Workers occupy Visteon Factory - updates and discussion

136 posts / 0 new
Last post
Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 6 2009 23:01

The court hearing today (Monday 6 Apr) lasted only a few minutes. The main points of the agreement made by union and Visteon administrators;

An agreement was made that the (potentially imprisonable) charges against Unite convenor Kevin Nolan and others would be dropped.

The union gave an undertaking that the plant would be vacated by Thursday. But the actual case was 'Visteon against Persons Unknown' - so the judge asked what validity could be given by the Unite union officials for the compliance of these Persons Unknown with any undertaking. The answer was that as the occupiers are members of Unite they could be expected to abide by whatever the union negotiates. Presumably as part of the interim deal, Visteon did not today seek an injunction against against all the occupiers, which could have been used as intimidation by threatening legal sanctions against those refusing to obey.

Visteon already, in a separate case, have secured a possession order for the factory but gave an undertaking not to use it while negotiations are ongoing. Nolan will fly with a leading Unite official to the US to negotiate at a meeting on Wednesday.

BUT - as was revealed tonight at a predictably tedious SWP-organised Visteon support meeting - a Unite official verified that the US negotiations will be with Visteon, not with Ford. The workers' demands have always been that Ford should honour the redundancy deals that workers signed up for when they were originally employed by Ford, and which they were promised would be honoured when Visteon took over. But if Ford are not even involved in the US negotiations, how can that demand possibly have a chance of being met? Even if Visteon wanted to honour it they presumably can't make promises on behalf of Ford. From the start of the occupation, Ford has maintained that any obligations they had to the workers are in the past. This thorny question was put to the Unite official but the SWP chair ensured - by pretending it would be responded to later - that it received no answer. Nor did a question asking the truth of rumours that production at Visteon Southampton was now hampered by shortage of components parts. That kind of practical reflection on possible strategy would have taken precious time away from the empty feel-good Party-line speechifying, telling the Party faithful what they want to hear. (One or two other non-party persons spoke from the floor, eg from Harringay Solidarity Group; some Visteon workers also spoke and gave useful accounts of their recent experiences.)

Though the union cannot officially condone unlawful occupation, they are aware that it gives them added leverage in negotiations - and that they would become immediately obsolete if they didn't support and represent the occupiers. They also know that, with every plant closure, their membership is shrinking before their eyes. The US meeting is on Wednesday - and one can speculate that if an acceptable deal is not reached and the occupiers decide to reject it and stay (thereby either coming into possible conflict with their union or maybe being given an unofficial nod of approval) then an eviction could begin soon after. Or the workers may decide to leave on Wednesday or Thursday. They received much encouragement today from various supporters to stick it out.

PartyBucket's picture
PartyBucket
Offline
Joined: 23-03-08
Apr 8 2009 20:29

Members of Organise! attended a rally today at the occupied Visteon plant. A march to the factory was applauded through the gates by the occupying workers, and the rally was held in one of the large workshops:

One steward from the factory made a point of coming to as many individuals as he could to shake their hand and thank us personally for our support.

As well as workers reps themselves (who stated at length that they were 'overwhelmed' and 'humbled' by the support that they had received and were still receiving), the meeting was addressed by Jimmy Kelly, regional director, UNITE, Jennifer McCan (a Sinn Fein MLA), and Alex Atwood of the SDLP.

Obviously anarchists will take the words of local politicians with a sizeable pinch of salt. And its not long ago that Jimmy Kelly seemed prepared to let two protesting airport shop stewards starve themselves to death in front of Transport House in protest at how TGWU had sabotaged their industrial action. Its the determined action by the workers themselves that will win this struggle. On the other hand, the workers seem happy to have their support.

The workers themselves say they are still determined to stay put for as long as it takes to win their demands.

Bit here from the local news...if youre eagle eyed you'll spot the Organise! banner

Heres the only other pic I took that wasnt spoilt by the pissing rain:

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 9 2009 08:41

any news about negotiations results?

