,

The absurdity of the world: Housing

Today, I decided to tell you a little housing, the need for basic shelter, gentrification and real estate speculation. Quickly same, I must admit that it looks extremely interesting LITTLE air, but we will try to make everything a little more dynamic. Let's see what it will give.

To begin, I would like to mention the principle of private property. Indeed, there is a moment in history in which people began to put fences around their lot of land and started saying that it was their property. It's a bit that time, that began to be born the wonderful capitalist system as we know it today with its rules that define something like this ; "At the height of pocket" and "The invisible hand of the market control the law of supply and demand".

previously, we lived in a feudal system, ie a system in which there were lords who offered protection and a lot of land to peasants vulgar in exchange for what might be called different types of taxes : "Taxes on production of the earth that we owe to the Lord", chore days on earth the Lord, Defense lordship in attacks, etc… And the system went on like that hierarchy, with the lords who also had obligations to noble, nobles who had obligations towards the kings, etc ... Then one day, this system is found completely meaningless, since all the charges weighing on farmers and their side, Lords began to accumulate more and more lordships and neglected their obligations to peasants. various revolts (French Revolution, Patriots Rebellion) ended up killing this system and have established a capitalist system in Western societies.

Now I would like to picture it all here thinking its owner making his rounds the pre mier the months to come pick up the rents tenants. First, we will tell, y a-t- it something less pleasant than this time '' awkward '' where the owner comes to pick strutting his due ? And I would like here we mark the ress emblance between the lord who picks his sacks of grain from the peasants and that the owner just collect rents. Do not you think that the resemblance is striking ? And just as in the manorial system, it is quite rare Reus Sir finding a landlord who is fulfilling its obligations to its tenants. I believe that almost everyone who has already had an owner knows what it is when it comes to renovations made by the brother peddler because we will save money or good old "I'll fix that soon, not worry yourself. »

At what point in history, we thought we'd let human basic needs (to dress yourself, to eat, housing) in the hands of capitalists have the sole purpose of making a profit ? When we said we were going to let people speculate about our basic needs ? That's what I find scandalous : People who get rich on the backs of people with stuff that everyone beso in au final. Why do we accept that people make money by selling food to the wasting preferring to raise its value to give to people in need ? When we thought we would parker people in owned buildings capitalist X and would make a profit ?

Short, all that angry at a high level because it brings out the conflict of interest on which base the system in place and I probably reparlerais you in a future column. But let us ask the question about the interests of the parties in the presence. What is the interest of the tenant ? Paying the cheapest possible to have quality housing. Now what is the owner of the interest of building ? Make the most money and how we made the most money ? By having the highest rents and the lowest possible costs. Short, what interest the owner to make repairs quickly, to have clean public areas, to provide quality service to its tenants ? No, unless it allows him to raise more money, but it means that apart luxury buildings where rents allows proprios offer good while enriching Service, this is not the case of buildings in most neighborhoods.

Now, if we continue in this logic, could approach the subject of real estate speculation that has created the phenomenon of gentrification. Real estate speculation is when people buy land or buildings in order to make an investment and thus to enrich. This is something peculiar to capitalism. That meant that the capitalists buy empty buildings hoping only sell them at a better price. It also ensures that while thousands of homeless people sleeping on the streets, hundreds of buildings are empty and have no use other than to be sold for a better price than buying. You think it's normal you ? And especially, do not try to go install a squat in these buildings because you'll quickly get to know the watchdogs of private property in our society, and I named : the police. Fuck that you're not even able to accommodate you, we, we do respect the law of the strongest and we will protect this building empty and useless against your dangerous human interference. Point bar.

Then the sole interest of property speculators is obviously profit. And what better way to raise property values ​​in a neighborhood to maximize profit ? here, where we also comes the phenomenon of gentrification of neighborhoods. Gentrification is when the original population of a neighborhood is driven by the arrival of a new richer class, which increases rents for everyone and pushes the poor and marginalized outside. Let's see this phenomenon from a perspective of a real estate speculator.

Thus for example, the owner of land in Hochelaga-Maisonneuve whose goal is to sell to maximize profit. His land appreciates in value if that surrounds also attacks. So how to appreciate in value to the land ? condos being built in areas where there were rental properties : it drives the poor, who do not have the means to buy a condo and it creates lots of small properties instead of a big, it's therefore increase municipal taxes and the more taxes, more we can pass on to tenants. Then the less poor, marginal and low-end shops, plus the value of the property on the market increases. Mister speculator has every interest in that there is more police and more regulations to drive the marginalized and the homeless neighborhood, because it increased the value of his property more. So that's how our watchdogs of private property, the police, is still involved in this process.

La gentrification, so, it benefits exactly ? In person other than real estate speculators. Point bar. Now, I would like to end this, Is it not time to think of a society where no one can get rich on the backs of the population with basic needs ? Is not it completely immoral to get rich that way ? well, the wonderful world of capitalism, the moral, it does not exist, it is the rich profits that count. Capitalism is the world crosser and crosser be. This is really what we want ? I leave you on that.

In my next column, because everything is in everything, I'll just tell you about a who had not paid his rent and that it had fallen on him in 2012. I speak of Gabriel Nadeau -Dubois, or more precisely these supposed unionists eventually run for office and try to change the system of intérieur.

 

Éric

 

original content: Live Action
Credit Photo: AtlasMedia
/0 Comments/by
, , , ,

Panorama of past struggles and future Gaspésie

1909- Everywhere in Gaspésie, fishing is conducted by foreign companies of & rsquo; Jersey, with the head Charles Robin, Collas and Co. Charles Robin is by far, the worst employers ; Indeed it puts up the "Robin system" : it ensures loyalty forced the fisherman to the retailer. To do this , s & rsquo; he wants to pay his debt accumulated during the & rsquo; winter in the general store run by the same trader, the fisherman can not see a solution : increase the amount of cod caught the next season. However, as is Robin decides the price of products and sockets, repayment is, every season, far from complete.

September 1909, fishermen learn that merchants set the price of cod quintal 3,50$ so that & rsquo; they expected 5 piastres. The situation is clear : we must act collectively in & rsquo; interest of everyone. It is with in fear, but raised fist, fishermen begin their claims on the fourth day of September. Starting from small villages near Rivière-au-Renard, the population began a march that leads the up & rsquo; the place where traders located ,with the intention of ending more & rsquo; d & rsquo a century; operating.

Following the & rsquo; history is predictable, Merchant appeal to the armed forces to ensure their safety, Punishment is implemented, there will be death, wounded, imprisonment among fishermen and claims will be rejected. However, several years later, fishermen will be organized into cooperatives to break the monopoly in place and will become available as the direct influence of traders. The revolt of the fishermen was the first step towards their emancipation from unscrupulous employers. Through this collective movement, fishermen n & rsquo; not learned that & rsquo; to demand better terms from their bosses, but especially, they understood that & rsquo; they had s & rsquo; organize to be able to pass d & rsquo; them.

1957- Best known recently highlighted due to its 60th anniversary : the strike of miners in Gaspésie Murdochville . The main cause of the strike was the refusal of employers & rsquo; affiliation of workers and ourières a more combative union versus the company union and Catholic whom he was affiliated-the-art. The strike was also heavily repressed and no direct gain was obtained by strikers. Two d & rsquo; them died during the conflict, about 500 were dismissed and replaced by scabs. However, recognizes aujourd & rsquo; hui this uprising, in the reign of Duplessis, was the trigger many other social movements. He forced the implementation of some reforms towards the & rsquo; partial improvement of working conditions and above, to the right of workers to choose the union of their choice instead of & rsquo; a system of representation of men and women workers. This system of representation, often set up by employers, indeed favored a permanent peace between the two parties. Despite this victory, this union culture inherited from the Catholic unions still persists.

So, behind a holiday destination image, Gaspésie, through its history since colonization, is d & rsquo theater; major battles between productive forces vs. the owners of capital and means of production. Of course, this relationship of domination of the latter on the first is always d & rsquo; news.

Speaking holiday destination, seasonal work related to the & rsquo; tourism industry here is a prime economic sector. Small traders, in the field of food e.g., must enjoy the summer windfall to accumulate the necessary capital to keep afloat their business and their rate of consumption in the & rsquo; year, while the employee hopes to accumulate enough & rsquo; hours to collect his unemployment to his layoff once the season or, if he or she is a student-e, to try & rsquo; accumulate the necessary to survive a school year. So, the seasonal-eras employees must produce intensively during the summer and it, despite the weak received salary. The shopkeeper will say then have to offer small salaries during the & rsquo; was to garner sufficient economies and low wages remains the & rsquo; year, to take up & rsquo; in the next season.

This is what m & rsquo; leads to speak of & rsquo; first difficulty in the field of & rsquo; organization and claim. C & rsquo; is that & rsquo; it seems difficult, in this context, to demand better working conditions without being accused of s & rsquo; take "small businesses that sustain the & rsquo; local economy". The pretext of "economic insecurity" of small businesses seems to justify Gaspé, the eyes of many, precarious workers, workers and students with Gaspésie-nes. So, people working d & rsquo; hard in the kitchen, dining rooms, cafes, various shops for tourists to feel es received as king and queen, forever play the role of disposable economic support and cheap serving patrons and tourists.

Another difficulty d & rsquo; here in the same field towards the fact that in this environment where everyone knows, conflict situations seem to be avoided at all costs, for fear that & rsquo; they affect social relationships outside work and that the names of the persons concerned do not become synonymous with "trouble maker" and so they lead to some exclusion from the labor market, problem less present in the & rsquo; anonymity of large urban centers.

A third difficulty is the short-term nature of the season in which these jobs abound. Cultural change is long to perform and requires constant involvement of many people. Many of these workers n & rsquo; is that passage, they and they leave behind them and the same working conditions that & rsquo; they arrive, thinking that anyway it n & rsquo; is only temporary. The winter season would be a good time to s & rsquo; organize those who inherit this precarious situation in & rsquo; year.

Besides this, sing here often promise better days thanks to the & rsquo; arrival of big industry : Pulp (Gaspésia), cement (McInnis cement in Port-Daniel), oil (Pétrolia), the industry & rsquo; wind (LM windpower)etc. These industrial giants, in collaboration with the & rsquo; State finance, are as the safeguard for the region. "They would bring jobs and prosperity", so that & rsquo; many times, this type of economic model that generates unemployment and devitalized. Indeed, except in the case of LmWindpower that engages hundreds of workers and workers, these industries advocate the & rsquo; purchase & rsquo; automated equipment and n & rsquo; brings and some jobs that will disappear as soon as the & rsquo; business will suffer the jolts d & rsquo; any economic crisis on Wall Street or d & rsquo; administrative decisions taken far d & rsquo; here. So, they will leave behind people without income and polluting ruins. Short, it seems to me that & rsquo; work organization by and for workers in the & rsquo; optical d & rsquo; an improvement of all the quality of life and all would probably be greater than a distribution of work by d & rsquo leaders, businesses and d & rsquo; state, deciding to produce any and n & rsquo; anything, provided that & rsquo; there is a profit to be drawn for each other and for their campaign promises to create jobs seem to be held, the risk of & rsquo; d & rsquo add, other social and environmental scars in the region.

To conclude, throughout their history, people d & rsquo; here have endured d & rsquo; intolerable treatment by d & rsquo; economic and political elites, as the sea that & rsquo; at the bottom of the mine through the & rsquo; factory. On the other hand, l & rsquo; popular history also shows us that when it's time to stick together among peers to improve our conditions, passion, l & rsquo; organization and & rsquo; action are waiting for you. A long work remains to deconstruct the prejudices that divide the working population, especially for those without jobs, or between permanent es and seasonal workers (unemployed and seasonal es chômeuseuses). Also, with a new "chapter" of the d & rsquo group The Pack extreme right in Gaspésie, the issue of racism and fascism becomes a priority, without forgetting the struggles against sexism, l & rsquo; homophobia, Aboriginal struggles etc.. The SITT-IWW account here very few members currently, but its development in the area seems to me very relevant and even urgent. So, s & rsquo; there are people interested to come "salter" in the corner, embarrass you not!

 

Photo credit: Camping Québec.
/1 Comment/by

The origins of the Solidarity Unionism. First part: a Bibliography

 

The Solidarity trade union movement is a term that was mainly led by Alice Lynd Staughon, inspired by the organizational model of the first campaigns of the IWW happened to get gains without legal bargaining unit or even without being recognized by the employer (collective agreements are not legally binding in the United States since the signing of the National Labor Relations Act in 1935, the Canadian equivalent could be the application of the Rand formula dating 1946). If the principle was also inspired by the work of Martin Glaberman, C.L.R. James et Stan Weird, the use of the Solidarity Unionism as understood today SITT-IWW appears for the first time in June 2002 in an article in The Nation magazine called Open Source Unionism: A proposal to American Labor, Joel Rogers and Richard B. Freeman.

The idea was then developed largely by the efforts of Alexis Buss, who served as General Secretary-Treasurer of the Industrial Union of Workers (SITT-IWW) from 2000 at 2005. It is in giving him the name of minority unionism, he explained the concept in a column published by the industrial worker called Minority Report.

Francophone literature is still thin on the subject, but for those of you with the chance to understand English, various books published, inter alia, by Charles H. Kerr Company and Labor Notes are still considered key works. The Headquarters of the ISTC-IWW listed in 9 among the most important:

  1. Punching Out & Other Writings – Martin Glaberman; edited by Staughton Lynd; Charles Kerr, 2002. 250 pages. 
  2. The New Rank & File -Édité par Staughton Lynd and Alice Lynd, ilr Press, © 2000. 288 pages.
  3. Solidarity Unionism: Rebuilding the Labor Movement from Below – Staughton Lynd; Charles Kerr, 1993. 128 pages.
  4. Democracy is Power: Rebuilding Unions from the Bottom Up – Mike Parker et Martha Gruelle, Labor Notes, © 1999. 262 pages.
  5. Class War Lessons; From Direct Action on the Job to the ’46 Oakland General Strike (Unions With Leaders Who Stay on the Job) – Stan Weir; Insane Dialectical Editions, 2006. 48 pages. 
  6. Singlejack Solidarity – Stan Weir; University of Minnesota, © 2004. 408 pages. 
  7. A Troublemaker’s Handbook, How to Fight Back Where You Work–And Win! – Edited by Dan LaBotz, Labor Notes, 1991. 262 pages. 
  8. A Troublemaker’s Handbook 2, How To Fight Back Where You Work and Win! — Edited by Jane Slaughter, Labor Notes, 2004. 372 pages. 
  9. The Politics of Nonviolent Action – Gene Sharp, by Gene Sharp, Porter Sarg. © 1973. 913 pages.
/0 Comments/by

You dreamed of a better world. Letter to a friend became small master.

You dreamed of a better world. I know it, I know you, you're a well-intentioned person you really thought there! That's why you've decided-e from a small business that would have values ​​different from those of large multinationals or the former factory where you worked : You, you do not délocaliserait the jobs like yours has been ! You going to buy local, Local produce and assure you that our jobs are here because you've seen too many companies from the last years in your area and too many people being unemployed, including yourself. It tore families, caused much misery, too bad it's shareholders that you've never seen in your life that have picked-e-s all the cash at the expense of workers which you were part. You were in criss-e and ready to make a difference. You had included e-globalization and neoliberalism, this is shit, and we agreed on it. So you got your e-party company to ensure you resist it and save your region despite my warnings.

Yeah ... You've decided-e one morning that you would be part of the new generation of e-s-dynamic entrepreneur, these "creative and innovative people, their ideas, restore the breath to the economy ", and you were going to, in addition to making money and creating jobs, be Green-e, well treat your employee-s ethics be worse down the line.

 

Bein me ... from my side, I warned that you were mistaken you royally bad we could not change the system from within and that you were better to become an e-wobblie and appropriating you your workplace then get involved in his self-management and / or from (or to reach you) a self-managed co-op if you interested in entrepreneurship. It was just my opinion. I think not hold the truth either, but I, the system, I said what was necessary to appropriate collectively, by and for workers, piece by piece, for misery continues. But you disagreed ...

 

Pity, in retrospect, I could offer you a beer more udder talk longer and maybe I could make you understand why I said that. But anyway ... there it's too late.

