The fine line of activism
Trevor at Solidarity blogs the emergence of an anti-shoppies’ union in Victoria, known as Unite. It’s an interesting development that isn’t exclusively good news.
Unite’s website, a quasi-blog made up of mostly media releases, states:
Whilst the campaigning of UNITE did lead to improvements in the wages and conditions for some workers in Melbourne’s inner suburbs, it became clear that much more than a lobby group was required to take on the massive issues faced by workers in the fast food and retails sectors.
That is why in May 2006 UNITE decided to turn the campaign into a trade union covering fast food and retail workers. The fast food and retail industries are a source of employment for thousands of young people. The life of a worker in these industries usually means casual hours, low pay, workplace bullying, and unsafe work practices.
Simon Main, a Unite organiser was quoted in the Herald Sun:
“We think this will be a massive shot across the bows for John Howard and his new laws,” he said.
“We will be a fighting union and like Unite in New Zealand it’s not done by sucking up to politicians or getting distracted by Labor factional games.
“We will be hitting bosses where it most hurts, in production, whether it be by withdrawing labour or establishing a picket outside a shop.”
If this is all Unite is about it seems to me that this is rather missing the point of trade unionism. Casual fast food workers were underpaid and exploited long before March 1996, and organising around the specific legislation of WorkChoices, or ‘targetting’ supposed bad corporations, seems a bit premature.
The only justification for trade unionism is success in improving working conditions for members. Not, it should be pointed out repeatedly, improving working conditions for non-members, or aiming high before the existence of any broad support or membership.
There’s a fine line of activism and militancy. In other places, in other times and in other industries, people setting up ‘alternative’ trade unions have earned themselves a special, famous, term. One that’s reserved especially for people who put intra-union bitterness in front of any other concern.
Scabs.
This is not to say the established shoppies’ union the SDA doesn’t deserve a bit of stoush. As far as I’m concerned they’ve brought this on themselves through being as close to totally useless as it’s possible to be.
I wish the workers of Melbourne’s fast food industry well, in the knowledge that no new union can be any kind of reforming silver bullet—the only ones who can change their conditions are them themselves.
jason wrote:
They will have a massive struggle trying to recruit members in that industry.
Low-skilled, young, transient - yep, they pretty much hit all three bogeys of the trade union movement.
Combine that with the obvious chip on their shoulder about ALP involvement and you get a fairly poisonous environment for new members to join and be involved in. That works for some (just look at the bitter minority in DSP/Resistance) but not many and not enough to make a difference. Hopefully they can work on a more positive message to take to the sector.
I appreciate your scabs comment but with unions such as the SDA I don’t think that criticism holds. They actively discourage membership participation in the structures of the union and hence have only themselves to blame when others get annoyed and try something different.
A union leadership survives by having good organisers in the field who have a rapport with the members and can encourage voting the incumbants back in, not strangling all dissent before it even emerges.
B.S. Fairman (not verified) wrote:
Is this the Wobblies trying to get back in by the backdoor?
larrylaffer wrote:
Yes, this is an intriguing development. I rather suspect that this group will not do too well but if they are able to connect with some activists in the respective workplaces then they may make a difference at SDA election time.
Its a topic which has not been the subject of much of a stoush on here: what do you all think of the ‘your rights at work campaign’ thus far? Do you think Shorten is the way of the future? Stoush on comrades….
jason wrote:
I am thoroughly disappointed with the lack of direction and output from the ACTU and various Labor Councils.
But if started really venting I could crash the server so will stop right now!
Mack (not verified) wrote:
Second your comments Jason!
On a specific issue, I’m worried that with the selective uptake by some unions around marginal seats campaigns as part of YR@W that this will turn into a massive stoush about ALP preselection.
On a completely different note - trying to get the myriad of unions working together would be like trying to herd cats. Can you imagine the discussions that occurred at ACTU national exec to get all unions to agree to one national phone number as part of this campaign? (oh to have been a fly on the wall!)
Liam wrote:
The server will live, Jason. Finish your work and get fired up.
…
From a marketing point of view I think Your Rights At Work has been brilliant. It’s been hugely successful in informing people about WorkChoices, it’s gotten stacks of people wearing badges and sticking bumper stickers on their cars, vans, offices and lockers, it’s pushed a whole lot of pamphlets across desks.
Trade unions themselves (like the SDA) though need to pull the finger out, though, because it’s raised expectations about what organsing is and should be.
rooster wrote:
Agreed, Liam. Your Rights At Work has generated so much chatter and buzz (apologies for the use of marketing “lingo”) it’s been fantastic. I can’t help but notice people setting their eyes on the badge on my satchel!
The ACTU have invested a lot of money into marketing research, advertising and media spend. It’s paying dividends so far. There’s so much more that can be done with rightsatwork.com.au and other forms of union campaigning though.
jason wrote:
Liam, how much actual material have you seen come out from UnionsNSW?
The campaign is really only biting in areas like Lindsay where some dedicated unions and a trageted seat campaign have made some headway. For the rest it is an issue, but not one where there are daily or weekly reminders, or ways to get involved, etc.
Liam wrote:
Zero. Yet another argument in favour of abolishing the states.
jason wrote:
Now now. We all have bills to pay…
larrylaffer wrote:
Yes- The media attention has been good. But the ACTU is lapsing into the ALP line of campaigning and that is thinking that the media and polls will win the day. The media campaign has been about telling people whats happening and lets be frank, scarring them. You can only scare people for so long…….scared people going to work and home each night does not make for a successful campaign in my view.
Post new comment