Posts

On strike for the planet

We are in 2019. The situation on Earth is catastrophic. The ozone layer is on track to be completely destroyed by the carbonic gasses from cars, Chemical Industry, and the push-push in cacane. Result : Earth is dying under the sun. It would eventually find a new planet move 8 billion tatas, but a providential series for children who rocked a generation of those who tatas we warned that governments and big business will never learn from their mistakes, Terran population decides to go on strike to save what is left to save.

 

Then in July 2017, British newspaper The Guardian published the results of a study showing that only 100 companies are responsible for more 70% of global emissions, it becomes increasingly disturbing to talk about personal choice and play the game of guilt or morals to treat ecology. If animal species are disappearing, the number of human deaths due to heat waves rising summer after summer and that our years on earth are counted, this is not because the neighbor's recycling bin is not full enough or that our colleague forgot to put his apple core compost.

 

Just in Montreal, there are over 150 000 of people who are joined at the foot of the Mont-Royal 15 mars 2019 to express their fears about the future and require the government and immediate actions companies. In the morning, Montreal School Board announced to have to close the doors of several of its secondary school following pressure from many students and many students who formed human chains to prevent courses take place. In several districts, the neighborhood elementary school could attend during recess or after school to children's events-e-s accompanied their teacher-e-s. Far from being confined to Montreal, there were ten actions planned across the province, including Quebec where several thousand demonstrators e-s stormed the streets. Recall that the members of 120 Student Associations from 35 different schools were on strike this Friday. These have also been able to count on the support of many citizens groups, community organizations and unions such as the IWW-SITT, Autonomous Federation of Education, CSN and the Employees' Union e-s Old Port to name a few.

 

Worldwide, the environmentalist wave has spread to more than 125 pays, for a total of 2083 and recorded actions but it is only the beginning! L’organisation Earth Strike, ad immediately for new protests 27 april, to build on the momentum from May 1 to strengthen ties with unions, and August 1, as rehearsal, so that the movement culminates in a Grand World General Strike to save the planet, the 27 September.

 

« A revolutionary ecology movement must also organize among poor and working people. With the exception of the toxics movement and the native land rights movement most U.S. environmentalists are white and privileged. This group is too invested in the system to pose it much of a threat. A revolutionary ideology in the hands of privileged people can indeed bring about some disruption and change in the system. But a revolutionary ideology in the hands of working people can bring that system to a halt. For it is the working people who have their hands on the machinery. And only by stopping the machinery of destruction can we ever hope to stop this madness. » ― Judy Bari (1947-1997), IWW et Earth First!

 

X374166

Photo credit: Patrick Sicotte

/0 Comments/by

Back teaching strikes in the US

Back on last year's events

launched 22 February 2018 by teachers of high school of West Virginia, the strike of 2018 extended the faculty of Oklahoma State, d’Arizona, du Kentucky, de North Carolina, du Colorado, Washington, New York and Illinois. Although strikes waves were smaller in these 4 last states, they nevertheless allowed the movement to go beyond the limits of the trade to get them professeur.es associé.es the Commowealth Virginia University and school bus chauffeur.es Georgia.

While the White House merely repeated not have money due to the costs of old age pensions (a speech that reminds us of something?), requests Teachers were clear: better working conditions and more education funding. Or, as every time the employers or the state refuses to untie the purse strings (who filled the same work we do and the taxes we pay), it only takes to brew a little cage to finally realize that the money actually was there. Gains were massive: reinvestment in education through tobacco tax, wage increase 5% at 25% and increased salary support employé.es are just some of the gains made in 2018.

 

The Angels, Denver and Oakland revive the ball!

But the movement that seemed breathless since May just reappear on the radar, this time via the Los Angeles Teacher Union, la Oakland Education Association (California) and the Denver Teacher Union (Colorado). What they ask and they? The same as everyone! An increase in funding institutions to provide a learning environment without mold and where every student can boast a chair and a desk to work and books necessary for learning. decent working conditions for a job that barely keep its workers and where stability employé.es is more than necessary for the welfare of the leading intéressé.es: Children and adolescent.es. While Quebec is on un.e enseignant.e 5 who leaves before his fifth career year, in the US we speak of a definitive abandonment rate 8% every year, across all seniority.

As in too many US and Canadian unions, one for Main obstacles auquel ont fait les enseignants face and enseignantes south of the border was tiédeur du syndical leadership here, we know it, although elected to represent their members, develops quickly on those complex and those who know better than others. These exécutant.es do not believe in fighting for their members and even they would believe, they and they do not believe that fighting can bring anything, better to avoid the worst and ask for the minimum. The strike of Los Angeles enseignant.es, interrupted after coitus 6 days, is a good example. So, if the central and faculty that represents can look forward to getting a pay rise 6%, a reduction in class size and hiring librarian and additional infirmer.es, the comments section of the Facebook page of UTLA has a bitter taste. It is mainly criticizes the Central its online voting system that, having been open only a few hours, prevented thousands of teachers from voting on the ratification of the agreement. Recall that if the 6% increase is not insignificant, Arizona and Virginia have seen their salary increased 20 and 25% Following pressure tactics performed 2018. Why leadership of UTLA was it merely a lean 6%? Mystery and gumdrop.

