Strategic Planning for Shitdisturbers
The showdown at Loman's warehouse took a disappointing turn this week with the release of a decision by the BCLRB that dashed UFCW local 1518's hopes of calling a strike just 3 months before its 10-year contract expires and the warehouse closes. The LRB's decision left many of the workers disappointed and angry. They'd been given to understand that the 1995 Memorandum of Understanding that gave the union the right to cancel the collective agreement at any time would stand up in court. It didn't.
MFD did its own analysis of the decision which, though it won't make the workers feel any better about the outcome, may help them understand why things worked out the way they did.
The bottom line: the LRB is only one element of any strategy designed to pressure an employer into something.Whether or not it is the most effective strategy depends on the issue, how likely the union is to be successful and the downside for the employer if the union wins. Taking "long shot" cases to the LRB isn't necessarily a bad thing.It can be part of a strategy to squeeze the employer, generate media attention and rally public support but unless the law is squarely on your side, don't pin all your hopes on an LRB complaint.
The problem with putting all our faith in the system is that inevitably you get focused on the wrong thing. Doing things the system way means bureaucracy, busy-work and business.It means unproductive meetings, pointless discussions, endless proceedings and reliance on expensive legal help who get paid win or lose.Most significantly, the system is here to look after the viability of the economy. At the end of the day, keeping business profitable is what counts.Why do you think that your right to strike is as severely restricted as it is?
Along with business and government, biz-unions are an integral part of the system - the third banana in the unholy trinity that maintains the economy and keeps workers in their place. This is one of the main reasons why biz-unions cringe whenever some reformer is talking about direct action.
"...direct action means that instead of getting someone else to act for you (e.g. a politician) you act for yourself. Its essential feature is an organized protest by ordinary people to make a change by their own efforts. Thus Voltairine De Cleyre's excellent statement on this topic:
"Every person who ever thought he had a right to assert, and went boldly and asserted it, himself, or jointly with others that shared his convictions, was a direct actionist."
From www.geocities.com/CapitolHill
The system does not recognize direct action.It outright prohibits some forms of direct action (wildcat strikes) and frowns patronizingly on others.Within the system, disputes can only occur between the workplace parties - the employer and the union. Workers don't figure in the equation at all. When there is a dispute between the workplace parties, it is to be resolved through legal processes like arbitration or the labour relations board. Direct action is well, uncouth.It disturbs the sensibilities of the fine men and women who are the system's gatekeepers.
Whatever the biz-unionists and their business and government partners may think of it, direct action offers a more effective strategy for workers taking on corporate bosses. The objective of a business - any business - is to maximize profit. Anything that stands to get in the way of that objective is arguably a strategy with potential. So whether it be an information picket, a leafleting campaign, a candle light vigil in front of the corporate head office or the CEO's yacht club or any one of dozens of other strategies, direct action may be more effective and much more economical than singing and dancing at the LRB.
Easier said than done?
"This is all very well and good", you are probably saying."We have a lot of great ideas about how we could put the screws to the company but how are we supposed to make anything happen? We're a small group without much in the way of resources.Our union isn't interested in setting the world on fire.What can we do and how can we do it?The answer to the first question is probably "more than you think".The answer to the second is that it might help to do some strategic planning.
Strategic planning is a concept we tend to associate with management but there's nothing about it that is exclusive to management - everyone does some strategic planning without even giving it much thought.
Strategic planning is a tool that helps us to:
- clearly define our goals;
- keep focused on our goals;
- decide on a course of action to take us to those goals;
- take stock of the roadblocks we will encounter along the way so that we can eliminate them, avoid them or climb over them;
- assess our strengths and vulnerabilities and those of our opponents;
- identify and make wise use of our resources;
- keep track of our progress so that we can adapt as conditions change.
There is no magic to strat planning.A strategic plan can be simple or complex, it can relate to a goal that is narrow or broad, it can be written down or something that you carry around in your head. Essentially, a strategic plan is something that says what you are doing, why you are doing it and how you are doing it.
The value of strategic planning is that it helps you to get organized and prevents you from getting that burned out, overwhelmed feeling.If you are taking the lead on something - anything - and feel that there is so much to do that you don't know where to start or that you feel like you have to be in a dozen places at one time, you may want to do get with a plan.
