"return to 70s militancy"

[Lyev]

Now teachers and firemen threaten strikes in return to 1970s militancy

By Laura Clark, Education Correspondent (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/search.html?s=y&authornamef=Laura+Clark,+Education+Correspondent)

Last updated at 12:10 AM on 18th September 2010
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/17/article-1312974-0B3BD90B000005DC-294_233x345.jpgChris Keates, the NASUWT's general secretary, warns that a new wave of co-ordinated industrial action would be the unavoidable consequence of budget cuts.

Teachers, classroom assistants and firemen yesterday became the latest public sector workers to threaten a return to 1970s militancy.

Classroom unions are gearing up for the first co-ordinated national strikes in a generation to fight cuts.

And firefighters in London voted by more than nine to one yesterday for industrial action in a row over new contracts.

The revelations follow news that immigration officers have voted to stage a walk-out at passport control and binmen are threatening to ballot for a strike that would see a return to rubbish being left in the streets.

Millions of pupils would be affected by mass walk-outs which could be staged by the end of the current school year. Even head teachers could take part, it emerged.

The three main teaching unions, the NUT, NASUWT and ATL, are increasingly working together as they challenge the Coalition over plans for free schools and semi-private academies. They last walked out on a joint national strike during the 1980s.

Chris Keates, general secretary of the NASUWT, said co-ordinated action would be unavoidable if education budgets were cut, leading to redundancies, poor pay offers and assaults on pensions, she told the Times Educational Supplement.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/09/17/article-1312974-004D412E00000258-821_468x286.jpg
Learning from the past: Teachers on a one-day NUT strike in 2002. Millions of pupils would be affected if the three main unions NUT, NASUWT and ATL co-ordinate a mass walk-out

Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers, said: 'Members are going to be extremely angry when these cuts hit home.'

Christine Blower, general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said she would discuss combined industrial action if faced with 'grave problems'.

More...


Unions conspire to take us back to 1970s as immigration workers set to go on strike (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312788/Unions-conspire-1970s-immigration-workers-set-strike.html)
Ministers hit out at police 'scare stories': Budget cuts will not spark riots, insists May (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312242/Ministers-hit-police-scare-stories-Budget-cuts-spark-riots.html)

Support staff, including teaching assistants and dinner ladies, are likely to be disproportionately affected by cutbacks.

Christine McAnea, of public service union Unison, said industrial action by her members, supported by teaching unions, could potentially cause 'chaos'.

And Russell Hobby, general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said he would not 'rule anything out'.

Meanwhile, the Fire Brigades Union said its members backed disruption short of a strike by 4,014 votes to 201.

But the dispute is set to escalate after the union decided to hold another ballot of its members in London for strike action.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1312974/Now-teachers-firemen-threaten-strikes-return-1970s-militancy.html?ito=feeds-newsxml#ixzz105hQTjk3

________________________________________________

Ignore for a second that this from the Daily Mail (I originally saw it in some other newspaper, but could only seem to find it online here); are we seeing some sort of general anti-cuts movement starting to form here? We've seen predictions from various commentators as a return "to the 70s", or people echoing the anti-poll tax movement etc. It would seem as though the overwhelming consensus, in the UK at least, is that people simply don't want cuts.

Thoughts?

[IndependentCitizen]

I was talking to my politics teacher today, and he mentioned their threat to return to the 70's styled militancy. And we were both estatic at the idea that people are finally standing up, and this time round it will be in strength.

I'll be sure to stand with my college's teachers if they choose to strike.

[Lyev]

But firstly, what are the theoretical foundations for such a strike? I'll wager that such a strike, left with its existing consciousness, will be based in vague Labourism, although I'm not sure. Secondly, leading on from the first question, what would the political and economic repercussions of a such a mass action be? I.e. where will this lead? The opportunity mustn't be missed - such action cannot simply just fall away into insignificance or be defeated. It needs support, which I don't think it will get. However, it's not simply a strike over pay; as far as I can see, it's to protest against public sector cuts on the whole. This all looks promising, and, yes, it's good news, but I wouldn't so quick to react with ecstasy.

