Posted by dereklane
on October 31, 2009, 8:54 pm, in reply to "Re: I'm All Right Jack!"
"Despite it probably being token in nature, the union ought to at least try to offer compensation to people who respect the picket line"
Another good idea.
Also, see noamswampy's expansion on my suggestions which bypass the whole problem of strike-breakers, so as not to unnecessarily victimise them.
They are good options - I can't for the life of me see why unions aren't adopting these more sane approaches (in acknowledgement of the repeated dirty tricks of capitalists) rather than running with the whole 'this is what we've *always* done, and so we continue...' approach.
My wall analogy, I think, still stands. The problem, it would seem, is that a few people here dislike criticism of any kind of the unions, which is unfortunate. I would *much* rather criticise any union before singling out oppressed individuals and beating on them.
btw, yes, individuals have responsibility. But what is happening here is that we are attributing blame rather than indifference to these characters. If they're not concerned or interested, rather than getting mad about that, the unions and their members should start by asking themselves why, and, if possibly, rectifying that in a way which will *increase* solidarity (ie, not by fighting with those people). Or, if that's a dead end, by circumventing them. The unions know this hole exists - the surplus workers, so why does it fool them every time?
As NS suggested, go slows and other ingenious methods would be much more effective, and not have the need for either
a) barrels of fire
b) strike-breakers
So everyone is a winner, because there is no victimisation of people who will take work if it is there (because the work won't be there). But while they're at it, they could strengthen the support they offer out-of-workers.
cheers,
Derek
--Previous Message--
: Klaatu earthling.
:
: ~~~~~So, when the capitalist machine drags
: in more workers, they really can't complain,
: at least past the grumble that this is to be
: expected. But its to be expected *from the
: corporate machine*, and therefore, the blame
: - all of the blame - should rest, again,
: with that corporate machine. Not with the
: bloke at the bottom (hierarchically lower)
: than even the blokes in the union.~~~~~
:
: All fair enough but I wonder if you're
: denying agency? Individuals are reponsible
: to an extent
:
: ' History is not like some individual
: person, which uses men to achieve its ends.
: History is nothing but the actions of men in
: pursuit of their ends.'
:
: The Blackleg is analogous to the foreign
: workers imported like indentured labourers
: at places like the Lindsey Oil Refinery. As
: a device to undermine unionised workers they
: become the ultimate reformists.
:
: Yes the union and its members have a wider
: loyalty to the working class but that is
: reciprocal. Despite it probably being token
: in nature, the union ought to at least try
: to offer compensation to people who respect
: the picket line and the newly unemployed
: (who are often surprisingly ignorant of what
: unemployment has in store for them) should
: have better manners.
:
Responses: