900 Oil Refinery Workers Sacked

[Pogue]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8108434.stm


Total sacks 900 oil plant workers


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45945000/jpg/_45945975_-5.jpg Sacked contractors are urging workers at other sites to take action

Nearly 900 workers constructing a new plant at the Lindsey oil refinery in Lincolnshire have been sacked, following unofficial strike action. About 1,200 contract workers walked out last week in a dispute over 51 redundancies. They claim an agreement not to axe any jobs had been broken.
Total, which owns the plant, said no such agreement was in place.
Managers had asked staff to return to work, but late on Thursday confirmed "with regret" hundreds had been sacked.
A group has gathered outside the main gates of the Lindsey refinery, waving placards in protest.
'Sympathy strikes'
A Unite spokesman said: "We are extremely concerned about the ramifications of the employers' actions.
"We are urging all parties to get back around the negotiating table to resolve this situation."
GMB general secretary Paul Kenney backed the call, saying: "Total have not tried to resolve this dispute, they sought to escalate it and they have sought to victimise people.
"I'm appealing to Total to actually come to the table and help the unions resolve it."
The action at Lindsey had spread over the past few days to other power stations at Drax and Eggborough in Yorkshire, Ratcliffe in Nottinghamshire and BP's Saltend refinery, near Hull.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gifhttp://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/start_quote_rb.gif Negotiations over illegal strikes cannot commence until the workforce has returned to work http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/img/v3/end_quote_rb.gif


Total statement

Workers have also walked out at the BOC oxygen plant at S****horpe, Fiddlers Ferry in Cheshire and Aberthaw in south Wales.
Reports suggest workers at various sites across the country have walked out in sympathy again after hearing news of the Lindsey sackings.
Text messages are reportedly being sent to workers to encourage them to take action.
One of the sacked Lindsey workers told the Press Association: "We are asking for support from workers across the country which I am sure will be given. Total will soon realise they have unleashed a monster.
"It is disgraceful that this has happened without any consultation. It is also unlawful and it makes me feel sick."
Another sacked contract worker, John McEwan, said: "We were left no option.
"If we have to defend the rights of our men on these sites and our pay and conditions then we have to do that."
The Lindsey workers had been building a new plant next to the existing site, but withdrew their labour last week in protest at a sub-contractor axing 51 jobs while another employer on the site was hiring people.
The BBC's Paul Murphy, who is at the scene, said: "The workers believe that the sacked workers should have been transferred to those new jobs and they were not."
'Frustrating'
Planned talks between unions and employers aimed at breaking the deadlock stalled on Tuesday.
In a statement, Total said the workers had been involved in "an unofficial, illegal walk out" that was "repudiated" by both Unite and the GMB union.
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/45903000/jpg/_45903417_lindseyoilrefinery2.jpg The Lindsey refinery is owned by French company Total

"Total can confirm, with regret, that our contractors have now started the process of ending the current employment contracts for their workforce on the HDS-3 construction project," the company said.
Total said it had "repeatedly sought to encourage the workforce to return to work so that proper negotiations can take place".
"This is in line with the union and industry agreed process that negotiations over illegal strikes cannot commence until the workforce has returned to work.
"It is frustrating and disappointing that these attempts have failed."
Total said any contract staff who wanted to return to the site could reapply for positions until Monday.
The construction project will remain closed in the meantime.
Total added that the 51 disputed redundancies were necessary because the relevant part of the project had been completed.
"That is the nature of the construction industry and is normal industry practice," it said.
The Lindsey refinery suffered strikes earlier this year over the employment of non-UK workers.



This is why we need storng unions.

[Manxboz]

This is the message my socalist party district leader sent me

"To all north-west Socialist Party members...
News last night - 900 construction workers sacked at Lindsey Oil Refinery. The employers are punishing the workers who defended jobs and the rate-for-the-job through striking in Jan 2009.

Yesterday the solidarity action spread in support of the 50-odd Shaw workers (sub-contractor at Lindsey) that had been laid off. Now Total, who run Lindsey, have gone on the offensive sacking 900 workers.

We have played a leading role in this strike, and it has now escalated dramatically! We urgently need solidarity messages of support sent to [email protected] or texts sent to 07706 710 041. Please send them yourselves but also try and get others including, if you're in a union, leading figures in your trade union.


North-west SP members are at Fiddlers Ferry, and just heard this morning that Stanlow Oil Refinery is out as well. If you can go to either during this morning or Monday please let me know.

Leaflets attached for info, circulation to all construction workers, and printing off to take to pickets.
Comradely,
Hugh.



Sites on strike yesterday in support of Lindsey Oil Refinery:
Fiddlers Ferry
Drax
Eggborough
BP Saltend
South Hook
Aberthaw
Ratcliffe
S****horpe BOC
West Burton
Didcott
Staythorpe "

We should all send our support

[JammyDodger]

All our groups and individuals should boycott there stations too.
(if Unite etc got off there arse an advised this to all there members ahem)

Ive emailed and texted, also fired off a quick letter to them and to two newspapers, (wont do a lot, but every little counts and im limited)

Will

[nuisance]

(if Unite etc got off there arse an advised this to all there members ahem)
Unite have condemned the strikes because they claim that they are 'politically motivated'.

[cyu]

Unite have condemned the strikes because they claim that they are 'politically motivated'.

What does that mean exactly? You're not allowed to want to change the economic situation because that would be politically motivated? Is it even possible to change the economic situation without changing politics? If you're not going to try to change anything about the economic situation of the employees, what is the point of having a union anyway? So your union "leaders" can lick the boots of those who have bribed them and force everyone else to do the same?

[JammyDodger]

Unite have condemned the strikes because they claim that they are 'politically motivated'.

In that case im inclined to condemn Unite, that many workers do not down tools and lose pay on a whim.

Unite must have a back passage like a clowns pocket the amount of time they offer it to the enemy.

[rednordman]

Unite have condemned the strikes because they claim that they are 'politically motivated'.Interesting...are they reffering to the creeping presence of the BNP or has the proletarian finally risen;):)!!

[Forward Union]

Interesting...are they reffering to the creeping presence of the BNP or has the proletarian finally risen;):)!!

BNP have been continually kicked off the picketts.

[rednordman]

BNP have been continually kicked off the picketts.:lol:Well if thats the case will someone please explain how they have become politically motivated and as a result Unite have pulled out? + I always thought that Unite already had a big socialist presence in it? (i may be mistaken) So are they not being a little bit contradictory?

[h&s]

What does that mean exactly? You're not allowed to want to change the economic situation because that would be politically motivated? Is it even possible to change the economic situation without changing politics? If you're not going to try to change anything about the economic situation of the employees, what is the point of having a union anyway? So your union "leaders" can lick the boots of those who have bribed them and force everyone else to do the same?

I think they have said that because unions have to condemn 'illegal' actions like this in the UK otherwise, by law, they can be punished for supporting them.
From what I've read today the unions are very actively involved in this as it was arranged by the shop stewards - the elected union representatives. They are the ones sending out the flying pickets and texting comrades accross the country. They are just avoiding officially including the union to avoid penalties being imposed on them.

[cyu]

They are just avoiding officially including the union to avoid penalties being imposed on them.

Law does not necessarily mean justice. If you're not willing to put justice before the law, then you will never get justice. Slavery was legal, Jim Crow was legal, miscegenation was illegal, heck even strikes were illegal at one point.

Yes, I do understand it means less paperwork for Unite and maybe they can escape a fine or two. They are free to go to their slave master with hat in hand, "Please sir, may I have some more?" or they can push the envelope. I would just be sad if the entire history of the UK labor movement from here on out followed the example of cowards.

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

Simply outrageous!
I hope the Workers will take any action necessary to defend their rights.

[K.Bullstreet]

There have been continued walkouts across the country in solidarity with the sacked strikers. There was also a demonstration today with workers burning their dismissal notices; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8111648.stm

There is a planned mass rally at the site tomorrow, with thousands expected. It would be good obviously if people near there could get along and show their support! Continued militancy and avoiding a sell-out situation by the Unions is paramount.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

That is a completely sickening statement from bastards at Unite. I cannot understand what they expect the workers to do. Go home, have a cup of tea and aceept they have been sacked for the 'greater good' because to strike and fight against being wrongfully sacked would be 'politically motivated'.

[Pogue]

3000 workers out in solidarity strikes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8111648.stm

[K.Bullstreet]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8114154.stm Here's a new update from the Beeb. It says talks are starting, but Total are only observing as they are not responsible for the dismissals, unions are saying different.

There's a short video at the start of a 1,000 strong demo at the site today.'Workers of the World Unite' looks a lot better than 'British Jobs for British Workers.' :)

[Patchd]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8120076.stm

Deal reached in Oil Refinery row.

The agreement follows talks between union leaders and employers of contract staff at the North Lincolnshire site.
Unions said the deal involved the reinstatement of 647 workers sacked for taking unofficial strike action and would be put to the workers on Monday.

[K.Bullstreet]

They had been planning a demo at the Total HQ in Paris, which I think would have been a good move.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8118147.stm
We'll see where it goes after it goes to the workers on monday I guess. I've been in contact with an LOR worker, will be interesting to see what he has to say about the deal.

[cyu]

Unions said the deal involved the reinstatement of 647 workers sacked


647 does not equal 900. 647 also does not equal 900 + 51.

Let's say the deal does go through, for one reason or another. If I were the reinstated employees, I'd just let the remaining ex-employees come in anyway, and let them continue to collect their paychecks.

...then again, I'd encourage them to do more than just allow re-entry of old employees, but I'd be encouraging them to ignore all of the executives' other commands as well.

[cyu]

...interesting... from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8118147.stm it says:

Total announced that 647 construction workers had been sacked for taking part in unofficial strikes.

