#OccupyOakland calls for general strike, unions say ‘Sorry, we have jobs.’
October 28th 2011 · 21 Comments
If you’re going to call for a revolution, it helps to make sure that everyone’s on board with it, right? Apparently, that didn’t occur to the #OccupyOakland protesters who called for a general strike, but didn’t realize that the majority of people would rather work to pay their bills, send their kids to school and, you know, live their everyday lives.
Besides, those unions who the #OccupyOakland protesters were counting on also have contracts, which means, if they strike, they violate their contracts and can be held legally accountable.
On Thursday Occupy Oakland announced a general strike that would “shut the city down,” but while the unions have expressed support for the political movement, labor representatives said on Friday they wouldn’t be striking. Protest organizers met with labor unions to get the support of labor, which they have, but only to a point. Occupy Oakland organizer Cat Brooks told Reuters on Friday the goal of the Nov. 2 action was a total general strike. “We mean nobody goes to work, nobody goes to school, we shut the city down,” she said. But representatives from the Peralta Federation of Teachers and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union both said their organizations wouldn’t call a strike for their members.
“It’s virtually impossible for any union to endorse a work-stoppage because all contracts have no-strike clauses, which unions are bound to honor. However most of the unions on the west coast, including ILWU, have been involved in supporting the Occupy Wall Street movement in their local communities,” ILWU communications director Craig Merrilees said.
Sorry, protesters, this isn’t Egypt (yet). While the unions may be with you in spirit, but that only goes so far.
________________
“I bring reason to your ears, and, in language as plain as ABC, hold up truth to your eyes.” Thomas Paine, December 23, 1776
Tags: #OccupyOakland, #OccupyWallSt, General strike, ILWU, Union Strike
By Editor
Twitter
Facebook
The tone of this article is unnecessarily snarky. Why is it that employers have the power to slip “no strike” clauses into their workers’ contracts, with no accountability for themselves? Why is it that they can layoff and fire masses of people and withhold fair salaries and benefits? Yet, the people can’t strike. The people won’t strike because the unions are under the thumbs of the corporations. This is exactly what we’re fighting against. “Spirit” isn’t enough, and there is great strength in numbers. Of course, nobody wants anyone to lose their jobs and be unable to feed their kids, but we NEED to fight for fairness in this system or things will stay the same. No, they’ll get worse. We will either sell ourselves body and soul, as we already do, to these businesses and institutions, or we will lose the opportunity to work altogether. Just a thought.
Very simply, the “no strike” clause is a trade off for a “no lockout” clause. If unions wish to have the ability to strike at whim (as they did ‘back in the day’), then the other side of the coin will present itself: The ability for those unions to be locked out.
As opposed to that occurring, rather than striking whenever they have a grievance (as unions used to do), a system called grievance/arbitration was developed in labor relations.
It wasn’t a “under the thumb” issue, it was a mutual tradeoff.
Maybe some Union reps could give the Occupiers a training on union law and history?
unions were better off before the grievance arbitration trade off in lieu of striking as evidenced by the continually shrinking unionization rate. the membership would be more empowered and involved. business unionism does not work long term.
pwned!
The solution? Take a page from the ILWU rank and file in Washington State. Wildcat.
This is just sad, but I can’t say that I’m surprised. The unions in this country are too bureaucratic and rarely do you get rank-and-file unions that go all out for their workers.
If we look carefully at history, we’ll remember that the biggest turning points occurred with worker action against the will of union leaders. I hope for some wildcat strikes…
No, the no strike clause is cutting your own throat and an immoral clause, just as Taft/Hartley is an immoral law and one to be broken at what ever cost! Because they are law does not make them moral, but the no strike/no lockout clause keeps the dues rolling in as the leadership capitulates year after year to corporate/company demands, yet retaining their salaries and benefits well above that of the rank and file. You rank and file members who support a contract with a no strike clause are simply cowards who only care about their own little insignificant well being and to hell with that of the working class as a whole, union and non-union brothers and sisters alike, and in doing so, giving up everything your predecessors fought and died for. Your predecessors who lived hard times and scraped to stay afloat while fighting for their rights in the work place and more importantly for those of the next generation, you.