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 9 2009 14:46

The occupation at Enfield is over since noon today - with details of a hinted deal not being made public until Tuesday. The union pursuaded workers to end the occupation before they even know what any deal is.

jesuithitsquad's picture
jesuithitsquad
Offline
Joined: 11-10-08
Apr 9 2009 15:20

jesus. are you serious?

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 9 2009 16:40

Yes.

Skips
Offline
Joined: 10-03-09
Apr 9 2009 16:59

thats abit crap.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 9 2009 17:46

i think it is pretty understandable in a workplace where unionists were activity and respected. to agree with such step you need a lot of respect, i would say. still, it is tactically quite bitter end. i am curious about the deal.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Apr 10 2009 09:13

It's a union sellout 100%. It seems unlikely that there's any deal at this moment (cos nothing's being made public after all) and the workers now have no leverage for any deal that may or may not transpire next week. IMO the union basically didn't wanna get fined and have their organisers in court so they agreed to assist Visteon in getting the workers out of the factory.

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 10 2009 11:12

One supporter's thoughts;

Enfield Ford/Visteon occupation ends with no conclusion...

The occupation was an inspiration for many - the spirit of the workers who refused to submit to being blatantly robbed by their bosses seemed to be what many had been waiting for, for far too long - the early possible signs of a resurgence of class struggle. Now that the occupation is ended without any clear victory in sight, some reflection is needed on the strengths and weaknesses of what has happened. It is always easy to be wise after the event, and necessary to be careful not to forget who initiated this struggle and took the risks. Any criticisms are as much of ourselves as supporters as of the occupiers. Still, we'll never get very far in developing our struggles if we don't reflect on where we went wrong and how we all might do things better next time.

The union pursuaded the workers to end the occupation today (Thursday Apr 9th) without any details of the rumoured deal being made known to them. They are told all will be revealed on Tuesday. The obvious question is - why then not wait until Tuesday to decide whether to leave the factory? There will be different answers from different interested parties. Some workers may say they are tired from constant occupation and/or that they have been pursuaded/pressured by the union that the bosses have insisted the occupation must end to guarantee the unspecified possible deal. The union may also claim that there could be legal penalties for failing to comply with the undertaking given in court on Monday to leave the factory by noon today. But none of this appears very convincing or in the workers' interest; they have surrendered their greatest bargaining asset, the possession of the plant, its machinery and stock. So the negotiations restart on Tuesday from a weakened position for the workers. The picketing that is planned to replace the occupation will be less effective in preventing repossession of Visteon property. And legal threats can probably be applied to enforce restrictions on picketing activity too.

The rough conditions in the factory shouldn't be underestimated, but another few days might have made all the difference to the outcome that may determine the workers' long-term financial future. (The Ford pension fund is already 100s of millions in the red.) It had already been suggested that a rota system could've been set up, with help from supporters, to ease the strain of manning the occupation.

The union may claim that the undertaking they gave in court on Monday - that the occupation would end by noon today - left them open to legal penalties; but even the judge queried if they could guarantee the obedience of the occupiers. One would think that all the union would've needed to do to protect themselves is to say that they had made an effort to pursuade the occupiers to leave. The occupiers themselves could have stayed with no legal sanctions hanging over them other than a standard possession order common in squatting cases. The agreed undertaking with Visteon was that they would not seek possession while negotiations continue. Visteon - and the union - made that conveniently obsolete by agreeing to postpone revealing any details of the deal until Tuesday (if there even is any deal). One can speculate that if a really satisfactory deal was on offer the union would already be shouting it from the rooftops.

The union and the left have already begun to claim this struggle as a victory on the grounds that it forced the company to the negotiating table and that it has inspired other workers. These are partial truths, though any real assessment would have to be made after any deal is sealed. But the fact that the workers have been maneuouvred by the union into a vulnerable position where they could easily be screwed is something not to be glossed over, as the left will want to. This false optimism is only a means of repressing reflection on limits and strengths of what has happened, and a recipe for a repeat of the same errors in the future.

