Statement from Aylesbury Estate Occupation

February 2, 2015 news From “Fight for the Aylesbury” occupation website. Since the “March for Homes” demo on 31st January, we have re-opened and occupied a part of the Aylesbury Estate in Southwark, South London. We are tenants, squatters, and other people who care about how our city is being grabbed by the rich, by developers and corrupt politicians, socially cleansed and sold off for profit. The Aylesbury Estate is where Tony Blair made his first speech as Prime Minister in 1997, making empty promises about social housing. Since then, for the past 18 years, Southwark Council and their developer friends have come up with one scheme after another. All with the same aim: to dispossess the residents, demolish their homes, and sell the land. In 2002 Aylesbury tenants fought and won a campaign against demolition and voted down the original scheme in a ballot. But now big areas of the estate are emptied and sealed up awaiting the bulldozers, while residents are “decanted” away from the area. The same bullshit that we have seen on the nearby Heygate estate, and all across London. No demolition of the Aylesbury. No yuppy flats. Homes for all. We are here to fight for the Aylesbury. We are here to fight for our city. We are here to liberate this space and bring it back to life. Come and join us. PS: Thank you to everyone who has come down to show support, to all our neighbours and to those who have even come from as far away as Hackney bringing tea!

Greece, Syriza win but where next??

So many leftists on twitter and around the globe seem ecstatic that the anti austerity alliance party Syriza have seemingly won the Greek elections. Many hopes and expectations lay ahead. I sense a very bumpy road and a lot of conflict to come. This is just the start not the end. Syriza, a party born from a coalition of Eurocommunists, social movements and anti-globalisation activists, is riding high and looks set to take a large share of the votes once all is said and done in Greece in the snap elections called recently. Whether enough for an outright majority its in no doubt this is a big moment in the Euro crisis which started way back in 2008. The general sentiment among Syriza officials and activists is that they will win the election and form the next government. The party won the European election in May 2014 and achieved some significant wins at the regional elections. It has been leading nationwide polls for months, scoring 29 per cent in late December 2014. The majority-friendly electoral law allows for an absolute majority at 35 to 40 per cent of the vote, depending on the number of parties passing the threshold. If Syriza succeeds in forming a government then it will face a huge number of challenges on the domestic and European level. At home, it will encounter fierce opposition from big business, the austerity parties and the Greek media. Greek economic elites might use the EU’s legal framework to work against Syriza. For example, bank owners could file lawsuits at the European Court of Justice against the restructuring of the banking sector. For Syriza itself, being in government may strain the relationship between the party leadership and its supporters and change the dynamic within the party. Syriza will have to find a balance between its two roles – first, representing a credible alternative to the establishment, and second, bringing forward a project for government. Care will have to be taken not to damage the party’s links to the social movements, and it will need to extend its presence within society to build bedrock of support to withstand the attacks. A party m very new and made up of a lot of various trends of Marxists, trotskyists indeed my former party the CWI have a section within Syriza don’t expect them to have much say though they will make a lot of noise but very little will come of it. They have also taken on a lot of ex Pasoc members and party officials who putting in a British context have seen a lot of defectors from the Labour party who have seen their party discredited in many peoples eyes as they were one of the first party’s to force through austerity doing the ECB’s European Central Banks and the Troikas job for them. Syriza will come to power with the pledge to re negotiate the bank bailout and try they might. But Syriza will certainly try. One of the first actions of a Syriza government will be to demand a reduction of public debt in Greece and Europe through an international debt conference. European governments and institutions will probably enter negotiations without making any concessions. Karitzis says, 'They are convinced that we will eventually compromise, that time is against us, and so they won’t be too hostile in the beginning.' Giorgos Chondros, director of Syriza’s department for environmental policy, expects negotiations to drag on for a while. 'We will not only have to fight the Greek elites, but also the European ones. This makes our situation much more difficult. We’ll need the support of movements in the whole of Europe.' John Milios anticipates 'psychological warfare' from EU elites and creditors. Greece will most likely violate some of the provisions of the EU’s deficit rules. 'There is no doubt that the numbers we see about Greek government accounts, the banks’ asset books, are all forged,' Yanis Varoufakis, professor of economics and Syriza advisor, says. The true state of public finances will probably come to the surface soon after a Syriza government is instated. Party figures argue that for economic reasons the Euro zone cannot afford to kick Greece out. European elites could, however, exert pressure in other ways. They could trigger a bank run inside Greece. They could tarnish the image of Greece as a tourist destination. The European Central Bank (ECB) could stop returning profits from interest on Greek government bonds. Less structural funds for infrastructure projects like roads might be awarded to Greece – according to Varoufakis, the rules concerning these funds have been loosened in the past to support the current Greek government, meaning they could simply be applied more strictly to harm a Syriza government. Investors in Greek government bonds have been reassured by 'winks' from Berlin and the ECB, suggesting that should Greece not pay, the debt would be covered. Varoufakis warns that 'they might as well do the opposite to increase financial pressure on a left government.' All of these measures would damage Syriza’s ability to deliver important promises to re-establish free access to healthcare, increase the lowest pensions and introduce rent subsidies. Possibly the most serious strategy would be for the ECB to threaten to stop providing liquidity to Greek banks. Varoufakis describes this as a 'nuclear weapon' which could bring the Greek banking sector down almost immediately. It would be extreme, but not unthinkable: In December 2014, the ECB threatened to effectively cut off Greek banks unless the government complied with Troika wishes. Varoufakis is convinced that a Syriza government must be prepared for this form of blackmail if it is to last long enough to negotiate a new deal for Greece. Despite all these challenges, there is still optimism among Syriza members. Although many consider it possible that their government could last only for a few weeks, they say their chances are better today than they would have been in 2012. They see fractures within the neoliberal bloc that they can try to exploit, like the ECB’s fear of deflation, the position of Italy’s Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, and the recent conflicts within the French government. By getting into government and implementing first measures, Syriza hopes to accelerate existing debates, especially within European social democracy and the trade unions. I am no longer in favour of taking a electoral route to change I think its a dead end strategy but if Syriza do win power I do think we should support them to a point. If there looks to be a backlash in the streets where the likes of the Golden Dawn are set against Syriza supporters us as Militant anti fascists we must stand with them and with the Greek working class. This is getting serious now. If Syriza do not carry through their programmed and leave millions let down and hopeless I dread to think of the backlash from the far right and how this will play out. Whilst I am no support of electoral projects I do think there’s support needed for Syriza even if in a critical sense to build confidence of workers to rejoin the class struggle in Greece to rejoin the struggle against austerity and give hope to other nation such as Portugal, Spain, Ireland and Italy and so on that we can fight back and win. We need to get to the point where workers feel confident enough to feel they can run society for themselves. Whilst we may be some way from that factory and workplace occupations and strikes can all add to workers confidence that things do not have to be this way The possibility of a new society is there if we are not sucked in by various sub plots and diversion tactics which no doubt will be coming. It is no surprise tonight to hear our prime minister in the UK David Cameron who is now saying Europe face’s further times of uncertainty following these Greek elections. If a small nation like Greece voting in a supposed anti austerity party despite all its faults and it does have many then just wait until the Spanish, Italian and French working class begin to re start the fight after a lull. The euro crisis never went away as much as many bourgeois commentators hoped its back with a bang now and Greece is where we will be watching closely for things we can learn from. Solidarity with the Greek working class tonight. Remember change is in the streets, the factory’s the workplaces and communities not in the ballot box.

