Showing posts with label union bureaucracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label union bureaucracy. Show all posts

Friday, 14 November 2014

Why we don’t need “leaders”, for working class self action

A lot in our movement put our failures and lack of progress down to the wrong leadership and we simply need better leaders and we will be much better off. If only it was that simple ay? I was once a member of a vanguard Trotskyist party the Socialist party of England and Wales formally known as the militant tendency. I found this strain of Marxist politics rather insular and often backward looking in its outlook. “The "vanguard of the proletariat" is a concept common to both the Leninist and Trotskyist strains of communism, and it is nothing more than a convenient precedent to seize and hold power. In post-revolutionary Russia, it saw the self-organised soviets infiltrated and commandeered by the Bolsheviks, the army re-centralised, and the establishment of a counter-revolutionary dictatorship. Vanguardism is a dead-end for real, libertarian socialism. In times when it had a chance of gaining power, it was a vehicle for dictatorship. Now, the point is to boost the numbers, fill the coffers, and sell the papers. Some groups, such as the Socialist Party - being formed from Militant Tendency - do have the upside of actually getting involved in workers' struggles in practical ways. But they hold to the same belief in workers' needing revolutionary leadership, and the same tendency towards building front groups As class consciousness begins to slowly grind into a very slow movement in progression is something to be welcomed naturally as those of us who wish to change the world for the better. But as consciousness increases, we also need to be aware of – and to challenge – illusions in official leadership and hierarchies. This goes for the Labour Party, of course, and for the numerous other sects which style themselves as our vanguards and revolutionary leadership. But, in the particular arena of industrial disputes, we need to be particularly wary of the influence and intent of the trade union leadership. As Anton Pannekoek wrote, the leaders and bureaucrats of the union movement “sit in conferences with the capitalists, bargaining over wages and hours, pitting interests against interests, just as the opposing interests of the capitalist corporations are weighed one against another.” This is how “they learn to understand the capitalist’s position just as well as the worker’s position” and so take it upon themselves “to regulate class conflicts and to secure industrial peace.” Though portrayed as enemies or rivals, trade union leaders and bosses end up collaborating to quell industrial unrest to the detriment of workers Many will say well if you think we don’t need a leadership how will we ever get anywhere. This is a hugely defeatist position which makes out the working class are incapable of thinking and acting for themselves. To create change workers must start to feel their own collective power and possibilities of action from below. The main vehicle for that is the mass assembly. Workers build confidence in their own strength through collective action, and an integral part of that is the ability to make decisions for ourselves. Thus, rather than limiting the input of the workforce to a statutory ballot, after which union leaders and executive committees decide the timing and the form of action, assemblies of all workers involved in a given dispute allows for this open debate and decision-making. It makes it easier to organise pickets, plan solidarity and fund-raising actions, and generally maintain the strength of an action. Where mass assemblies are not practical, for example in disputes and actions spread across a broad geographical area or involving a number of sites, an elected strike committee is the next best option. Such a committee should be composed not of representatives imbued with the power to make decisions for their constituents, but of delegates with strict mandates who are accountable to those who elected them and instantly revocable. In establishing such a committee, those taking action are able to coordinate their activities efficiently and respond to issues rapidly whilst still making sure that it is ordinary workers who are calling the shots, beyond the reach of the demobilising forces of trade union bureaucracy. This