In the final meeting of occupiers no real opposition was expressed to the union's direction to walk out. This despite some occupiers in earlier conversation expressing a desire to carry on until a decent deal is struck. The same union convenors, who in the beginning had said they and the other occupiers would never leave until a satisfactory deal was agreed, were now obliged to convince the workers they must leave with nothing guaranteed, only rumours of a possible mysterious deal to come. Some in the meeting voiced serious criticisms of the union for keeping them in the dark about developments and not giving enough support to the occupation, but most were by now either relieved or resigned to walking out. The union's authority to ultimately decide the fate of the workers was not challenged. Early on in the occupation, when it was mentioned that the union might pressure an end to the occupation against workers' wishes, a couple of workers replied "ah, but we are the union", as if the workers' collective voice could control the union structure. But once negotiations were organised by officials - on the other side of the world - and the whole process becomes remote and secret from the workers in the hands of specialists, they become dependent not on what they know, but on what they're told. And we know from long experience that the union hierarchy has its own vested interests to protect that often don't coincide with that of the workers.

As the occupiers came out, the SWP - never ones to miss an opportunist photo-opportunity - swamped the crowd with their placards and chanted 'the workers united will never be defeated'. Under the circumstances, this had a hollow and ironic ring. It began to feel, as nearly every strike has in the past 20+ years - like one more predictable stitch up by union bureaucrats - more interested in helping Nu Labour manage capitalism in crisis than feeling the need to win even modest gains for workers. Even if a passable deal is struck next week, one could see the ending of the occupation as unnecessarily risky and bad strategy for the workers and an unsatisfactory capitulation to pressure from both Visteon and union bosses.

But it is often awkward to stick one's neck out; given the general identification with the union, many supporters felt sensitive about being openly critical of the union and its underlying agenda, for fear of being seen to be divisive. But at the end of the day it's no good repressing these criticisms - or glossing them over for the sake of some image of unity - when only the explicit recognition of these realities may prevent defeat.

It was a real contrast to see how much energy and resources went into the organising of the G20 protests compared to how much support the Visteon occupation was given. This is partly an indication of the difference in priority, for some, given to activist protest on the one hand and class struggle on the other - and partly that many useful G20 resources had already returned to their sources outside London. It is only now that the union - as the occupation ends - provided a caravan, brazier, toilets etc.

Documents uncovered by Visteon workers at Basildon suggest that closures have been planned for several years with the intention of restarting production with cheaper labour - and that the creation of spin off companies like Visteon is part of a long-term strategy to restructure and trim away the less profitable parts of the car industry. So the lessons and outcome here are important for whoever is next in line for the chop.

24hr picketing will continue, and a Ford/Visteon Supporters Group has been set up.

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 10 2009 17:00

This was a response to the comments above;

d'accord. i guess we have to answer the question why workers did not dare to stay inside despite the union advice. there is the personal-moral element: the state threatened kevin, our rep and work-mate, and the union got him out by agreeing that we would leave (if that is actually true is a different question). there is the 'organic union corruption' element: we managed to get good lawyers and we flew your mechanic to a meeting with the big-wigs to the big apple - now how can you not collaborate with us by following our advice?! the legal question is such a complex and threatening thing, it seems to need specialists to understand it, either in form of well-paid lawyers or in form of semi-professional squatter advisors. the main support by the 'anarchist' left was 'specialised', e.g. in form of computer technical support, or media contacts or legal advise. may be a focus on 'how to make decisions in bigger groups, how to spread information more equally" would have been more fruitful than getting bogged down with all the legal stuff.

