Posts

Solidarity twenty miles dollars

Someone hears about the IWW by un.e ami.e, we contact us online and we arrange to meet and discuss ways to take to claim the stolen wages. This is how many of our start campaigns Reclaim your pay, but our most recent will is not bound to the ordinary. Tale of a victorious campaign, the biggest in the history of our industry.

In his first message in late January, a worker tells of a chic restaurant closed, checks that bounced and more hours worked but not paid. They call to ask for more details, and we learn that they are 11 employé.e.s closed restaurant have bounced checks and / or unpaid wages! The information is relayed to the voluntary union for campaigns Reclaim your pay, and at the magnitude of the case, a team of three Wobblies is formed. Quickly, a meeting is organized with the greatest possible travailleurs.euses. At this first meeting, 5 of the 11 are presented, we count all wages to demand to realize that more than 20 000$ are at stake! We also note all relevant information about the boss: in addition to the closed restaurant, He is also co-owner of a chain of coffee shops in Montreal and coffee distribution company. He also has a habit of not paying its employé.e.s; the travailleurs.euses have heard similar stories in their, which spread on 10 last years. The boss will not easily let impress. This time, against, the claim will be organized and supported by a union. We do not lose anything to wait, we immediately establish a schedule of direct action to do in the coming weeks.

All campaigns SITT-IWW to claim stolen wages are based on direct action. The 11 employé.e.s have everyone made a complaint to the CNESST (except one, who worked in the black), but these complaints can easily take a year to reach a payment. For more travailleurs.euses, One year is too much to wait for three to four weeks of payroll. Direct action puts pressure on the employer to convince him that he has more to lose if he does not pay, without going through the legal. It is always the travailleurs.euses who democratically choose what actions, although union members can suggest them some.

The first step is to send letters of request to the boss, to remind him of the amounts payable and to inform the union is now on the case. While the letters are being delivered, the boss contacts a worker of 11 with the intention of paying it after she complained publicly. union members accompanied to this meeting, taking the opportunity to put the application letters to the boss personally. He takes the letters without reacting and not receiving any message from them by mail / e-mail or phone. It's time to start actions.

We start by sending emails denouncing the situation in several bosses in case of partners, without results. then continues with a "phone zap", where for two hours several people continually call to shops boss to block phone lines, and a blitz of negative comments on the pages of its companies (facebook, google, yelp, etc). To raise public pressure, is published on the website of the union an article that directly exposes the boss and unpaid wages. At this stage, three weeks have passed and certain.e.s travailleurs.euses receive boss Messages for, in short, threaten them with lawsuits and tell them that the union does not scare him. The next action, early March, continues escalating pressure tactics, this time physically with cafes whose boss is co-owner to distribute leaflets at the entrance. The managers are panicking a little, but we managed to pull three days to three coffees without too much trouble.

This is the week of towing the union is finally contacted by the boss to arrange a meeting, held the 14 mars. When it, it serves us the usual stories: "This is a misunderstanding, I'm the real victim, we could just talk not need to attack me ", etc. Rest you leave the meeting about 12 000$ checks! 6 of the 11 Former employé.e.s are now completely payé.e.s, there are still a few thousand to claim for 5 other.

The rest of the campaign covers 4 month, during which we discuss and negotiate with the boss to get the rest of salaries. One time, it seems that the boss ignores us, then organized a small action of towing two of its cafes, to get back his attention. The whole story is concluded on 19 June, when the last checks we are supplied by the employer. One worker did not have any money, and it is because it has decided to stop the campaign of direct action and rely solely on complaints it filed with the CNESST. It was noted that the worker who was being paid below the table has received his money, without particular difficulty.

In total, efforts 11 travailleurs.euses and the union have helped claim 20 995$, in unpaid hours 4%. Certainly a direct action campaign involves more work than the single gesture of complaint, but this considerable victory shows us once again qu'armé.e.s solidarity, we can overcome all obstacles, and build a better world for tomorrow.

Solidarity is priceless,

X377266

X377638

X385004

English version here.