 

Needless to stress, the problem with this lack of vision on the part of the union leadership is that it creates a new standard that exceeds the limits of the agreement or the workplace. Whenever a union accepts a sellout, see the status quo or worse '' lower back '' as we begin to get used to in Quebec, it is a step towards normalization of losses. A steeper climb for those who want more. All the more so as we émoussons our weapons, the state continues to sharpen his. While Quebec begins to discover that special laws are less and less special, salarié.es the Oklahoma State are already preparing their next battle while just tabled a bill to criminalize enseignant.es who would do battle with their senator. An injury to one is an injury to all, a lack of fighting to One is a lack of fighting spirit to all.

Despite the cowardice of some union leaders and repression of political leaders, that the teachers in the United States have managed to prove is that it is still possible to organize with colleagues. It is possible to do locally is in worrying about a central inert organizing a walk-out completely illegal, but perfectly legitimate, as it is possible to regain control of his assembled and bring the union to take over the role that historically rightful: This not only ensure our well-being as salarié.es, but also to bring a project of greater society for everyone.

 

Solidarity,

Mathieu Stakh.

Photo credit: thenation.com

 

/0 Comments/by

Mission Accomplished in precarious Community of show

The Show precarious Community, what a beautiful evening of solidarity that was for us, members of Union workers and community workers!

 

As union "by and for", we do not have the financial means to an employers' group, consequently, the stands to speak are not common. In fact, for speech, we can not expect that we tend, we must take. It is in this light that we wanted that runs the show and that's why we wanted to take the microphone to people, organizations and artists like us.

 

To express our disgust, our tiredness, our rage and our solidarity with comrades before and, it is a privilege. denouncing underfunding affects us, we burned, conditions that undermine our work, the threats of donors like Centraide put pressure on groups defending rights like the Public Organization of Social Rights of Greater Montreal (OPDS-RM), sexism social net, while laughing and listening to peers and colleagues perform on stage, That is why we organized this show.

 

And we could not have hoped for better reception, so many people. It was for us a success!


A bit of humour


The Community precarious the show began with the solid performance of Colin, the son of Christian Vanasse, that seemed 20 years of experience to give to public shows. Precarious community were able to discover the next prodigy of Quebec humor. Then it is the father who made his entrance by chaining jokes against people who exploit us and contradictions that capitalism imposes on our lives. Thereafter came the two leftist par excellence of the Quebec humor : Colin Boudrias and Fred Dube. Colin gave us several jokes of his political repertoire, including that on the false veganism. While qu'Anarcho-teasing (Fred) We had arrived with his jokes and anti-capitalist activists of the extreme left. Finally, Catherine Ethier ébloui.e.s us again its incredible verve questioning several problems of our society.

 

 

After humorists, for the music!

The duo Acoustic Assonance, accompanied by their daughter, we offered a breathtaking performance! The choice of songs, sweet and melancholic, sung by the rousing voice Izabelle has conquered the room and after laughing a bit, bring us into melancholy of this work and this struggle of ours. Assonance Acoustic then made up the Union Thugs, who launched their part with a heartfelt speech about the injustices that plague the business for too long.

 

 

As approval, spectators and spectators quickly abandoned their seats to sing in heart Heroes and Martyrs, a resumption of Parisian band Brigada Flores Magon that honors all the men and women in combat mort.es. If the end of the concert was trying for their guitarist who turned 25 years and seen so each song be interrupted by a new round of shooters led by its ami.es, for many and many in the room resumed I Am the Son of Corrigan Fest finished setting the table for the punk of The Awkwerz. Person arriving in the middle of the afternoon could not have imagined that the small bar of Stand-Bars would be transformed into a dance floor for a frenzied trash just hours later! Geneviève a, like always, was first order frontwoman. Spitting his words and occupying the front of the stage with an unparalleled presence that night at Building 7, the perfect recipe for a perfect community precarious show was officially completed and we can say : Mission accomplished!

 

All funds raised during the evening were donated to L’OPDS-RM.

Solidarity forever!

/0 Comments/by

unionism, Community and Retreat

Day after the International Day of Workers

The 2 May, a day of reflection on the working conditions in the Community was organized by organisms at the bottom of the ladder, the popular Training Center and the sectoral grouping of community organizations in Montreal (RIOCM).

We were three members of the Community Committee of the IWW Montreal to attend. It was an interesting day and well organized. There was material to brainstorm ideas with more than a hundred people. Congratulations to the transition to the organization. Several proposals have been put forward; we will mention some, explaining the pros and cons, and issuing certain criticisms we hope constructive.

 

Context

Three workshops framed discussions : labor conditions, the work-life and the workplace. The issues raised were mainly lack of funding (mostly), overwork, les burnouts, the large staff turnover, martyr culture, the few links of e-s-employee with their board, sexism in the workplace, la bureaucratisation, project funding (and thus insecurity), etc.

Those are, in sum, problems that most of us who work in the community and have already seen weighing on our shoulders every day.

Before moving forward, an aside is necessary to explain the context of discussions. We said, a hundred people were present. However the majority of these people were either in leadership positions, coordination with a power of hiring and dismissal or board member of directors. That is to say that we were talking about our working conditions with boss. Bosses obviously conscious of their employee-e-s (and suffer themselves and themselves some of the issues discussed), but the boss still. And the discussions were tinted.

Also, to be clear : reflections and critical that we bring here are ours, those unionists.

