Why striking is right and why it works!
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Monday, November 28, 2011 at 3:32 AM.
Response to Councillor Ian Manning (Lib Dem East Chesterton). Who wanted these points answering about strike action.
1) Striking isn't consistent with its aims
On your first issue. Of course you are right that some people in front line emergency jobs don't participate fully in the action. But actually many people in these jobs do take action of some sort. The recent London Fire strikes are an important example of this. All FBU members take a cut in days pay when they take action but they sit on the station ( essentially going to work any way) and will respond to emergency calls (where peoples lives are in danger). The won many of there demand and in doing so have made the Government and the London Fire authority have to think again about making cuts to services that in the long run would have lost many more lives.
You implication is that strikes are counterproductive as they start to hit the mass of ordinary people. The later part of this presumption is of course true, and far more obvious and immediate when public service workers strike, and it needs serious consideration.
For the first few days of strike action the impact on other working class people is temporary and limited. None the less well observed action (like that which will take place on Wednesday) is an extremely effective demonstration of public opinion (The majority of people feel that huge injustices are being committed by the coalition - BBC polls puts 61% in support of strikes and many more like you, I hope, might support some of the aims but not the method).
However when strike action starts happening on a mass scale over longer periods of time then the workers taking action will start to go back to work on our own terms - deciding which work to do and what is necessary and what is not. What is exploitative and what is useless. Sometimes this leads to a revolution and a challenge to capitalist economics. At other points it will just challenge the worst excesses of market dictatorship - this is what happened when Argentina defaulted in the early 90's. This is also what happened in Egypt during the period in March when they got rid of Mubarak. This is the sort of democracy I support and the lack of industrial action is largely why Libya and now Syria have been much more bloody that Egypt or Tunisia where the Working Class has more of a tradition of organisation. The best account of this is the first page of Orwell's Homage to Catalonia - read the end and you will find out how a combination of Stalinism, Anarchism and Western European Imperialist interests let Franco's fascist dictatorship in.
I will repeat what I said ono you on Saturday. Liberal democracy gave working people nothing (this is one of its greatest veneers -read Gramsci on Hegemony). Everything we see as a benefit of living under this system – as opposed to naked dictatorships - have been won by strike action and/or sustained periods of protest or boycott (usually several of these things but striking is by far the most effective). Of course parliament claims that these were given to workers by companionate people in power. Here are just a few examples.
1) The end of Bondage and Serfdom - Peasants revolt.
2) Everything we know of a modern representative democracy (which I do believe are gains for ordinary people, even with its real limitations and lack of accountability). Chartist's struck in what they called Mass holidays and working class men got the vote after a wave of action before and after WW1. Women got the vote after sustained action and protest that including strike action.
3) Public housing, health and schooling was won after almost revolutionary action swept Europe after WW1. Some of this was more immediate other parts where brought in fear of repeat action after WW11.
4) The weekend and a reduction in the working week from 80 hour was won by striking Railway workers.
5) all health and safety legislation.
6) Equal pay act - see made in Dagenham for popularised and condensed version of struggle.
7) Every Pay increase and sadly more recently every concession in the reduction of wages. Teachers pay has been decreasing year on year since 2004 whilst executive pay has risen by a huge margine.
2) Striking is an agressive, bullying act
To answer your second point. Simply I think you stand on the wrong side of a clear class divide and I would argue this is against your own interests (unless you are sitting on lots and lots of wealth)
Striking as you are describing it is not a bullying act. It is most often the act of people who are exploited and pushed to the limit. I wish that people took strike action more readily as we would live in a much faired society. As it is most people are very trusting and extremely hard working. They have to be provoked, pushed and bullied to the extreme before they take collective action and then unfortunately more often that not they don’t.
On Wednesday you will see people taking to the streets who work hideous hours, putting their mental and physical health at risk and who will most would go the extra mile to do the job properly. They will not just be taking action because they risk having their pensions saving stolen to pay for bankers speculation, but because this is the last straw in a process that has been going on since Thatcher came to power (this is when the gap between rich and poor started to widen).
The real bully’s are those who run the large private investment banks. They have been on strike since Leman Brothers went down. Their stike is real bullying and utterly undemocratic ( but I’m afraid always the end result of capitalism and Liberal Economics which is not compatible with democracy). Their strike is an investment strike, they are holding back capital and forcing the poorest to pay for the crisis that was of their making, so they can make the unstable system profitable again for a short period of time . They hold ordinary people and our governments to ransom as a result - they have even chosen the prime ministers of Greece and Italy.
I hope that you come down to Parkers Piece on Wednesday and talk to some of the people who are taking action. My hard left views will not be representative of those involved. In fact a large number will have voted for the Lib Dems. These will on the whole be people who feel (rightly) that a huge injustice is being committed against themselves but more importantly against their Co-workers.
All out N30
1) Striking isn't consistent with its aims
On your first issue. Of course you are right that some people in front line emergency jobs don't participate fully in the action. But actually many people in these jobs do take action of some sort. The recent London Fire strikes are an important example of this. All FBU members take a cut in days pay when they take action but they sit on the station ( essentially going to work any way) and will respond to emergency calls (where peoples lives are in danger). The won many of there demand and in doing so have made the Government and the London Fire authority have to think again about making cuts to services that in the long run would have lost many more lives.
You implication is that strikes are counterproductive as they start to hit the mass of ordinary people. The later part of this presumption is of course true, and far more obvious and immediate when public service workers strike, and it needs serious consideration.
For the first few days of strike action the impact on other working class people is temporary and limited. None the less well observed action (like that which will take place on Wednesday) is an extremely effective demonstration of public opinion (The majority of people feel that huge injustices are being committed by the coalition - BBC polls puts 61% in support of strikes and many more like you, I hope, might support some of the aims but not the method).
However when strike action starts happening on a mass scale over longer periods of time then the workers taking action will start to go back to work on our own terms - deciding which work to do and what is necessary and what is not. What is exploitative and what is useless. Sometimes this leads to a revolution and a challenge to capitalist economics. At other points it will just challenge the worst excesses of market dictatorship - this is what happened when Argentina defaulted in the early 90's. This is also what happened in Egypt during the period in March when they got rid of Mubarak. This is the sort of democracy I support and the lack of industrial action is largely why Libya and now Syria have been much more bloody that Egypt or Tunisia where the Working Class has more of a tradition of organisation. The best account of this is the first page of Orwell's Homage to Catalonia - read the end and you will find out how a combination of Stalinism, Anarchism and Western European Imperialist interests let Franco's fascist dictatorship in.
I will repeat what I said ono you on Saturday. Liberal democracy gave working people nothing (this is one of its greatest veneers -read Gramsci on Hegemony). Everything we see as a benefit of living under this system – as opposed to naked dictatorships - have been won by strike action and/or sustained periods of protest or boycott (usually several of these things but striking is by far the most effective). Of course parliament claims that these were given to workers by companionate people in power. Here are just a few examples.
1) The end of Bondage and Serfdom - Peasants revolt.
2) Everything we know of a modern representative democracy (which I do believe are gains for ordinary people, even with its real limitations and lack of accountability). Chartist's struck in what they called Mass holidays and working class men got the vote after a wave of action before and after WW1. Women got the vote after sustained action and protest that including strike action.
3) Public housing, health and schooling was won after almost revolutionary action swept Europe after WW1. Some of this was more immediate other parts where brought in fear of repeat action after WW11.
4) The weekend and a reduction in the working week from 80 hour was won by striking Railway workers.
5) all health and safety legislation.
6) Equal pay act - see made in Dagenham for popularised and condensed version of struggle.
7) Every Pay increase and sadly more recently every concession in the reduction of wages. Teachers pay has been decreasing year on year since 2004 whilst executive pay has risen by a huge margine.
2) Striking is an agressive, bullying act
To answer your second point. Simply I think you stand on the wrong side of a clear class divide and I would argue this is against your own interests (unless you are sitting on lots and lots of wealth)
Striking as you are describing it is not a bullying act. It is most often the act of people who are exploited and pushed to the limit. I wish that people took strike action more readily as we would live in a much faired society. As it is most people are very trusting and extremely hard working. They have to be provoked, pushed and bullied to the extreme before they take collective action and then unfortunately more often that not they don’t.
On Wednesday you will see people taking to the streets who work hideous hours, putting their mental and physical health at risk and who will most would go the extra mile to do the job properly. They will not just be taking action because they risk having their pensions saving stolen to pay for bankers speculation, but because this is the last straw in a process that has been going on since Thatcher came to power (this is when the gap between rich and poor started to widen).
The real bully’s are those who run the large private investment banks. They have been on strike since Leman Brothers went down. Their stike is real bullying and utterly undemocratic ( but I’m afraid always the end result of capitalism and Liberal Economics which is not compatible with democracy). Their strike is an investment strike, they are holding back capital and forcing the poorest to pay for the crisis that was of their making, so they can make the unstable system profitable again for a short period of time . They hold ordinary people and our governments to ransom as a result - they have even chosen the prime ministers of Greece and Italy.
I hope that you come down to Parkers Piece on Wednesday and talk to some of the people who are taking action. My hard left views will not be representative of those involved. In fact a large number will have voted for the Lib Dems. These will on the whole be people who feel (rightly) that a huge injustice is being committed against themselves but more importantly against their Co-workers.
