Fw: Striking Irish Train Drivers

----- Original Message -----
From: Karl Carlile <dagda@eircom.net>
To: Revolutionary Communism <rev-commies@egroups.com>
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2000 7:26 PM
Subject: Striking Irish Train Drivers


> The ILDA Rail Drivers Strike
> Karl Carlile
>
>
> For approximately eight weeks the members of the Irish Locomotives
Drivers'
> Association  have been on strike in defence of their living standards and
conditions
> of work. The ILDA strikers are rail drivers employed by Iarnród Éireann ,
a state
> company. At the heart of the strike is the anti-democratic way in which
Iarnrod
> Eireann has sought to implement new conditions of work and pay. The train
drivers have
> been denied the opportunity to vote on the new proposals. ILDA, a trade
union, that
> represents 48% of the train drivers has been denied the democratic right
to express in
> a ballot their position in relation to the new proposals. The proposals
have been
> anti-democratically forced through with the joint collaboration of the
leadership of
> SIPTU and NBRU. The proposals are being implemented with less than the
support of the
> majority of the totality of train drivers in Iarnrod Eireann.
>
> The striking train drivers have had some support from other workers in the
public
> transport sector. Many other public transport workers refused to pass the
pickets -bus
> and rail workers from SIPTU and NBRU. Consequently there has been ongoing
serious
> disruption of public transport services. Sections of the bourgeoisie and
the petty
> bourgeoisie in Ireland have been using this service disruption as an
opportunity to
> promote the neo-liberal agenda of both privatisation of state transport
companies and
> the introduction of more competition into the transport industry.
>
> The ILDA  workers have had to face the savage hostility of the Iarnród
Éireann
> management, the state, the employers, the bourgeois mass media and the
official trade
> union leadership -particularly NBRU and SIPTU. Despite this they have
remained
> steadfast. Many transport workers have shown solidarity by refusing to
pass pickets
> and even, in some cases, joining the picket line. They have done this
against the
> instructions of their unions -SIPTU and the NBRU.  The Dublin Bus Workers
Action Group
> have been a valuable agency in mobilising solidarity around the ILDA
strikers. Brendan
> Ogle -the executive secretary of ILDA- , has been demonised by  the
bourgeoisie, the
> mass media together with the SIPTU the NBRU leaderships. Disinformation
and confusion
> has been deployed in the campaign to break the strike.
> This ferocious attack by the forces of capitalism against the striking
rail drivers is
> a response to what is essentially a challenge to the state and the
reactionary
> leadership of the trade union movement. Their very act of unlawful
secondary picketing
> is, ipso facto, a challenge to the state. So far the state has been
reluctant to
> enforce the law. Its reluctance is an expression of its fear of the
masses. It is
> afraid that enforcing the law may galvanise other sections of the working
class into
> industrial action in solidarity with the ILDA workers. The state view the
action of
> this incipient union as a challenge to its corporatist strategy to keep
wages down and
> worsen conditions of work. Should such a breakaway union be successful it
will
> encourage growing numbers of workers unhappy with the present trade union
leadership
> to join ILDA or form militant breakaway unions. Such developments in the
class
> struggle will render it more difficult for the state to continue with its
very
> successful current  anti-working class strategy of which the Partnership
for
> Prosperity and Fairness is a concentrated expression.
> A victory for ILDA may lead to the undermining of the corporatist
leadership of the
> trade union movement. The employers perceive such a development in the
class struggle
> as a threat to their success in their intensification of the exploitation
of the
> working class.  The trade union leadership have formed an alliance with
both the state
> and the bourgeoisie to crush ILDA. The President of SIPTU, Des Geraghty,
has become so
> desperate that he has even urged, unsuccessfully, his members to  perform
the duties
> of their striking colleagues -to engage in blacklegging.
>
> In contrast communists must support this strike. They must expose the
reactionary role
> of the corporatist state and the trade union leadership. Communists
support this
> struggle by showing the working class in general that the ILDA struggle is
their
> struggle. By revealing the link that exists between this particular
struggle and the
> struggle of the working class in general the working class can come to
understand that
> the ILDA strike is their struggle.
>
>  Should the ILDA workers loose this struggle then this particular defeat
is a defeat
> for the working class in general. It adds to the confidence of the unholy
alliance of
> the reactionary trade union leadership, the state and the bourgeoisie.
This encourages
> it in its strategy to further erode the living standards and working
conditions of the
> working class as a whole. On the other hand a defeat increases
demoralisation among
> the working class discouraging workers from mounting further opposition to
the
> bourgeoisie and the corporatist state. It encourages conditions that
favour a
> tightening of control by the pro-bourgeois trade union bureaucracy over
the organised
> working class rendering the conditions for further opposition less
favourable.