putting our ideals into practise

For many trying to change the world is something which may take many different forms to different people. I am of the belief that we should try to live as close to our ideals as we can. In today’s world long before some unspecified date when the revolution will come. For me this means living by our ideals on a daily basis including our attitudes towards sexism, racism and all forms of discrimination these are not issues we cannot put off until after the revolution. Solidarity is a concept talked about allots within those who wish to change society in a revolutionary socialist way but what do we mean by this? To quote from an anarchist FAQ. "To practice solidarity means that we recognise, as in the slogan of Industrial Workers of the World, that “an injury to one is an injury to all.” Solidarity, therefore, is the means to protect individuality and liberty and so is an expression of self-interest. As Alfie Kohn points out: “When we think about co-operation... we tend to associate the concept with fuzzy-minded idealism... This may result from confusing co-operation with altruism... Structural co-operation defies the usual egoism/altruism dichotomy. It sets things up so that by helping you I am helping myself at the same time. Even if my motive initially may have been selfish, our fates now are linked. We sink or swim together. Co-operation is a shrewd and highly successful strategy — a pragmatic choice that gets things done at work and at school even more effectively than competition does... There is also good evidence that co-operation is more conductive to psychological health and to liking one another.” [No Contest: The Case against Competition, p. 7] And, within a hierarchical society, solidarity is important not only because of the satisfaction it gives us, but also because it is necessary to resist those in power. Malatesta’s words are relevant here: “the oppressed masses who have never completely resigned themselves to oppress and poverty, and who ... show themselves thirsting for justice, freedom and wellbeing, are beginning to understand that they will not be able to achieve their emancipation except by union and solidarity with all the oppressed, with the exploited everywhere in the world.” [Anarchy, p. 33] By standing together, we can increase our strength and get what we want. Eventually, by organising into groups, we can start to manage our own collective affairs together and so replace the boss once and for all. “Unions will... multiply the individual’s means and secure his assailed property.” [Max Stirner, the Ego and Its Own, p. 258] By acting in solidarity, we can also replace the current system with one more to our liking: “in union there is strength.” [Alexander Berkman, What is Anarchism? p. 74] Solidarity is thus the means by which we can obtain and ensure our own freedom. We agree to work together so that we will not have to work for another. By agreeing to share with each other we increase our options so that we may enjoy more, not less. Mutual aid is in my self-interest — that is, I see that it is to my advantage to reach agreements with others based on mutual respect and social equality; for if I dominate someone, this means that the conditions exist which allow domination, and so in all probability I too will be dominated in turn. As Max Stirner saw, solidarity is the means by which we ensure that our liberty is strengthened and defended from those in power who want to rule us: “Do you yourself count for nothing then?” he asks. “Are you bound to let anyone do anything he wants to you? Defend yourself and no one will touch you. If millions of people are behind you, supporting you, then you are a formidable force and you will win without difficulty.” [Quoted in Luigi Galleani’s The End of Anarchism? p. 79 — different translation in The Ego and Its Own, p. 197] Solidarity, therefore, is important to anarchists because it is the means by which liberty can be created and defended against power. Solidarity is strength and a product of our nature as social beings. However, solidarity should not be confused with “herdism,” which implies passively following a leader. In order to be effective, solidarity must be created by free people, co-operating together as equals. The “big WE” is not solidarity, although the desire for “herdism” is a product of our need for solidarity and union. It is a “solidarity” corrupted by hierarchical society, in which people are conditioned to blindly obey leaders. " "Anarchists have long argued that people can only free themselves by their own actions. The various methods anarchists suggest to aid this process will be discussed in section J (“What Do Anarchists Do?”) and will not be discussed here. However, these methods all involve people organising themselves, setting their own agendas, and acting in ways that empower them and eliminate their dependence on leaders to do things for them. Anarchism is based on people “acting for themselves” (performing what anarchists call “direct action” — see section J.2 for details). Direct action has an empowering and liberating effect on those involved in it. Self-activity is the means by which the creativity, initiative, imagination and critical thought of those subjected to authority can be developed. It is the means by which society can be changed. Society, while shaping all individuals, is also created by them, through their actions, thoughts, and ideals. Challenging institutions that limit one’s freedom is mentally liberating, as it sets in motion the process of questioning authoritarian relationships in general. This process gives us insight into how society works, changing our ideas and creating new ideals. To quote Emma Goldman again: “True emancipation begins... in woman’s soul.” And in a man’s too, we might add. It is only here that we can “begin [our] inner regeneration, [cutting] loose from the weight of prejudices, traditions and customs.” [Op. Cit., p. 167] But this process must be self-directed, for as Max Stirner notes, “the man who is set free is nothing but a freed man... a dog dragging a piece of chain with him.” [The Ego and Its Own, p. 168] By changing the world, even in a small way, we change ourselves. In an interview during the Spanish Revolution, the Spanish anarchist militant Durutti said, “We have a new world in our hearts.” Only self-activity and self-liberation allows us to create such a vision and gives us the confidence to try to actualise it in the real world. Anarchists, however, do not think that self-liberation must wait for the future, after the “glorious revolution.” The personal is political, and given the nature of society, how we act in the here and now will influence the future of our society and our lives. Therefore, even in pre-anarchist society anarchists try to create, as Bakunin puts it, “not only the ideas but also the facts of the future itself.” We can do so by creating alternative social relationships and organisations, acting as free people in a non-free society. Only by our actions in the here and now can we lay the foundation for a free society. Moreover, this process of self-liberation goes on all the time: “Subordinates of all kinds exercise their capacity for critical self-reflection every day — that is why masters are thwarted, frustrated and, sometimes, overthrown. But unless masters are overthrown, unless subordinates engage in political activity, no amount of critical reflection will end their subjection and bring them freedom.” [Carole Pateman, the Sexual Contract, p. 205] Anarchists aim to encourage these tendencies in everyday life to reject, resist and thwart authority and bring them to their logical conclusion — a society of free individuals, co-operating as equals in free, self-managed associations. Without this process of critical self-reflection, resistance and self-liberation a free society is impossible. Thus, for anarchists, anarchism comes from the natural resistance of subordinated people striving to act as free individuals within a hierarchical world. This process of resistance is called by many anarchists the “class struggle” (as it is working class people who are generally the most subordinated group within society) or, more generally, “social struggle.” It is this everyday resistance to authority (in all its forms) and the desire for freedom which is the key to the anarchist revolution. It is for this reason that “anarchists emphasise over and over that the class struggle provides the only means for the workers [and other oppressed groups] to achieve control over their destiny.” [Marie-Louise Berneri, Neither East Nor West, p. 32] Revolution is a process, not an event, and every “spontaneous revolutionary action” usually results from and is based upon the patient work of many years of organisation and education by people with “utopian” ideas. The process of “creating the new world in the shell of the old” (to use another I.W.W. expression), by building alternative institutions and relationships, is but one component of what must be a long tradition of revolutionary commitment and militancy. As Malatesta made clear, “to encourage popular organisations of all kinds is the logical consequence of our basic ideas, and should therefore be an integral part of our programme... anarchists do not want to emancipate the people; we want the people to emancipate themselves... , we want the new way of life to emerge from the body of the people and correspond to the state of their development and advance as they advance.” [Op. Cit., p. 90] "Unless a process of self-emancipation occurs, a free society is impossible. Only when individuals free themselves, both materially (by abolishing the state and capitalism) and intellectually (by freeing themselves of submissive attitudes towards authority), can a free society be possible. We should not forget that capitalist and state power, to a great extent, is power over the minds of those subject to them (backed up, of course, with sizeable force if the mental domination fails and people start rebelling and resisting). In effect, a spiritual power as the ideas of the ruling class dominates society and permeate the minds of the oppressed. As long as this holds, the working class will acquiesce to authority, oppression and exploitation as the normal condition of life. Minds submissive to the doctrines and positions of their masters cannot hope to win freedom, to revolt and fight. Thus the oppressed must overcome the mental domination of the existing system before they can throw off its yoke (and, anarchists argue, direct action is the means of doing both — see sections J.2 and J.4). Capitalism and statism must be beaten spiritually and theoretically before it is beaten materially (many anarchists call this mental liberation “class consciousness” — see section B.7.4). And self-liberation through struggle against oppression is the only way this can be done. Thus anarchists encourage (to use Kropotkin’s term) “the spirit of revolt.” Self-liberation is a product of struggle, of self-organisation, solidarity and direct action. Direct action is the means of creating anarchists, free people, and so “Anarchists have always advised taking an active part in those workers’ organisations which carry on the direct struggle of Labour against Capital and its protector, — the State.” This is because “[s]much a struggle ... better than any indirect means, permits the worker to obtain some temporary improvements in the present conditions of work, while it opens his [or her] eyes to the evil that is done by Capitalism and the State that supports it, and wakes up his [or her] thoughts concerning the possibility of organising consumption, production and exchange without the intervention of the capitalist and the state,” that is, see the possibility of a free society. Kropotkin, like many anarchists, pointed to the Syndicalist and Trade Union movements as a means of developing libertarian ideas within existing society (although he, like most anarchists, did not limit anarchist activity exclusively to them). Indeed, any movement which “permit[s] the working men [and women] to realise their solidarity and to feel the community of their interests ... prepare[s] the way for these conceptions” of communist-anarchism, i.e. the overcoming the spiritual domination of existing society within the minds of the oppressed. [Evolution and Environment, p. 83 and p. 85] For anarchists, in the words of a Scottish Anarchist militant, the “history of human progress [is] seen as the history of rebellion and disobedience, with the individual debased by subservience to authority in its many forms and able to retain his/her dignity only through rebellion and disobedience.” [Robert Lynn, Not a Life Story, Just a Leaf from It, p. 77] This is why anarchists stress self-liberation (and self-organisation, self-management and self-activity). Little wonder Bakunin considered “rebellion” as one of the “three fundamental principles [which] constitute the essential conditions of all human development, collective or individual, in history.” [God and the State, p. 12] This is simply because individuals and groups cannot be freed by others, only by themselves. Such rebellion (self-liberation) is the only means by which existing society becomes more libertarian and an anarchist society a possibility. " An excellent piece by Phil Dickens over at Propety is theft puts it really well too "If, in the end, we want a self-managed society, this has to come from a self-organised movement. You cannot get it from a heavily stage-managed, top-down “democratic centralism” wherein The Party becomes the vanguard or revolutionary leadership of the working class. To believe that “a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat” will tend towards true communism, and that the state will “wither away” is nothing short of delusion. Rather, our means must reflect our aims. Just as building a top-down revolutionary movement sets the stage for tyranny, so a movement without hierarchy is the necessary starting point for a society without hierarchy. As the Solidarity Federation explain in the leaflet what is anarcho-syndicalism? (PDF); The role of anarcho-syndicalist networks and unions is not to try and recruit every worker, but to advocate and organise mass meetings of all workers involved in each struggle so that the workers involved retain control. Within these mass meetings anarcho-syndicalists argue for the principles of solidarity, direct action and self-organisation. In this way anarcho-syndicalism is completely different to trade unionism, which seeks to represent our economic interests and the so-called ‘workers parties’ which seek to represent our political interests. Instead, anarcho-syndicalism unites the political and the economic and opposes representation in favour of self-organisation. By organising this way, we learn to act for ourselves, exercising our power without being led by union officials or political vanguards. These calls into question the way society is organised and prefiguring the world we want to create, without bosses or rulers: libertarian communism. And it is not just our organisations which should reflect this horizontal structure, but the spaces we occupy as well. FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT; ALT=" Anarcho-syndicalists promote solidarity, direct action, and bottom-up organisation precisely because we believe that a free society can only be born of a libertarian revolutionary movement On the smallest scale, this would apply to radical social centers; Then and now social centre volunteers come from a range of backgrounds: community activism, animal rights, anti-war, climate-change, feminism, anarchism and more. We don’t agree about everything, nor do we need to, but what unites us is a shared desire for: ‘A fair, free and sustainable society – without hierarchy, discrimination or the exploitation of people, animals and the planet for profit.’ Creating the social centre as an autonomous, non-hierarchical, do-it-yourself space is part of trying to realise this. We don’t claim to or seek to represent anyone. Instead we look to provide resources for people to work for themselves, to increase their own self-confidence and to improve their own lives. More broadly, we can put the same principle to work in our actions. An occupied workplace can become an example of anarchism in action, the management structure replaced with cooperation, consensus decision-making, and solidarity and mutual aid both internally and with activists on the outside. This applies whether the aim is to take over the workplace for the workers, or simply to force concessions out of the bosses. It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about a community union, a squat, a social centre, an occupied workplace, or a national federation. What matters is that the way you have organised reflects the way you want to see society organised. And if you’re an anarcho-syndicalist, that means on the basis of “solidarity, direct action, and self-organisation.” There is no over-arching blueprint or formula for anarcho-syndicalism, either in the present or in a post-revolutionary world. Instead, we have a set of key principles, developed and strengthened through practice. We are not conducting an intellectual or philosophical exercise, and so practice is – ultimately – what counts. Just as our principles today are born of the practice of the past, so our practice today is what defines where we end up in the future. We truly are building the new world in the shell of the old one." With thanks to Phil Dickens over at Property is theft http://propertyistheft.wordpress.com/2010/12/31/building-the-new-world-within-the-shell-of-the-old/

