow and held a solidarity demonstration for the Belgrade Six outside the Serbian embassy of Stockholm today. The Serbian Ambassador came out to the demonstration to announce the breaking news.

FAU wins Berlin trial of union freedom!

2010-06-10T19:15:00.000-07:00

Good News, everyone! A german court ruled today against the previous ruling that FAU could not act as a Union or call itself one. The judge's argument focused on freedom of speech as afundamental right.

the following is a poorly translated press release from the FAU:'

FAU wins Berlin trial of trade union freedom

Berlin, 06.10.2010

Before the Berlin Court of Appeals today the preliminary injunction to de facto prohibition against the FAU Berlin was lifted. As a result, the union may call again as such.

Neuhaus judge stressed the importance of freedom of expression as a fundamental right. He questioned whether the applicant either as Babylon cinema in general come to demonstrable harm, when the FAU occurred in the operation as a trade union. The question of the collective ability to play no role.

In December 2009 the management of the FAU Berlin had also prohibit by injunction to call himself a trade union or trade union base. The Berlin FAU, as the strongest union in the plant had previously submitted a labor contract to negotiate.

"We are pleased that they have failed to banish the strongest and most active trade union in the movies. The ruling allows militant unions to be active. It has also shown that the means of injunction is not sufficient, may order a crippling industrial action, "said Lars Röhm, General Secretary of the FAU Berlin.

The Free Workers Union (FAU) is an anarcho-syndicalist trade union base, which advocates a militant operation working from the bottom.

Press: FAU Berlin Verbotsferfahren 10/06/2010

[For more information on today of the trial will be published here within the next few days to fau.org.]

Phoenix Iww's Photos - Pei Wei Picket

2010-06-08T14:59:00.000-07:00

12 Pei Wei workers were unjustly fired after they collectively decided to miss work in order to participate in the May 29 Demonstration Against the passage of SB 1070 hate bill, a bill which requires police officers, if they form a “reasonable suspicion” that someone is an illegal immigrant, to determine the person’s immigration status, effectivly legalizing racial profiling in Ariziona.

The Phoenix IWW came out for a June 5 informational picket demanding that Pei Wei reinstate with back pay all 12 fired workers.

Anarcho-syndicalism in the 20th Century: a review

2010-06-08T13:16:00.000-07:00

orignially posted on Libcom.org

Anarcho-syndicalism in the 20th Century: a review

A review of Vadim Damier's 'Anarcho-syndicalism in the 20th Century' by Jared Davidson

For those who can read Russian, Vadim Damier’s two-volume study of the International Workers’ Association (IWA) is a comprehensive history of the worldwide anarchist labour movement in the early 20th Century. For the rest of us, Malcom Archibald has translated what is essentially a streamlined version of Damier’s larger work into English. Anarcho-syndicalism in the 20th Century is a broad survey of a movement often marginalised by Marxist academics, and is a welcome addition to the existing literature on anarcho-syndicalism. As Damier illustrates, anarcho-syndicalism was far from a outmoded, ineffective or petty-bourgeois movement — the practice of direct action and revolutionary struggle controlled and self-managed by the workers themselves extended to all countries of the world.

Damier: “Its appearance in so many settings has created a daunting task for historians who would do justice to its scope and diversity.” Exploring this diversity and its development from revolutionary syndicalism, its theoretical and tactical differences as it was practiced worldwide, and historical examples of anarcho-syndicalism in action, the reader gets a sense of how hundreds of thousands — indeed millions — of workers embraced the ideology of anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian communism, and put those ideas into practice.

The actions of anarchist-influenced workers and their struggle for freedom truly was an international movement. Although Europe is often the focus for historians, Damier does a great job in showing that stronger and numerically larger movements existed in Latin America — not to mention Japan, Korea and China, Africa, Eastern European nations and even Australasia. And although Damier does examine in detail the Spanish Revolution (and the fatal rejection of core anarchist principles by the leadership of the CNT), the international framework used throughout the book is a refreshing change from Eurocentric anarchist historiography and Spanish Exceptionalism.

The origins of the international syndicalist (and in turn anarcho-syndicalist) movement is explored in the first chapters. Using examples from around the globe, Damier argues that an explicit shift from revolutionary syndicalism to anarcho-syndicalism was signaled in 1919. In a speech made by German anarchist Rudolf Rocker at the 12th Congress of the FVdG (Free Association of German Trade Unions), a synthesis of anarchism and revolutionary syndicalism was put forward in opposition to co-opertaion with parliamentary activity, political affiliation, and co-operation with the German Communist Party. According to Damier, Rocker’s ‘Decleration about the Principles of Syndicalism’ helped clarify the ideology on which the anarcho-syndicalist movement was to be based.