/1 Comment/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 value

This article is not one of our usual items. It is rather a part of a new series of articles from our union of self-employed, which will assess the various challenges faced by these workers whose domain is, by nature, unpredictable. And, a more significant, it will assess what we can do about these issues.

 

Does film criticism still has value? I have seen more rumblings to that effect recently, but as with all things, This will work as well. This is a transitional pass; I barely thirty and film died and was saved a dozen times in my life. Critics are thinkers and thinkers; they and they contextualize the world of art. But I'm not here to discuss the critical role. What I am here to do is break down the work that goes into a fairly standard movie review. Because, naturally, criticism is work.

Little is also taken for granted that the work published online. There has been a steady devaluation of writing in cultural nature of the Internet as a service paid, for over a decade now. The legends of this area can not maintain a contract. Publishers and editors lead a mediocre contest to see how much content they and they can squeeze their team with an almost nonexistent funding. All you see online is written by someone-e and shocking part of these writings was made for peanuts.

So how much is a film critic? Detail all.

Before going further, This is to clarify that 100% an estimation. The rate that I will use are based on strong intuitions and some fifth-grade math. Where I try to come in here is an approximate figure that is larger than, good, zero.

Now, even before you take paper and pencil to write this vicious row or sparkling leaflet, you must watch this damn movie. It is obvious that this is part of the job, and so you should be paid for it-es. Think of it as training; it's part of the job where you learn what you have to do. Without this, you can not do the job. Critics should definitely be paid es for their time and they spend watching the film. Now, I know that critics are often invited es to broadcasts,get links or receive one way or another a film copy. But you do not watch the movie for fun! If we are going to exist in a capitalist system, and if someone will extract the value of our work (in that case, a movie review), fair wages should be expected. The time during which you're stuck es on the film office is part of that value which is extracted because it is an inextricable part of the work you do. No movie, no critical, It's that simple.

"But wait," say definitely someone-e backstage, "Does that mean that a video game critic should be paid for the many hours he or she puts in a game so that they can write about them?? "Absolutely. AT 100%. "More “Breath of the Wild” is a game of 45 hours?!"You want me to play the full game and I write about it? pay!

So, if we assume a rate of 15$ /h (and seriously, why do not I?) and a film lasts two hours, it should 30$ in your pocket from the start. We have not even started to put words together. Once again, using well elementary math, presupposing a ratio 1:1 viewing time – write time, a salary 15$ /h, and a text 700 words, we arrive at a rate of about four cents a word (which is in the lower bracket of the price of honest self-s-worker). So the rate minimum for this text 700 words would 60$. A short capsule 200 word back to 38$. An texts 1000 words would 70$. This rate of four cents a word plus a living wage for the film screening is a absolute floor what is your job.

This is for a single film. These numbers can not be transferred for a full week; those who keep score at home will realize that our way text 700 Words cost four hours of work: two to watch, two for write. There is absolutely no chance that a person look ten movies a week and write about each. This is a sure way to destroy your work-life balance. Furthermore, the highest amount of movie releases in one week is four, with an average closer to three. But assume that the film section of a publication committed one in the new releases, and say there is a big weekend of four films coming up. Take for example 6-8 april 2018. This week saw the exits of :

  • A Quiet Place
  • Blockers
  • The Miracle Season
  • Chappaquiddick

These four films were covered in the New York Times therefore use the figures set out above with the respective length of their journals in Times as a base, decompose these films in terms of labor costs (15$ Time for viewing, four hundred word).

  • A Quiet Place: (651 Words * $ 0.04) + (91’*($15/60’)) = $48.79
  • Blockers: (674 Words * $ 0.04) + (91’*($15/60’)) = $52.46
  • The Miracle Season: (252 Words * $ 0.04) + (99’*($15/60’)) = $34.83
  • Chappaquiddick: (881 Words * $ 0.04) + (101’*$15/60’)) = $60.49

So if a person covers the entire weekend, this amounts to a pay 196,57$. These films are relatively short and one of the five is roughly a capsule; if we keep our example two hours, 700 words, a weekend in four films amount to a pay 232$, which is still not a living wage. But there are precedents in terms of being able to live on a critical new releases salary. Let me take you back to ancient times, pre-recession 2008, and the hourly rate of Mike D'Angelo, currently one of the many many film critics who work on contract. According to this tweet, he was paid 400$ by review when he worked for the Las Vegas Weekly. That's four zero zero. This is a rate that has negotiated the 200$ magazine offered him because, according to him, there was "no need of work". M. D'Angelo, and presumably other critical full time around the same time, earned enough money by writing for a living wage with two or three journals, or about 2100 words, per week, and had enough leverage to negotiate a rate twice that which was offered at the beginning. It's amazing.