The socialist Party and the police

I am long since a member of the Socialist party which has if I like it or not formed a lot of my politics to date. Yes they did many good things and I can say I gained my class politics from them to understand things in Marxist terms if good for me or not. I do think the bits I learnt much of it off my own back too to be honest as the education the SP gave out was hugely patronising and really basic stuff meant for primary school kids I’d say rich bad poor good we need to change this, join our party etc etc. Well I don’t need anyone to tell me I found myself frequently at odes of what the party put out and said as time went on. If not visibly then certainly in my head. One of my first bones of contention was the party’s relationship and views towards the police and the state as a broader identity. I joined in 2011 after the student mass demonstrations of the year before maybe this formed a point of which I wished to join a revolutionary organisation after being a labour party member for a few months before and after the general election which on class lines was a really big one when it came to class. For me even as a very timid and partly non educated political thinker I could still tell that the general election of 2010 was a very political one and a deep sense of unjust that the ruling class were back in power via the Tories and their lackies the Lib Dems and this was not right. I somehow thought labour was for the people and they would be my natural ally in the coming months to years. How wrong I was…. So I joined the SP in hope of better answers. For a while they gave me that but in time I began to question things as I’d always been brought up to do. One of the things that did stand out for me was the Socialist party’s line on the police and whether we should stand in solidarity with them or not. For me the SP was firmly behind the police and many instances can back this up sadly. This for me while students were getting beaten back by the police and riots were happening sparked off by a policeman attacking and killing an innocent black man in Tottenham in 2011 sent me into wonder how the SP could square having solidarity with these people who clearly had it in for our class. In recent years when the police have gone on strike or protested about their pay and conditions we in the SP were urged to support them. This stuck in my throat and I could never bring myself to supporting these agents of the state and lend them solidarity from our class when only weeks before they had attacked students fighting for a better future. It never sat well with me. It is a scene workers are all too familiar with. In a bid for savings, the "gravy train" of rank-and-file pay and benefits is being slashed by the highest earners who remain unaffected. However, sympathy may be muted by the fact that the workers in question are the police. While at first it is understandable to many to have solidarity with the police after all don’t they work for a wage and need to work for their living?? Their role when it comes to the working class and when we fight back is very very telling for me. , "the idea that police neutrally uphold democratically-decided laws has been exposed as a fiction." In the words of Fitwatch; It’s time to wake up –these institutions do not exist to protect us but to subjugate us. They give us enough to believe we live in a free and democratic society whilst protecting capital and those who defend it. What is the use of having rights if the state determines when and where we can exercise them? We are given the right to protest when we’re no threat, but refused the right to even assemble when it’s most critical. If public anger over the government's attacks on the working class ever emerges as anything even remotely radical, the police are the ruling class's first line of defence. Their job is to act against their class interests and either keep us in line or lock us out of the way. Until they decide to spurn that role, they should expect no sympathy. Working class solidarity should not be reserved for those who exist to smash it The SP clearly think that supporting the police and helping them split the state will in some way help the workers movement. The fact workers decide to join the police is lost on them and that workers do not always fight for their own class instincts. The fact that some feel drawn towards the police and the wider state should make us ask questions of why and how this is so. As @piercepenniless from twitter once wrote at http://piercepenniless.tumblr.com/post/19795478930/on-police-strikes “ I’m happy for the police to strike, but the right to strike is taken and retained, not granted, and we should ask why police don’t strike, that is, what police think they do, what they actually do, and so on. ) Extending an abstract defence of the power to withdraw labour into an argument that activists should defend police against funding cuts is logically questionable. It relies on a notion of police as a subsection of a greater set of ‘public servants’ that elides some fundamental differences. If they are so, we should ask, which public, and served how? We defend against cuts because they involve dismantling things like the NHS and welfare services, not because the organs of the state are inviolable goods. Hence this tautologous argument that anti-cuts activists ought to oppose cuts because they are anti-cuts activists elides the reasons that people oppose cuts. This elision is significant. The arguments put by serving police officers as to why they shouldn’t be cut largely involve their subsequent inability to afford water cannon, tasers, routine arming, &c. They also often extend to their need to exist to keep scum (etc) ‘off the street’. This is not benign civil work: it is racist, it victimises the poor, the inconvenient and the vulnerable. Any argument that we attain a moral victory by defending their working conditions and thus enable them to further fulfill their structural role seems to me rather weak. ) Should we not consider the work the police do as obviously and qualitatively different from the work of other portions of the public sector, and should they really fall under this rubric at all — in other words, what kind of work is this work?” Every time there is talk of police marching, striking or in any way protesting, liberals and leftists have put out calls for solidarity and support. This makes me feel very uneasy and now more than ever with events in Ferguson in America and lots and lots of attacks on black people by the police who we are told are there to serve us this is clearly not the case but a illusion to keep the mass’s where they are and in order. There some in the anti cuts movement who have written that "those of us in the anti-cuts movement should be protesting alongside them." Their reasoning is that although there are "the few nasty police," who "we want out," at the moment "our fight is elsewhere." The police who will take place in any march "are ordinary people with families and rents and mortgages," and we should "do for them what they wouldn’t do for us." My train of thought goes off in a somewhat different direction. Unlike these leftists , I don't see the behaviour of the police as an abberation. The fact that they are more aggressive in handling protests now, and are actively seeking to clamp down on dissenters by releasing footage and seeking "suspects," is not just something that happened. You can see it every time there is a serious threat to the established order, from events like Bloody Sunday back in 1911, through the Miners' Strike, Hillsborough and the Poll Tax Riots, to the G20 and, of course, the more recent student protests. In between, there are a myriad of other incidents, such as the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes. Not to mention the Forward Intelligence Teams, DNA databases, arresting people simply to be able to take their details, and other "illiberal" tactics Sumpter cites. As an article in The Commune points out; “Fair-minded people are against “disproportionate”, “provocative”, or “brutal” policing; and presumably in favour of a polite push and shove. This is an appealing message (and it may make sense to accentuate it to the cameras), but is more or less a fiction. Of course, there are incidents here and there where we can say that particular police could have been less brutal. But if the direct action we defend has any content at all, it must mean we supported, and support, concrete attempts to stop the law being passed, up to, including, and beyond the invasion of parliament – and we are in support of people trying as hard as possible to do that. And it is a fiction that the police could have tolerated that, or that preventing it could ever have been done gently. If it could have been, we wouldn’t have really been trying. If the police hadn’t been at parliament square during the student demonstrations of 2010, and if they hadn’t been prepared to act brutally, parliament would have been stormed, and legislation to triple top-up fees and abolish EMA would not have been passed. The brutality of the police is not incidental to the nature of the state, it is essential to it. So you have to pick: the state, and horse charges against children who object to having their pockets robbed; or against the state (which means: against capitalism, for social revolution); and against the police too; brutal or otherwise. Polite fudges are polite – but more or less part of the continuous stream of liquid nonsense which constitutes the news media. This is not a matter of a "few nasty police." If we support the police against cuts to their numbers and their services, then we actively support the institution of the police. That cannot mean anything except the state's monopoly of violence and the cracked skulls of working class activists and their repression. The Police Federation's own propaganda underlines this. The image before us is a line of riot police blocking a road, presumably less able to do their job because their numbers are cut. If you choose to support or join their march, that is what you are standing in solidarity with. Remember that. Every baton swung at the head of a protester just for being in the way. Every horse charge to keep the crowds in line. Every kettle because people wanted to cover their faces. Every taser that kills or paralyses somebody. Every stop and search of youth simply for being youth. Every Ian Tomlinson, Jean Charles de Menezes, Smiley Culture or Mark Duggan. It's on your head as well as theirs. Because you marched to defend it. Yes, the police are working class. They have to sell their labour for a living in order to feed their families this is not the end of the matter though . Nobody made them choose, or stay, in a job which exists to subjugate the same class that they come from - to smash picket lines, choke off dissent, and maintain the dominance of the ruling class. I was once told of a police officer who refused to attack picket lines - and was shuffled around the country until he ended up the constable of a quiet and inoffensive area. He is no doubt not the only one. So, if police can be persuaded to side with the workers and against capitalism, then it is clearly a choice that sees their career either go down the toilet or end altogether. Those still on active service, in the big cities, and marching to preserve their jobs, will be those with no qualms being on the other side of the class war. Thus, I still have no sympathy for the devil. I maintain that "working class solidarity should not be reserved for those who exist to smash it. so lets be clear, the police and their hangers on are not our comrades or on the same side as us and should be treated as such