Damier dedicates valuable space to the years up to and including the 1922 congress of the IWA, as it included debate on how anarcho-syndicalists should organise themselves, what tactics and structures enabled the most effective struggle, and what role they saw for their organisation after the revolution. The FVdG congress certainly influenced the IWA’s own decleration, the ‘Principles of Revolutionary Syndicalism’. As W. Thorpe points out, the decleration “signified an important advance in syndicalist thought, since it confirmed and made clear what had often only been implied in pre-war European syndicalism”. It put forward more strongly the opposition to political parties, the methods of the Bolsheviks and their associated trade unions, and moved past the political neutrality of the 1906 Charter of Amiens.

In Rocker’s 1919 speech, he had made it clear that the role of the anarcho-synidcalist union was not to manage the successful revolution. Instead, the management of production and consumption were to be transferred into the hands of Councils: “the organisation of enterprises and workshops by economic councils, the organisation of the whole of production by industrial and agricultural associations, and the organisation of consumption by workers exchanges”. The explicitly anarchist communist Argentine Regional Workers’ Federation (FORA) in its ‘Memorandum’ “catergorically rejected the notion that labour unions — organs which arose under capitalism in response to capitalist conditions and fulfilled a service as the best means of worker resistance against the State and Capital — would be transformed in the course of revolution into the basis and ruling organs of the new society”:

“With the liquidation of the capitalist production system and rule of the state, the syndicalist economic organs will end their historic role as the fundamental weapon in the struggle with the system of exploitation and tyranny. Consequently, thse organs must give way to free associations and free federations of free producers and consumers”.

Debates around structure and industrialisation continued into the 1920’s and 30’s. These were essentially debates between communist modes of distribution and a collectivist revisionism, which for sections of the French CGT and the German FAUD seemed more suitable to the industrial development at that time. Once the bearer of anarchist communism, many of the FAUD’s leading activists began to see distribution according to need as a ‘crazy idea’, calling instead for the study of capitalist economic categories, distribution according to ‘productivity’, and that ‘rationing by means of monetary regulation’ was ‘fairer’ than anarchist communism. The idea of stages of development crept into the movement. French theoretican Pierre Besnard advocated organisation in imitation of capitalist economic formations, so that the unions could become the nervous system of the new society, the organs of economic coordination and planning. The first stage, which Besnard called ‘libertarian communism’ would involve the preservation of the monetary system and distribution ‘according to labour’. Only the second stage (’free communism’) would carry to completion the ideal of a self-managed communist society.

For some in the IWA this signaled a dangerous influence of capitalist thinking, the depature from anarchist communism, and a slide towards centralisation and Marxist ‘gigantomania’. The FORA were particularly critical, and as Damier argues, presented one of the first thorough critiques of the Marxist viewpoint on history and historical determinism. “The new, free society should not develop according to the laws of the old society... but represent a decisive, radical break with it”. Socialism was not just an economic problem, but also a cultural and psychological one which extended outside of the factory gates. The self-activity and struggle of the workers themselves was more important in the destruction of capital than some linear stage of revolution outside of their control.

The Japanese federation Zenkoku Jiren were even more vocal in their opposition:

“The current system, they said, was based on the division of labour and the consequent hierarchy; this division and its attendant mechanisation deprived workers of any responsibility and required coordinating and administrative authorities incompatible with libertarian communism. Therefore the structure of the future free society could not be compatible with the existing authoritarian and capitalist structure. The new society must surmount industrialism with its soul destroying division of labour and base itself on a different conception of the interrelation of production and consumption, but with the emphasis on consumption”.

Instead, they argued for anarcho-syndicalism which challenged the continuation of society into groups according to occupation, the preservation of the factory system and centralisation, and the organisation of society on the basis of industrial unions. These would simply perpetuate the division of labour and the hierarchy of management. Instead, the free association of communes and councils would unite consumption and production after the revolution: organising according to a capitalist framework in the here and now would hinder, not help, these future structures.

The above arguments illustrate the diversity within the anarchist labour movement during it’s development. Damier also shows that these developments were important for a visible minority, if not the majority of workers in the 20th Century. In many cases struggle was more influenced by the ideas of Bakinin and Kropotkin than Marx or Engels — a point especially relevant now that Marxist-Leninism is relegated to the dustbin of history, and as workers look for a real alternative to both state socialism and capitalism. In illustrating the international movement and it’s debates, Damier makes available important themes for a new generation of anarchists, and helps point to current understandings of anarcho-syndicalism (such as ‘Strategy and Struggle’ by the Solidarity Federation). Although there were (and are) variants within the movement, it’s clear from Damier’s research that ‘Strategy and Struggle’ has historical precedence.

Unfortunately, the book gets a little sparse on actual examples of contemporary anarcho-syndicalism — only briefly touching on the splits within the IWA after World War Two, and more recent struggles. However, to have a broad survey of a movement and it’s ideas in one place is a valuable resource in itself and worth checking out. Anyone interested in a basic history of anarcho-syndicalism, the IWA, and a libertarian alternative to capitalism will be well pleased.