[Devrim]

There is no return to 70s levels of militancy outside of the heads of Daily Mail journalists. There is a growing militancy within the working class, but it is nowhere near 80s level let alone those of the 70s.

Devrim

[Lyev]

There is no return to 70s levels of militancy outside of the heads of Daily Mail journalists. There is a growing militancy within the working class, but it is nowhere near 80s level let alone those of the 70s.

DevrimYes, I did mention the source was somewhat biased, but trade-union representatives have said themselves we'll see a return to the 70s etc. etc. Anyway, disregarding how the Daily Mail blab on about "dangerous lefties" and such, what's your opinion on the actual event? Could something like this perhaps lead to somewhat of a restoration of the worker's movement, similar to how consciousness was in the 70s or 80s?

[Vanguard1917]

Yes, I did mention the source was somewhat biased, but trade-union representatives have said themselves we'll see a return to the 70s etc. etc. Anyway, disregarding how the Daily Mail blab on about "dangerous lefties" and such, what's your opinion on the actual event? Could something like this perhaps lead to somewhat of a restoration of the worker's movement, similar to how consciousness was in the 70s or 80s?

What is there to suggest that it will?

[Lyev]

What is there to suggest that it will?OK, well let's ignore for a second any claims that this might be a "return to 70s militancy" (which is tenuous) and just take this for what it is: several different sections from the public sector coordinating a (national?) strike in opposition to austerity which is conducive to harsher working conditions, but also a drop in the standards of these services themselves. Where do you think such an action might lead?

I guess justification for thinking this may be something on way to what the worker's movement was in the 80s and 70s in the UK is largely that this a coordinated between 2 or more services - usually a lot of strikes are isolated (esp. in UK) and therefore fall flat on their faces. I think the fact that two separate professions are uniting is a reflection of how severe this austerity is.

It seems austerity measures will only get worse; it is my belief that workers (and anyone that in fact uses public services; and that's many people) won't just let cuts happen. People don't want a drop in their standard of education, or less hospital beds or a fire-service that's inadequately equipped etc. etc. - nor, of course, do the workers that operate these services want worse pay and conditions.

[Devrim]

Could something like this perhaps lead to somewhat of a restoration of the worker's movement, similar to how consciousness was in the 70s or 80s?

No, I don't think so. I don't think that there will be a sudden jump from where we are today to a much higher level of struggle. That is not to say that it is altogether impossible though.

More likely in my opinion is a continuation of the slow return to class militancy, which has been growing over the last decade slowly, but surely.


Yes, I did mention the source was somewhat biased, but trade-union representatives have said themselves we'll see a return to the 70s etc. etc. Anyway, disregarding how the Daily Mail blab on about "dangerous lefties" and such, what's your opinion on the actual event?

Trade union leaders can talk such rubbish. I believe that Bob Crow was suggesting that people dress up as Spiderman or something. For those who can't remember the 1970s, and the winter of discontent, which was the second biggest strike wave in history, it might be worth mentioning that it was actually a reaction against the agreement on pay controls that the unions made with the government.

Devrim

[Adil3tr]

When I saw the title I thought this was about reviving groups like the Red Army Faction

[Dimentio]

You cannot simply stomp such a spirit up from the ground. It has to be there from the beginning to capitalise on it.

[stella2010]

So now the firemen is where the real struggle begins

how and who will be putting the flames of struggle out.

No firemen means more fires of war.



CODE RED MEN.


..

zen

..

[Red Brigade]

What do they mean "militancy" are teacher unions going to attack schools with moltovs or something? :confused:

[IndependentCitizen]

What do they mean "militancy" are teacher unions goo a attack schools with moltovs or something? :confused:
More walk-outs, more strikes, and hopefully more direct action.