also, again, reinforces the idea that workers are able to take action of their own accord, as a class, and helps to build the confidence and consciousness required not only for significantly larger actions such as a general strike but also to reinforce how things will look in the event of a radical re-organisation of society in workers’ interests. Ultimately, workers need to self-organise. Yes, we need to rid ourselves of the dead-weight of union bureaucracy, but that does not mean installing an out-of-touch vanguard in their stead. Serious and effective resistance to the class war can only come from below, at the hands of people who are willing to take direct action but who also realise that looking revolutionary isn't the same as being revolutionary. In the workers’ movement, solidarity isn’t just a word. It is a weapon. It is the basic principle behind working class people combining to defend their collective interests and reciprocally supporting each other’s struggles. In practical terms, it can take many forms; from joining and supporting the picket line of another workforce to donating money to those who have withdrawn their labour. The latter is particularly important if we want to build a culture of industrial action that is independent of union bosses, because the availability or refusal of strike funds is one way in which they are able to demobilise people and turn action on or off as they see fit. Hence the importance of locally controlled strike funds. Such monies do not, obviously, spring up out of nowhere. By bringing the control of funds back to the grassroots, so we also bring them the responsibility for raising them. There are a number of ways to do this. Self-organised groups, such as Liverpool Antifascists, use benefit nights and gigs to raise money. As they put it, “these events not only serve to raise money … but to lay down links in communities and raise awareness of the … cause.” Thus, not only do such actions raise cash, they also forge the community links and sense of comradeship that is equally vital to maintaining struggles. In particular, this is a good way of drawing those outside of the affected workplaces into the action, and they can be encouraged to contribute to the fight not only financially but by turning up at pickets or demonstrations as well. Practical solidarity and mass picketing Not all disputes follow the same pattern. As such, there is no single formula that can be prescribed to guarantee success. However, as a general principle, building practical support and solidarity is integral to any potential victory. Particularly, as in Britain, if you are standing up in defiance of restrictive laws. The broader the base of support for an action, the harder it is for the bosses or politicians to make workers suffer any backlash.” In order to challenge the cuts agenda, we do not need to “win the argument” or to elect the right people into power. We need to shift the balance of power back in favour of the working class. This can only be done by encouraging people to self-organise and take control of their own struggles, in the community and in the workplace. 1. Rank-and-file control The point of direct action is that the working class do not put pressure on those in authority to negotiate, nor work in partnership with them to solve common problems. Instead, we identify what we want and either take it or force those in power to concede it to us. As its essence lies in un-mediated class struggle, by definition it cannot be directed from above by any self-styled revolutionary leadership. Direct action has to be initiated, and led, from below by the rank-and-file. This acts as a safeguard against being demobilised from above by bureaucrats or politicians who will put their own careers ahead of class interests; but it also serves as a demonstration of our own power. By organising in this way, we learn to exercise that power without the need for political leaders or vanguards. This not only allows us to challenge the present rolling back of workers’ rights and defend the status quo, but also to look beyond it and question the way that society is organised as a whole. With quotes and extracts by Phil Dickens over at http://propertyistheft.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/standing-on-the-picket-line/ A And http://propertyistheft.wordpress.com/2011/02/28/defeating-the-cuts-an-anarcho-syndicalist-strategy/

