1700 workers go on strike in UK over jobs for foreign workers

[JollyRedGiant]

What stake has Tony O Reilly got in in Lindsey oil refinary? Or Rupert Murdoch for that matter?

O'Reilly, Murdoch and their ilk have a vested interest in ensuring that trade unions are undermined in order to preserve the rule of capitalist order.

You keep on harking back to this cartoonish evil factory owner vs worker nonsense.

As the economic crisis deepens and the government and employers are forced by the scale of the depression to target working class people with further job losses, cuts and tax increases - it will be amply demonstrated who will be on which side of the class struggle.

You are a cloistered champaign socialist who cannot abide workers having an opinion that is not first mangled through the marx-o-matic translator that you need to understand the real world.

After 25 years of being an elected trade union representative I think I have a far better understanding of the attitude of workers than anyone of your political persuasion possibly could.

Please spare us (the rest of the workers in this country) your blinkered arrogent nonsense and you bleeting over the Pensions levy.

The establishment have been reasonably effective over the past few weeks in turning the heat on public sector workers about their pensions - however - as the campaign by public sector workers gathers momentum you will be surprised at how the fear and anger being demonstrated will turn into a full-blown hatred of FF and all establishment politicians. Remember a week is a long time in politics.

[Brenny]

Unfortuantely your analysis is incorrect in terms of the motives of the workers and who was actually involved -

in the early part of the 19th century most of the craft unions were dominated by craftsmen employers rather than the journeymen. It was the the employers that primarily attempted to prevent non-local workers from working in a particular locality.

At a later stage as the craft houses became bigger, the craftsmen employers tried to use workers who were not members of the 'combination' in an attempt to drive down wages. This led to journeymen craftsmen who were being sacked to target those workers who refused to join the combination (be they local or non-local).

Non-local workers were targetted by the Ribbonmen etc when these workers were being brought into rural areas by tenant farmers to drive down the wages of agricultural labourers.

Okay, your analysis of the early nineteenth century labour movement is flawed for a number of reasons.
By 1800 employers were NOT dominating unions. You're confusing, guilds, combinations and unions. Guilds were active in Ireland up till the mid to late 18th century. Guilds were dominated by employers, who were called masters. A man who served his apprenticeship could become a journeyman who could in turn eventually set up his own business and become a master. By 1800 this system had broken down in Ireland. The amount of capital needed to set up a business was too much for nearly all journeymen, who knew by that stage that the employers were a different class from them. Employers began ignoring guild rules and started hiring cheap labourers in place of skilled workers. From this point artisans began to form combinations. As Fergus D'arcy has said of the situation in Dublin, 'It was a conflict between employers who wanted cheap labour in the form of unlimited apprentices and low wages, and artisans who tried fair means and foul to counteract this.' The journeyman combinations became particularly defensive after 1815 when the economy began a long decline. The early unions were not radical, they just wanted to recreate the best bits of the guild system. The early unions would KILL any foreign worker who sought to by-pass their union and gain employment in their city.
I'm not trying to glorify the mindset, I'm only posting this to back up Anewbeginning who stated that unions were set up to protect local workers.

[Thac0man]

O'Reilly, Murdoch and their ilk have a vested interest in ensuring that trade unions are undermined in order to preserve the rule of capitalist order.

So the fact they have interests in the UK is proof positive of your proposerous assertian that a media conspiracy was in effect? Please

The establishment have been reasonably effective over the past few weeks in turning the heat on public sector workers about their pensions - however - as the campaign by public sector workers gathers momentum you will be surprised at how the fear and anger being demonstrated will turn into a full-blown hatred of FF and all establishment politicians. Remember a week is a long time in politics.

The Penions levy is a relatively small measure and a soft one at that designed to save 1.4 Billion compared to the real pain in this country. 327,000 on job seekers allowance is real pain, a pain a socialist like yourself, in a state job, is all to willing to exploit but has demonstrated cannot understand. The focus on the Public sector is there because that one part of the package announced by Cowan that dealt with the Public sector has been greeted with hysteria.

Please do presuse to tell the rest of us, who do live and work in the real world (where the lions share of your pension contribution is paid from), what is really going on.

[Thac0man]

As the economic crisis deepens and the government and employers are forced by the scale of the depression to target working class people with further job losses, cuts and tax increases - it will be amply demonstrated who will be on which side of the class struggle.