[Lyev]

No, I don't think so. I don't think that there will be a sudden jump from where we are today to a much higher level of struggle. That is not to say that it is altogether impossible though.

More likely in my opinion is a continuation of the slow return to class militancy, which has been growing over the last decade slowly, but surely.
Your responses are very much appreciated. I suppose with someone like me, who is relatively young and hasn't really been politically active for a very long time, it's easy to get over-excited about an event like this. Are you of the opinion that a struggle like this must unfold "organically", so to speak, without much guidance from socialists at this stage in its development? I mean, what is it that we can do to help or support such an endeavour? And how did things culminate eventually so that the worker's movement in the 70s was at the consciousness that it was? What were the decisive struggles and events that lead up to such a (comparatively) high level of consciousness and militancy?

Also, a slightly wider question to anyone who wants to answer - I think a big problem with public sector strikes (in the UK at least) is that there's little or no popular support for them. I am always hearing arguments along the lines of "they're messing up things for the rest of us", or "public sector workers should just stop complaining" etc. etc.; so how do you guys defend militant strike action against such negative criticism? Thanks.

[Devrim]

Your responses are very much appreciated. I suppose with someone like me, who is relatively young and hasn't really been politically active for a very long time, it's easy to get over-excited about an event like.

I think that it quite understandable. If you talk to people in our organisation, the ICC, who were young militants when it was formed over forty years ago, they thought the revolution was coming in the next few years*.


Are you of the opinion that a struggle like this must unfold "organically", so to speak, without much guidance from socialists at this stage in its development? I mean, what is it that we can do to help or support such a struggle?

Yes, pretty much so. I also think that much of the 'guidance' from socialists plays a very negative role.


Also, a slightly wider question to anyone who wants to answer - I think a big problem with public sector strikes (in the UK at least) is that there's little or no popular support for them. I am always hearing arguments along the lines of "they're messing up things for the rest of us", or "public sector workers should just stop complaining" etc. etc.; so how do you guys defend militant strike action against such negative criticism? Thanks.

I don't know who you are hearing it from, people you know or the media, or wherever. Of course the media nearly always presents strike action as against the public interest, even when it is genuinely popular.

You have to argue it on a class basis that the conditions of all workers are linked. I'd be a bit put out to draw modern examples in the UK as I haven't lived there for a couple of decades, but when I was working there two examples would be that the defeat of the miners strike brought about a general attack on workers wages and living conditions, and how the pay increase at Ford used to set the tone for the entire working class.

The other point that is really important is that public opinion doesn't win strikes.

Devrim

*In their defence we are talking about France around the time of 68.

[Manic Impressive]

Also, a slightly wider question to anyone who wants to answer - I think a big problem with public sector strikes (in the UK at least) is that there's little or no popular support for them. I am always hearing arguments along the lines of "they're messing up things for the rest of us", or "public sector workers should just stop complaining" etc. etc.; so how do you guys defend militant strike action against such negative criticism? Thanks.

If a petty-bourgeois acquaintance criticises militant strike action to me I punch them on the nose.

Not really.

If they were arguing the case that too much money is being spent on the public sector I would counter it by saying that while money is mis-spent at the top of these organizations, the majority of workers are working unsociable or long hours with a degree of risk to personal safety or a higher than average need for training. This works fine for the "sexy" jobs which are seen as noble professions but for the council workers I would take a different line stating that the alternative to them being public sector workers would be that they are private sector workers as in the US. Then state the reasons why that would be horrendous. I would then waffle on for a few hours about the evils of capitalism
until.......
a) they get so bored they take their own life
b) they get so depressed by the realization that the world we live in is shit that they take their own life
or........
C) they put on a Guevara style beret, raise their left fist towards the sky and join the workers revolution.