it was so obvious how the relation of the occupiers with their occupation changed during the week. at the beginning even kevin would refer the invited journalist to the security guards at the main gate in order to ask for permission to enter the factory. the next day, after some back and forth with the security guards the workers just pushed open the gates, and a dozen of scruffy anarchist could enter the plant. the union's decision to declare that the 'unknown legal person' in court are 'unite members' changed the atmosphere: outsiders had to leave the plant, in the end there was only X allowed to stay inside (because he has been inside right from the first minute), but during the meeting with the union official wednesday night even he had to stay outside.

on top of the legal attack there is the state in form of the job centre starting to individualise people. all workers get individual letters, during the last days they had to appear at the job centre, filling out their first ever dole claim, they have to sort out their mortgages. no attempt to undermine this form of decomposition as 'unemployed'.

most pressing unanswered question relate to the material power: what about southampton not having enough parts to continue production? what about the rumors that visteon want to open a shadow company and keep production in the uk, may be even inside the plant in enfield? what about the plan to shift some of the machines to berlin? what is the situation at the visteon enfield suppliers, one of them 3M, the company where workers in France boss-napped the management only some weeks ago? what is actually behind the rather empty promise of the ford workers reps to black visteon parts - what are Ford workers willing to do? without being able to answer these questions it will be difficult to give workers 'better advice'.

in france there was an attempt to transform some of the factories in struggle against closures into something like nods for wider discontent against job cuts, e.g. by holding a struggle conference of workers affected by job cuts in one of the plants. if, for example, some city cleaners and sacked call centre workers would have started to link their situation with the one in enfield, it could have bridged the (geographical) gap to the 'London' class situation.
the question now is whether we can encourage the workers to develop a more collective way to deal with the probably pathetique outcome of the tuesday negotiations...

this was posted on wsws today, quite good report about a factory occupation in france. i will print it out and take it along to the rally tomorrow...

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/apr2009/occu-a10.shtml

---------

On the question of how informed people were, a quote from Newsline;
"Bob Kiff, a retired Visteon worker, said: ‘I was a convenor here for seven years. My wife worked here for 34 years. The struggle has gone reasonably well but I’m not impressed with union leaders Simpson and Woodley. Today’s the last day of the occupation. They sent two junior officials who wouldn’t answer any questions. ..."

off the hook
Offline
Joined: 5-04-09
Apr 10 2009 23:35

...except the union were even more spineless than is suggested by the "supporter's thoughts". their original offer of legal advice to the workers was to meet up half an hour before the court hearing on Monday. rumours abound that "pressure" from elsewhere was put on Unite to do the decent thing and give legal support to the workers. the threat of outside lawyers flying in and taking over led to them relenting, and a legal meeting was set up just before the 11th hour, on Sun pm.

as for the union providing "a caravan, brazier, toilets": unless we're talking about different caravans and loos, the caravan belongs to one of the workers, the toilets were provided free of charge by a local portaloo company and the brazier, well, it's the workers who have been spending most of the day scouting for wood (and threatened with arrest as a result) - but maybe the union provided the bin to burn it in.

On another point though, the criticism of G20ers seems a little unfair. The news of the occupation came as people were already congregating in the city (last Wed), and any plans were pretty much underway. I don't think it's about priorities. I think it's about what came first. Who expected a factory occupation (apart from, possibly, Visteon UK - their timing to bury the news couldn't have been better)? By the end of April 1st, most activists from a range of political backgrounds were pretty drained - class warriors or not. Expecting anyone to do a full day at, or outside, the factory the next day is expecting a lot. Burnt out brothers and sisters will not make a movement that can sustain itself.

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 11 2009 09:23

Thanks for your clarifications, off the hook. Trying to find out what's going on has been pretty haphazard since the occupation began, including for the occupiers. There's plenty the union haven't wanted to be known and nobody really challenged that monopoly.

The occupation's been going for about 10 days now, and I doubt there's ever been much more than 300 people outside the factory, including workers, family and friends, and SWP. In comparison with the thousands at G20, not all of whom, it's true, live in London; but many of whom are not 'class warriors' either and reject such an outlook. So I think the "priority" comment is fair.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Apr 11 2009 10:06
Ret Marut wrote:
Thanks for your clarifications, off the hook. Trying to find out what's going on has been pretty haphazard since the occupation began, including for the occupiers. There's plenty the union haven't wanted to be known and nobody really challenged that monopoly.