The IWW and The Making of a Revolutionary Working Class Counter culture

2010-06-06T17:54:00.000-07:00

From Issue 1 of the Irish Anarchist Review, May 2010

The IWW and The Making of a Revolutionary Working Class Counter culture

Review: The IWW and The Making of a Revolutionary Working Class Counter culture
Paperback. Charles H Kerr (2003)

A number of years ago Franklin Rosemont, Illinois based and a wobbly red card carrier himself, carved out a massive slab of social history called Joe Hill: The IWW and the Making of a Revolutionary Working Class Counterculture contributing to the mythology of the IWW that haunts the imagination of so many radicals.

Whatever about an unfortunately dated show-card cover – inside there’s a breathtaking orgy for the mind of the contrary worker. So with that said, you are probably expecting a short biography of Joe Hill disguised as a review, and with good reason.

Hill’s background was Swedish, he emigrated to the states and laboured in the San Pedro docks and became involved in the IWW there; leading him to furore into Mexico “under the Red Flag” of it’s revolution and later to travel to Canada to support the 1912 Fraser River railroad strike.

And of course along the way he knocked off a dozen or so labour movement standards in strike camps across the country, songs that’d eventually make their way across the Atlantic to our own pubs with time. Towards the end of 1915, he was fitted up as a “stick up man” in Salt Lake City for the murder of an ex-cop.

So from the start Rosemont is forced to build his Hill narrative from “an armful of solid facts, some strong possibilities, and a bedraggled suitcase of educated guesses” - apart from some oral histories and letters passed down, there wasn’t much to sketch his life from.

An old wobbly, Richard Brazier, who matched Hill’s traits of song and migratory labour, summed up the biographical problem facing Rosemont rather neatly: “we wobblies were very restless men and, as we were mostly migratory workers, were on the move continually...Most of us were only concerned with the present, and our origins and pasts were seldom talked about.”

What’s been left to float down the stream of history to us about Hill is mostly legend. Myths themselves exert a mobilising passion on us but to learn from history, as Rosemont’s wants us to, requires clear cutting through any approach that hoists Hill up as another “superman, saint and saviour” or an almost comic book like abnormal “proletarian super hero.”

These popular caricatures of Hill as “labour’s supreme organiser” imply a herding of the masses, and are deeply antithetical to the every day wobbly disdain, Hill’s own included, for them ordering us from above. As the author points out, this hagiography writing arose from the Stalinist cultural tradition’s attempt to integrate Hill into their political pantheon, much like how our lot squabble over the bones of Connolly.

The book can be read in a number of ways; on one hand it rescues the IWW from Stalinist critics that fashionably flounced after Russian Bolshevism; it gives insight to the politics and personalities of the union itself and rescues Hill the man. But as suggested by the subtitle, it’s Rosemont’s treatment of how the IWW built a counter hegemonic working class culture that is the most interesting facet of this brick thick work.

Hill’s life path becomes a tool for Rosemont, a scaffolding around which to thread an examination of the wider wobbly milieu and the culture it generated. From this angle he quickly sketches the IWW as a deeply indigenous radical traditional, both uniquely American and working class: spawned from the melting pot of immigration, where democratic ideals flirted with European socialisms and a heavy refusal of the dogmatism prevalent among the early American left.

Born in an era of capitalistic expansion and the brute pitting of class interest against class interest in dusty company towns, places where the mediation of a welfare state was an idlers dream; the wobblies argued that the self-organisation of working people against exploitation, to provide themselves a means to life, required, direct, rather than later action. One cartoon bluntly puts it: a migratory worker chases a pork chop being waved by Lady Liberty while a shop keeper, under a sign engraved “working man’s friend,” shouts from his porch: “Hey lad! Why don’t you stay in one place and vote the socialist ticket?”

Rosemont places huge importance on everyday collective intellectualism, a practice he finds uniquely special to the early wobblies. From the vantage of the 1970’s, Fred Thompson, an IWW old timer in Chicago, reminisced about the “marxism in overalls of his youth,” how his fellow wobs used theory as a method of getting at reality. Resisting divisions into intellectuals and activists, Wobs met through study groups and in workers colleges, being both familiar with the exploitative character of work from theory and experience, they ribbed in iconoclastic songs about old “Karl Marx’s Whiskers.”

The alternative to is presented in a cartoon from One Big Union Monthly called The Ass in the Lion’s Skin. The American Communist Party, or the Comical Party as the Wobs had it, pops up as a Frankenstien’s monster – not patched together from those dispossessed by a modernizing capital, but hewn from poorly digested ideologues,
a clumsy vaudeville villian, wearing Lienknecht’s hat, Lenin’s coat and Gorky’s hair and totally alien to the experiences of American workers.

We all know the IWW was a union movement, but Rosemonts focus bends more towards it as a social movement of class, with its union halls evoking parallel principles for how culture and society could take shape once the shell of capital was cracked. This culture was important to the IWW, both as a method of leaving organisational stains in workplaces constantly washed over with high turnovers, and to spread politics in a lightening fast, almost viral manner.