[∞]

Its really a shame we pay teachers crap for all of the labor and necessity they provide for society. I'm glad they are letting their voice be heard, usually teachers are pushed aside. Due to the fact that they have no capital or power over "physical" production, and get taken advantage of. Finally its time for some of the greatest wage slaves to stand, and demand legitimacy for their labor! This is only possible with the most militant unionism to occur since the Spanish uprisings.

http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/04_01/marchDM0104_468x301.jpg
This is the start of a great victory

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTINLzRXbzvsH5GwQWSWBso6vnHhSeJw eRgRz2xSNyBLervxkM&t=1&usg=__TO5HmIIZ3U2U0rB7HTsmglvmwb0=

[Tavarisch_Mike]

First of all i dont have a overview of the political situation of brittish politics.
I do welcome such a good etempt of the workers in public sectors, i wish them good luck and ofcourse i hope that it will spread to more sectors.

But we need to have a materialistic explination on the militant of the 70-80s, during that time the economical boom was high in all industrialized countrys, unemployment was low and those things tend to make workers more militant, wich you can see in the big amount of wild cat strikes and such things happening in all of the western world.Some will also argue that even if they dont support what had becommed the system of the eastern bloc, its existence had a roll as counterweight to the benefit of workers in the west, since it was a reminder for the capitalists that one day the proletariat might rise, so when negotiating with unions they werent so hard to convince about higher salarys then comparing to now.

[Devrim]

But we need to have a materialistic explination on the militant of the 70-80s, during that time the economical boom was high in all industrialized countrys, unemployment was low and those things tend to make workers more militant,

This is just not true. UK unemployment was officially* higher than it is today at points in the early 80s after rising throughout the 1970s. The same was true in other 'industrialised countries' as this figure for the US shows with unemployment hitting a peak in the early 1980s.:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9c/US_Unemployment_1890-2009.gif

Devrim

*I suspect that it was probably really lower as governments have become more expert in excluding people from the statistics.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

Wow how wrong i had, i thought that the post ww2 economical bood came to al first world countries and did last until the middle of the 80s.
Do you have any other explination ore theory on why the militant among the working class was so high then?

[Devrim]

Wow how wrong i had, i thought that the post ww2 economical bood came to al first world countries and did last until the middle of the 80s.

It is called the 'thirty golden years' by economists in Europe though it is not a phrase that you hear often in English, and that puts it as coming to an end in 1975. Bu that time, however, the cracks were distinctly there, and had begun to show about a decade before.


Do you have any other explination ore theory on why the militant among the working class was so high then?

I'd put it down to the return of the crisis, and the remergence of the working class as a political force. I'd say that the period continued to its high put at the turn of the 80s and then fought a fighting retreat through the 80s, before the terrible years of the 1990s.

Worker militancy has been on the rise for just less than a decade now although the onset of open crisis again caused a temporary set back to it.

Devrim

[DWI]

First of all i dont have a overview of the political situation of brittish politics.
I do welcome such a good etempt of the workers in public sectors, i wish them good luck and ofcourse i hope that it will spread to more sectors.

But we need to have a materialistic explination on the militant of the 70-80s, during that time the economical boom was high in all industrialized countrys, unemployment was low and those things tend to make workers more militant, wich you can see in the big amount of wild cat strikes and such things happening in all of the western world.Some will also argue that even if they dont support what had becommed the system of the eastern bloc, its existence had a roll as counterweight to the benefit of workers in the west, since it was a reminder for the capitalists that one day the proletariat might rise, so when negotiating with unions they werent so hard to convince about higher salarys then comparing to now.
Britain was really ceasing to be a first world country at that point, not booming.

[stella2010]

What do they mean "militancy" are teacher unions going to attack schools with moltovs or something? :confused:

No you idiot.

It means to militarize yourself.

How is your country defended.

Thats what YOU DO.
THAT IS the way to do it.

If there is something better then thats how to do it.

ALSO

Think about what your doing.


..

[Reznov]

Is there an actual date planned for these strikes?

Or are they just making threats right now?