So was it 647 or 900 who lost their jobs? Anyway, regardless of the numbers, you know what the Three Musketeers say, "All for one, one for all." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unus_pro_omnibus,_omnes_pro_uno)

[cyu]

Here's some reporting that makes it more clear:

Exerpts from http://socialistworld.net/eng/2009/06/2602.html

All the workers’ demands have been met. The bosses’ 647 dismissals have been withdrawn, the 51 redundancies rescinded and all employees have been guaranteed a minimum of four week’s work – what they would have got if Blackett and Charlton had taken them on – i.e. as much work as is probably available.

This victory has been achieved by the militancy and determination of LOR workers taking unofficial strike action and by the solidarity action of at least 30 other sites, including power stations and petrochemical plants. This exerted enormous pressure on the full-time officials of the GMB and Unite union, who while repudiating the unofficial action, were then forced to give the strike official dispute status once the 647 were dismissed.

There are many important lessons of this dispute. The anti-trade union laws were brushed aside by the determined strike action and the solidarity. This was the third time, this year, that engineering construction workers have taken illegal action.

Another important lesson is about the role of the shop stewards and strike committee and the role of the daily mass meetings where all workers were able to participate in the discussion and ask questions.

It is important to highlight that the unofficial action was clearly solid and strong and that was the basis for the official backing, which was then a source of confidence for the workers.

However this victory is not the final word. The battle is won but not the war. The employers still have their sights on breaking the national agreement and the trade unions. But this victory has strengthened the workers’ resistance. The employers, both Total and the sub-contractors, completely underestimated the workforce. The mass sackings made it clear that the dispute was about effective trade unionism and the national agreement.

The employers have completely capitulated but still want to break the national agreement. However, they have been weakened.

[Patchd]

647 does not equal 900. 647 also does not equal 900 + 51.

Let's say the deal does go through, for one reason or another. If I were the reinstated employees, I'd just let the remaining ex-employees come in anyway, and let them continue to collect their paychecks.

...then again, I'd encourage them to do more than just allow re-entry of old employees, but I'd be encouraging them to ignore all of the executives' other commands as well.

Sorry, with all due respect, I think you're mistaken, 647 workers were made redundant, not the original planned 900. In addition, the 51 are expected to be given jobs too.

There's an article on the AF blog about this:

http://afed.org.uk/blog/workplace/101-lindsey-strikes-again.html

[cyu]

647 workers were made redundant, not the original planned 900. In addition, the 51 are expected to be given jobs too.



Yeah, see the post right above yours =]

[Patchd]

Haha cool ;) No worries :thumbup1:

[K.Bullstreet]

The workers have voted tp go back to work and have accepted the deal put forward by the unions. An LOR worker I've made contact with said it's "a small victory in part of a wider struggle."
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8123545.stm

[Fictional]

Anyone know the exact cause of the sacking?

[K.Bullstreet]

Cause of which sackings Fictional?

The 51 guys that were originally made redundant is a little more complex than just being sacked. Apparently it's the done thing on the sites that when a different construction contractors are hired to do a job on the site then it's simply a change of name, it's the same workers in different overalls effectively. However, these guys were not offered this option or given the job, and when pressed why the bosses basically said they were trouble makers. Presumably for their involvement in the strikes earlier this year.

There was then obviously the wildcats in support of them, to which the employers responded by sacking the whole project force - the 647 workers.

I think that's generally the jist of it, that's how I interpreted it anyway. Maybe somebody else can explain better...:)

[Fictional]

Ahh, thanks.
That's alot of people to sack just because the original 51 trouble makers.
Wouldn't there be a rather large work delay (certain amount of oil) not hitting the capital and what not, causing the oil prices to rise some more? or is that nothing to do with it?

[K.Bullstreet]

Well the term 'trouble makers' was apparently used by the bosses, I prefer to use to term concious workers.

These guys were engineering construction workers, building a new part of the refinery. They weren't actual oil refiners, so the oil wasn't effected I don't think. However, according to Total the strikes have set work back by a few months and have cost an extra £85m.

[Angry Young Man]

Why is this not reported on the 6pm news? It's from the BBC website.

[Patchd]

It's easier to put it up on the website, people don't check sites as much, whereas the TV news gets proper publicity ... mainstream doesn't think much of workers taking action to support their fellow workers. Thanks for the answers too KB :)

[Angry Young Man]

But even in the totally cynical outlook, it might affect electricity supply and fuel prices, which in the context of the winter fuel poverty rates may be deemed quite important

[Angry Young Man]

But even in the totally cynical outlook, it might affect electricity supply and fuel prices, which in the context of the winter fuel poverty rates may be deemed quite important

[Patchd]

But even in the totally cynical outlook, it might affect electricity supply and fuel prices, which in the context of the winter fuel poverty rates may be deemed quite important
I'm guessing TV space is for top priority stuff too, as it's limited. Still, I would be more dubious, and say that although they could have attempted to spin this differently, giving workers an idea (spontaneous walkouts in support of one another against their bosses) may not work to their favour ideologically speaking.

Their attempt at spinning the Iranian protests to suffice British Imperialist interests would probably be high on the agenda at the moment. :)