It made use of the social technologies of working class people during the period and its philoso- phy of disobedience was carried as much on the informal rail road of migratory hobo’s travelling through the circuits of capital from harvest to dock than through it’s official publications.

In 1914 a Californian economist Carleton Parker surveyed eight hundred casual labourers, noting half were familiar with the Wobbly programme: “where a group of hoboes sit around a fire under a rail way bridge many of the group can sing IWW songs without the book. This was not so three years ago.”

Much has been written on the failings of the IWW, but its real success was contributing a tense residue of emerging ideology of class power to American popular culture, one that accompanied and flanked their organising, hammering away in song that “if the workers took a notion, every mine and every mill, will at their command stand still” as well as organising shops.

Rosemont makes clear how other organisations of the left published papers to be consumed by workers reaching into libraries for pre-cast models straight off the assembly line as it were. Taking a different approach, the Wobblies put out material by pissed off workers and for other bored workers. Their writings were quirked with the consequences of alienation, often spilling over into a romantic vision and a poetry that could animate their struggles through immense criticism of life as lived.
Just because they’d become radicalised, they refused to think themselves out of their class. So, within the IWW literature he presents, class isn’t talked about just in theoretical terms. It was given the nuance of different characters and contemporary behaviors, creating a point of identification for the reader and birthing the social actors that could carry out the great Wobbly liberation.

On the other side of the great Wobbly class divide we have the masters and their Pinkterton detec- tives, “sky pilot” clergy and most famously of all, illustrated in the form of Mr Blockhead, the sniveling work place fool that buys just about everything the boss has to tell him.

The book could equally serves as perfect coffee table fodder with pages and pages of simple yet gorgeous humorous art leaving you reeling with thoughts of how impoverished our contemporary movement is despite the reign of knock off Photoshop copies.

The first generations of Wobs used silent agitators - stickers stuck prominently around workplaces, in a technique scammed from the hobo habit of leaving marks on safe places, or near their camps. Many echo contemporary adbusts. One has the stripes of the American flag replaced with lines accounting for patriot driven anti-radical legislation, and another has the HMV dog listening to his masters voice crackle “be concentrated, work hard!”

Card games were used to illustrate anti-capitalist economics too, simple graphics dotting the IWW’s politics around the deck. Missing a Mister Block cartoon, an early paper even carried a joke futurist etching of a square to represent that common arselick.

Their habit of soap boxing of course was a very immediate form of communication, utilizing talented story tellers and orators that cleverly used manufactured folklore to emphasize, for example, anti-racist solidarities such as the origins of the IWW “wobbly” pronunciation from a Chinese chief and other ways to push back capital. One such character, Jack Phelan known as the “silver tongued boy orator,” fought in Mexico like Hill, and always stood up, with an umbrella over his head whatever the weather, and let roar “help, help I’m being robbed!” Once a crowd gathered he’d launch into: “I’m being robbed by the master class” in an intriguing mashing of performance art into radical street rhetoric.

Many of the classic IWW songs, such as “Long Haired Preacher” were parodies of Salvation Army hymns, an organisation union soap boxers battled with for street corner space before speaking from the stoop. Often banned by the local judiciary, leading to mass jailings as more and more ploughed into towns like Spokane to take the place of the busted.

Its possible to be critical of Rosemount, letting his own words bite back against him, he describes one of his tangential paths from Hill a “digressive and admittedly speculative discussion.” And some of it really is.

Rosemont ends up seeking the Wobbly spirit in the world of the culturally hip, from surrealism to beat poetry, and by pleading to the images of these later sub culture rather than seeking out class counter cultures he veers way off. None of this denies the books stature as a worthy contribution in the absence of a more controlled and schematic approach to the autonomous counter culture bred by the IWW.

The book doesn’t really focus too much on why the IWW collapsed. Though the vicious anti-red repression and foreigner hysteria; how it was stamped into the ground and politically ruptured by others on the left during the twenties does get a look in. Maybe Rosemont saw little point poking around the corpse of the wobbly movement?

If the almost “what if” banter of the biographical aspect is a failing, the real value of Rosemont is read between the lines; how he smacks down ahistorical visions of working class culture. Asking us to look at what we have around us, what oddities and networks are already out there piercing through the shell that we can give revolutionary definition to, along lines suggested by Piet Mondrian, creating “images of what society must one day make a reality.”

Here’s where such social history is a viagara to the impotence of thought put into revitalising our radical labour movements. The radical cultural utopianism incubated and informing the IWW’s working class horizontalism, bred a movement that could sit alongside the daily lives of workers where an old time crafts unionism couldn’t, allowing them to express their dreams beyond work and build organizations relevant to the structural forms of employment foisted on them by a shifting capitalism.