>
> Communists must show solidarity with the ILDA  workers to  ensure that the
strike is
> effective and call on the working class to generalise the strike into
general
> opposition against capitalism in defence of its living standards and
working
> conditions as a class. Support must be expressed at all levels: There must
be support
> in the form of propaganda; agitation; fund raising; sympathetic strikes;
participation
> in the ILDA picket lines and the organising of a defence militia; mass
protests and
> meetings; the organising of solidarity groups  in support of a settlement
in which the
> demands of the train drivers are met.  This is the only way in which the
success of
> the strike can be both guaranteed and developed into a struggle to advance
the class
> interests of the Irish working class.
>
> The state, by means of the courts and industrial relations legislation,
have
> restricted conditions under which workers can form unions and function as
negotiating
> bodies. It has also restricted the conditions under which workers can
picket-secondary
> picketing has been outlawed. ILDA is a victim of these oppressive
conditions.
> Communists  should demand that these restrictions be lifted. Workers must
challenge
> theses impositions which would not have been introduced without the
support of the
> trade union leadership.
>
> The state must be forced to negotiate with ILDA. The absurdity of a
situation in which
> the state and its subaltern, the Iarnrod Eireann management, cannot
negotiate with
> ILDA, even if wanted to, should be exposed and fought against as one more
oppressive
> capitalist contradiction. The state has been increasingly involved in the
restriction
> and regulation of industrial relations which means that the state has been
> increasingly involved in the regulation and restriction of the class
struggle. This
> interventionism is meant to limit the struggles of the working class
thereby
> precluding their development into a revolutionary challenge to the
capitalist state.
> These  restrictions on the expression of the class interests of the
working class form
> part of a systemic attempt by the bourgeoisie to prevent the working class
from
> politically developing in a revolutionary direction. The working class
must break
> these shackles. If the working class is to effectively organise and fight
for the
> defence  of its living standards and conditions of work then it is
necessary that it
> extends its struggle beyond the procrustean limits imposed by the state.
To break
> these fetters the working class must organise against the current trade
union
> leadership. Without the connivance of this leadership no such limitations
would exist.
> Indeed these restrictions are the form by which this reactionary
leadership seeks to
> guarantee its own survival. The trade union leadership has formed an
alliance with the
> state to constrain the freedom of the working class to struggle to advance
its class
> interests.
>
> The state, by placing legal impositions on the way the class struggle is
conducted,
> has rendered  struggle by the working class in defence of its living
standards and
> conditions of work ipso facto a matter of direct confrontation with the
state. The
> imposition of legal  constraint on class struggle invests such struggle
with an
> explicitly political character. Capitalism has thus put another nail in
its coffin.
> Because of the growing inherent contradictory character of capitalism the
bourgeoisie
> solve one problem by creating another. The state is forced to become
increasingly more
> corporatist in order to protect itself from the working class. The
struggle to defend
> living standards and conditions of work has increasingly acquired such a
challenging
> character that the state is forced to regulate and restrict industrial
disputes within
> the limits of the capital relation. This logically implies that the
struggle to defend
> wages and conditions of work is implicitly a political issue and
consequently a
> question of the nature of state power and in whose hands it should be.
>
> The latest development is that the linesmen employed by Iarnrod Eireann
have deferred
> their threatened strike action in view of an apparently improved offer by
Iarnrod
> Eireann management. Clearly management were prepared to offer improved
conditions to
> the linesmen in an effort to break the ILDA strike. The offer was made as
part of a
> strategy to maintain and increase the isolation of ILDA.
> ILDA demands that the minimal condition for a return to work must be
based on its
> former conditions of work. Furthermore ILDA must demand the democratic
right to vote
> on the issue of  any new  proposals concerning working and pay conditions.
ILDA must
> demand that all of the three unions  involved in the matter organise a
ballot of the
> rail drivers. Acceptance of the proposals must be accepted or rejected on
the basis of
> majority voting. Before any proposals be put to the workers ILDA, NBRU and
SIPTU must
> form part of the committee appointed to draft new proposals. ILDA must
urge NBRU and
> SIPTU members to call on its leadership to put an end to their alliance
with the state
> and the bosses and to desist immediately from activity that undermines
ILDA. It must
> call on the rank and file of these two unions to condemn the treachery of
their
> leadership towards the ILDA workers.
>
> Karl Carlile
>
> Be free to check out our Communist Think-Tank web site at
> http://homepage.eircom.net/~beprepared/
>
> Subscribe to Revcommy Mailing Community at
> rev-commies-subscribe@eGroups.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>