 

Yeah ... Today, you talk to me every time we meet and you're the same person. I am thinking against you begin to understand : You got to have naively ! You as tou-te-s the other, you ended-e-s exactly the opposite situation you want to create from, worse now ... it makes me ill-at-ease because you're rendering an e-shit bosses such as tou-te-s other although initially, deep inside, I know you're still a good person ! You just bosses of class interests, worse is the system that you're made of same-e. If we took away your company and you starting from scratch tomorrow, you would join you at this time we. Non ?

 

Then why are turned-e you like that ? What happened ? You want me to tell you ? Ok ! Here's how I, the wobblie, anticapitalist that did not want you listen to at the time, I see your history :

 

First of all, have started e-business you your. It's been a long time, money, energy, too bad you and the first employee and first-s that had you, you worked-e-s tou-te-s also, with a pittance and do hours of sick (like me I'm with the union in addition to my job), because you believed there, project ! Despite all that, thou hast made quickly e-account only succeed in an ethical environment ... it is not easy. It has not taken much time for you to understand that you would need to keep wages low, including stand, if you wanted the company passes the five years. But by doing that, you have created poverty; yours and that of your employee-s ! Because working 55-60 hour weeks, it's expensive resto, guardian, psy, bad for a couple of e-I suspect, which probably you, alcohol and dope to self-medicate. I remember the first time you released me (and I knew you were gonna do it one day) it put you in criss when your employee-s come to see you to earn more or have time off or vacation as thyself, thou was splitting the ass for them and in them and had not even you as much, and moreover, you "taking all the risk" as was recorded you and for you, a business failure, it was also a personal bankruptcy.

 

I understand your point of view and I have told you that it is for that reason that private enterprise was not a solution since the operation rather than being exploited, it ended by auto-Operate. Were not you agree, you said that one day, it would get better and that neither you nor your employee-s do would operate by your company. But that's not what happened, hein ?

 

Do you remember when come-e're telling me that the grants to young companies and tax holidays and tax, finally, it really necessary ? We'll hear here… you was not down-E low as to make a donation to PLQ yet (and I hope you never did), but it was made clear to you that ask young companies to pay taxes prevent them to exist and that it is the citizen-not-s or larger businesses, that they, have money, to pay it. I knew you were going to tell me one day. And I've told you that in thinking like that, one more time, you was creating poverty because you now leaned neoliberal agenda, but you you lived in denial and told me not. You said you still "left" because feminist and that you wanted to reinvest in schools, the health system and the sustainable and green economy, and you always give a fair wage to your employee-s compared to yours. But with what money we reinvest, hein ? Large companies pay no taxes and the system is unable to do anything against it, too bad you know ! And the workers that you paid $ 12 / hr not afford to pay either. I told you that the only solution, was to organize to reclaim the, the big enterprises; it was the only way to get back the money from our work, but unfortunately, as an entrepreneur, it was not in your interests, So you've never done or supported. You've always been anti-union enough with your employee-s done. Non ?

 

You also remember the times you said that the minimum wage to $ 15 / hr, it would mean to kill all small businesses "ethical and create jobs" [sic] region as yours ? Damn that was made you a Boss ! I pogne strong with you this time, you remember it ? Like I explained why if everyone won 15 $/h minimum, it would make you more money in the end that now because your income would increase more than your salary expenditures, but you told me you could not you afford "unless the minimum wage went up for everyone at the same time and it eventually also affect you and your competitor-e-s". But it's funny, although you were all right this time, I've never seen you in the street to support a substantial increase in the minimum wage either, or encourage people to go there. You not understand what is, it looks, class struggles.

 

Anyway…

 

Your business began to grow since that time, and now she's fine. Good for you also ! You've worked hard, I must give you ! The trouble with against ... is that your employee-s also, it worked-e-s hard, and now that you you win 50 000 $ per year (more your chariot 70 000 $ on behalf of the company and your eight or ten business trips in the annual five-star hotels around the world and your business dinners in restaurants in 25 $ the covered two or three times that week between not you in this 50 000 $ there to believe your employee-s and yourself that you just wins 50 000 $), and yet they themselves earn between 25 000 $ and 45 000 $ per year.

 

I asked you why, challenger for you, you remember it ? You answered me-e because it was had assumed-e all the risk before you incorporate and that it was you who had ridden the entire company, and therefore you deserved it. That's when I knew that you had gone a ***** bourgeois, that is to say a person who appropriates the labor of others (because everyone worked, not just you ! I work 70 I am weeks, it's more than you, and I earn $ 15 / hr ... yet) and that makes his work and have acquired (acquired by the exploitation of others, lest we forget) for it and can now continue to receive some income without lifting a finger. Yeah… you're a made-e-e parasite of society, but unlike the assisted-e-s social is often wrongly treated parasites, you you CAN work instead of making you live by the work of others, and thou earn much more than the people who pay to make you live !

 

Ah ! And let me explain another matter and explain it to your e-s-employed simultaneously, because I am a trade unionist and I think they understand it and they should : Your company purchases for some time other companies to increase the value and, as you are in the sole owner, one day you can sell everything that you have purchased (without creating job because you now go about buying existing companies) through the work of your employee-s that they and they will reap nothing. We agree ? So, that's it : Finally, if one calculates it over everything I have mentioned above, you not win 50 000 $ per year; in earns you well above 100 000 ! And did not you worked harder than many people who are not earning 30 000 $. You're rich because you're only become e-Boss in which its employee-s must all because without you, "The company pays not exist". The system you have eaten ! Are you become like tou-te-s the other ... You just makes you not in account.

 

And the ultimate, is that now that are made e-Boss you to a company that makes enough money to pay taxes according TES before standards, and although you have changed e-idea about that too because "your competitor-e-s are tax evasion and if your company does not, your e-s-competitor will win over you ". And once again, I will not see trying to push for all businesses pay their taxes through international laws that would ensure that you would not disadvantage compared to your competitor-e-s and you do not shut it your gates, hein ? Too bad, because with the power that you have now, you have plenty of ways to contribute to the fight. But no, I guess you, you not have time, you do the business ! Full e-s-employed you need for the company to go well and that they have a job. This is the other, those who work not as much as you (but who, in fact, their activism in addition to their job, work and more risk than you), that should do it, I suppose.

 

In any case ! I remember after you have told me that and I wanted to send you walk, I tried one last time to make you understand that you had become and I asked you what was left of your ethical business. Your answer was to put you to brag about your products (which are excellent and I Achaetes, this is not the problem) made here with ecological materials and subcontracts here rather than in China. I asked you if you thought not, in the bottom, your company was just that the "branding" (his trademark) is to be "ethical" and that you used to draw your customer-e-s but in reality, everything was going BEYOND the product itself was not ? And it hath upset-e. It was pogne again on it. Fortunately, we managed to calm down because both, it is smart-e-s adult and able to discuss and we've known for a long time. I've still wondered if you still thought we could change the capitalist system from within by private enterprise, and, you tell me 'yes, but ... "and you've unpacked the typical arguments of a privileged person who really believes that the fruit of his labor, she deserved only, and it really stood your affair, sorry. Basically ... I knew you'd understand, it appeared in your face. You were about to realize that I was right from the beginning; ethical and responsible business, it's a trap ! It takes good people and it makes monsters. Wanting to do good around you ... you have just created more poor, and to paraphrase Robert Rifle : Y are poor because you're rich, worse because what you're rich are poor.

 

That’s it !

 

You could have from a self-managed co-op or join you in the fight (and you can always, if you accept to sell everything), but you did not because ... maybe ... somewhere, had you not really revolutionary interests and this is perhaps not the justice and the good of people you wanted more than the fame of being a young-e e-contractor ethics and status (and BMW) that goes with. Maybe also, and I think it's rather that, that you rather just lacked knowledge to really understand how the system works and that you simply have made a big blunder, like many other people. The truth is that I'll ever know. But now, hast been my board, and I would like that everyone read that text before starting a business or before undertaking a careerist path, whether in politics or in business, hoping to change things like that.

 

To all of you : You are wrong ! This is not the way to change things ! Ethical business, it's a trap !

 

We have to finally understand…

 

 

X377131

 

Photo credit: Alexandre Shields, Le Devoir.

/2 Comments/by
, , , ,

Fier-era to be part of a union singing: the struggle to Ellen & rsquo; s Stardust Diner

The Ellen’s Stardust Diner is a New York institution, a place or Broadway actors and actresses do not wait table, but there singing songs of their shows when there are them. It is also a place or there is currently an ongoing labor dispute that has seen mass removals, strikes, demonstrations and picket lines that returned Morning food deliveries.

The employees of Ellen's were organized with the IWW-es for much of the past year. their union, Stardust Family United, came out in the streets, raising their voices and raising their fists to defend and improve their working conditions.

Several Stardusters worked at the restaurant from time to time over the years. According to them, Ellen's was a really nice place to work. Managers were accommodants when it came time to leave for a show. And despite the large number of waiters and waitresses taking off for the stage, Ellen's was a tight knit community. It was a place or workers developed their talent and was building friendships that crossed years.

All it would change last year when the new administration was introduced.

The art manager stopped being accommodative when Fri.has time to take leave. Workers denouncing security problems or complained of sexual harassment were ignored or es, even worse, returned es restaurant. Workers longtime, including some who had multiple-es many years of service to double digit, were returned es without recognition of their services.

So the idea came to form a union. Workers have contacted some local unions and the IWW New York proved most receptive, quickly arranging training d & rsquo; organization for employees of Stardust. Workers found solidarity unionism model of the IWW, which focuses on the basic control and direct action approach to organize, as a model of solidarity that had already established them in their workplace.

For some time, the organization took place under the radar. Problems relating to health and safety were raised and workers used the internal communication system to pressure management. He and they also organized a " march on the boss "To get back their tip seal and it was after this action and that they decided to come out publicly as a union. The spot where he chose them to do so : The New York Times.

Workers do not have vote for the election a labor council, rather asking the owner, Ken Sturm, to negotiate directly with them and they.

In the beginning, Executive suggested that & rsquo; ele would cooperative. But it did not last. Shortly after the union came out publicly, Sturm has hired a syndicate of dismantling firm and invented reasons to return more 15 Employees suspected es to be leaders that led to the union launched.

Workers responded with a chant strike (a singing strike), refusing to perform during their shifts.

Then something remarkable happened; the restaurant was closed for the day. nor 11 September, nor the passage of Hurricane Sandy had successfully forced the bosses of Ellen's closing, but workers have shown that remaining silent Artists-only, it them had the power to stop it in restaurant.

Following the recent layoffs, countryside really began to heat up. The workers have gathered new and new employees to rebuild the number of union members. He them have successfully defend against their employer attempts to learn new songs on their own personal time. He had obtained them from the administration, a return to an appropriate level of staff. An unstable part of the scene involving injury was finally replaced.