Monday, 18 November 2013

Why the IWW

I am fed up with Unite and how it is besotted with the labour party and gives millions of our own subs to this party who kicks us all the time. I have been doing a bit of looking about and have stumbled across a union called the IWW who has caught my interest. In their about section on their website they state: "We are a grassroots and democratic union helping to organise all workers in all workplaces. The IWW differs from traditional trade unions. We believe that workers have greater voice if we are organised within our own industries. For example, teachers, cleaners and secretaries who work in a school should be classed as education workers and all is in the same union. Furthermore, unions in one industry are far stronger if they are in the same organisation as all other industrial unions. Our aim is to see society re-organised to meet the interests of all people, and not just shareholders and corporations. We are NOT: • Full of stifling bureaucracy or linked to any political party or group. • Led by fat cat salary earners who carry out deals with bosses behind your back. • Going to sell you services, life insurance or credit cards. We are: • Led by membership. We make all decisions and we all have the final say. • For uniting all workers across trades, industries and countries. • Able to offer practical support for members in their workplace. • Flexible so you are still a member even when you change job or contract. Who is the IWW for? We are for ALL workers who do not have the power to hire or fire. This also includes workers who are retired, students, unemployed, part-time, temporary or those working at home. Workers who are members of other unions are also welcome. Britain and Ireland Regional Administration of the IWW " This to me sounds all very appealing. A union with no bureaucracy it does sound good. I will do some more reading of course but this sounds worlds apart from unite and its labour love in obsession. "Founded in 1905, the IWW is open to all workers. Don’t let the “industrial” part fool you. Our members include teachers, cleaners, social workers, retail workers, construction workers, bartenders, and computer programmers. Only bosses are not allowed to join. If you are currently unemployed, you can still join. You have a legal right to join a union and your membership is confidential. We are a volunteer-driven union, and this means we, not union bosses or bureaucrats, run the union. The IWW is not controlled by or affiliated with any political party or political movement. No money goes to politicians. Membership dues are used to maintain the union and assist organising campaigns. As a result, monthly dues are low. Why join the IWW? It does not take long to figure out those workers and their employers do not have the same interests. Workers want shorter hours, higher pay, and better benefits. We want our work to be less boring, less dangerous, and less destructive to the environment. We want control over how we produce goods and provide services. We want meaningful work that contributes to our communities and world. Our employers, in contrast, want us to work longer, harder, faster, and cheaper. They want fewer safety and environmental regulations and they demand absolute control over all decisions, work schedules, speech, and actions in the workplace. Practical benefits of a union The easiest way to stand up for each other in our workplaces and communities and the easiest way to improve our working conditions is to join a union. That is why employers fight so hard, and spend so much money, to keep unions out of their workplaces. Workers with unions generally have higher pay and job security, better benefits, and fewer scheduling problems. More pay equals fewer hours at work and more hours for enjoying the good things in life. Union workplaces are safer and have less harassment, discrimination, and favoritism. This is because a union gives workers the power to make workplace decisions. The less we let our employers make all of the decisions, the better our lives, our family’s lives, and our communities will be. Unions also provide mutual aid. This means assistance with problems at work, but it could also mean help with things outside of work too. Why every worker should be in the One Big Union Whether your job sucks or is “pretty good” (at least today), we in the IWW believe you should join us. We need to start sticking up for ourselves and our coworkers in our workplaces and industries. Ask around on your next shift. How many coworkers have two or three jobs? How many are one payday away from eviction? We have a duty to our co-workers and those who will follow in our footsteps to make things better, not only in terms of immediate gains but also as part of a bigger plan to build a radically new worker-run economy for the benefit of all. The only way to do this is to organise together. When we band together around our common experiences and interests, we can improve our jobs and industries. Our labour, not our bosses', is what makes our workplaces tick; our knowledge and experience is what keeps their business afloat; and we can use that power to improve our working lives. Britain and Ireland Regional Administration of the IWW " What is not to like about that? You can visit their website and find out more at http://t.co/W9Y7z1S3