 

Calling versus employment

Several people mentioned : there is a culture of martyrdom in community organizations. That of not including overtime, to accept the often precarious conditions, And this, just because our work is a care. We work with the world of precarious and often messed up, our work is essential. Somewhat the same speech that is served to nurses and called women's jobs. A random? Probably not. It is often also said that the EU is a work '' militant ''. The boundary between work and activism is not always clear. It is common to see people overwork at work on this basis, that '' because '' is worth a couple of unpaid overtime!

Interesting proposals have emerged. Deconstructing this speech first. Explain the nature of our jobs, to denounce these situations overwork, just as the health care workers have for months with strength, either via public texts or videos. Refusing to do more (with less means).

An expression is however emerged repeatedly from the mouth of managers or directors of organizations, is the need to "educate their employee-s in overtime". Manner of providing the fault of overtime on the shoulders of the employee-s, but neither on directions or the structure of organizations, and even less on donors. If employers accept imposed performance requirements donors, knowing we often "low staff", it is inconsistent to require e-s-employee to provide the same services, but in less time.

 

Funding, bureaucracy and paperwork

Sure, the main issue remains : under-funding and project funding. Some people have raised the possibility of pressuring the political parties in the context of election campaigns. Trying again to strike the Community, perhaps with clearer objectives and decentralized than the aborted 7 February. And look more broadly and talk more. But above all to mobilize the very foundations of organizations : either the employee-e-s!

[On this subject, a personal story and a parallel with the Retreat : nowadays, very little employee-s organizations with a health mandate and social services (Such prevention of STIs) I talk to had heard of this missed strike 7 February. As few of my colleagues intervention had heard of this day of reflection on our working conditions. Visibly, if these are the coordos directions or who receive an invitation to talk about workplace conditions, there is little chance of that is transmitted to the employee-s. Imagine then speak to strike ...]

In terms of insecurity issues related to project funding rather than mission, few solutions have been put forward, Furthermore to make a strike Claim. We have mentioned a few times to tackle some private donors such as the United, who actively participate in the entrepreneurial culture, but no one picked up the ball, which in itself speaks volumes about the lack of analysis we have our own "industry" working.

 

Be heard as workers

An announcement was made, namely that a national association and workers Community workers would be created in the coming months. Few details were unveiled. As the creation of meeting has not taken place, it is difficult to say what its mandate, but we suspect that this will be our rights, to demand better funding, etc.

By asking a few questions in the following weeks to people involved in its creation, we have some, or concerns, but the project still interests us.

Already, have a space where propose actions, where share and talk about our working conditions is interesting in itself. Can come together is almost a luxury, considering all the tasks and we weigh. This will definitely be a project in which it may organize actions on trades that we.

However, some concerns remain. First, that will be part? Will be qualified-e-s Workers people who have hiring and dismissal powers within our bodies? Suppose we begin to talk about organizing, are we going to face an internal group that fiercely oppose it? Or simply to speak of self-management, internal conflicts, power relations within our bodies ... Will speak are we working conditions or just general underfunding? The question is valid.

 

Trade union solidarity and self-management

Sure, we preached for several solutions like us. Against some reluctance to join unions under a traditional model, we talked about putting forward a solidarity unionism. Namely mobilize, We base, by and for ourselves, so not only talk about underfunding, but also to bring up to date the self in community organizations in which we work. But also to be able to address issues such as harassment, the employee-s reports versus directions / boards, etc. This is why our trade unionism is voluntary, to enable people to be heard according to their needs.

We mentioned the importance of not remain impassive when an organization is cut. And I believe that this goal remains for us one of our key mandates : asserting solidarity among people working in the Community. Because it is together that we have a balance of power and that we can protect our bodies.

 

Conclusion

in short, it was an interesting meeting. We hope it will not be an isolated exercise, and it will be followed by a more general and broader. Organizations that have started organized something important, we hope it continues and that it be given suites.

The meeting was after all the Community Image : we are well aware of the problems we are experiencing, we have a good idea of ​​the solutions within our reach, but taking action is unclear, or uncertain.

Anyway, our side, we will provide all the help we can in our midst colleagues, and we invite them to contact us. The more we are many and many, more our voice will.

 

An injury to one, an injury to all!

 

Members of the union workers and community workers.

/0 Comments/by

The Origins of Solidarity Unionism: Minority report 5

During the recent training of IWW organizers, we talked about the kind of agreements that union solidarity could do with a boss. After all, we aim to ensure better conditions and to take advantage, which means , Firstly, to negotiate with management and commemorate the agreements we have concluded.

 

The readers of my topics I will regularly criticize contract elements, in my opinion, should be excluded if we want to be a strong movement. Some of these elements are desired by the union bureaucracies rooted, some are desirable for management, and some serve both interests, while abandoning the workers. I speak deductions of union dues, prerogatives of management and no-strike clauses. There are other characteristics of the contracts, such as binding arbitration as the last step of a grievance procedure, deadlines that promote management, the '' zipper clauses '' and so on, I regularly complain.

But what are the types of agreements that we should conclude, so? Generally, I speak of the agreements in terms of using direct action to take power on specific situations and negotiate to commemorate the result. But there are elements in the current contracts that are very useful. What remains to be seen, that is if a more comprehensive agreement that truly protects and extends the rights of working men and women can be negotiated in the current climate.

 

In my opinion, when negotiating, the workers should seek:
1) the end of the employment status "OTC";
2) a grievance procedure;
3) all economic improvements and working conditions they may wish and;
4) past practices clauses.