More depressing still: take the hourly rate received by D'Angelo 2008 according to its updates (400$ by review, 600-800 words per review) and analyze it. Keep the same hourly rate 15$ for the time spent watching the film and assume an average week end of three film releases, a two-hour film. Six o'clock, 90$. this leaves 310$ for the act of writing, and if an average of criticism is presupposed 700 words, this gives us a rate just words above 44 cents.

All this is another way of saying something you already knew. Capitalism has destroyed the safety net that critics had a decade ago and since hastened to cut more corners. But you should be compensated fairly for your art-work, without exception. By sticking together, fair rates can become a reality rather than a rarity.

Solidarity,

Yancy Richardson

In english

/0 Comments/by

workers interview: A strike from the SAQ is tabarnak!

The employee-s SAQ (Société des alcools du Québec) themselves with-e-s a strike mandate 6 days to pressure the corporation as part of their trading. A member of the IWW asked some questions to SEMB-SAQ Comrade (CSN) about strike. To avoid employer reprisals, his name will remain anonymous. Solidarity!

 

Quickly, can you tell us a little about your background? Is this your first strike?

 

I am an employee of the SAQ for almost ten years, before that, I had worked in an emergency CHUM from my 18 years. 2012 was my first fight, Now I fight as an employee at the SAQ.

 

Why are you on strike, What is your claim?

 

To date, we used one of our 6 go slow days ** and it was on Tuesday 17 July 2018 as many have found out. Our main demands are the following : reducing the precariousness of employment with our members and the work-family balance. What you should know is that 70% our employee-s on 5500 are e-s-time employee who does not have insurance, no paid vacation, no paid day off, no pay scale and no time guarantee the schedule week after week.

They and they receive their schedules three days in advance, and this creates a "surembauche" and staff turnover, because we can not keep workers in those conditions. Not to mention that it takes between 10 at 15 years to get a job. It is by portraying the people as children spoiled-e-s because our starting salary is 19,33$ /h, but when multiplied by 0 pendant 3 straight month, it's still a basic multiplication giving 0$ by salary. Basically, SAQ can not keep the employee-s, And this, even with a salary that could be called attractive because it can not guarantee hours.

Our other claim is work-life balance and I think I have no need to elaborate too much on it, it's pretty obvious. Serious, Couillard the government made its campaign, but to believe that it is not for us as it plans to privatize us. If already, must be between 10 and 15 years for a position at the SAQ, it would be cool to have a schedule that has no or a single day weekend. schedules of the floor we want to keep our present agreement and / or improve, but when your employer refuses even the status quo, we realize that despite its record profits, it crunches in us. If I get a job after 13 years and I want to hope to have a good life with my family, it will not be at the SAQ, So I fight!

 

SAQ bosses are how? Executives tell you what?

 

Where to start? Basically, their bonus system is done on the backs of workers. The more they cut their hours and bonuses are proving attractive. So, it's not worth the trouble of really talking. My opinion is as follows, I studied industrial relations from a variety of people think that when they will arrive in a company, they can demonstrate "leadership", is cute.

 

What do you do as equity?

 

At the beginning, we started off the uniform, but that has not reacted population. On the other hand, the beginning of the pressing means, which were voted on 94.7%, had the effect of changing the balance of power. It was through actions gradation we do understand that the employer stands. We are 5500 members throughout Quebec and they are 350 and several branch managers. They tiring-e-s we were to see us at work, dressed-e-s the way we wanted and they were no longer recognized as an authority figure.