That’s an organisational form we are starved of today and a pattern of resistance our own constantly moving service industry and out-sourced hobo’s could well do with. Pick up Rosemont if you want to look back for inspiration to push ourselves forward, not if you want to salivate over the wistful obscurity of history or write photocopied odes to dead movements.

Workers, community rallies for St. Boniface Post Office

2010-05-21T16:09:00.000-07:00

On April 29, workers and members of the community gathered for a rally at the St. Boniface Post Office at 208 Provencher against a proposal by Canada Post to shut down the post office instead of retrofitting it to address concerns about accessibility. The St. Boniface Post Office has provided bilingual service and has been part of the community for over 100 years. Any attempt to shut down this historic post office would be a serious blow to Canada Post workers, users of the postal service, and the culture, heritage and linguistic identity of St. Boniface.

Starbucks Workers Union Speaking Tour

2010-05-03T04:14:00.000-07:00

Starbucks Workers Union Speaking Tour

Date:
Saturday, May 8, 2010

Time:
2:30pm - 4:30pm
Location:
2nd Floor Millenium Library (Anhang Room) - 251 Donald Street

Description

Come out and learn more about the experiences of Starbucks workers across North America who are organizing unions in their workplaces. Erik Forman of the Twin Cities General Membership Branch of the Industrial Workers of the World and Starbucks Workers Union will be speaking.

This public event is FREE but donations towards the SWU are greatly appreciated.

LIVE: A-Zone Tele-fund raiser

2010-05-01T14:35:00.000-07:00

azone on livestream.com. Broadcast Live Free

May Day: The History of The Internationale

2010-04-30T10:18:00.000-07:00

Tomorrow is May Day, The REAL labour day, where we celebrate the social and economic achievements of the international labour movement. One of the ways we celebarate is by signing the theme of the working class movement, the Internationale. The following is documentary on the development, history, and meaning of the Internationale.

Winnipeg Wobbly #4: May Day Special

2010-04-29T17:52:00.000-07:00

Check out the new, Special May Day edition of our newsletter, the Winnipeg Wobbly! Included in this edition:

**May Day: The REAL Labour Day
**Party Politics don't Work
**The Belgrade 6 are free!
**Report Back from Winnipeg Israeli Apartheid Week
**Selected Events from the MayWorks Festival

Click Here For The Winnipeg Wobbly Vol. 1 Issue 4

Flint Arthur: The Fascist Agenda of Immigration Reactionaries (FAIR)

2010-04-29T10:12:00.000-07:00

Rachel Madow drew the connection between Arizona's recent anti-immigrant legislation and the Immigration Reform Law Institute and the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform (FAIR). I'd like to explain a bit more about FAIR and their racist ties. This is largely based on a letter I wrote back in 2002.

Years ago I went to a meeting held by the union (Washtech/CWA) on off-shoring and H1B Visa (guestworker program). I ran my mouth alot at that meeting and picked some fights; and I've been generally trying to counter some of the anti-immigrant rhetoric around the periphery of the union (not union-members; the union has abut 300 members, but an email list of interested folks is 15,000 subscribers--techies). Anyway, at this meeting a guy from FAIR (Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform) showed up.

I argued with him at the meeting; and we ended up on the subway together; and we argued some more. Somewhere over the course of the conversation, I said, "You sound like the American Patrol" (a notorious anti-immigrant vigilante group in the southwest). His reply, "The American Patrol are misunderstood"... so then Mr. FAIR went from the "crazy right-winger" category to the "suit&tie fascist" category in Flint's brain. In one 17-month period in 1999 and 2000, at least 30 incidents of vigilante violence were reported in a single section of the Arizona-Mexico border. One of the American Patrol's big projects was an unmanned surveillance drone.

Later on this Washtech+periphery email list someone posted a report from FAIR. So I decided to research these creeps. FAIR was one of the leading forces behidn California's infamous Proposition 187. FAIR is one of a dozen organizations founded by John Tanton. They vary in the extremes of their policy, but all are essentially either anti-immigrant think tanks, or anti-immigrant activist groups. All their funding comes largely from less than a dozen sources (mostly individuals). Groups like US English, American Immigration Control Foundation (AICF), Center for Immigration Reform, US Inc, NumbersUSA, the 21st Century Fund, Population-Environment Balance, and the Immigration Reform Law Institute, and even the American Patrol (Voice of Citizens Together). They are all tied together by a few people. US English and FAIR shared board members like Arnold Swarzenegger and Linda Chavez (who almost ended up as Secretary of Labor for the U.S., until it was revealed that she had an undocumented worker as her housekeeper that she irregularly paid).

Chavez (and many other prominent Republicans, including congressmen) eventually quit from FAIR's board when Tanton made several comments in a leaked memo that many thought was both racist and anti-catholic.

Tanton's also owns a publishing company The Social Contract Press. Which is the sole U.S. publisher for the book, Camp of Saints--'a lurid, racist novel written by Jean Raspail that depicts an invasion of the white, Western world by a fleet of starving, dark-skinned refugees.'