Most contracts contain a clause of "progressive discipline" or "termination for cause", that effectively terminates the employee status '' OTC ''. I would be interested to hear unionists seasoned-e-s the kind of progressive discipline provisions that have worked well in their experiments. One of them we have negotiated here based on the idea not to make it easy to discipline e-s-employed for simple wrongdoing. Management was obliged for each discipline to write an essay on the good qualities of the disciplined person, specify how to improve performance and meet regularly with the person concerned to discuss progress. Because it's a bit painful to do this, only the most serious offenses are identified, and former insignificant disciplines have simply disappeared.

Grievance procedures are systematic way the problems that arise in a factory are treated. Many clauses limit the definition of a complaint to the matters covered by the contract, thus reducing the ability of working people to file grievances on matters not provided for in the contract. It could be argued that the questions that are not covered by the contract are exempt from limits resolutions prohibited in the contract, then maybe not this is the worst thing that can happen. But having a procedure that management had agreed to follow when a conflict occurs can be very advantageous for workers.

Too often, I saw the wind out of the sails of organizing campaigns with promises of leadership that are never delivered. A clear process demonstrates to everyone when it is being ejected-e-s, and workers may well decide quickly how to raise the bar. I prefer that the last step of the grievance procedure is actually a gray area where nothing is assured. Yes, have steps ahead – meetings to discuss the issue, put in writing, bring a mediator, and everything that makes sense in the structure of your workplace. But to rely on a third party – that did not work under the agreement that it requires you to submit – to take the final decision is not ideal. Past practice clauses actually say: "Unless we reach an agreement, the workplace remains as currently. "What this has the effect of putting the burden of change in the workplace on the employer's shoulders. They must come to the union to talk about the changes and the union may or may not be consistent, or negotiate. When workers decide that a situation must be resolved, the grievance procedure can be used to bring the discussion to the calendar. These clauses have largely disappeared current contracts, but I think it's time for a rebirth.

 

The series of “minority reports” was written and published in 2002 on the website of the IWW, by Alexis FW Buss.

Link to original article: https://www.iww.org/about/solidarityunionism/explained/minority5

/0 Comments/by

The Origins of Solidarity Unionism: Minority report 4

Most union campaigns are organized around the problems experienced in the workplace or in a specific industry. Workers set up committees, a campaign is launched, and the problems experienced in the workplace are explained so as to increase the support given to the union. Generally, this type of organization is obtaining formal recognition by employers in accordance with legal procedures in place, to a collective agreement is negotiated.

 

But what happens when it comes time to negotiate the Convention? It is wrong to believe that labor and management are involved in this process on an equal, and that this process is emerging agreement that benefits everyone. In the context of accredited unionism, unions enter into the negotiation process in a weak position : their legitimacy as a union and the satisfaction of their claims primarily depend on the good faith of the employer class, rather than the implementation of proactive responses.

 

The concept of "labor peace", applied in Canada including the Rand Formula and the adoption of laws for union certification, As was the case of employers that governments and union bureaucracies : employers had enough of fighting unionism and its disruptive methods (occupations, manifestations, strikes, sit-ins, etc.), governments were tired of having to help large companies to Sort this out after every labor dispute, and the trade union bureaucracy was tired of having to "manage" the members who claim to be respected. The system of collective agreements was therefore set up to give the employers a legal responsibility to negotiate the conditions of workers with union, framed by rules and laws that essentially restrict the labor scope to legal and rhetorical joust.

 

Traditionally, it is assumed that as the target company is profitable, unions and the employing class enjoying the renewal of collective agreements or the renegotiation of employment contracts to improve conditions for workers. However, this is not the case : it is very common that companies, unionized or not, close plants, branches or offices, abolish positions, reduce wages and benefits, and generally show no compassion for workers, even when business is good. Furthermore, it is common - and generally expected - that the agreements and contracts contain a series of clauses and managerial prerogatives completely useless and absurd, even harmful, for workers.

 

Since many unions seem to believe that workers should be "e-s-managed" by bosses who do what they want, Most collective agreements and employment contracts traded give the employers a total control over the workplace. Furthermore, by collecting contributions directly on the payroll of their members, accredited unions have an interest in encouraging them not to strike, or lose a portion of their income and having to support the strikers disturbances.

 

When we think about the means available to us to transform the trade union movement, we must take into account these elements, and can not limit ourselves to saying "better organize our workplaces"; As we have not solved the problem obliging unions which do nothing to help their members take control of their environments, we will be stuck-e-s in a loss to negotiating paradigm with an entrepreneurial class that decides the agenda.

 

Comment, so, do we get out of this game which we do not have written rules? We must first and foremost stop making legal recognition and contract negotiation top priorities. Although our unions and solidarity networks must be able to act to resolve issues at the source of most union campaigns (wages, social advantages, working conditions, etc.), it is absolutely necessary to be respected as workers, as well as having control over our workplaces and on how our work connects us to our community and the world. We need to create a context in which they are the bosses and bosses, and not the unions, who want the signing of an agreement; we must create an environment in which it is the employers who fell to his guns to get our collaboration. This is an important part of the potential offered by the solidarity struggle unionism.

 

The objective of this unionism, as promoted by the SITT-IWW, is to organize the workers so that our power can not be ignored by employers and governments, or recovered by facade union. The Solidarity trade union movement is one of the ways to achieve it, since the goal of our struggle is not simply to sign a contract or obtain legal status.