Wednesday, 2 October 2013

TUSC and its future direction

I’ve felt for some time now even when I was still a member of the socialist party which in all honesty runs TUSC politically for the most party along with a few key trade unionists on the left anyway. I have felt TUSC has stagnated and failed to develop as I was told at the start that it would start to. Now I’m not inpatient or unrealistic to think we’d have a fully working mass new workers party in4 years of TUS being around but the general lack of debate, discussion on the project seems concerning for someone who would like to see the left get its act together sooner rather than later. For me when I was standing for TUSC it felt like a banner and not much else there is very little in the way of an organisation as such. The idea that TUSC can be the new workers party is very hard to believe at this stage. I constantly read in the socialist and tweets by various SP members that we need to build TUSC but I don’t see anyone even talking about building TUSC let alone actually trying to do so. For me it seems like a half way house in many ways a whole reformist platform which trade union figures and leaders can feel comfortable with. It is designed with the idea to try and entice trade union leaders like the Len McCklusky’s and Billy Hayes’s of the world over from backing the labour party. They have created a mirror of the early labour party and if various big 3 trade union leaders came over to TUSC one day they would be the ones in control not the workers and any ordinary member if there would be a membership by then. This is all hypothetical of course as TUSC and its steering group as its interestingly called as there is not much steering that goes on I must say has blocked attempts for TUSC to develop into anything bigger blocking off attempts for new groups to get involved such as Socialist resistance. Whilst I am no fan of their politics it seems foolish to not allow them in. Talking of membership it always is a thorny issue with TUSC being hugely opposed to any form of membership system at this stage they say. When the time is right I was always told while never given a time or a situation where membership may become necessary. Presumably no time soon I assumed. TUSC independent or the ISN as they call themselves have all but abandoned TUSC not for good but for now as they do not feel TUSC is growing, developing or even wanting to. They have tried their luck with Left Unity which at least has a membership system all be it a little odd and skewed at this point as its all before the30th November founding conference where we will start to see more about Left Unity develop. It is a crying shame that TUSC seems to be just an election front for the likes of the socialist party and the RMT it could be so much more if it opened up and reached out to groups like UK Uncut, boycott workfare and so on. There are enough people angry with the system today out there to start to form something on the ground. Talking of on the ground TUSC regularly complains about a lack of media coverage I’ve suggested a press officer in the past to contact various local and national media outlets to drum up support for TUSC yet I’m not sure if there is any movement on this proposal at all at this point. I was constantly told TUSC is a working progress and is not the finished article but for me the frustrating part was and still is to be honest the lack of any will to move it forward and try and build it. It felt like we were constantly waiting for the bigger unions like Unite and others to come join in then we could have our new workers party. Labour mark 2 if you like. As that is how it felt we were holding out an olive branch to the union bureaucracy constantly and not looking to go too far in front of them constantly. In reality TUSC consists of just the socialist party, a half-hearted Socialist Workers Party and a handful of others. The union leaders The Socialist party talks about are mainly Socialist party members, and Bob Crow is not exactly confident his union will agree to back it in future election as at a national TUSC meeting last year where it was told this wasn’t a voting conference the RMT representative Alex Gordon at the time said they may not stick with TUSC forever and a day waiting and waiting. This is reflected in TUSC’s basic and rather reformist programme to be honest. It’s vaguely social democratic with a few radical sounding ideas thrown in but it’s very sparse and basic and low on the details. Maybe for good reason I don’t know again to appease various union leaders I imagine to not scare them off but the socialist party claims to be Marxist and for a socialist society yet all it push’s for within TUSC is mild reforms to capitalism and a bit of nationalisation thrown in for good measure. All very uninspiring if we are honest. While it is true TUSC’s results in elections have been poor on the whole and dismal in others there has been a few decent results like Tony Mulhearn in Liverpool mayoral election got 5000 odd votes and Mary Jackson in Doncaster got about 2000 odd but most results are 1% to 9% and the odd one a bit higher clearly having no national profile or any way of getting through to people this is not going to change anytime soon I’m afraid. As for next years prospects I feel ill at the thought that TUSC or certain parts of TUSC are again putting their weight behind the No to EU banner once again playing into UKIP’s hands with a nationalist rhetoric that ill be hard to separate on the doorsteps where next year I would expect UKIP to do very well next year in the European elections if not win them out right actually. But what kind of workers’ party does the Socialist party want? Something pretty similar to what comrade Rob Griffiths of the old Morning Star CPB favours: i.e., a Labour Party marks two. The SWP is all for halfway houses too, but does not think the Socialist party trajectory is realistic. No meaningful layer of trade union bureaucrats is about to abandon Labour in order to set up another version of it this side of the 2015 general election. I would say TUSC has a long way to go and may not be the answer long term but please we do not need another labour party the one we got at the momentous bad enough making a safe space for various union bureaucrats is not my idea of a new workers party and I think workers need a party of their own still which they do not have.

Friday, 26 April 2013

TUC- the Useless congress

This week the NSSN lobbied the TUC general council and again made the appeal for a 24 hour general strike which would be the start of rolling action not simply that and nothing else which is what some ultra left’s think we are calling for. It would only be a start. But given that at the most the TUC would call a one day of controlled militancy with a very top down approach are our attempts to lobby this bureaucratic body really having an affect? No doubt more know about the ideas of a 24 hour general strike now it is still largely misunderstood I think and many rank-and-file union members are still unaware of the in’sand out’s of what it would actually mean. I still don’t feel we have explained what it would mean very well despite a number of comrades best efforts. We are simply to small to gain that amount of influence within work places. We do some excellent work but I do think we are missing a trick by only appealing to union tops and most of which are right wing union leaders very few are left union leaders those that are do a good job but are still wedded to the bureaucracy despite their best rhetoric. The simple truth is that the TUC is there deliberately as a block on workers taking action I can see this very clearly so I can fully understand comrades frustration when lobbying some very well to do union leaders. In my view it should be the rank-and-file we should be looking to win over to build and support action from below to go beyond the structures of the TUC if need be. Only by forcing action will union leaders take note if you’re simply appealing for them to lift their tiny finger a slight bit it may happen but asking them to take subsequent follow up action would be even harder. Their answer will be we’ve gone out on strike once and we did not win so we can’t win. Much like on November the 30th many union tops will say we went on strike and the government didn’t back down. Well no they didn’t as many of you sold out and thought it was more about damage limitation than actually trying to win. The old saying if you don’t fight you can’t win but if you do fight at least you got a chance to win is very apt today. I don’t think we should have one strategy of simply lobbying the TUC every few months its clear its not having much affect at all despite my part the socialist party thinking it is I see very little evidence for this. I do think we have the tendency to talk up a situation being better than it is sometimes I think its sub continues that we’d like to think we’re far stronger than we actually are. This is not very Marxist as we are always told to tell things how they are and if we are not very strong we should recognise that fact. Then if you recognise where you are you can then start to build from there not from where you’d like to be. Union density especially in the private sector is terrible and calling for a general strike when most of the population are not in a union may draw more towards you but could also alienate many too if we’re not careful. The way this is posed is very important. Considering only 6 million out of a working population of millions more could create more divisions than unity if it is not carefully explained and won over the best layer of workers who can bring their colleagues along with the on any action. I don’t think lobbying the TUC is a total dead end it can be a good propaganda tool to bring militant workers towards us but many will soon come to see the difficulties I feel as I have done now. I will always support our actions but have now realised their limitations and difficulties. The fact is the TUC is not a vehicle for struggle like it once may well have been the TUC takes in militant workers and tries to pay them off into comfortable positions of bureaucracy where they are watered down and restrained from action. It takes a strong vanguard with an organised cadre of militants to gain any affect. At present our rank-and-file movements are far too weak to call any action on our own at this stage. Deepening our links and our influence in unions should be our priority winning positions but also gaining influence among the rank-and file should be key to rebuilding the trade union movement. I meet many young people especially who do not even know what a trade union actually is and often believe the views of the capitalist media that all unions do is go on strike and disrupt things. Well that is just one side of them and knowing the actual background is just not there for many. It’s our job to re educate the class to popularise the ideas of struggle once again. Explain what unions can do for you and how you can fight within them for change. Unlike the labour party unions can be reclaimed for their members as the all be it limited democratic structures in some unions do still exist today. This will not be a short term fix and there will be moves forward and backwards in the struggle but winning back our unions is key. Working outside the TUC structures must not be ruled out either the working class when blocked off on one route can take any number of other routes to fightback we should not dismiss this if it happens but look to be there when they do move and look to arm workers with ideas of socialism and what is needed at each stage. Workers will come to their own conclusions no doubt so a calm patient tone is always necessary. But certainly I can fully understand many workers dis-trust and even anger at the TUC and its representatives it’s been a long time since they have represented workers. For us to appeal to that can feel very disheartening but it’s a means to an end not an end in itself which is why I haven’t completed written it off. We will have to see if from under pressure any action is called the pressure is building from below no doubt and union leaders may have to act to let the steam off from below. But this can be done in many ways. One thing is for certain workers are waking up slowly and will look for their traditional structures at first if they are not there or not working for them several options will present themselves. We must support them all the way if we are to win influence and ultimately change society towards a socialist society.