After, we made a sticky campaign that was never requested by our nego table and not by the executive. I think it is important to mention to tell the employer that it is an autonomous movement of members of HE Mr. B. has grown, for we have been insulted-e-s by the lack of employer recognition, so they should forget their formal notices! We must also say that some of our customer-e-s we asked tights to put them inside or outside the store. This kind of action on the part of these has shown us that they love us and that it is not the workers who are in the wrong, but senior leaders of monopoly.

At the moment, we made "facing" alternative, before spinning the bottles, is put in reverse the signs and made himself indispensable with customers. Then the rest, it's still a secret.

 

Picketing happens how?

 

After a day, it is very well among our ranks. Members answered the call in an extraordinary way. We realized, shortly before the strike began, the employer would operate small stores, which SAQ Express.

On the other hand, people have kept the watchword : prevent deliveries! The response of our members was incredible.

However, we saw people from many unions who were wearing clothes identified with the colors of said unions cross our picket lines, And this, shamelessly. The SEMB-SAQ is known to support all the struggles of union-e-Colleagues! I will not lie, but it makes me when tabarnak / syndicated e-pass our picket line during a strike day ONLY for buying wine. It is as if we members SEMB-SAQ were worthless for them. I advise them reading "Traîneux foot, Boreal Edition ", because we were the first to organize in the mid-sixties in the public service. We have a history of union struggle which we are proud-e-s.

To Montreal, I would like to acknowledge the presence of Manon Massé and several e-s-Québec Solidaire candidate who came-e-s we press lines.

 

If the world in general would support you, what actions they could?

 

a premier, when you go to the SAQ, you can fill out a survey. So, if you write that you would like the employee-s have a good collective agreement, it would be great appreciated (you can also say that the boss was on the phone all the way to his office)! Ensuite, never be embarrassed-e-s ask for the boss (even if he is in his office) branch to tell him that you find unacceptable that the employer rule by the labor dispute with the employee-s. If you get your hands on tights, treat yourself! Especially tell the workers that you press!

 

The other unions, they can do anything for you backer?

 

DO NOT MISS OUR picket lines, please!

 

Solidarity and good next strike days!

 

If you want to follow the negotiations and strikes following days, you can do so via the SAQ-SEMB Facebook page (CSN) : https://www.facebook.com/semb.saq/

 

** go slow : which interrupts the activity of a company by a succession of small work stoppages. Like the fellow said : "That is one vote 6 days, but they can be used one day at a time. It makes the employer more nervous because he does not know when it will come out versus an indefinite strike. »

/0 Comments/by

Campaign History : redeems your pay!

often receives such a call.

* Remi contacted us because his former employer, who has a housekeeping company, had not paid him the wages he owed him for nearly two months. Not far from 300$. Either the food for a solid month, or a good portion of the rent.

He had worked for her boss a full weekend. Fourteen hours. The boss had to get back to him and send his schedule earlier this week. After a few days without news, Rémi concluded that it would not make other shifts. He started trying to get the salary that was rightfully his.

You will be more to recognize you in his situation. When a boss wants to talk to you, you are better respond rapidly worse. Enwoye, press it, there is no time and money to waste. When the reverse against by, suddenly, there is no urgency.

Call after call, no answer. The boss finally replied to a text message asking Remi sent him an email by sample check in order to make him a bank transfer, which he did on the spot. A few days pass, nothing. Rémi against him by, it is hard and he rewrote his boss, only to be told to send back an email with a sample check. Once again, without new, no transfer.

It will retry again, but radio silence, his former boss gave no sign of life. Few weeks later, Rémi happening by chance to one of our posters Reclaim your pay and we called.

He explained his situation and how we operate. So we established a game plan quickly. Direct actions to the menu. On the other hand, as we ask anyone who contacts us : a final call is suggested, but this time mentioning having contacted a solidarity union!

Well, the word union is still afraid! When Remi told his former boss that he had called and we were about to get in step, suddenly, the boss has become ben ben conciliatory and a few minutes later, he shed his unpaid wages!

All this to say, ensemble, when one is standing and we stick together, results are obtained. And the small victories, it is essential to build a little solidarity. Congratulations for your perseverance Rémi!

Solidarity,

A member of the Industrial Union of Workers.

 

* For privacy concerns, we changed his name.

/0 Comments/by