The occupation's been going for about 10 days now, and I doubt there's ever been much more than 300 people outside the factory, including workers, family and friends, and SWP. In comparison with the thousands at G20, not all of whom, it's true, live in London; but many of whom are not 'class warriors' either and reject such an outlook. So I think the "priority" comment is fair.

I agree with the priority thing but there have been people busy responding to the other "big story" last week which was the death of Ian Tomlinson. This and the police violence have been a focuss of several demonstrations on April 2nd and April 4th - both of which were also big calls for support for Enfield.

Unfortunately I didn't have time due to work/family issues to make it up to Enfield (or any of the G20 solidarity demos) however as there is a recognition of two poles of the movement - one focussed on "Activism" the other focussed on "Class Struggle" (I think the divide is much more complex than this anyhow) - the question should be of how those that say they are involved in class struggle politics have managed to build up the networks, resources, organisation and mobilisation capacities needed to support these situations. After many many years of apparent involvement the question for me is what has "that side" of the movement developed as a mechanism of support.

And just to note, politically I support everything that Ret Marut has written in relation to the struggle at Enfield especially the critical nature against the Trade Unions. But like I said, not having time myself to get involved has been frustrating.

cheers

A

Red Marriott's picture
Red Marriott
Offline
Joined: 7-05-06
Apr 11 2009 11:38

Thanks, raw. If, as may be the case, more occupations occur then as a start it would be useful if such basic resources as a tent/marquee and tea-making equipment were available at short notice for supporters and pickets. That would make any further forms of organisation easier. ASS have also been asked to produce a legal guide for workplace occupiers, which would have saved a lot of fear and confusion in the beginning at Enfield.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Apr 11 2009 11:55

Just got texted the following:

Quote:
THE THIRST guerrilla gig @ Visteon factory occupation 1pm Tuesday 14 April @ Morson Road, Ponders End, EN3 4TN - musical solidarity to help fight the global recession.
Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 11 2009 12:11

Tuesday morning at 6:30 a.m. the 17 workers who weren't laid off have been asked to show up for work.

Also on the Tuesday is a job fair for the sacked workers, which is either 10 a.m.-12 noon or 12 noon-2 p.m., so if people can get down there to bulk up pickets please do.

Supporters are also needed to help with picket duty from 6:30 p.m.-6:30 a.m. from now until Tuesday. Shifts start at 6:30 p.m. and 10:30 p.m..

Meeting Point:

Meet half an hour before shift at the Falcon pub, 115 South Street, EN3 4PX (by Ponders End station, opposite Greggs) and go down together as the supporters group.

If you can't meet at the Falcon pub beforehand, or are late for your shift, when you do turn up can you let them know you are from Supporters group and rotaed on to do a shift."

Work Shirker
Offline
Joined: 9-04-09
Apr 11 2009 15:54

We need to get as many of us as possible up there for 6am Tuesday before the 17 turn up for work at gate 2. The first train leaves Liverpool Street at 5.42am and gets in at 5.59am.

Work Shirker
Offline
Joined: 9-04-09
Apr 11 2009 17:45

Me again..Just want to pick up on Ret’s comment about the thousands at G20 compared to at Visteon / peoples’ priorities...out of the 10,000 there in total, my guess would be that there were at least as many class-based folk (of different persuasions) as not; but those who have developed the best skills and resources at organising practical stuff , EG, such as the brilliant facilities at Climate Camp ( and, as Raw say, the networks, resources, organisation and mobilisation capacities needed for support) are largely not.. but that doesn’t mean to say the ‘two sides’ are so separate