NO borders, a revolutionary slogan

For many years I was told that having a no borders position was wrong and not even possible under the current world we live in under capitalism. They may be right but a lot of our demands and positions we stand for are not realisable tomorrow but we still do strive for them. For me and many others who believe that capitalism needs removing for good and that a new society is not only possible but actually necessesary for the survival of many people on this planet a future where borders are broken down and solidarity forged between peoples is key. As Karl Marx correctly said the working class has no nation. “The Communists are further reproached with desiring to abolish countries and nationality. The working men have no country. We cannot take from them what they have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois sense of the word. National differences and antagonisms between peoples are vanishing gradually from day to day, owing to the development of the bourgeoisie, to freedom of commerce, to the world market, to uniformity in the mode of production and in the conditions of life corresponding thereto. The supremacy of the proletariat will cause them to vanish still faster. United action, of the leading civilised countries at least, is one of the first conditions for the emancipation of the proletariat. 'In proportion as the exploitation of one individual by another is put an end to, the exploitation of one nation by another will also be put an end to. In proportion as the antagonism between classes within the nation vanishes, the hostility of one nation to another will come to an end. [“ There is a huge crisis on our borders which has gone unnoticed by many in our poor excuse for a media and this is just on our doorsteps. Almost 100,000 boat people have made the dangerous journey across the Mediterranean to Europe this year, a roughly 60 percent increase on the whole of last year, and about 800 have died in the attempt, the U.N. refugee agency said on Thursday. It is not unthinkable to imagine many bodies washing up in our medetarianian shores very soon given how the EU is washing its hands of helping migrants who risk it all to try to achieve a better life. The exodus has surged this year, as far more migrants put their lives in the hands of smugglers or unseaworthy vessels in a desperate attempt to reach Europe. Rescued refugees and migrants have reported handing over their life savings to smugglers More than 75,000 made the trip in the first six months of the year, landing up in Italy, Greece, Spain and Malta, the UNHCR agency said. Their number included 10,500 children, two-thirds of them unaccompanied or separated from their families. The number of the whole of 2013 was around 60,000. The UNHCR also said that this year the numbers are accelerating: 21,000 have reached Italy since the beginning of July. Meanwhile, more than 260 people have died or gone missing in the past 10 days, bringing to 800 the total number of deaths so far in 2014, compared with 600 in the whole of 2013 and 500 in 2012. "Europeans need to take urgent action to stop this catastrophe getting worse in the second half of 2014," U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres said in a statement. Many of the migrants are fleeing violence in Eritrea and Syria, and most travel from Libya or elsewhere in North Africa. "Rescued refugees and migrants have reported handing over their life savings to smugglers, in order to travel in unseaworthy and overcrowded dinghies, packed into a few metres of space without food, water or life jackets," the UNHCR statement said. This is clearly a tragedy and only in the last week or two the United Kingdom via Teresa May the Home secretary has made it clear Britain will not commit to helping those who are willing to risk their lives trying to cross from Africa towards Europe. This is essentially saying we are happy to see many more die as a consequence as the Tories look to see of UKIP to their right who are posing a bigger problem for them by the week. The Tories feel they need to appear tough on immigrants to face off UKIP but in reality all they are doing is fuelling hatred of those who are not of this land. As we go forward into the future decades Africa’s population is set to double while Europe’s is set to fall. There is a huge pull towards Europe from Africa with a lot of troubles there and scarcity of resources is only fuelling this. In recent months the mainstream media has focused on the crisis at Calais in France where a lot of migrants attempt to cross the channel to make a better life for them. In a recent excellent piece over at Novara media By Ruth Ciara and Daniel Martin http://wire.novaramedia.com/2014/08/calais-migrants-eviction-crisis-4-faqs-answered/ “Coming from Syria, Eritrea and everywhere in between, the migrants in Calais are fleeing war, persecution and exile in their own countries. Most endure harrowing and life-threatening journeys across the Mediterranean; from covering vast deserts with no water, to being cramped in small sailing vessels for sometimes days at a time with hundreds of fellow migrants, many of whom die from heat exhaustion or drown in the sea. Eventually, they reach Europe and make the journey to Calais, which for many is the last stop before crossing the channel into Britain – a journey which also tragically costs some their lives. Migrants typically pay smugglers to get them across each stage of the journey with funds coming through relatives who all hope for a better life. Some of the migrants had jobs, some were aid workers, and others were students. Due to the British border controls, some have previously gone to the UK to study only to be deported back when their visa ran out. A common question is: “is the UK good?” within which lay their hopes and dreams. Wanting to get across to build a better life for themselves – indeed many will proclaim that being in Calais is no life at all – they yearn for the opportunity to be educated, start a family and work. These rights, though seen as universal in the West, are denied to those in Calais. The hostility of the police and the constant fear as a result means any rights they do or should have are further abused. The migrants have fled severe persecution in their countries of origin, only to be dehumanised, oppressed, and forced into poverty in this town where they remain trapped, desperately waiting to succeed on the last leg of their journey. 3. What is daily life like? Each day is a struggle for survival. Forced into a constant game of cat and mouse with the French police and local fascist group Sauvons Calais (‘Save Calais’), the migrants seek refuge where they can; many stay at the squat, and those who can’t often come during the day before returning to their respective crossing points at night. Food is cooked by migrants at the squat, provided by organisations such as Calais Ouverture et Humanitie (COH) and more recently Emaus, whilst donations are regularly received from locals and a food distribution centre is run by Salam. Activists provide English classes and legal workshops to prepare the migrants for when they arrive. However, due to local mayor Natacha Bouchart they face constant police brutality, with many being found whilst trying to cross and returned, some are bought back multiple times each night having been unsuccessful. Occasionally, an effort is successful and a migrant will manage to board one of the lorries in one way or another, only to find several hours later that the lorry has driven to some other European destination as opposed to crossing the channel. They will then have to once again travel hundreds of miles back to Calais, in order to pursue their relentless efforts to reach the British coast. 4. What are the solutions? Calais is a humanitarian disaster, and the future for its migrant population remains bleak. Bouchart’s reasoning is that the migrants shouldn’t be Calais’s issue, it should be Britain that adapts its border policy, thereby allowing Bouchart to disrespect, abuse and deny any rights the migrants had or should have. In contrast, over 500 people and many local and national organisations rallied to support the initial opening of the Impasse squat – proving the scale of support that exists. This support has to continue if the migrants are going to survive with an urgent appeal for people to come and support both squat and occupants. Britain’s border policy needs to be more flexible and move away from legislation which hampers asylum efforts and forces migrants to cross illegally, such as the Dublin II regulation. Adopted in 2003 as a way of monitoring and controlling asylum access throughout the EU, the Dublin regulation states that the country responsible for the asylum claim and process should be the first EU member the claimant reaches. However whilst long term solutions can be proposed, an immediate solution has to be found: Bouchart needs to offer more asylum applications or at the very least provide housing, food and resources to these people.”

TUC Side With Bosses To Back Tory Workfare Scheme

Posted on August 2, 2014 by johnny void “The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.” In an astonishing and genuinely sad day for the trade uni0n movement, the TUC have teamed up with the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) to issue a statement supporting unpaid work. The TUC have sided with the bosses to sing the praises of the Tory Traineeship programme. This unpaid scheme can involve up to five months full-time work, sometimes for giant profit making companies like BT or Virgin. The placements are used to ‘prepare’ young people to be Apprentices, although there is no guarantee that they will be offered even this at the end of the scheme. Just like Margaret Thatcher’s despised YTS schemes, Traineeships represent a wealth grab by greedy employers. Once companies recognised they had to pay young people whilst they trained – now the tax payer will pick up the tab whilst the worker gets nothing. And just like the YTS programme was used as political cover to strip benefits from 16/17 year olds, Traineeships will be used to undermine social security payments for those under 25. George Osborne has already announced that under 22 year olds who refuse a Traineeship will soon face the prospect of six month’s workfare somewhere else instead. Despite Osborne’s announcement, the TUC say in the statement that Traineeships should be voluntary. As claimants themselves know, very little is voluntary such is the current mass benefit sanctioning culture at the DWP. This doesn’t seem to bother the scabs running the TUC who seem to have decided that Traineeships aren’t workfare, and even if they would rather they were voluntary they appear to back them anyway. This is an appalling attack on not just young unemployed people, but all workers who will see their own wages and conditions undermined by an army of unpaid staff. It is hardly surprising that the CBI are salivating at the prospect of this huge subsidy for business at the expense of the working class. Tory Skills Minister Nick Boles has joined them saying he is ‘delighted’ that the TUC support this scheme. They no doubt dream of a day when they don’t have to pay people under 25 at all. That day may not be far away and that the TUC are helping to bring it closer is as shocking as it is shameful. This blog has no sources of funding so here’s a quick reminder that you can help ensure it continues by making a donation. Follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid

Mythbuster: Israel’s attack on Gaza

This is a great piece By the excellent Tom Walker of red Pepper who takes apart the excuses Israel is using to justify its massacre July 2014 Over at http://www.redpepper.org.uk/mythbuster-israels-attack-on-gaza/ MYTH: The Palestinians started the conflict From looking at some of the media coverage you would think so – but it’s vital to put today's problems in the right historical context. The key date is 1948, when the state of Israel was created by Jewish settlers in Palestine. Fleeing persecution in Europe, they were handed the land by Britain, which held it as a colony at the time. Israeli myth has it that the country was mostly empty at this point. In fact, terror gangs murdered large numbers of Palestinians, and forced others from their land and homes, in order to expand Israel’s territory. Around 400 Palestinian towns and villages were ‘wiped off the map’ or renamed. Israel’s militarised, colonial nature is part of the state’s very foundations, and has continued ever since. Every time the borders of the map are redrawn in Israel’s favour, Israel pushes still further – the areas usually described as ‘settlements’ are in flagrant violation of international law, but nothing is done. New settlements continue to be built in the West Bank today. Most Palestinians, meanwhile, have been left stateless and landless, some living in refugee camps. Jewish people from all over the world have the right to move to Israel, but Palestinians do not have the right to return to their villages or homes. FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=" MYTH: Whatever the history, the problem now is the violence on both sides This is a common position, and allows the speaker to feel very even-handed in their condemnation. There’s a problem though: as I write, hundreds of Palestinians have been killed since the start of the recent offensive. The Israeli death toll, on the other hand, stands at... two – and one of those is thought to be from ‘friendly fire’. This is not new: massively disproportionate death counts have long been a feature of Israel’s attacks on Palestine. In Israel’s 2008–9 invasion of Gaza, an estimated 1,400 Palestinians were killed, compared to 13 Israelis. It is also the case, both then and now, that the majority of the Israeli casualties are military, while most of the Palestinian dead were civilians. Lazily drawing an equals sign between Israel and Palestine ignores that one side is the occupier, and one is being occupied. Right now, one is invading the other! To equate them is as absurd as talking about the US’s invasions of Iraq or Afghanistan by condemning ‘both sides’. If you are against violence, surely you need to focus your anger on the side that is committing the vast majority of the violence? If every death is a tragedy, one side is bearing a far greater weight of tragedy than the other. There can be no peace without justice. MYTH: Israel is defending itself against rockets fired from Gaza The ‘rocket fire’ is a central part of how Israel is justifying its invasion of Gaza – so let’s take a minute to look at the reality of these rockets. Many of them, known as Qassam rockets, are improvised from basic steel parts, fuelled by sugar and fertiliser and with a range of only a few kilometres. More recently there have been the Grad rockets and a few others, old cast-offs from Iran and Syria, with a slightly greater range. To get an idea of the level of ‘threat’ to Israel, have a look at reports of the damage done by Gazan rockets. Again and again you will see the phrase ‘no injuries or damage’. In one case some marks were left on a road. Another caused a small fire in a field. More recently a cat was startled from a tree: Israel, on the other hand, is a US-backed nuclear power with billions to spend on the latest military hardware – including the ‘Iron Dome’ missile defence system which shoots down most Palestinian rockets in any case. Israel’s weapons are capable of massive destruction, it has many more of them, and it uses them constantly, even during supposed ceasefires. There is much talk of Israel’s ‘right to defend itself’ from the Palestinian rockets. But what about Palestine’s right to defend itself from Israel’s infinitely more powerful arsenal? MYTH: The attacks are targeted at ‘terrorists’ and their tunnels This is one of the more transparent of Israel's lies – not least because the list of Palestinian dead shows such incredibly high numbers of children. For example, Peter Beaumont, the Guardian’s correspondent, witnessed four Palestinian children aged between 7 and 11, who were playing on a beach, being killed by Israeli shelling. ‘I’ve seen some truly shocking scenes this morning,' he tweeted later, after the invasion started. ‘A man putting the remains of his two year old son into a shopping bag...' These are not exceptions but the everyday reality of Israel’s victims. Israel attempts to claim that any civilian casualties are the result of Hamas using ‘human shields’, but from its actions it is clear that everywhere in Gaza is a potential target. Israel literally demolished Gaza’s el-Wafa hospital. A hospital is quite obviously not a ‘terrorist tunnel’, yet these were no accidental hits – the building was hit on all floors with up to 20 rockets and shells, then burned down. It is an upside-down world where it is ‘terrorism’ to dig a tunnel but ‘self-defence’ to destroy a hospital. Israel claims that it drops leaflets and makes phone calls so that civilians can evacuate any building or area it is planning to bomb. But the whole of Gaza is under siege, and Israel does not let Palestinians cross the border. Where, exactly, are they supposed to go? MYTH: While Israel can be criticised, it is ‘the only democracy in the Middle East’ Surely if Israel was a democracy, then the Palestinians in the areas it is occupying would have at least basic civil rights and a vote. In fact even the few Palestinians who are allowed to live in Israel itself as citizens are subject to discrimination and harassment. People talk about Israel as if it is a small, vulnerable island surrounded by hostility on all sides, its very existence in need of defending. But it is Palestine, not Israel, whose existence is at risk. It is Palestine that is gradually disappearing from maps. In fact, if it weren’t for the resistance, Palestine might have already passed into the history books, forgotten by the world. What is really meant by the ‘only democracy’ phrase is that Israel is a reliable ally of the US and other Western governments: that Israel is on their side. But their criteria are not ours. We need to target Israel with boycott, divestment and sanctions, and continue to build the global mass movement to free Palestine.

Justice for the 96, 25 years on we remember

25 years ago today the 15th of April 1989 FA cup semi-final between Nottingham Forest and Liverpool Fc at hillsborough. One of if not the worst disasters in footballing stadium history took place just after 3:06 the game was a abandoned and only then did the world start to realize what had happened in the liverpool end behind one of the goals. 96 innocent football fans lost their lives on that day tragically and we will never forget them. The idea that this was anything to do with hooliganism or drunken fans is just nonsense and the disgraceful reports by Kelvin Mckenzie and his newspaper at the time the Sun were nothing short of disgusting. To this day, in spite of the massive weight of evidence pointing to a cover-up designed to shift the blame for the 96 deaths from the agencies of the state onto the victims themselves, not a single person culpable in the tragedy has been brought to book. The inquest has been told that police accounts of the Hillsborough disaster were changed by senior officers and lawyers to remove criticism of the police leadership. Margaret Thatcher's statement at the time that the police should emerge blameless revealed the intentions of the establishment. That this stage has been reached is due to the courage and fortitude of the families seeking justice for the 96 who, in spite of being fobbed off, crossing chasms of obstruction, showered with empty promises, refusal by ministers to re-open the case pursued their quest with unremitting courage and determination. A key factor highlighted by coroner Lord Justice Goldring was Chief Superintendent Duckenfield's decision to open the football ground's gates at Leppings Lane which triggered off the catastrophe. Duckenfield's lie that the fans had forced open the gate was repeated by FA chief executive Graham Kelly, and media outlets ran with it before the lie was retracted. Kelly visited the police control room where he was told by Duckenfield that there had been an inrush of fans after they had forced open Gate C. He later admits this to be untrue but by 3.40pm, BBC Radio Two broadcast: "Unconfirmed reports are that a door was broken at the end that was holding Liverpool supporters". Thatcher's chief press secretary Bernard Ingham is later quoted as saying: "I know what I learned on the spot; there would have been no Hillsborough if a mob, clearly tanked up, had not tried to force their way into the ground." These remarks, along with the Sun editor Kelvin Mackenzie's vile onslaught, unleashed a Niagara of slander onto the victims and their families. (A 50,000-signature petition protesting the Sun's coverage was delivered to Downing Street by the late Militant [forerunner of the Socialist Party] supporting MP Terry Fields and others from Liverpool). The coroner has now posed questions which if investigated forensically should uncover the facts which have been shrouded in murk for 27 years. For instance what was done to manage the approach of fans to the turnstiles at Leppings Lane? Did a crush outside the entrance develop? If so, could anything, or anything more, have been done to avoid or minimise that risk? If so, by whom? The answer to that last question is the key to shining the light on and proving who bears the responsibility. Such an outcome will be a testimony to the courage of those who suffered and the mass movement of ordinary working people in Liverpool who have never wavered in their determination to achieve justice for the 96. The families are to be applauded for their courage and tenacity in the pursuit of justice. A debt of honour is owed to them for showing that working class people, fired with courage and determination, can render the forces of the state accountable. I am no fan of Liverpool football club being a supporter of Everton but on days like today both clubs in the city of Liverpool will come together and put rivalries to one side and stand shoulder to shoulder with the families of the 96 who will never be forgotten. Justice is still being fought for with a new inquest under way at the moment forcing the families to recount all the old wounds once again. Allot of the blame will have to go on to the police on the day who covered up a disaster for years only recently we have discovered the truth that many police statements on the day were doctored and changed to put the police in a better light. As the old saying goes no justice no peace, those responsible need bringing to account. Until that day which is hopefully sooner rather than later we stand in solidarity with the people of Liverpool in fighting for justice. Justice for The 96

RIP Bob Crow A militant remembered

I am sad to pass on the news of the passing of Comrade Bob Crow this morning aged 52. The general secretary of the RMT union for many years leading them to successful victories time after time on pay, jobs and working conditions. I understand Bob died in the early hours of Tuesday the 11th of March 2014 of a heart attack. His death will be a huge loss to the labour movement not just in the UK but around the world where his militant stance and taking on the employers one admirers all over the world. While I didn’t agree with Bob on everything such as the his No to EU project and its semi left nationalism and his 145 k a year salary not taking a workers wage we cannot knock his record in fighting for his members and his class as a set of results. Bob was revered by the Tories and the labour party alike who saw him as a troublemaker and hell bent on strikes and bringing the London underground to a standstill. This was not true at all as you would expect me to say. The only reasons tube workers and their drivers got such good pay was through their fight and determination to not roll over and give in to the employer’s demands. I do hope Bob’s legacy is remembered well for me he was one of the greatest trade union leaders in his generation. I just hope we don’t see the crocodile tears from the labour party and their hangers on as they were no friends of the RMT or Bob Crow demonizing him on many occasions over the years. Let’s put our efforts in to making Bob's legacy a one he would have been proud of. As the big man would not have wanted us to mourn his death but to get organised and continue the battle for a better world instead as Bob more than most understood collective power in the workers movement. RIP and solidarity. To all who knew the man.