Some of FAIR's (and these other Tanton groups) money comes from the likes of Richard Mellon Scaife; founderof the Heritage Foundation. FAIR also has ties to the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) and American Renaissance. American Renaissance is the white supremacist academic conference held in Virginia until it was recently shutdown by anti-fascists. Glen Spencer, from American Patrol, also spoke at that AmRen conference. Also at past AmRens: Mark Weber, a principal of the Holocaust-denying Institute for Historical Review; White power web maven, former Klansman and ex-con Don Black; Gordon Lee Baum, "chief executive officer" of the CCC; and several members of the neo-Nazi National Alliance.

FAIR representatives went to Cullman, Ala., for a CCC-organized protest against a swelling local population of Mexican workers. The CCC also has a relationship with former Attorney General John Ashcroft. Some of the groups that endorsed Ashcroft for Attorney General: American Council For Immigration Reform, English First, and Council of Conservative Citizens. Ashcroft also did an interview Southern Partisan (a neo-confederate journal). Other Republicans with ties to the CCC: former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, and Georgia Rep. Bob Barr. Someone else involved with the CCC? White Supremacist David Duke.

Cordia Strom, who was once FAIR's legal director, became a staffer for the House Immigration Subcommittee in 1996. Strom became counsel to the director and coordinator of congressional affairs for the Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Anyway, one of FAIR's major sources of funding is the Pioneer Fund, which also funds a number of anti-immigration and eugenisist studies. Pioneer Fund has been at many of the epic-center for race-based academic scandals. FAIR is pretty much the only "activist" group that the Pioneer Fund gives money, the rest of their money goes to providing grants that give academic justification to racism. Pioneer Fund also provided the money to found American Renaissance's parent foundation.

A bit of history of interest to wobblies and syndicalists... the Pioneer Fund was a setup in 1937 by Wickliffe Draper, a white supremacist textile factory capitalist who was in opposition to to Eastern and Southern Europeans migrating to the U.S. Why did Draper set this up? In 1912, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) organized the Draper Company at Hopedale after a four month strike. Since that time, Draper was desperately trying to use science to prove that others were genetically inferior so that he could return to the "old order". Further that his anti-immigant ideas were because immigrants might be more open to subversive activities or to be communists. This entire twisted web of anti-immigrant propaganda, anti-immigant lobbying in congress, the funding of academic racism in the U.S.... all things that have lead to 20,000 imprisoned immigrant "detainees", 148,000 people deported between September 11th 2001 and September of 2002, plans to deport 400,000 more, and the recent anti-immigrant law in Arizona --the money trail goes back to one white-supremacist capitalist who was bitter that he lost a strike to immigrant wobblies.

Letter from CUPW to Canada Post on Canada-Israel stamp

2010-04-28T22:14:00.000-07:00

The following is a letter from the Canadian Union of Postal Workers to Canada Post regarding the issuance of a joint stamp with Israel to "celebrate 60 years of friendship". CUPW has been on the forefront of labour solidarity with Palestine in Canada, and in 2008 was the first national labour organization in North America to join the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions campaign against the apartheid practices of the state of Israel and in solidarity with the Palestinian people.

**************************

Canadian Union of Postal Workers letter to Canada Post, April 2010

Photo: Palestinian children mourn the dead in Gaza, January 2009.

Moya Greene

I am writing to you on the eve of Canada Post issuing a joint stamp with Israel.

A recent article in Canada Stamp Detail said “Canada Post will issue the stamp “to celebrate Canada’s strong bilateral relationship with Israel – a friendship that spans six decades and is marked by shared values, common interests and strong political, economic, cultural and social ties.”

While CUPW is glad to see Canada Post taking on new and innovative ways to sell stamps, we are somewhat concerned that Canada Post is launching a stamp with Israel on the basis of “shared values”.

CUPW recognizes that Israel is a democracy and has taken steps to end discrimination against lesbian and gay citizens. However, we are puzzled about the concept of shared values with a country that has consistently ignored United Nations and World Court decisions in regards to the ongoing Occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.

A fundamental value is that all human beings have equal rights without discrimination on the basis of race, religion, ethnicity, and other categories. Sadly, in Israel there are still over 20 laws that discriminate against the Palestinian national minority on such basic issues as education, jobs, land ownership and access to public resources.

Israel is still building a “separation wall” around the West Bank. A number of human rights groups have found that approximately 80% of this Wall is being built on West Bank land that has been illegally confiscated. On July 9, 2004 this Wall was declared contrary to international law by the International Court of Justice. This Court cited Israel’s obligation to dismantle the Wall, and to pay reparations for all the damage caused by its construction. To date, the Government of Israel has refused to abide by this ruling, thereby ignoring an important value of adhering to the principles of International law.