All out N30
Just some of the surface car parks off Newmarket Road!
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Tuesday, May 10, 2011 at 9:14 AM.
Our Council Planning Committee (LIB DEMs) need to be utterly ashamed of themselves.
They clearly don't care about this bit of town or the environment!
We need better transport and underground parking. Then this area cound be houses and parks!!
View Houses before Retail/Carparks in a larger map
Don't hand our Schools to the private sector!
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Friday, March 18, 2011 at 3:15 PM.
Heads and Governors in Cambridgeshire schools who are falling over themselves to take up the new academy status are either naive or highly deceitful. They paint a picture of themselves as standing up for local schools and communities. They have either swallowed or are promoting David Camerons 'localism' mantra - which is a euphemism for handing public assets to the private sector and opening up new markets.
The academies bill is pushing schools to set up as businesses and it endangers the whole concept of the community schooling. Schools will be competitng against one another and will sink or swim. To be successful the new school businesses will have to expand to meet economies of scale, those that don’t will be taken over. The accountability of schools to their parents and students, already limited, will be virtually nonexistent and those with specific educational, emotional and behavioural needs will feel it hardest.
The real term funding for all schools is being reduced and that is partly why some heads are now fighting each other over the few extra scraps being top sliced to academies. The ‘extra’ funding is comming from other schools and central services. Many Schools will still struggle and the Governors, many of whom are already out of their depth, will now be personally responsible and fearing the loss of their own houses will hand the school over to others to run. This might not be the next School up the road but one of the vast edu-businesses who are licking their lips at the prospect of running hundreds of schools for profit. Heads and governers who value education as a right should resist the acadamies shock docterine and stay with the local autority and fight to make it better.
http://www.antiacademies.org.uk/
The academies bill is pushing schools to set up as businesses and it endangers the whole concept of the community schooling. Schools will be competitng against one another and will sink or swim. To be successful the new school businesses will have to expand to meet economies of scale, those that don’t will be taken over. The accountability of schools to their parents and students, already limited, will be virtually nonexistent and those with specific educational, emotional and behavioural needs will feel it hardest.
The real term funding for all schools is being reduced and that is partly why some heads are now fighting each other over the few extra scraps being top sliced to academies. The ‘extra’ funding is comming from other schools and central services. Many Schools will still struggle and the Governors, many of whom are already out of their depth, will now be personally responsible and fearing the loss of their own houses will hand the school over to others to run. This might not be the next School up the road but one of the vast edu-businesses who are licking their lips at the prospect of running hundreds of schools for profit. Heads and governers who value education as a right should resist the acadamies shock docterine and stay with the local autority and fight to make it better.
http://www.antiacademies.org.uk/
Cambridge City MP supports post privatisation and implies pensions are unsustainable!
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Thursday, March 03, 2011 at 1:47 AM.
It appears that Julian Huppert is yet another one who does not understand the basic issues around the Postal Service. He says in his response below that the volume of mail is dropping. This is wrong on two accounts. Firstly if he cared to visit the sorting or deliveries office in cambridge and spoke to those who deliver the mail he would find out that they are working at capacity. Secondly the volume of mail on the UK road (across all carries) has massively increase. It doesn't take a genius to work this out. Junk mail is on the rise and royal mail currently delivers this at a loss or at best the profit from this service goes to down sorting houses that are privately owned. And of course the internet, through online shopping, has increased the need to delivery and distribution networks. Julian Huppert spent all day yesterday discussing cycling in the city of Cambridge yet he can not grasp that hundreds of different mail distributors add traffic to our roads and undermine the public mail infrastructure that is the most efficient and environmentally sound way of getting post to our doors.
With regards the Pension - well Gordon Brown took 5billion out of the postal scheme in 1997 and has not put it back. Postal workers, like everyone else deserve good pensions.
From the Office of Julian Huppert Member of Parliament for Cambridge House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA Telephone 01223 304421 Email julianhuppertmp@gmail.com 02 March 2011 Dear Tom, Thank you for contacting me about the future of the postal services.
The Government published the Postal Services Bill on the 13th October
which sets out its vision for the future of the Royal Mail and the
Post Office. I understand that there are concerns over the proposed
changes. However, I hope you will allow me to explain why I believe
these are changes for the better.
The Royal Mail and the Post Office are two different businesses, which
require different approaches.
The network of over 11,500 Post Offices
is enormously valued by the public. The Liberal Democrats have
campaigned against post office closures for years. That is why the
network is not for sale and there will be no further programme of
closures. Instead, new ideas have been proposed to sustain this unique
national asset. The Government is proposing that, in time, the Post
Office could be converted into a mutual structure. This would mean
handing the ownership and running of the Post Office over to
employees, sub postmasters and communities, in a similar manner to
success stories like the John Lewis Partnership or the Co-operative
Group.