Please support the tube strikes

Thousands of London Underground workers are taking part in a 48-hour strike over proposed cuts which include closing every Tube ticket office in London. Members of the RMT and TSSA unions walked out on Tuesday and will stay out until 9pm on Thursday 6th February in the first of two 48-hour stoppages. Under the proposals being put forward by London mayor Boris Johnson and Transport for London (TfL) hundreds of station staff jobs would be lost and supervisors would be moved from stations. TfL claims the plans are needed to save £50 million a year. The London Chamber of Commerce and Industry estimate each strike could cost the London economy £50 million a day. Workers have already been taking action with an overtime ban in place since last month which has led to some station closures. From Friday union members are set to start a 'revenue strike' which should allow free travel between certain times on certain days. The second 48-hour stoppage is due to take place from 9pm on Tuesday 11th Feburary to the same time on Thursday 13th February. Picket lines Workers are asking members of the public to support their picket lines and are expecting supporters from groups fighting austerity, such as Disabled People Against the Cuts and Occupy, to attend. Please visit this website below http://www.rmtlondoncalling.org.uk/node/4830 To find out where picket lines will be and to pop down and lend your support. During the next few days where we will see some rough stormy weather why not warm a tube worker up by popping along to the picket lines and offering solidarity. This is sure to be a long drawn out bitter dispute with Boris Johnson looking to try and smash the unions. Don’t let him these are attacks against our class we must stand up and show solidarity with our brothers and sisters who work on the tube day in day out and provide the safety in their assistance they give us. As a disabled person I am hugely appreciative of the kind support and assistance I can access when travelling the tube and this allows me to access the capital and travel independently. Do not allow Boris his moment in the sun. Solidarity and victory to all tube workers.

support the 3 cosas's campaign on strike this week lend solidarity with ULU cleaners

Plans and information on the 3 COSAS STRIKE – come to support the strike at Senate House! We, the outsourced workers responsible for cleaning, security and maintenance at the University of London, are striking next week on the 27th, 28th and 29th January. We are striking for our union, the IWGB, to be recognised by our employers, Cofely GDZ Suez, to be entitled to the same sick pay, holidays and pensions as directly employed University staff, and also for assurances from the University that we won’t lose our jobs as a result of the student halls of residence – the Garden Halls – being closed this summer. We feel picketing is very important, and if you can spare some time to come down to support our strike, it will help immensely. Bring your solidarity, love and warmth. Here are our plans for the three day strike: DAY 1: MASS PICKETING FROM 6 AM! We want as many supporters, students and others to come down to support us! We will begin pickets at 6 am at the main Russell Square entrance to Senate House. To find you way, click here. The first day is crucial to having an impact on the University and explaining why the strike is happening to colleagues, but also for boosting confidence! Please come down! DAY 2: TOUR OF LONDON! On the second strike day, from 9.30 am, the entire picket line will board an open top bus and do a whistle-stop tour of high profile sites throughout London, including national media outlets and places of particular interest to the University of London and Cofely. This will be followed by a contingent of supporters on bikes. Bring your bike along to follow the moving bus picket! Importantly, we will still be maintaining pickets at the University! DAY 3: MASS PICKETING! SOLIDARITY WITH THE NATIONAL STUDENT MEETING! We will be continuing the strike picket lines at Senate House from 6 am. Workers from the campaign will also be going to Birmingham to link up with students and staff from across the country to protest and develop national demands for ours and similar campaigns. * On each of the strike days workers at the University of London will be producing a daily strike bulletin through 'Open Book' - this will be to share news, counter management myths and give updates on the strike. See the current bulletin in the lead up to the strike: As well as coming down to the picket lines, how can you support the strike? 1. Contribute to our strike fund: http://donate.3cosascampaign.com/ 2. Pass a motion in your trade or students’ union or community group, info here: http://3cosascampaign.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/model-motion-support-for-the-outsourced-university-of-london-workers-3-cosas-campaign/ 3. Invite us to speak at a meeting to spread word of our campaign: http://3cosascampaign.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/a-national-speaker-tour-3-cosas-the-university-of-london-struggle-and-beyond/ 3cosascampaign

No justice no peace, Solidarity with the family of Mark Duggan

The disgusting scenes yesterday of the jury in the Mark Duggan inquest ruling that he was lawfully killed whilst being unarmed sparked fury inside and outside of the Royal Courts of justice in London. Understandably the family of Mark are outraged and this will do little to help race relations in the area and relations with the police which are at an all time low I should expect today. If you believe any of the news reports he was a thug and “one of the most dangerous criminals in Europe” and there was no choice but to take him out. Except... The gun he was accused of holding, there was no evidence of his DNA on it. The jury were specifically told this. Mark’s DNA was on the box that was allegedly carrying this gun but not on the weapon itself. The jury concluded that he was unarmed when he was murdered but it was still lawful to kill him. They believed he threw the gun from a taxi before the police standoff. An eye witness was able to confirm Mark was not in possession of the gun but was holding a mobile phone in his hand. He testified that it appeared Mark was about to surrender when he was cruelly executed by the Met. The taxi driver that had driven Mark to the scene, his testimony was disregarded also. As @justinthelibsoc put it “The #Duggan taxi driver wasn't believed. The anon witness who claimed it was an execution wasn't believed. I wonder what they had in common.” An all-white jury sat in for this case (led by a South African – let’s think in the language of our oppressors for a moment) and chose to believe witness statements by the police over the damning eye witness statements by PoC. We are not surprised, we are livid. The disgusting news coverage by the BBC parroting police lies and trying to make out Mark was this violent criminal where in fact Stephen Fry has a worse criminal record than Mark dangerous and violent I think not… This incident describes perfectly the way ethnic people are treated in society. It is the most brutal and extreme examples but it is perfectly allegorical. A person of colour is identified as a problem. They are monitored and treated suspiciously, feared even cos of course many people do believe we are still in the savage stage. The white oppressors make a plan to take said coloured person out, in this instance it was an execution but for many of us it’s being sacked, it is being denied opportunities, it is being ministered and silenced and they create the narrative around you and your character, people will believe them when they say you are a liar or aggressive because of course non-white people just aren’t civilised. Evidence to the contrary doesn’t even hold water in court! Institutional racism is endemic at every level of British society. The courts, the police, we must not trust them. The journalists, the BBC, we must not trust them. Bosses, doctors, nurses, some of our friends; we cannot trust them. It doesn’t matter what we do, they will use our words to hang us if we dare to challenge this racism in the state. I do feel Brittan is still very racist reading a lot of the twitter comments last night it was a lot of white privileged people assuming he must be guilty as apparently he had a gun and he was black so he must have been up to no good. Such deep set in stone prejudices are hard to smash and break down. I believe the truth will out in the end as it has done with Hillsborough but for now we stand shoulder to shoulder with the family of Mark Duggan and all others who have been murdered by the police and the state. No justice no peace.

Solidarity with striking firefighters this festive season

Last night as the storms hit much of the country our brave firefighters were out in force and today they take to the picket lines once again in their long running battle. They deserve our full support and solidarity. Firefighters in England and Wales will this evening strike for the Seventh time in their long-running dispute with the government over Pensions. They will take action between 6 pm and midnight today, as well as between 6.30pm on December 31st and 12.30am on January 1st. Matt Wrack, Fire Brigades Union General Secretary, said: it’s now been Almost two months since the government has been willing to meet for negotiations Despite several invitations from us. Until they do and until they start to actually resolve the dispute, we€™all Keep up the pressure for the sake of public safety and our members Pensions. In a week when the full details of a £7,600 pay rise for MPs” which will Also increase their pensions emerged, firefighters anger at the governments Unworkable, unaffordable and unfair proposals will be even greater. No firefighter wants to strike, but we cannot allow the governments Ludicrous proposals” and outright hypocrisy” to stand. We'll keep on fighting Until the government sees sense and comes back to negotiations. Most firefighters take home approximately £1,650 a month and already pay £320 or more a month into their pensions. From April 2014 this will rise for the third year in a row to over £340 a Month (£4,000 a year). Many firefighters also face a fourth consecutive rise of 2.2% expected in 2015. On top of this, a large section of firefighters face an additional threat to Their pensions as a result of the government refusing to honor long-standing Agreements. As a result, they will not receive the pension they were promised Despite paying into their scheme for many years. The FBU argues that the scheme is one of the most expensive for workers Anywhere in the public or private sector. Contrary to government claims, it is also one of the least generous because Employers pay one of the lowest proportions of pension costs compared to other Public service employers. The union has also said that the expensive pension proposals are designed to Fail because they ignore the physical demands and fitness standards required by The firefighters€™ occupation. Evidence suggests that at least two thirds of the current workforce would be Unable to maintain the fitness standards required by the fire service beyond the Age of 55. Such firefighters would face the prospect of being dismissed or seeing their Pension reduced by almost half. union-news.co.uk/2013/12/prepared-long-struggle-firefighters-dig-pensions-fight/">“We’re Prepared for a long struggle “FBU general secretary Matt Wrack tells Union news Uk

A thank you at Christmas

To all who have read this blog during the year and even just skimmed read bits I thank you for stopping by. This year has been an emotional one for me where politically I’ve transformed myself going from an out and out Marxist and Trotskyist in the Socialist party to ending it being in no party questioning party politicise and Marxism itself. 2013 has been a big year for myself looking back at may where I stood in a local election in the county council elections where I received beyond my wildest hopes I gained 59 votes in a huge Tory are whilst standing for TUSC. Whilst this blew me away I never thought this would change much locally and nationally I still feel TUSC are plugging away in vain with a lot of the oppositional votes going to labour for now and frankly their strategy and message is not working and I have explained this elsewhere. But for me attending various protests and meetings earlier in the year to now where my activism is on the low side of things it’s been a big year of change for me. Personally I’ve reached point where I am no longer as big into politics as I was but still keep a firm interest in such matters and am still as I’d call myself a socialist but maybe with al to of anti leadership ideas and a few more autonomous views where democracy matters a lot more to me now than before. I am a lot more of an independent critical thinker now than I was and I feel better for it. I am no longer under the control of an unappointed leadership who see themselves as leaders of us all. A new start and a new wave of thinking is breaking out on the left and many of the old left parties are in crisis and will face bigger upheavals in 2014 I feel as they fail to adapt to this new period we are entering. Now I’m free of all dogma’s and party controls I feel free to express myself as best I can and I am happier for it. I encourage others struggling with a oppressive top down party to break from it you will be better off for it trust me they are not the be all and end all as I’ve discovered they are ultimately holding us back I feel. As Karl Marx rightly pointed out only works can change society no one else no self appointed leaders or parties they can only lead us to state bureaucracy and less freedom as shown in the last century we must learn the lessons and not repeat our mistakes. I have a few irons in the fire and my political journey may not yet be over but 2014 looks to be another big year with European elections and the Scottish independence referendum to watch closely the next year looks to be shaping up to be another big one for many who have progressive outlook on things and look to turn things around for the working-class. A lot has happened in the last year and 2014 will be interesting for many reasons many events are yet to happen that we will have no idea they will happen but to ground ourselves in solidarity with our common people other workers and those oppressed right across the world is key. I understand now revolution is not around the corner for us in the UK but things can change very quickly and we must be awake to them but things do not just happen our ground work this year will influence watt happens next year. The fantastic work by students on campus’s up and down the land but notably in London and Brighton has set the path for bigger and better struggles next year for students against cops on campus and outsourcing too. This looks set to be another big battle ground of struggle for 2014 which we should keep our eye on. But going forward we cannot make big predictions as some do at the end of a year going into new one but what we can say is that workers may have suffered b big defeats in the past but there is no grantee they will go on suffering big defeats a time will come where there is a layer in society with not much left to loose who will be the first to really fight back and give this gov a scare and possibly upset the whole apple cart. I once again thank all for reading this blog this year and hope you can continue in to the New Year and offering your suggestions for improvements if possible. # Happy New Year and a safe and prosperous 2014 to all.