Israel is continuing to build settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank. The construction of some of these settlements has been criticized by Barack Obama, the President of the United States. These settlements are illegal under international law. In the same July 2004 decision, the International Court of Justice declared that “Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territory including East Jerusalem are illegal and an obstacle to peace and to economic and social development. The continuing failure to live up to international law and respond to international pressure is a questionable value.

There are many United Nations resolutions which Israel is failing to live up to. One of the most important ones is UN resolution 242 which calls for Israeli withdrawal from the territories occupied during the 1967 war, is based on the principle of “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war”. Disregarding United Nations resolutions is hardly a value which we want to uphold and endorse.

In the winter of 2008/2009, Israel carried out Operation Cast Lead in Gaza. A number of eminent people have concluded that Israel’s use of white phosphorous was unacceptable. Others, including jurist Richard Goldstone condemned Israel’s apparent targeting of schools, ambulances, and UN Institutions in Gaza. More recently, Israel’s participation in the blockade of Gaza has resulted in a serious undermining of living conditions. There have been desperately sad reports of increased child and maternal mortality as a result of this siege. Taking actions which result in the death or pregnant women and children is not an acceptable value.

The conditions of the Palestinian citizens in the West Bank is troubling for any one who holds the value of treating people with fairness and respect. John Dugard, the UN special envoy to Palestine reported that the rules governing the granting or permits which allow Palestinians to travel through the West Bank are constantly changing and create great hardship. In addition, Mr. Dugard reported that within the Palestinian territory there are highways solely for the use of Israeli’s. Palestinians are banned from these roadways. In addition, these checkpoints put lives in jeopardy in the west Bank as they often restrict quick access to hospitals. These are not conditions where respect is fundamental.

In light of these facts, CUPW is concerned that Canada Post is celebrating “shared values, common interests and strong political, economic, cultural and social ties.” with a country, whose Government has repeatedly failed to act with courtesy and sensitivity towards Palestinians.

Yours truly,

Denis Lemelin
National President
Canadian Union of Postal Workers

cc:
National Executive Board
Regions
CUPW Locals

Sauvons notre bureau de poste/Save the St. Boniface Post Office!

2010-04-28T22:08:00.000-07:00

From the folks at CUPW...

Canada Post has put it out there that the St.Boniface Post office at 208 Provencher could be closed because it isnt modified for handicapped clients.

Canada Post has also said that residents would have to go to Shoppers Drug Mart for postal services. This is unacceptable. There is non-exististant french services at Shoppers. 208 Provencher has been serving St.Boniface in French and English for over 100 years. To close this post office to the public would be an attack on the nature and character of St.Boniface and would further diminish the rights of the French speaking community. On April 29th join activists from the community and union to demonstrate against Canada Post from even thinking about closing our historic post office. The demo starts at 4PM at the St.Boniface post office at 208 Provencher Boulevard and there will be community and union speakers participating. (see facebook event)

What:	Rally to protest closure or relocation of historic francophone post office
When:	Thursday April 29 at 4:00 p.m.
Where:	208 Provencher Boulevard in St. Boniface
Who:	Denis Lemelin, National President of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers Daniel Boucher, President and CEO of the Société franco-manitobaine Bill Caithness, Letter Carrier from St Boniface Joanne Therrien, author of the book: Saint-Boniface

Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black

2010-04-28T10:35:00.001-07:00

I found this on another website. Although there isn't the same kind of reactionary movement here in Canada (yet) this article is one that cuts at the very nature of white privilege that is at the base of all western conservative movements.

Courtesy of Ephphatha Poet:

"Imagine if the Tea Party Was Black" - Tim Wise

Let’s play a game, shall we? The name of the game is called “Imagine.” The way it’s played is simple: we’ll envision recent happenings in the news, but then change them up a bit. Instead of envisioning white people as the main actors in the scenes we’ll conjure - the ones who are driving the action - we’ll envision black folks or other people of color instead. The object of the game is to imagine the public reaction to the events or incidents, if the main actors were of color, rather than white. Whoever gains the most insight into the workings of race in America, at the end of the game, wins.

So let’s begin.

Imagine that hundreds of black protesters were to descend upon Washington DC and Northern Virginia, just a few miles from the Capitol and White House, armed with AK-47s, assorted handguns, and ammunition. And imagine that some of these protesters —the black protesters — spoke of the need for political revolution, and possibly even armed conflict in the event that laws they didn’t like were enforced by the government? Would these protester — these black protesters with guns — be seen as brave defenders of the Second Amendment, or would they be viewed by most whites as a danger to the republic? What if they were Arab-Americans? Because, after all, that’s what happened recently when white gun enthusiasts descended upon the nation’s capital, arms in hand, and verbally announced their readiness to make war on the country’s political leaders if the need arose.