But you won't be in the class struggle will you JRG? The factory owners will be paying your wages and guarenteed pension and the state will be borrowing like made to keep up with your Unions demands. And when things turn around, hopefully, those who get jobs can pay off the debt accumulated in maintaining your living standards while others had to emmigrate or go without. Real pretty picture JRG.

[JollyRedGiant]

Okay, your analysis of the early nineteenth century labour movement is flawed for a number of reasons.
By 1800 employers were NOT dominating unions. You're confusing, guilds, combinations and unions. Guilds were active in Ireland up till the mid to late 18th century. Guilds were dominated by employers, who were called masters. A man who served his apprenticeship could become a journeyman who could in turn eventually set up his own business and become a master. By 1800 this system had broken down in Ireland. The amount of capital needed to set up a business was too much for nearly all journeymen, who knew by that stage that the employers were a different class from them. Employers began ignoring guild rules and started hiring cheap labourers in place of skilled workers. From this point artisans began to form combinations. As Fergus D'arcy has said of the situation in Dublin, 'It was a conflict between employers who wanted cheap labour in the form of unlimited apprentices and low wages, and artisans who tried fair means and foul to counteract this.' The journeyman combinations became particularly defensive after 1815 when the economy began a long decline. The early unions were not radical, they just wanted to recreate the best bits of the guild system. The early unions would KILL any foreign worker who sought to by-pass their union and gain employment in their city.
I'm not trying to glorify the mindset, I'm only posting this to back up Anewbeginning who stated that unions were set up to protect local workers.

again you are only partially correct - The master craftmens dominated the trades unions during most of the early part of the 19th century as evidenced by things like the composition of trades councils, mechanics institutes etc. - There were short periods when the journeymen held sway - and yes - master craftsmen did attempt to use cheap labour to undermine the wages of journeymen tradesmen - but the journeymen would target anyone unwilling to join the combination be they local or non-local. The attacks on non-local workers occurred predominantly in rural areas among agricultural labourers.

[JollyRedGiant]

So the fact they have interests in the UK is proof positive of your proposerous assertian that a media conspiracy was in effect? Please

the media is part of the capitalist establishment - did you ever hear the saying 'don't believe everything you read in the papers'

The Penions levy is a relatively small measure and a soft one at that designed to save 1.4 Billion compared to the real pain in this country. 327,000 on job seekers allowance is real pain, a pain a socialist like yourself, in a state job, is all to willing to exploit but has demonstrated cannot understand. The focus on the Public sector is there because that one part of the package announced by Cowan that dealt with the Public sector has been greeted with hysteria.

a small measure would be confiscating the wealth of the ten richest individuals in the country (leave them a paltry 100million euro to survive on) and you clear the budget deficit in one swoop and have about 5 billion left over. The only people who are 'suffering' are workers - losing jobs, pay cuts, extra taxes - while the rich get off scot-free.

But you won't be in the class struggle will you JRG? The factory owners will be paying your wages and guarenteed pension and the state will be borrowing like made to keep up with your Unions demands. And when things turn around, hopefully, those who get jobs can pay off the debt accumulated in maintaining your living standards while others had to emmigrate or go without. Real pretty picture JRG.

Factory owners have been siphoning off 20 billion a year for the past 15 years in profits and paying diddly-squat to the state (indeed the state has also been providing them with grants and tax breaks) - five of the ten richest people in the country didn't pay a penny in tax last year.

By the way - I will be paying the new levy with absolutely no pension entitlements and I will be one of the 1200 teachers who will be out of a job by the end of May.

[Thac0man]

the media is part of the capitalist establishment - did you ever hear the saying 'don't believe everything you read in the papers'

So you do actually believe the the media rushed up to Lindsey, all the them that could send somebody, and did so, at short notice, with a pre-prepared strike busting strategy. That is outlandish and cartoonish in the extreme, but in keeping with your other views.

Factory owners have been siphoning off 20 billion a year for the past 15 years in profits and paying diddly-squat to the state (indeed the state has also been providing them with grants and tax breaks) - five of the ten richest people in the country didn't pay a penny in tax last year.

Most factories are owned and run by corporations, the profits are either reinvested or paid out as divident to share holders, who include a spectrum of individuals and investment funds such as pension schemes. Your odd dickensian take on the "factory owner" is as hopelessly outdated as the rest of your views.