Who does strategic planning? Anyone who is taking the lead on an initiative or action.If you have a thought in your head about something you'd like to do or change in your workplace or in your union or both, you have a goal.If you want to work toward that goal, you're potentially a leader.
Me, a leader? Yes, YOU! Who are you waiting for?
Over the past few months we've talked off and on about leadership and the new breed of leaders that will emerge to take back their unions and engage the future. This is tough topic to get our heads around.Our conceptions about leaders and leadership are influenced heavily by the leaders we know and by mainstream society's concepts of leadership. The traditional view of a leader is a powerful individual who directs people, tells them what to do and moves them to some goal that he (usually) believes is desirable for them.Here's a good example:
Troublemakers Handbook
What our contributors had to say this week about working towards our goals:
Licatsplit
It is so hard to remain united in solidarity when your income is cut off and your family is getting hungry and all the while your officials who represent you are still drawing their checks and telling you how important it is to remain strong in your beliefs. Shouldn't our officials pay stop as well when we are forced to take a stand and fight for what we deserve? Wouldn't they have a little more vested interest? If they listened to the membership and joined them in the trenches, wouldn't it help to hold the membership together? It never ceases to amaze me how far we have drifted away from what made labor unions viable in the first place. You may say I'm a dreamer, Imagine all the people! (Lennon)
Richard
Seriously, the CLC and Federations are reactive, not proactive. They don't save jobs; they complain about lost jobs.
Guys with fine clothes and flashy cars find it too embarrassing to cause a public ruckus. They'd rather risk the members' money than any personal sacrifice. They'll hire a lawyer before they will spend a night occupying Jimmy Pattison's office or Overwaitea Food Group's headquarters.
These guys are businessmen; they aren't hard-core activists. They hire communication specialists and lawyers. They spend other people's money; they do not lead workers into battle. Unless there is a camera present to record their 15 minutes of PR activity, they do not rub elbows with the peasants.
Caw4transport
Navistar you big bully, hire a bunch of cement heads to break the rights of the working people, that's right working people have the right to fair a contract, working people have the right to negotiate with the company, So Navistar get back to the table put an end to the violence on the strike line and negotiate with the union a fair deal. Message for Scab workers you want to work @ Navistar in Chatham then go to the HR department get an application and apply for a job like everyone else has to do. GO HOME SCABS.
Troll
There's a huge difference of what Buzz Hargrove does and says when CAW members are harmed and what a UFCW president does and says when UFCW members are screwed around.
One says, "Call out the troops!" and the other says, "Phone the lawyers."
Siggy
You all want to know what's sad?
I am a ufcw 1518 member. The loman/ofg guys are my union brothers. Since the dispute has escalated I have not been given any direction from 1518 on what I and others can do in support of 250 brothers who are fighting for their livelihood.
Solitude_ity forever
Solitude_ity forever
Solitude_ity forever ...
My union's not that strong
The post with the most:
Scott McPherson
Folks you have to understand this is all just a big game and you are pawns. OFG tells the members very early on in the year that "your toast" then sits back and watches the show. The union stalls for time hoping the members will soften up enough to accept a pathetic deal and huge cut in wages, or they can at least secure the new warehouse with some sort of voluntary wreck deal.
The union tells you to have faith, "it's not over yet" keep this under your hat but...we have an ace in the hole. We'll do this, and we'll do that and in the meantime keep going to work and doing your job. All the while the clock keeps ticking down.
The only wrench in this whole affair is the Lomans people who refuse to stay quite and wait it out. No problem though, the company just use's this to pit one union member against the other. They have their managers test the waters and see who if anyone would be willing to cross a Lomans picket line. If people seem willing now then down the road in 2003 they'll be just as willing won't they? They also get to see just how strong a backbone the union has for a fight and what they might expect from them in front of the LRB etc. and in the media.
Think of this as a small skirmish to test their weapons and sharpen their blades before the really big battle begins next spring. Oh yeah, speaking of next spring, don't expect to be out on a picket line prior to Easter either, that's just too big a week for sales despite the contract running out in the middle of the month. Sales in the Lower mainland tend to stagnate or even slightly drop off during the summer months when school gets out, not to mention the child care issues for parents who don't want to bring their kids to a picket line [particularly if people are crossing it and things are getting nasty] That's why I believe if in fact a strike does happen your looking at next summer.
Better start planning and thinking ahead.