Some months later, Ken Sturm has engaged in another round of illegal mass dismissals. When clast ette, sure 70 servers and serveuses which were employees at the time of formation of the union, half were returned es. Again, some-es worked there for over 6 years, even talk of 20 some years to es. The National Labor Relations Board declined following a request of the union for an injunction.

References n 'however not stopped the campaign. It was after all these references that Stardusters staged their most radical action : a twelve-hour strike during the "rush" Friday night.

In an action separate working, workers refused es to be filmed by a Brazilian film crew who had entered a sort of deal with the administration. He them spontaneously created a petition and presented it to the management on the floor, who was forced to fold it.

some participant es when these actions were working the restaurant for only a few weeks. All this is a testimony to the success that the workers have managed to build in the restaurant to stand up for oneself and for others.

Workers were beaten es ardently with actions including staff who had been sent : weekly musical events, a "sip-in" (Action in which supporters of union present at the restaurant and leave a great tip without buying anything), « phone and Facebook blasts », and target other businesses associated with owner Ken Sturm.

At a certain point, l’administration a even brought in outside musicians to try to drown the sounds of Saturday night pickets. However, it was discovered that those it was union members who born musician, after a discreet word, es have joined for a few protest songs and soon after left. L’administration n'a not tried this tactic again from.

It was recently Stardust seen staff return deliveries with their musical picketse.

behind them regular action at work, the “Stardust Family United” regularly holds a fundraiser "Stardust after dark" and launched its own page Facebook and his site web. Its members are also related to d & rsquo; other employees of the restaurant are afillié to & rsquo; IWW, in building especially a relationship with " Burgerville Worker Union »Portland.

The campagne a motherme his propre theme song, written by an-e member de la “Stardust Family United” and recently taken by Tom Morello as a tribute to the dedication and creativity of workers of Stardust.

Stardust workers that include them are taken, are in a long process , despite the answers illegales and draconian Administration, He them are determined es to continue fighting and continue singing until them earn.

 

For more information, check out the link below. If you go through the city of New York, take a look at them page Facebook for events and fundraising events. If you are outside, If you-please consider making a donation :https://www.youcaring.com/stardust-family-united-634720/donate?utm_source=widget#wp

A dozen workers and workers have so far have was sent-es and New York is an expensive city, all you can give would be greatly appreciated assistance. in parallel, why your union local branches or political groups do not would organize a fundraiser to support these inspiring es workers ?

Chilli Sauce, mars 2017

/0 Comments/by

Do not be a fool coping with bad ideas

John O'Reilly - Thoughts on the Struggle, published on 20 July 2011 (special thanks to A. Vargas for the ideas and suggestions, Nate Hawthorne and the writing group of Wobs)

In an ideal world, any ideas about organization would be appropriate, but it's not the case. Sometimes people with good intentions, do things that make them waste their time or worse, squarely harm the organization and that they are trying to build. We have everyone done an assessment and said: « Wow I can't believe I put all this time into a project that was clearly destined to fail ". Often, this afterthought is accompanied by a " Wow, this or that comrade of experience should have notified me ». Sadly, sometimes the Wobblies comrades of experience allow these failures in two ways, as widespread as dysfunctional, indeed act as an asshole and doubt are two mistakes that we commit wrongly!

Often, the organizers of experience do not want to impose themselves on new members by telling them what to do with their time. The result is often that the organizers find themselves passively observe comrades engage in initiatives that make no sense and are doomed to fail. This reluctance to meddle causes lost hours of work for individuals and groups, while other, far more effective options were offered to comrades. This hesitation is a spontaneous response to many of us. We prefer to see the person or group divest itself from an inefficient and often negative direction rather than investing in a demanding process of critical reflection. Overcoming this reluctance is an important task that we must get used to.

that being said, we sometimes fall into the opposite trend o? ù the organizers critics condescendingly. Certainly, experience and knowledge allow us to sometimes anticipate a resounding failure, which increases the temptation to act condescendingly, but unfortunately, this is not an adequate strategy to deal with the problems. Faced with this attitude, some will persist (« Doe says this is a bad idea, but I don't care, we're doin' it! ») and others will simply lose confidence (« doe said it is a bad idea, I must not be a good unionist.»). The condescension and paternalism sometimes make it possible to quickly evacuate bad plans, but the unfortunate consequences of these behaviors do not contribute to the union's construction. Rather, we must imagine new ways to overcome the bad plans.

Sometimes, we need to let people try things and let them fail to promote learning. However, it remains possible to ensure a critical presence, but still encouraging. If members want a debate on the ideas of Daniel DeLeon's on recruitment of workers, we can offer our help for towing. It wastes a bit of our time, but in the long term, it allows us to build relationships with these members, avoids us discussions questioning our involvement and allows us to introduce new promising projects. It's also sometimes necessary to attract the attention of comrades to better projects. for example, if some members pushing the union to discuss at length the need for class struggle to make himself clothes and food recovery in the trash (which are not necessarily bad things, but they do not have a direct link with the class struggle). It would be possible to intervene by asking members in question : why do they want this to be discussed at the general meeting? It would be appropriate to suggest to discuss these subjects outside the general meeting and take the opportunity to talk about more relevant ideas. When comrades suggest bad ideas, it is best to approach this group and criticize from within rather than from the outside.