 

In fact, as much as possible, we must avoid giving our collective power to substitute a contract or a legal framework; if the contracts and agreements help us make our bosses and bosses accountable by obliging them to respect their commitments, it is very good. But if negotiation is not a process by which we negotiate what we lose as rights and benefits, and by which we legitimize a total employers' control over us as workers, there is definitely something wrong.

 

Note: This article was translated from English and adapted to the Canada-Quebec reality by x377545. In the original text, the author evoked specifically in the American context the procedure Card check recognition and union election process, supervised by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

 

The series of “minority reports” was written and published in 2002 on the website of the IWW, by Alexis FW Buss.

Link to original article: https://www.iww.org/about/solidarityunionism/explained/minority4

/0 Comments/by

The origins of Solidarity Unionism: Minority report 3

In this section, and other opportunities, I wrote about the major advantage enjoyed by the ISTC-IWW compared to corporatist unions. Particularly with respect to our approach allows any worker or workers to get involved and to find meaning to his involvement with the union, and that a majority of colleagues has demonstrated his desire or not to negotiate with the boss. I named the minority unionism.

There are other benefits to SITT-IWW — we believe in the principle of one vote per member. Any and all responsible and representative and union representative is elected-e and see these posts frequent turnover. Any structural change of the union is subject to a vote, including the amount of contributions and constitutional amendments : democracy. Our members are very motivated es to fight to win better working conditions. The Wobblies are often the first and first to arrive on a picket line and the last and last to leave, even when the action does not affect them directly : militancy. These elements should not make us unique, but it is unfortunately too often the case.

A growing militancy and democracy can only benefit every worker organization, especially corporatist unions and there are people who work very hard for such reforms. These remain good minor reforms to the unions that remain quietly within the Labor Code.

Since I wrote the first edition of this topic, I realized how much the idea of ​​minority unionism disturbs the pattern of major unions, especially when it comes to court. Let's look at a hypothetical example:

Alice, an employee of the loading dock at Best Buy, is told that she has to buy his own safety shoes. It is legal. She does not pay, these shoes are expensive. Let's, for the need of the cause, that most of his colleagues feel the same. The Directive, which was forwarded them to be applied in two weeks.

Alice speaks with an electrician who came to install a new gadget store. He is a member IBEW (The International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) and told him, if it were unionized, she would not have this problem since the union would ensure that the company pays for safety equipment.

Alice calls IBEW and says it wants to join the union. It is sheer madness to his interlocutor ears. It would have to follow the apprenticeship program and the waiting list is long. Furthermore, there is not enough work in the area to justify new members. Alice hangs up, baffled by this contact with the craft union.

She speaks with a truck making a delivery. The driver is a Teamster. He also told him to form a union is the right way to resolve their situation. Alice therefore calls the Teamsters and request to join the union. Let's say we have here is a section that is experimenting a bit with the minority unions as they are campaigning in Overnite (transport company) and have had to develop a strategy allowing them to hold a union presence in the workplace (Note that I say this to the discussion purposes — it's not something that really happened). The Teamsters answered him, "Yes, join us."

However, a colleague Alice has a brother who works in the public sector, also on loading docks, and is represented by SEIU (Service Employees International Union). This colleague becomes SEIU member.

the UFCW (United Food & Commercial Workers), representing retail industry workers, Wind of what unfolds and requires the transfer of these two members in name, that the AFL-CIO (American Federation of Labor – Congress of Industrial Organizations) grant them. Neither union members do not want to be affiliated UFCW saw their inability to adequately represent workers in supermarkets across the country. Instead, they decide to buy their own safety shoes and give up the idea of ​​a union.

Although the above scenario is fictional, I think it illustrates the problems that would surface area in the event that the corporatist unions adopt a minority unionism strategy or a direct affiliate program. The reason I think the situation would unfold well — maybe not every time, but often enough to make it problematic — is that the corporatist union abandoned the minority unionism 1935 and when they pleaded es for the Wagner Act.

The Wagner Act — well what offer some protection to workers involved in minority unionism campaigns through its clauses protecting the concerted action — was greeted with open arms by the union leaders. Indeed, it guarantees exclusive bargaining rights to unions won powers of representation, while facilitating the management of the clauses related to members, such as collecting contributions. The AFL-CIO has pushed even further with, within its structure, anti-poaching judicial language and having protected the worst affiliates, preventing workers accentuate the democratic aspects activists and union representatives.

In Australia, the government, accredited and bosses have cut workers' industrial landscape jurisdictions countries unions. The unions have exclusive rights trading industry standards such as leave, salaries, the safety standards, hours and working conditions. They have the right to negotiate whatever members density, but the results of these negotiations affect all and all workers and industrial workers, union members or not. When a worker or a worker becomes a member or, it is usually to tackle a problem on their own workplace. A worker can become a union member and used to agitate for its own sake or for the workplace full. Given the history of American unions fighting for legal rights, I can imagine a system based on that of Australia, but without the right to represent an entire industry.