What is intersectionality ?

The term Intersectionality has come up quite allot on the left of late I thought I’d look into what it is and what it means for us all. New movements against oppression have brought with them a new vocabulary. The concept of “intersectionality” is prominent among them. Intersectionality says three core things. First: we should fight all manifestations of oppression. Second: the experiences under capitalism of one person differ from that of another person because of one’s place across material lines of oppression and exploitation. These first two ought to be common sense to socialists. But intersectionality also says a third. This is that one form of oppression can be shaped by and can shape other forms of oppression. Racism, for example, can be sexualised, or women’s oppression can be racialised – and this happens in such a way that it becomes impossible to view different oppressions as separate. We already know that all oppressions are connected by having material roots in capitalism. And by claiming that all oppression and exploitation intertwine, there is at least a vague recognition by intersectionality that all oppression is rooted in the same societal structures. But intersectionality makes the further claim that you cannot, for example, say that a black woman experiences sexism on the one hand and racism on the other, as separate to that sexism. In reality, the sexism that black women face is often shaped by their blackness and the racism they face is shaped by their gender. The result being women’s oppression for black women is intimately connected but also has nuanced differences to women’s oppression for white women. Similarly we understand how women’s oppression for the ruling classes differs to that of the working class. Have i lost you yet? So the experiences of oppression can differ depending on who you are. We know this – so why is intersectionality useful as a descriptive tool? I'd say that as we all experience things very differently and are not all the same. How one person reacts to something may be different to another we cannot blanket catch all in the way we go about things. Some argue intersectionality tends towards fragmentation. If you talk about women, you could talk about black women, and if you talk about black women you could talk about black, gay, disabled women – and so on. What can be said in response to these arguments? Firstly, I don’t see what’s wrong with talking about the oppression of black, gay, disabled working class women under capitalism. Attempting to relate to as many people as possible by talking about the specificity of their oppression is a good thing. The question, however, is whether such concerns over the specificity of experience lead to divisions and separatism. In fact the way intersectionality is used today – for example on campuses – operates in precisely the opposite direction: intersectionality is as a call to unity! The argument is that everyone concerned with oppression should naturally be concerned with the nuances of everyone else’s oppression. That is not fragmentation – it is the basic building block of solidarity in my opinion Others argue that intersectionality sees class as simply another form of oppression and therefore fails to be compatible with Marxism that places the working class at its root. I’d say this depends on the explanatory framework intersectionality is used within. We must not forget that intersectionality is not an explanatory theory in itself: it does not aim to explain why oppression exists. In its most basic form, it rather tries to describe the nuanced experience of oppression that arises from the mingling of different structures of oppression, and the way that all this plays out in our lives. So intersectionality only treats class as another form of oppression if the explanatory framework you use it within also treats class as oppression. For example, if you put intersectionality within the framework of privilege theory, then there are a whole host of criticisms we could draw out against intersectionality. But we should be careful not to confuse criticisms we have of privilege theory with those of intersectionality. If you place intersectionality within the framework of privilege, you should not blame intersectionality for the conclusions that privilege theory leads to. Capitalism today is characterised by a global economic crisis and neoliberal economic policies. Class antagonisms are taking centre stage, and the fact that increasing numbers of young people are even speaking of class because of the influence of intersectionality is a step forward – even if they’re mistakenly labelling class exploitation as a form of oppression. There is allot of oppression out there having a good understanding where it is coming from and the means and ends are always in constant flow. It’s a theory I’m still learning from all the time but it is not something which will go away overnight I fear.

Solidarity with Higher education staff on strike today for fair pay

Today see's another nationwide strike in Higher education and momentum is growing with greater support and more student occupations this time too could the student movement be making a comeback in support of their lectures ? With Exeter, Sheffield, Goldsmiths, Sussex, Ulster, Edinburgh and Birmingham all occupied in support of fair play in HE we can be Proud of students right now Tens of thousands of university teachers and support staff are expected to walk out for a second day today in an increasingly bitter pay row. Unions say they have “bent over backwards” to prevent the dispute from escalating, but they say employers have refused to increase a “miserly” pay offer. Officials say the proposed 1% increase would see university workers receiving a fifth consecutive pay award below the cost of living. They estimate the value of some staff salaries has been eroded by 14% in that time. Today’s action will involve members from UNISON, UCU, Unite and EIS. UNISON general secretary, Dave Prentis, said: “The decision to take action so close to Christmas shows the depth of feeling that this issue has caused. “It is a disgrace that universities are sitting on cash surpluses worth £2bn, but they are not prepared to reward their staff who are the backbone of our world class university system. “The employers’ imposed payment of 1% does not address the increasing cost of living for staff who face rising energy costs and increasing food bills, and does little for the 4,000 staff working in universities who earn less than the living wage. “A fair day’s work deserves a fair day’s pay, and higher education workers deserve a better standard of living in return for their hard work and the contribution they make to the success of UK universities.” Unions say terms and conditions amongst higher education workers are being eroded while job insecurity is increasing, with greater use of zero hour contracts and an increase in the gender pay gap. The median salary of vice chancellors is £242,000, with the highest paid employee in higher education receiving more than £500,000. However, workers at the bottom end of the pay scale earn just £13,486. Unions say they have attended a series of negotiations, including at the conciliation service Acas, to try to resolve the dispute. EIS general secretary Larry Flanagan said: “Strike action is always the last resort for any trade union – but it is the point at which we have reached in the pay dispute with the University Employers’ Association. “The employers do not seem to understand the effect that four years of sub-inflationary pay rises have on their staff. “Members literally cannot afford to go on like this, and that is why we have joined our three sister unions and colleagues in taking concerted action to pursue our claim for fair pay. “The sector is financially healthy, with an increasing number of senior staff on salaries of over £100K a year with ever-increasing principals’ salaries – we ask the employers to fairly share the fruits of the HE sector staff hard work.” So remember if your near a picket line or have a lecture today do not reschedule the lecture respect the picket line and give support to those out on strike if you can. This strike cannot be effective if a picket line is crossed. Best of luck

Solidarity with striking outsourced workers at ULU

On Wednesday 27 and Thursday 28 November, outsourced workers at the University of London will strike as part of their “3 Cosas” (“3 Things”) campaign for sick pay, holiday, and pension equality with their directly employed colleagues. The strike coincides with the University’s “Foundation Day”, due to be attended by Princess Anne. A protest is planned for 6pm on Wednesday 27 November at Senate House. A University of London worker spoke to Solidarity about the strike. ________________________________________ What are the demands of the strike? There are three demands which form the basis of the industrial dispute between our union, the Industrial Workers union of Great Britain (IWGB) and our employer, Balfour Beatty Workplace. The first issue is union recognition. We want a formal recognition agreement in order to set up a proper and formal negotiating infrastructure. Lots of the workplace issues that later turn in to formal grievances or industrial disputes could potentially be avoided if there was more dialogue between the company and the union. The second issue is terms and conditions. The current terms and conditions for Balfour Beatty workers, specifically for sick pay, holidays, and pensions, are far inferior to those of direct employees of the University of London. We want parity in these terms and conditions between directly-employed and outsourced workers. The third issue is job losses. The University of London is planning on shutting down the Garden Halls, a halls of residence where many of our members are employed as cleaners, next summer. We want the company to re-allocate these workers within the company as vacancies arise in order to prevent job losses. What can people do to support the strike? There are two important ways people can support the strike. The first is by coming to Senate House, where workers will gather, on the strikes days. We will be there from 6am to 1pm on the 27 November, and from 6am to 3pm on 28 November. The second way to help is by donating to the strike fund, so that those low paid workers going on strike won’t lose as much money. You can donate online here. What do you think about the University’s use of surveillance and police intimidation, including arrest, against activists on campus? The University of London has turned to increasingly aggressive tactics in order to silence the campaign. This includes attempting to ban protests on campus, collaborating with the police in order to arrest students, closing off spaces on campus with barricades and chains, and filming staff and students who protest peacefully. The University of London is resorting to these tactics because they simply do not have a moral argument. Furthermore, after the campaign ignored the University’s ban on peaceful protests, I believe that management felt the need to become even more aggressive in order to not lose face. Given that they are now arresting people for organising demonstrations, and the demonstrations continue to occur, I am not sure what their next move will be. Perhaps banning students from campus altogether? Gandhi once said, “First they ignore you. Then they ridicule you. Then they fight you. Then you win.” It is comforting to know we are nearing the end. What’s the relationship between outsourced staff and directly-employed workers? Despite the fact that the bulk of IWGB members at the University of London branch are outsourced workers, we have an increasing number of members who are employed directly by the University. Some have joined out of solidarity with the outsourced workers. However, more and more workers have joined in order to be part of a union that stands for something, is willing to defend workers in disciplinaries and grievances, and puts the worker first. Together with Unite, UCU, and Unison, we balloted our direct employee members to strike in the recent pay dispute. They struck on 31 October, and mounted joint pickets with UCU and Unison members. On 27 and 28 November, the directly-employed IWGB members will also strike. Our branch meetings are open to all members, no matter who the employer. Mutual support and coordinated action will benefit both the outsourced workers and the direct employees. What else does campaign have planned? 27 and 28 November are just the first strike days. If we do not make progress we will continue with a series of rolling strikes until Balfour Beatty starts to take us seriously. The status quo, where outsourced workers are forced to work when sick or injured, do not have enough time to visit family, and don’t have a decent pension, simply cannot continue. We have offered to sit down at the negotiating table with Balfour Beatty on various occasions. We agreed to talks through ACAS, but after four and a half hours of dithering they offered nothing. We had a 97% yes vote in our ballot. We expect the picket line to be quite large. With thanks to http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2013/11/26/outsourced-workers-strike-equality