When the organizers act like fools facing bad ideas, they discourage people to get involved in important aspects of our union. Now, imagine another scenario. Think about enthusiastic members whose idea is to tow near a factory of 500 workers with a red and black flag. Their answer curtly that this is not a good idea and it does qu'éloigner these people the SITT-IWW is more likely to ensure that these comrades persist and get stuck in this bad idea and do not change their perspective when new opportunities. Bad ideas will not disappear by magic, so we need to build an organizational culture that recognizes the evil plans made in the past and we mainly learn to anticipate. Let us remember that acting stupidly facing bad ideas is often more damaging to the organization than trying to implement these ideas.

Our approach with bad projects should help build our organizational role. As such, we're used to-identify campaign leaders and try to use this direction to develop the skills of workers in their midst. Inside the union, we must use these same dynamics. for example, determine who inspires a member and leverage this relationship to bring forth constructive ideas, strengthen ties among members rather than shine the one-es against other. At the heart of this issue, the ability of organizers to be aware that if their critics are not taken seriously, they are not helping. Being right is not enough, people need to be right and go in the right direction.

 

John O'Reilly

NOTICE: The views expressed here are not the official positions of the SITT-IWW and are the sole responsibility of the author.

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Dual Carding. Questions and answers

Below are some notes on the dry run of an experimental dual carding workshop (Ndtr : le dual carding, soit l’adhésion à l’IWW et à un autre syndicat). I'm posting the questions and my answers below for discussion. I'm thinking this may be the first of a few notes on "the IWW and other unions" trying to outline some perspectives on this stuff perspectives on the subject.

Where I say "we" I am making an assertion about classical IWW positions, where I say "I", I'm saying I think this is my opinion. . I do my best to keep those separate , though of course like everyone, I fail at this a lot. .

*What is our relationship to the decertification or désafiliation? It seems that People Work College 2012 several people brought the idea that we should put our focus on the decertification business unions to replace by a new accreditation, that of the IWW-SITT. I'm not sure whether it is a strategy that has been used, if anyone has heard of such an experience I would be curious to learn more.

I can only speak from our experience in Edmonton where we were a few approché.es opportunity by Workers, eager and willing to decertify their union. Generally, we have always recommended. The problem is that the ISTC-IWW does not occupy the same space as other union, therefore it is illogical to substitute one for the other. Beside, usually, when workers or workers seeking to withdraw the accreditation of their union in their workplace, and it is because they are not satisfait.es the services they and they receive it. With a skeletal budget, minimum contributions and aucun.es employé.es, we will not do much better in terms of services. This is not what we do.

In the local of the Union of Workers and Workers Post (sttp) where I am, the average grievance, after clearing all stages will cost beyond 10 000$. This is several hundred dollars just for the early stages. With our voluntary contributions and low-cost, finance such level bureaucracy through fund raising, is not an option either.

* What is the role of the Left caucus? Throughout the conversation Work College People, the general feeling was that the left caucus are inevitable and may even be helpful. Or, the fact is that tou.tes the pre Fellow workerssent.es impliqué.es were in places that, more or less, used the left caucus. The first in an emerging solidarity networks among OPSEU (Public Service Union Employé.es of Ontario) and others in an Alliance of Local Public Service of Canada (AFPC), which serves some out of headquarters formilitant.es.

I agree that the left caucus are inevitable and I participated personally in one of them in CUPW, but I never do not report my activities SITT-IWW, nor the IWW SITT-one seems to be concerned. All that is politically significant in this world does not need to be under the banner of the IWW-SITT. I am also interested in reforming the trade unions and a good representation of members than anyone else. Or, it is not a revolutionary commitment and to be frank, I do not think it has anything to do with the IWW-SITT.

Regarding the sanctuaries of militants and mainly militant.es union, simply note that the militant.es do not always make the best recruitment pools to find good Wobblies. Many of them have careerist ambitions even within their union and if this is not a problem either, it will not advance the SITT-IWW either. Of Workers angry and respected by their peers are far more important, and if by chance, they are also militant.es, it's better this way, but it is not the most important.

*What about elections? Here again, the shared feeling was that at times it could be useful.

To begin, it must be remembered that in the regulations of the ISTC-IWW much is mentioned about the position of Officer or an Officer to another union, It's not about saying you can not be, but we place rather severe limitations on the subject. Of course, it is always possible to bring the appeal regulations to evade restrictions, but it is important to understand why we have these rules in the first place. This is because our understanding of revolutionary syndicalism is not limited to being a "very progressive union". Just as we recommend the establishment of the organizing committees on the floor and exceeding the delegate system; a revolutionary position exceeding the électoralisme and avoiding contractualism, our structure and function is embodied in a commitment to a different kind of policy. In the IWW-SITT, unions are not politically neutral organizations, on the contrary, their structures and commitments reflect the political perspectives of their architects.

All this was more clear at a time when the labor movement was marked by more ideological diversity, but since the 60 there is a hegemony of social democracy and that is what the standard structure reflects. Grab these structures without calling the serious question can only lead to an appointment, a receivership or both.

 

*Still on the issue of being un.e union délégué.e, the question came on the floor : If no one else is present, Is it not desirable that one of our activists to make the, at least, the job done? Do this does not in addition to having a legitimate reason to talk about work with colleagues without this having weird?

I'm not against people who decide to become steward, but these people should be keeping the eyes wide open. What the job involves? If the priority is to build a committee that handles requests from the floor and helps people develop a strategy to collectively pressure on the boss, I'm all for it. If the job is simply to do what any other delegate will do, it is not either an error, but it should be clear to those concerned that they and they do so for personal reasons and not as a member of the IWW-SITT. That said, note that the ISTC-IWW has no clear position on the subject.