This would be implemented by the AFL-CIO that would cut the jurisdictions and approve that only unions having a presence in some industries may be a member or working there. The majority of this work has already been done, it has only been sidelined with the latest most difficult years. The Australian system was put in place because the working activity was up. Many moved from one union to another, changing organization as it saw them looking for a maximum level of militancy. Rather than encouraging devotion, the choice was made to control the workers by not allowing them membership in specific circumstances.

interesting note : the Australian system is not actually an industrial unionism. for example, there is a union secretaries. The secretaries are an indispensable part of almost any industry, but rather than being members of the union that represents them, and they are represented by an art-craft union. Ironically, although the vast majority of secretaries are women, the union is controlled by anti-feminist men, mainly because of some union members have the right to vote. The union is very little actually to organize the people it represents and even tries to counter any attempt at reform by members. The union can behave that way since it can retain its bargaining despite a very small amount of members, allowing a very small group of individuals unpopular among secretaries to be the sole representatives.

To return to the Alice scenario, that would SITT-IWW in this situation? We occupy ourselves with immediate safety shoes. Alice would initially contacted either with an intersectoral local or regional industrial council, an organization that serves to unify workers regardless of their industry. It would be in contact with other members, would provide training and would find solidarity. She would learn how to organize themselves to achieve gains as well as how to build a trade union presence in the workplace.

The SITT-IWW is open to all workers and all workers and our system of industrial unions is designed to increase our strength report. The only reason would have to wonder what industrial union join is to give us the best possible negotiating power, not to protect territory. The SITT-IWW opposed the Wagner Act when thinkers who created it made him the first draft. This is because we have seen the danger of the fact of relying on laws to organize the working class in our place and we did not want the cumbersome bureaucracy, the short-sighted and methods of separation of the corporatist unions.

Building our movement in this way makes us deeply only. We choose to experiment with new methods of organization, methods that have the potential not only to successfully provide for smaller claims, but also the potential to create a movement that can make a real difference.

 

The series of “minority reports” was written and published in 2002 on the website of the IWW, by Alexis FW Buss.

Link to original article: https://www.iww.org/about/solidarityunionism/explained/minority3

/0 Comments/by

The origins of Solidarity Unionism: minority report 2

At the most recent General Assembly of the IWW, I had the chance to participate in a panel discussion to share ideas on how to rebuild the labor movement. My exchange theme was minority unionism. Here are some excerpts:

 

If the unions must become a movement, we must come out of the current model, based on a recipe increasingly difficult to prepare: a majority of workers vote union, a contract is negotiated. We must return to the kind of unrest that has earned us the eight-hour day and built the unions as a vital force. One way of doing this is what is now called the “minority unionism”. It's a question of constituting organized solidarity networks and significant improvements can win on individual workplaces, in industries and for the benefit of the international working class.

 

The minority unionism occurs on our own terms, irrespective of the legal recognition. It is not a question of simply creating a small clique of professional malcontents. It should rather aspire to grow, but in the short term, He gives an example of possible types of organization when we decide that our unions will exist because we need.

 

Diets working relationship between the United States and Canada are established on the assumption that the majority of workers must have a union, generally approved by the government in a global context, which is relatively rare. Even in North America, the idea that a union needs official recognition or majority status for the right to represent its members is relatively recent, mainly thanks to the choice of the unions to the legal trade of membership guarantees.

 

The labor movement was not built by the majority unionism – it could not exist. A hundred years ago, the unions had no legal status (indeed, courts have often ruled that unions were an illegal conspiracy and constituted a form of extortion) – they were recognized by their gross industrial power.

 

When the IWW fought for the eight-hour day in the wood and wheat fields, they have not decided to prove their majority in boss through elections. Workers have rather held meetings to decide what their claims, elected shop committees to represent claims, and used tactics such as leaving work after a quarter of eight hours to persuade recalcitrant employers to accept their demands. Union recognition in the construction trades was carried out through a combination of strikes, direct action and respect stakes grêve and of each other (and which, often, not enough).

 

The wave of sit-ins that have implemented the IOC in auto and steel, for example, was undertaken by minority unions who were very present in the workplace with agitating history. The union then appealed to the minority presence to take direct action that galvanized the largest workforce in their factories and have inspired the continent workers.

 

Trade unionism was built through direct action and through the organization of work. But in the years 1930, bosses have been increasingly difficult to recruit thugs and friends judges, and to proceed with collective redundancies. Recognizing that there was no way to crush the unions and tired of the continuous conflicts, they proposed an agreement: if the unions agreed to abandon their industrial power and instead worked through appropriate channels – the National Labor Relations Board in the United States, various provincial offices in Canada – the government would act as a referee “impartial” to determine whether the union was or not bona fide workers' representative.

 

Short term, unions could bypass the need to sign the workers one by one, to collect premiums directly. Bosses exchanged suit unionists for the thugs they had previously employed. And after a brief period of membership, trade unions (particularly in the US) began a long spiral. As part of this exclusive negotiation model, unions do not attempt to work on the job as long as they have not obtained legal certification. This legal process provides employers an almost unlimited ability to threaten and intimidate workers and drag out proceedings for years. It is a system designed to interfere with the right of workers to organize – and the IWW emphasized when the national law on labor relations was adopted.

 

However, if the labor law system is designed around this majority-majority unionism, he does not really require. As long as workers act together, they enjoy the same basic legal rights – such as those – whether or not in an officially certified union. Indeed, in some cases, they enjoy more rights, the courts have ruled that most union contracts implicitly refer to the right to strike. It is illegal to fire members of a minority union for trade union activity, to discriminate, to dismiss for strike, to refuse to allow union representatives to attend disciplinary hearings, etc. An organized group of workers have legal rights, but it would be wrong to expect that labor boards more vigorously apply than they do for unions that have been certified. And an organized group of workers, even if it is a small minority, has much more power than the unorganized individual workers.

 

In most of the cases, you have as many legal rights as a majority union as a minority union – with the only exception being certified as the exclusive bargaining agent and sole authority to negotiate a contract. A minority union has the right to file grievances (even though there may be no formal complaints procedure); engage in a concerted activity, make requests to the boss; seek meetings, or even trigger a grêve (even if it's not a good idea if you do not have the support of the majority).

 

If you choose well your problems and use them as an opportunity to talk with colleagues and mobilize, you can fight together for better conditions and build a 'union'. By campaigning on issues that matter to your colleagues, you acquérerez experience in self-organization, you will learn that you can trust, and you establish that the union of workers on the job and they are there for a long time.

 

The labor movement was built when workers groups have banded together and began agitating for their demands: sometimes, they persuaded their colleagues to approach their boss and ask that some problems are corrected. Sometimes, they refused to work under working conditions or unsafe manner, and persuaded their colleagues to do the same. Other times, they acted individually, sometimes they were demonstrations across the city on issues of common interest such as working hours and hazardous work.

 

The crucial point is that they acted. They identified the key elements of their problems; they got together, they agreed to an action plan, then they executed. It is the trade union action. It does not require official recognition, it requires no contract. It requires Workers who join together and act collectively.

 

If the unions must become a movement, we must come out of the current model and return to the type of agitation on the ground that we won the eight-hour day and built the unions as vital force. The minority unionism is to form organized networks of solidarity and significant improvements can win on individual workplaces, in all industries and the benefit of the international working class. This is a process, a process that offers hope to transform our greatest weakness – the fact that our members are scattered in many workplaces largely disorganized – into a force.

 

The series of “minority reports” was written and published in 2002 on the website of the IWW, by Alexis FW Buss.

Link to original article: https://www.iww.org/about/solidarityunionism/explained/minority2

/0 Comments/by

The Origins of Solidarity Unionism: Minority report 1

These last years, I have occasionally contributed to a section named "Wobbling the Works”, which put the & rsquo; focus on & rsquo; impact of laws governing the world of work on & rsquo; union. I will continue to write about it from time to time, but recently my attention was focused on a concept that I designate as "minority unionism", is a way of describing a method of organization that does not wait after the majority of workers d & rsquo; a place of work to earn the legal right to negotiate. This month, I will share some aspects that have sparked my interest and led me in this direction.

 

Recently, j & rsquo; I had to rewrite the constitution SITT-IWW for our comrades Regional Organizing Committees, who were tired es of US spelling mistakes such as "labour” and "organising”. Scrutinize the Constitution made me think of the idea of ​​the branches job. A job sector is a group of five or more members of the IWW-SITT in the same workplace and to meet at least once a month. This implies a more or less implied that them discuss their grievances, that & rsquo; he creates them strategies to address and establish a union presence in their work.

 

I am working on a project that was intended to be a video version of the classic pamphlet IWW, “A Worker’s Guide to Direct Action”, but has gained momentum after it began. By making the search for the video, I saw Miriam Ching Yoon Louie talk about his book, Sweatshop Warriors, which provides excellent examples of how the centers of Immigrant Workers es have helped many workers understand their rights and organize themselves around various problems at work and in the community. I also had the chance to interview Barbara Pear, a maid at the University of North Carolina and president of the EU branch number 150, When & rsquo; she visited the maintenance staff at Swarthmore College, leading a campaign for living wages for more than six years. The University union has no legal right to negotiate, but has nevertheless been successful thanks to the & rsquo; use of pressure tactics aimed at bringing administrators at the negotiating table and d & rsquo; secure improvements for workers and the least-paid workers are.

 

I often think of ways that workers, who do not have the legal right to negotiate or who have no collective agreement, can put the & rsquo; before to act as a union, using the law to amplify their work. This came to mind because Staughton Lynd asked me to repeat our pamphlet "Labor Law for the Rank and Filer"At a time when I had become particularly cynical with regard to the use of laws governing work in & rsquo; union. I was returning from a weekend with the family Lynd, the people "Youngstown Workers Solidarity Club"Disruptors and their cohorts, interference, veterans and vétéranes activism and d & rsquo; d & rsquo organizers, organizing student-es, from d & rsquo; across the US.

 

The club was developed as a parallel trade union center that filled a missing when the local plant could not provide adequate support for a strike. Hold me with these people was the antidote to the cynicism that I felt; it's not that I have more confidence in the law, but I now feel able to see the possibilities ... There's a month I saw a documentary, American Standoff, on the shore of the trucking company Overnight, I have criticized in the latest issue. “Standoff"Illustrated many problems that the working class has not adequately confronted. How can we organize ourselves in companies that are so anti-union they are willing to spend millions of dollars just to keep worker-are far from the negotiating table? The campaign Teamsters in Overnight, which is currently in a difficult situation that it is not even certain that it can be taken in hand, is the latest example of a long list of campaigns that left the trade union left scratching their heads wondering how to deal with self-destructive employers and labor laws completely backward. Sure, the answer, it is not to give up. But it s & rsquo; is not to simply d & rsquo; a clique of agitators and d & rsquo; agitating minority on each workplace. It s & rsquo; is to create real solidarity networks that are organized and able to win improvements in individual workplaces, through industries, and for the benefit of the international working class.