Imagine that white members of Congress, while walking to work, were surrounded by thousands of angry black people, one of whom proceeded to spit on one of those congressmen for not voting the way the black demonstrators desired. Would the protesters be seen as merely patriotic Americans voicing their opinions, or as an angry, potentially violent, and even insurrectionary mob? After all, this is what white Tea Party protesters did recently in Washington.

Imagine that a rap artist were to say, in reference to a white president: “He’s a piece of shit and I told him to suck on my machine gun.” Because that’s what rocker Ted Nugent said recently about President Obama.

Imagine that a prominent mainstream black political commentator had long employed an overt bigot as Executive Director of his organization, and that this bigot regularly participated in black separatist conferences, and once assaulted a white person while calling them by a racial slur. When that prominent black commentator and his sister — who also works for the organization — defended the bigot as a good guy who was misunderstood and “going through a tough time in his life” would anyone accept their excuse-making? Would that commentator still have a place on a mainstream network? Because that’s what happened in the real world, when Pat Buchanan employed as Executive Director of his group, America’s Cause, a blatant racist who did all these things, or at least their white equivalents: attending white separatist conferences and attacking a black woman while calling her the n-word.

Imagine that a black radio host were to suggest that the only way to get promoted in the administration of a white president is by “hating black people,” or that a prominent white person had only endorsed a white presidential candidate as an act of racial bonding, or blamed a white president for a fight on a school bus in which a black kid was jumped by two white kids, or said that he wouldn’t want to kill all conservatives, but rather, would like to leave just enough—“living fossils” as he called them—“so we will never forget what these people stood for.” After all, these are things that Rush Limbaugh has said, about Barack Obama’s administration, Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama, a fight on a school bus in Belleville, Illinois in which two black kids beat up a white kid, and about liberals, generally.

Imagine that a black pastor, formerly a member of the U.S. military, were to declare, as part of his opposition to a white president’s policies, that he was ready to “suit up, get my gun, go to Washington, and do what they trained me to do.” This is, after all, what Pastor Stan Craig said recently at a Tea Party rally in Greenville, South Carolina.

Imagine a black radio talk show host gleefully predicting a revolution by people of color if the government continues to be dominated by the rich white men who have been “destroying” the country, or if said radio personality were to call Christians or Jews non-humans, or say that when it came to conservatives, the best solution would be to “hang ‘em high.” And what would happen to any congressional representative who praised that commentator for “speaking common sense” and likened his hate talk to “American values?” After all, those are among the things said by radio host and best-selling author Michael Savage, predicting white revolution in the face of multiculturalism, or said by Savage about Muslims and liberals, respectively. And it was Congressman Culbertson, from Texas, who praised Savage in that way, despite his hateful rhetoric.

Imagine a black political commentator suggesting that the only thing the guy who flew his plane into the Austin, Texas IRS building did wrong was not blowing up Fox News instead. This is, after all, what Anne Coulter said about Tim McVeigh, when she noted that his only mistake was not blowing up the New York Times.

Imagine that a popular black liberal website posted comments about the daughter of a white president, calling her “typical redneck trash,” or a “whore” whose mother entertains her by “making monkey sounds.” After all that’s comparable to what conservatives posted about Malia Obama on freerepublic.com last year, when they referred to her as “ghetto trash.”

Imagine that black protesters at a large political rally were walking around with signs calling for the lynching of their congressional enemies. Because that’s what white conservatives did last year, in reference to Democratic party leaders in Congress.

In other words, imagine that even one-third of the anger and vitriol currently being hurled at President Obama, by folks who are almost exclusively white, were being aimed, instead, at a white president, by people of color. How many whites viewing the anger, the hatred, the contempt for that white president would then wax eloquent about free speech, and the glories of democracy? And how many would be calling for further crackdowns on thuggish behavior, and investigations into the radical agendas of those same people of color?

To ask any of these questions is to answer them. Protest is only seen as fundamentally American when those who have long had the luxury of seeing themselves as prototypically American engage in it. When the dangerous and dark “other” does so, however, it isn’t viewed as normal or natural, let alone patriotic. Which is why Rush Limbaugh could say, this past week, that the Tea Parties are the first time since the Civil War that ordinary, common Americans stood up for their rights: a statement that erases the normalcy and “American-ness” of blacks in the civil rights struggle, not to mention women in the fight for suffrage and equality, working people in the fight for better working conditions, and LGBT folks as they struggle to be treated as full and equal human beings.

And this, my friends, is what white privilege is all about. The ability to threaten others, to engage in violent and incendiary rhetoric without consequence, to be viewed as patriotic and normal no matter what you do, and never to be feared and despised as people of color would be, if they tried to get away with half the shit we do, on a daily basis.

Game Over.

Tim Wise is among the most prominent anti-racist writers and activists in the U.S. Wise has spoken in 48 states, on over 400 college campuses, and to community groups around the nation. Wise has provided anti-racism training to teachers nationwide, and has trained physicians and medical industry professionals on how to combat racial inequities in health care. His latest book is called Between Barack and a Hard Place.