As long as you can pay for your big screen tv and the comfortable couch you sit on to watch it your ok. But when you lose everything your forbearer’s fought for, decent wages, benefits and pensions leaving your children nothing but low wage no benefit jobs, well, no one is going to be there for you cowards, except maybe in spirit and I would have doubts about that!
Is this really a labor union site?
Because it seems like a Republican apologist organ. If you don’t see the importance of the strike on Nov 2, you’re living in a dream world.
As a rank & file member of ILWU Local 10 in the Bay Area I support Occupy Oakland and will not attempt to cross ANY lines or blockades set-up by the protesters. Our union cannot legally call for a strike, but WE CAN HAVE AN IMPACT!
oh, and another thing, I think this website is bullshit! -AN INJURY TO ONE IS AN INJURY TO ALL
October 14, 2011 @ 12:17 amGummint goons vresus union goons.Stupid is as stupid does. Higher education and all.
This is neither a union site, nor is it a “Republican apologist organ.”
It is anti-Marxist, though. In addition, idiots who think a ‘general strike’ will accomplish anything other than helping to push California further over the economic cliff are delusional.
Then again, perhaps that’s what you want. If that’s the case, go have your strike, moron.
Yes, this is no doubt a Republican apologist, anti-union, anti-worker, right-wing, conservative website purposefully designed to trick union workers and spread lies. Look at the blogroll- Michelle Malkin, BigGovernment.com (home to right-wing fraudster Andrew Breitbart), Redstate, Red Meat Conservative, and so on.
A general strike would be hugely beneficial for democracy in Oakland and the country. I’m just sorry we couldn’t mobilize for one in Wisconsin back in March and April.
In re: Your general strike. Please do it…and make it a long one, so that you can realize just how irrelevant you are.
Between union-bought Democrats and establishment Republicans, the difference is the Democrats are only one step closer to hell. You can have them both.
As a member of ILWU Local 10 in the Bay Area I cannot ‘legally’ strike, but I can honor picket lines or blockades set up at the Port of Oakland by the Occupy Oakland protesters which I plan to do on Wednesday when/if it comes to that. AN INJURY TO ONE IS AN INJURY TO ALL
… — this is not an authorized ALF – CIO media outlet … — this is biased fascist , elite 1 % publication , masquerading as a union source of information … — fuck you ; burn in heel cocksuckers
You are correct on one point, Mr. Brown, we are not authorized by ALF. He is an alien life form. As to your other points, you’re just an idiot–and wrong. We just don’t like Marxism and those that support it.
… — this is not an authorized ALF – CIO media outlet … — this is biased fascist , elite 1 % publication , masquerading as a union source of information … — fuck you ; burn in hell cocksuckers … all unions are in favour of the occupy movement … — the negative occupy slant on this information is totally obvious and corrupt
For whatever feeble brain cells that you may have that are functioning, if you can read this and understand the difference between unions as they were vs. what they have become, you might get a glimmer as to why your premises are not just wrong, but your solutions are evil as well:
I want to tell you, Socialists, that I have studied your philosophy; read your works upon economics, and not the meanest of them; studied your standard works, both in English and German—have not only read, but studied them. I have heard your orators and watched the work of your movement the world over. I have kept close watch upon your doctrines for thirty years; have been closely associated with many of you, and know what you think and what you propose. I know, too, what you have up your sleeve. And I want to say that I am entirely at variance with your philosophy. I declare to you, I am not only at variance with your doctrines, but with your philosophy. Economically, you are unsound; socially, you are wrong; industrially, you are an impossibility.
Samuel Gompers, Founder of the American Federation of Labor, 1903