 

And, finally and especially, several comrades on the other side of the Atlantic sent me an article on minority unionism that appeared in a recent edition of the magazine The Nation. L’article, written by Richard B. Freeman et Joel Rogers, argues that theAFL-CIO should develop a d & rsquo plan organization that does not depend on recruiting the majority of d & rsquo workers; a workplace. What was amazing to receive multiple copies of this article in my emails was not the astonishment of American trade unionists who sent. The quite upside which we do chaisons is absurd. Few countries practice trade unionism as we do in the US (and Canada) with the union as the sole bargaining agent of a declared majority. I think it would help a lot if a majority of workers with whom I discuss were aware of how things are done elsewhere, and it would also be nice if people d & rsquo; elsewhere could see the consequences of the way we & rsquo; organize.

 

Now, that is the purpose of this section. I want to share these stories and experiences. I want to connect my classmates with resources that others have found useful in their union work. I can not offer a recipe for success. These examples will not always suitable for everyone. But an intelligent reflection on a way forward is not only a possibility, it s & rsquo; is something that is already short. And developing resources to try these ideas, we will give us the confidence to turn comments like "what a great idea!"To" I'll try it!”.

 

The series of “minority reports” was written and published in 2002 on the website of the IWW, by Alexis FW Buss.

Link to original article: https://iww.org/about/solidarityunionism/explained/minority1

/0 Comments/by

poor record

The RQ-ACA and the fight

In recent years, le RQ-ACA (Quebec Independent Community Action Network) and its regional fronts are the channels through which community groups in the Autonomous Community Action (HERE) bearing claims on funding and recognition deal with different levels of government, through the campaign "Commit yourself to the community".

 

The criteria to be part of community action groups are : be a non-profit organization, rooted in the community, have an associative and democratic life, and have the freedom to determine its mission, its approaches, practices and guidelines. To be qualified as independent, we add that it must have been formed at the initiative of the people in the community, pursuing a social mission of its own and promotes social transformation, having an approach based on the totality of the problem addressed and be led by an independent CA public network. In our groups, it is usually to our members, militant.e.s and / or users-using and we are accountable.

 

ACA gathers groups working on very diverse axes : women, LGBTQ, defense rights, Harm reduction, popular education, family associations, Hosting Resources, international cooperation, ecology, etc. Assemblies are held periodically, by region, so members are involved in developing the outline of the action plan that will define the national struggle.

 

Among the means used, include poster campaigns, distribution of stickers "I support the Community ', press conferences, publication of texts, representations to various bodies, manifestations, actions "disturbing" and finally strike, like the aborted 7 February.

 

The worn speech is roughly as follows : the state must reinvest in the community so that we can accomplish our mission and maintain (or increase) our services, suites historical struggles, we managed several gains that we want to save what is now an acquired.

 

The (lack of) Community funding

In recent decades, we see a change in the state funding. Private foundations are playing an increasingly important and bring with them the performance requirements and efficiency, short do more with less. In the best known, there Way, Chagnon Foundation, etc. These give the funding requested by their vis-à-vis the mission judgment, Services, activity reports, etc. These donors require specific account yields qualitatively and quantitatively. In survival mode, Community has no choice but to turn to these donors for survival. And in spite of ourselves, sometimes, it must distort our missions and mandates to meet the funding criteria. The state also seem increasingly inclined to do so in the allocation of funds.

 

The ACA groups are important and worthy of funding, but are not the only elements of the Community. Several salarié.e.s Community must both cope with precarious funding, and their tutelage under external bodies (CIUSS/CLSC, YMCA, foundations, hospitals, etc.). This is the case of aidant.e.s pair.e.s are considéré.e.s as part of a specific project under supervision and are then envoyé.e.s in various groups, but are not always treated equally face permanent.e.s intervenant.e.s of these organizations.

 

The fight is personal

Work in the Community is, for many of us, much more than a job, it is a vocation. Nonetheless concretely, un.e salarié.e occupying the same function in a government resource, or even in the private has much better conditions. Our vocation is it leave us in poverty?

 

Who among us, Workers, volunteers and community militant.e.s, has not seen colleagues or comrades in from burnout? Who does not know quelqu'un.e who saw his position abolished or cut hours for lack of funding? How are we jumping from contract to contract and end up chronically unemployed? How many CA work or teams have had to make difficult choices as that of maintaining a position or cut in insurance, pensions and / or other benefits? And we pass by! That's the reality we chatter between workers of the community.

 

There seems to be treading water for years, and our struggles are fragmented. Everyone is trying to pull a piece of cover on their side hoping to make giving back a portion of the amount that has been cut, or see our funding be indexed. As soon as it receives a portion of what it hoped, it withdraws from fight. Efforts our state donors are not living up to our potential. From year to year, the same strategies are repeated : representations to various bodies, petition and letter, and a very symbolic temporary occupation of a lobby government offices or large financial players.

 

Funding for our groups must not only enable us to continue our activities, it should allow wages and viable conditions for everyone. Often agencies must draw on their funds to adequately pay salarié.e.s engagé.e.s for a temporary project. It lasted quite. We can not bear any longer to be the cheap labor of the State in social services. Our donors can perhaps muzzle our groups, organizations and projects, but they can not muzzle workers who wear them at arms. Join the Union of Workers of the Community!

 

Rage and Solidarity,

A member of the union workers and community workers.

/0 Comments/by