The Royal Mail, which collects and delivers your letters, is facing
business environment that is vastly different from twenty or thirty
years ago; mail volumes are far lower in the digital age, there are
more competitors who have been able to devise new, more efficient
working methods and there is scope to integrate new technology. The
only way to save it for the future is to bring in new private capital
to drive modernisation. The Postal Services Bill will also provide the
employees of the Royal Mail with greater security, over their pensions
and also the future of their employer.
They are facing a multi-billion
pound pension deficit but pensions will now be safeguarded in a public
sector scheme.
Overall, I believe that the Postal Services Bill is the best way to
secure the future of these two organisations by enabling the Royal
Mail and the Post Office to meet the new challenges they face in
today’s world.
I hope this helps to clarify my position but please feel free to get
in touch if you wish to discuss this matter further.
Yours sincerely, Julian Huppert MP Member of Parliament for Cambridge
Labels: Environment, Huppert, Pensions, Royal Mail
Left electoral project for Cambridge
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Sunday, October 25, 2009 at 2:27 PM.
Following on from our successful initial meetings in July and October, at which there was a consensus to move forward with a local electoral project, we will be meeting again on Monday November the 2nd. A room in the Friends Meeting House (Jesus Lane) has been booked from 7.30pm - 9.00pm. The items we agreed to discuss are a manifesto, a constitution and a name. A draft document has been produced tofor the meeting. If you would like a copy or want to submit other documents then please contact us.
Please invite other people to the meeting who you feel would be sympathetic to the project. If you can't make it to the meeting then let me know and I will make sure that notes of the meeting are sent to you.
Please invite other people to the meeting who you feel would be sympathetic to the project. If you can't make it to the meeting then let me know and I will make sure that notes of the meeting are sent to you.
Support the troops - bring them home!
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on Monday, October 12, 2009 at 9:22 AM.
Please watch this video and then come to the stop the war meeting and Demo (see below)
Thursday 15th October, 7.30pm
Cambridge Stop the War Public Meeting
Afghanistan – Troops Home
Keynes Hall (enter via Kings Lane)
Speakers:
Adrian Clarke – Falkland’s veteran and Fire Brigades Union Regional Secretary
Daud Abdullah – Muslim Council of Britain
Andrew Burgin – Stop the War
Saturday 24th October
Stop the War Demo
TROOPS HOME FROM AFGHANISTAN
London
Coaches from Cambridge £3/£7/£10
Call: 07841657222
Thursday 15th October, 7.30pm
Cambridge Stop the War Public Meeting
Afghanistan – Troops Home
Keynes Hall (enter via Kings Lane)
Speakers:
Adrian Clarke – Falkland’s veteran and Fire Brigades Union Regional Secretary
Daud Abdullah – Muslim Council of Britain
Andrew Burgin – Stop the War
Saturday 24th October
Stop the War Demo
TROOPS HOME FROM AFGHANISTAN
London
Coaches from Cambridge £3/£7/£10
Call: 07841657222
Following on from our successful initial meeting last July we agreed to meet again on Tuesday October 6th. A room in the Friends Meeting House (Jesus Lane) has been booked from 7.30pm - 9.00pm. The items we need to discuss are:
Are we agreed that a united left alternative in the up and coming general election and the local elections in Cambridge is a good project for us?;
What would be the programme such a united left would stand on?;
Are there any other initiatives we could jointly work on?
Please invite other people to the meeting who you feel would be sympathetic to the project. If you can't make it to the meeting then let me know and I will make sure that notes of the meeting are sent to you.
Are we agreed that a united left alternative in the up and coming general election and the local elections in Cambridge is a good project for us?;
What would be the programme such a united left would stand on?;
Are there any other initiatives we could jointly work on?
Please invite other people to the meeting who you feel would be sympathetic to the project. If you can't make it to the meeting then let me know and I will make sure that notes of the meeting are sent to you.
Join The Cambridge Coach to RAGE AGINST NEW LABOUR
0 Comments Published by Tom Woodcock on at 1:56 AM.
Protest at Labour Party Conference in BrightonSUNDAY 27th SEPTEMBER for:
JOBS,PEACE & EDUCATION
Cambridge TUC Coach leaves Queens Road (The Backs) at 8.30am – return journey leaves Brighton at 5.30pm
Tickets Cost £2 Unwaged/£5Waged/£10 Solidarity (get your group or union to sponsor seats) Contact: woodcocktom@hotmail.com