RTS was such a bridge back in the 90’s–see this report from Organise! in 1996 (way after I’d left btw) on RTS linking up with the Liverpool Dockers: “Monday's picket of the main dock gates was the pivot of the entire weekend. Many comrades, again anarchists in the forefront alongside the magnificent "Reclaim the Streets" people were up and out at the crack of dawn, well awake before the dozy cops, to sneak into the dockyards occupying dockshed rooftops and high gantry cranes. The bravery and agility of the R.T.S. people was an inspiration to the other 600 or so of us on the picket at the dock entrance. They waved banners and flags all day long at the heavy handed, lobotomised cops who were pushing and shoving with unnecessary force into the massed picket. Cops provoked 36 arrests by the end of the day including dockers shop stewards, but mainly nicking Reclaim the Streets, who as a group gave overwhelming support and life to the huge protest throughout the day and weekend”.

RTS doesn’t exist anymore - but the people and the will to link up the ‘activists’ with class struggles still does, to block roads to stop movement of machinery; bring facilities for support; use networks to mobilise numbers etc... I feel optimistic that if Visteon-Ford stuff continues and we see more occupations etc as more and more people get laid off, that impetus will get put into practice again.

jesuithitsquad's picture
jesuithitsquad
Offline
Joined: 11-10-08
Apr 12 2009 01:51

i think the g20 v. visteon conversation is incredibly cogent. of course one wouldn't expect the reformists et al to take up arms over a factory occupation, but one would expect self-professed class-struglists to be all over something like this.

and yet it just doesn't bear out: a quick search of another oft-mentioned site's forums show visteon mentioned in exactly 7 posts-- initiated by frequent posters here--whereas there are hundreds of posts about g20.

in hind sight, all the shit you guys got in the build up to g20 is hilarious.

pegleg
Offline
Joined: 12-04-09
Apr 12 2009 17:44

Just read some of the document posted to me by the Administrators re pensions.
Seems VES protected their employees by separating from the main fund 13/02/09 ! ( Doc posted in Library - am new to this - learning how to post ! ).
Also seeking help whether to send form RP1 or wait till Tuesday's announcement.

JoeMaguire's picture
JoeMaguire
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Apr 12 2009 17:12
raw wrote:
Unfortunately I didn't have time due to work/family issues to make it up to Enfield (or any of the G20 solidarity demos) however as there is a recognition of two poles of the movement - one focussed on "Activism" the other focussed on "Class Struggle" (I think the divide is much more complex than this anyhow) - the question should be of how those that say they are involved in class struggle politics have managed to build up the networks, resources, organisation and mobilisation capacities needed to support these situations. After many many years of apparent involvement the question for me is what has "that side" of the movement developed as a mechanism of support.

What does that question even mean?

I had chance on the weekend to swing by the Ian Tomlinson commemoration and then later getup North London for a leafleting and collection session that was being organised for the visteon workers. The two are worlds apart in terms of how anarchists are orientating themselves to the class and prioritising tasks IMO. I can remember only the other year Blackdwarf was at a meeting which had alot of key London activists and organises and he raised the issue of supporting workers struggles, and it was followed by an uncomfortable silence, says it all really.

raw
Offline
Joined: 8-10-03
Apr 12 2009 18:47
october_lost wrote:
raw wrote:
Unfortunately I didn't have time due to work/family issues to make it up to Enfield (or any of the G20 solidarity demos) however as there is a recognition of two poles of the movement - one focussed on "Activism" the other focussed on "Class Struggle" (I think the divide is much more complex than this anyhow) - the question should be of how those that say they are involved in class struggle politics have managed to build up the networks, resources, organisation and mobilisation capacities needed to support these situations. After many many years of apparent involvement the question for me is what has "that side" of the movement developed as a mechanism of support.

What does that question even mean?

I had chance on the weekend to swing by the Ian Tomlinson commemoration and then later getup North London for a leafleting and collection session that was being organised for the visteon workers. The two are worlds apart in terms of how anarchists are orientating themselves to the class and prioritising tasks IMO. I can remember only the other year Blackdwarf was at a meeting which had alot of key London activists and organises and he raised the issue of supporting workers struggles, and it was followed by an uncomfortable silence, says it all really.

To explain, I don't see the fact that others who call themselves anarchists "do other things" as the only problem. There are many people involved (or atleast promoting) class struggle politics who need to build these resources rather than rely on the climate camp/activists or whoever for infrastructure. Thats why it is a good idea to set-up this London Solidarity Group who will prepare infrastructure for situations like visteon.

I prefer to take any continious debate on these issues somewhere else October_Lost as it will derail the thread. If you feel the need then create a seperate thread go ahead and we can discuss other issues, if not then no worries.

Raw

back2front's picture
back2front
Offline
Joined: 15-03-09
Apr 13 2009 08:07

I know I've said this before but rather than trying to continually find divisions between activists and class struggle anarchists, wouldn't discussion on how to draw the two together be more appropriate? Might it be, for example, that activists are going at what they see as the root of capitalism itself (G8/G20/IMF etc) while class struggle anarchists are confined to tackling the branches (symptoms of capitalism) by small scale local actions?

Might it be that lifestylist anarchists (as activists are often dismissed as) often don't understand that struggle comes from the bottom up and confrontation neither bothers the state per se and distracts support from events on the ground such as wild cat actions, which if the right conditions could be cultivated, could escalate into something far more promising?

Or might it be suggested that supporting a strike for better conditions for workers merely slaps the back of reformism while bosses remain on their thrones? The problem might be semantical or it is probably more likely to be an interpretation of what anarchism means. You'll find that many of the anarcho-punk fraternity for example got their anarchy off the back of a record cover, though not always. Or you'll find some ancient bearded lefty arguing about Spain 1936 and quoting from dusty tomes by Bakunin or Stirner as if this is going to have young people (the backbone of struggle) quaking with excitement.

I accept that to build a movement it is better to find areas of common agreement between disparate groups and finds ways of encouraging solidarity. The French tabloid La Monde reported that there was a black bloc army estimated 7000 strong at the recent protests in Strasbourg. The will is certainly therebut it becomes a question of how to utilise it to best advantage.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Apr 13 2009 11:03
back2front wrote:
Might it be, for example, that activists are going at what they see as the root of capitalism itself (G8/G20/IMF etc) while class struggle anarchists are confined to tackling the branches (symptoms of capitalism) by small scale local actions?

The problem is that such an analysis would be part of the problem. As if summit meetings - which are essentially PR exercises and photo ops - are the "root" of capitalism while the workplace - the point of production and exploitation - is merely a "branch".

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Apr 13 2009 11:45
raw wrote:
To explain, I don't see the fact that others who call themselves anarchists "do other things" as the only problem. There are many people involved (or atleast promoting) class struggle politics who need to build these resources rather than rely on the climate camp/activists or whoever for infrastructure. Thats why it is a good idea to set-up this London Solidarity Group who will prepare infrastructure for situations like visteon.

Good stuff, a similar group has just been set up in Merseyside for the same purpose.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Apr 13 2009 13:32

like raw says, please do not post any further comments on this discussion here. this thread is for discussion of the visteon dispute only, cheers.

MT
Offline
Joined: 29-03-07
Apr 15 2009 21:54

any details of the deal someone?

flaneur's picture
flaneur
Offline
Joined: 25-02-09
Apr 16 2009 09:52

No news of the deal, but just heard one worker has crossed the picket, and a manager turned up but was chased away.

Money and people to picket constantly are required, so if anyone can do either, send their cheques to HSG at HSG, PO Box 2474, London, N8, or put your name down on the rota here.

Work Shirker
Offline
Joined: 9-04-09
Apr 16 2009 11:19

No confirmed reports but we've heard that Visteon only offered 90 days pay at the negotiations yesterday, which the workers are saying is not enough. Not sure at this stage what they want to do next though -no more Unite/Visteon talks currently planned...