 

*How the dual membership works in a multi-union environment? How can we actually bring the Union for All and for All to help the organization in the days days?

We have some experience on the subject in Edmonton and the most important is to start communicating with people working together. Not only between unions, but between syndiqué.es workers and workers and non-workers syndiqué.es. The benefits that direct action on the official channels is that attacking a unified management structure, it is possible to put more pressure. Prioritize applications that affect everyone (as issues relating to human rights, to parking spaces, health and safety) allows an expansion of the fields of action, while contractual disputes types are obviously narrower and less useful. Joint meetings (in our case meetings during coffee breaks) bring together everyone on the floor.

 

*If Wobblies can do things like take control of the union newsletter or bulletin, get hold of contact lists, etc. How should we, and we must, put its possibilities to use?

Of course you should. You should do everything like in the Training Organization 101 (FO101 or OT101 English), to-one meetings, identify leaders and cheerleaders, get them to do actions in the workplace, then include them in your committee. The newsletters and newsletters can be a good way to share the gains that have been won on the floor.

 

*How can we avoid being co-opt the union? That is, to see the legalistic incumbent union claim that the victories of the committee are hers?

Most important is that workers themselves and themselves appropriated victory, no more the case the incumbent union IWW-SITT. If the role of ISTC-IWW was decisive, then it must be stressed that the organization has, but we can not just take all the credit. for example, we have already set up an education program, promotes tactics March on the Boss and work on an independent blog. But he is not here to be that so typical left which again and again repeating the same slogans proclaiming himself an enlightened vanguard, but earlier use by the methods of workers who make common sense.

 

*What kind of backlash can we expect when the double membership will be discovered by the highest levels of the hierarchy? What type of inoculation is required before the country becomes public? More stories and anecdotes may be useful here ...

CUPW we just set the record straight. We had no interest in becoming the bargaining unit certified for post offices and we consider ourselves as loyal members of CUPW . Yet we insisted that no worker, and no worker has to ask permission to carry out actions on the floor, and the officers and Officers were asked their members and not the other. That being said, I think there are too many differences from one union to another to be able to give some kind of prescription boilerplate more accurate than to be clear about the fact that what we mean by union is very different from that the PSAC, for example, means union.

 

*What is it that he differs AEIOU in the context of an already unionized environment?

It does not differ.

 

*What is the ultimate goal of the organization in double membership? In FO101 several sections begin by asking participants , "Why do we do this? », as in "Why are we shaken? », "Why do we ask our colleagues to join the union? », "Why follow up on tasks? », etc. I wonder if, perhaps, keep this format might be a good way to introduce this module. and, as in the FO101, this could include a series of responses. Yet I feel a little silly saying this, but after sitting down to think about, I could not articulate a clear answer to "why" we do this.

I think the ultimate goal of the organization in double membership is the same as in FO101, build a functional organization committee can mobilize workers on the floor to make direct action to assert their own interests.

I will try and work with Rhiannon to answer any practical questions regarding the workshop, I think many of them are valid, and the lack of precision or clarity of our answers will matter not a problem with your questions, but soon the level of thinking we are made. However, one of the points which I can already answer about this module is that it is deliberately a supplement to FO101 because we believe that this training covers the basic work organization. To which I would add that in my opinion, not only, organizational work by double membership is not so different from the organizational work in non-unionized environment, particularly with the necessary skills to relate, but the bulk of the material is actually oriented towards an understanding of what the IWW-SITT. That being said, I also think that we need to work the issue in more detail, since the phenomenon of business unions bearing the red flag is increasingly common.

 

Written by Nick Walter, Edmonton IWW, the 17 October 2014
Translated by the SLI Communication Committee of Montreal, the 16 mars 2017

/0 Comments/by
,

Reading Ideas for the Holidays

A People's History of the United States – from 1492 à nos jours

on8vatziap“Make america great again”. The slogan of the last US election campaign, on
l’a tous et toutes vu sur les casquettes rouges made in China. However, A People's History of the United States – from 1492 à nos jours de l’historien Howard Zinn dresse un portrait d’un pays qui n’a jamais été si fabuleux, à moins d’être un riche propriétaire blanc. Indeed, l’auteur se penche sur les communautés généralement absentes des livres d’histoire. Il y est question des autochtones, unionists, des esclaves, des activistes pour les droits civils durant les années ‘80 et ‘90 et plusieurs autres groupes et luttes sociales. Sure, il y est question de l’IWW, de ses actions, de la solidarité qui y a toujours régnée, de la répression, des emprisonnements et des victoires notables du syndicat qui fut l’ennemi numéro un du gouvernement américain à une autre époque. Read more →

/0 Comments/by
, , ,

Business owners in I.W.W. ?!?

Further reflection to the article "be syndicated IWW and self-employed" .

It is true that the I.W.W. syndicates everyone except the representatives of state authority (police, judges etc.) and those in authoritarian situations on other workers out hereinafter called the boss ...! Employers as a business owner and their lackeys that are the managers and other executives who are ,according to my understanding, under the category of "boss".

But what is a "self-employed" ? Is not a business owner ? N.. Yes : If we stick only to the definition that gives us the liberal economy. This would be the case judging by the definition given on the site educa-Law :

" In fact, the self-employed and individual enterprise are one, that is to say the self-employed worker carries on a business and that business is the result of his own work. Since we can not say that the self-employed is itself a "business form", rather they say he operates a "single undertaking" of which he is the sole owner. »

scan0004

Read more →

/0 Comments/by