3 cosas workers to strike Nov 27 & 28 at University of London

Solidarity with the workers at the university of London fighting back. Outsourced IWGB members working for Balfour Beatty Workplace (BBW) at the University of London have voted overwhelmingly for strike action as they pursue their goals of recognition, protection for Garden Halls workers and the 3 Cosas. The ballot results, published last week , show a massive 97% vote in favour of strike action, on a huge 70% turnout. The first days of action have been called for Wednesday 27 November and Thursday 28 November, the first of these being Foundation Day at the University of London, the traditional event when the Chancellor Princess Anne bestows honorary degrees on the great and good. IWGB Vice-Chair Sonia Chura was resolute, declaring that ‘The ballot results are positive and excellent. 97% in favour of the strike. We workers are firmly demonstrating that we are united in our cause’. She once again stressed that the IWGB was still willing to negotiate, but warned that time was now growing short if BBW were to avoid inflicting massive disruption on the University, its staff and its students. If you can get down to their picket line on the days mentioned above the support would be hugely appreciated. Please donate to the strike fund – as low-paid workers already on the breadline, they will inevitably be affected more than most by the loss of earnings which a strike entails. By you can donate online at http://tmblr.co/ZEL_Hq_YHvLQ

Workers and non workers

I've always felt that as a labour movement and as socialists we tend to talk allot of workers and the working class but we should not forget the non working workers the unemployed movement is just as important in my view to build solidarity and links in the community. For non workers they can often feel isolated and cut off from the workers movement for example when there are strikes or a demonstration or something they are not always integrated as well as they should be in my opinion. We've all been unemployed at some point in our life all be it at a young age or not but the desperate feeling it creates and the feeling of uselessness must be dealt with by the trade unions. I do feel trade unions could do more to open themselves up to the unemployed to join with workers in unity within a union. Why can’t non workers who are as much as part of the working class as workers themselves all is them not being fully exploited by wage labour. Reaching out to the unemployed in times of mass unemployment is key by the labour movement can build real solidarity where it is needed building unity w where the ruling class wish to divide and rule us. Our problems are not so disimilar between the unemployed and the employed as we all face a very difficult situation which if we stand together we can win and resist. I think we are wrong in the labour movement if we don’t reach out to our comrades who are unemployed and vice versa. It is important to build as strong links as possible The stronger links we have with all members of our class the better and that goes for all parts of the class who may have different ideas of how to go about things but our solidarity must be there.

Solidarity with the 3 Cosas Campaign

’ One of the most fantastic militant and brave even campaigns I’m following and giving support to right now is the 3 Cosas Campaign which is made up of mainly low paid immigrant workers who speak little English but have organised themselves from the bottom up and deserve our support. Cleaners, porters, security guards, catering staff, and other support staff at the University of London administrative offices (in Senate House and central academic buildings) and student resident halls are employed by private contractors. In September 2011 many of these workers earned just above the national minimum wage, hardly enough to live on in London. After months of campaigning led by activist workers they managed to secure the London Living Wage (£8.55) as a basic minimum hourly rate. Inspired by this success the same group of activist workers went on to launch the “3Cosas Campaign” (Spanish for “three things”) in November 2012; the demands: the same sick pay, holiday pay, and pensions that other University employees enjoy. According to a number of the stewards the leadership said that they tacitly support the demands but that the campaign would need to be led by the outsourced workers themselves as the branch leadership was “too busy”. The workers duly did this, set up weekly meetings, and begun planning, recruiting and publicising the campaign. The campaign plan and budget was brought to a union branch meeting for endorsement on 4 November 2012. It was at this point that smouldering tensions between the union branch leadership and activist workers erupted. According to a number of members present the meeting became heated with Ms Grahl declaring her opposition with a petulant “I’m the secretary and I don’t support this” and vice-chair Simon Meredith refusing to bring the issue to a vote. When the allotted meeting time was up, with the debate in full swing and a majority of committee members seemingly in favor of endorsing the campaign, Mr. Meredith declared that time was up, called the meeting closed and, together with Ms Grahl and local area organiser Tony Mabbott, walked out. In an online UNISON article six weeks later, Ms Grahl seemed to endorse the campaign. (Reference cited: http://www.unison.org.uk/activists/pages_view.asp?did=15102) Sonia Chura, a cleaner at Hughes Parry Resident Hall and a union steward, guesses that the schism emerged because the branch leadership felt out of control of what was clearly becoming the most dynamic branch activity. Quite possibly there were other contributing factors (the union leadership named have not responded to requests for an interview or comments) but Ms Chura’s conjecture seems to be borne out by the fact that the branch leadership then called a meeting on 22 November to discuss launching an official branch campaign with the same objectives (with the addition of maternity leave). One of the only five workers to attend explained that none of the existing campaign leaders were asked to participate in planning and running the meeting and that it was scheduled for a time when many workers were already on their way to their second jobs. As a result many of the workers have left Unison and their stifling bureaucratic ways and have joined the IWGB union who are keen on organising for them being run from the bottom up and crucially are not linked to supporting the labour party which does hamper Unison more often than not. The 3 Cosas Campaign’s aims are simple – to ensure equality of terms and conditions between the University of London’s direct employees, and its outsourced workers. There are three areas (‘tres cosas’) where the disparity between University and contract workers is greatest – SICK PAY, HOLIDAYS and PENSIONS. The campaign aims to persuade the University to ensure that all workers have the same rights in these three areas. It is eminently affordable, and it is the only right thing to do. Sick pay For a number of reasons, many of the outsourced workers have different terms and conditions. However, the vast majority of the outsourced workers are entitled to Statutory Sick Pay (SSP), as anyone who earns over £107 per week is entitled to this by law. SSP entails that during the first three days of absence due to illness the worker receives nothing in compensation. Starting on the fourth consecutive day of absence the worker is entitled to £86.70 per week (paid by the government). Given that most people do not know how long they will be sick for when they fall ill, and given that it is extremely difficult to survive on £86.70 per week in London, the reality is that many of the workers come in to work when sick or injured as they cannot afford not to. For more information on SSP click here. The lack of proper sick pay is especially reprehensible in that people who clean toilets and are exposed to strong chemicals, security guards who walk around in the cold for hours on end and catering staff who clean dirty dishes, among others, are particularly exposed to illness. What the 3 Cosas Campaign is calling for is the same sick pay policy for outsourced workers as that received by direct employees of the University of London’s central administration. The table below details the University of London occupational sick pay scheme and has been taken directly from the University of London’s website. As one can see, the amount of sick pay entitlement increases in proportion to the employee’s length of service. Length of Service Level and Length Allowance* Level and Length Allowance* During the first 3 months’ service 2 weeks full pay 2 weeks half pay Three months to one year’s service 2 months full pay 2 months half pay Second and third year of service 3 months full pay 3 months half pay Fourth and fifth year of service 5 months full pay 5 months half pay After five years of service 6 months full pay 6 months half pay Holiday Entitlement There is some variety in holiday entitlement among outsourced workers. For example, there are caterers at the University of London on zero hour’s contracts who receive no paid holidays, despite the fact that their contracts allow for this. However, many of the outsourced workers are entitled to 28 paid holidays (as required by law) per year. Out of these 28, 8 are bank holidays. A significant number of the outsourced workers are then required to take the days that the University of London is closed (roughly 6 per year), out of their remaining 20 days. The workers can then (in theory) decide when to take the remaining days each year. However, in reality, many of the workers are restricted on when they can take these days. For example, during the Olympics many of the intercollegiate halls of residence were rented out to commercial guests (rather than students) and the cleaners at these halls were not allowed to take any vacation days during the summer months. The lack of flexibility on holidays is particularly burdensome in that many of the outsourced workers, particularly cleaners; have to work 3-4 jobs per day to make ends meet. This means that if they want to go back to their countries on vacation that they have to coordinate their vacation days with 3-4 employers. The lack of a fair amount of total paid holidays per year is also especially burdensome in that most of the outsourced workers are immigrants, many of whom have a desire to return home to visit their friends and families. When one is earning £8.55 per hour, and a plane ticket to South America or Africa costs over a £1000, it is difficult to justify going for only two weeks. University of London direct employees, on the other hand, are entitled to between 25 and 30 paid holidays, plus the 8 bank holidays, plus school closure days, totaling as many as 44 paid holidays per year. The 3 Cosas Campaign is calling for all outsourced workers to be entitled to 30 paid holidays, plus bank holidays, plus school closure days, and for more freedom on when these days are taken. For more information on University of London employee annual leave, please see the University of London’s website. Pensions The outsourced workers are eligible for a BBW pension scheme but the terms are so unfavourable that the reality is that almost none of the outsourced workers have bought into the schemes on offer. The mandatory government scheme recently introduced is so small as to be almost negligible. The 3 Cosas Campaign is calling for the ability of all outsourced workers at the University of London to buy into a pension scheme as good as or better than SAUL. The benefits associated with this pension scheme (below) have been taken from the University of London website: • Cost to member is 6% of gross salary and 13% to employer; • A pension for life when you retire; • A tax-free lump sum; • A pension for your spouse when you die; • Allowances for your children when you die; • Full tax relief on all your contributions; • Your benefits protected and preserved should you change employer; • Increases made to your pension after you retire; • The opportunity to pay Additional Voluntary Contributions (AVCs) to improve your benefits. You can find out more about the campaign and find out how to donate to the strike fund as I have done now at http://3cosascampaign.wordpress.com/2013/11/01/iwgb-strike-fund-please-help/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog