Unions Say They Won't Strike with Occupy Oakland

[brooklynite]

Source: Atlantic Wire

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.

Separately, Peralta Fedration of Teachers labor representative Sara Connors said that while that union did have a process by which to call for a strike, it involved a union-wide vote that the organization's leadership had not as yet scheduled. "We’re going to do what we can to have members there participating. We didn’t call a strike vote, but we’re participating in the day of action," she said. The plan for Thursday's action includes three separate assemblies -- at 9 a.m., noon, and 6 p.m. -- to be held in downtown Oakland. Unions have encouraged their members to attend when they can, but not to skip work.

ILWU members have a recent history of taking the day off on their own volition when there's a cause they support. In 2008 about 25,000 members walked off the job at ports along the West Coast to protest the war in Iraq. In 2003, workers joined protesters at the Port of Oakland to protest the U.S. invasion. Merrilees refused to speculate on whether port workers would join the general strike next Thursday, but he said: "The ILWU members have a long and well-deserved reputation for exercising their fisrst-amendment rights on a wide variety of issues, all based on bedrock principles of social justice. That goes back to the times shortly after the union was founded, when workers refused to load ships bound for fascist Germany or Hirohito’s Japan, and includes actions that members took to oppose the apartheid regime in south Africa, and the war in Iraq during our time."

Read more: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2011/10/unions-say-they-wont-strike-occupy-oakland/44287/

---

As I said before, calling for a strike you can't deliver is a major tactical error.

[Ian David]

1. Maybe they should have asked the unions FIRST. n/t

[Cal Carpenter]

3. Omg, I actually agree with you about something.

..

[SkyDaddy7]

18. See there is always something we can agree on!

I don't care what the issue is I love to see DUers agree at least every now & then. Right?

[Ian David]

35. No, you don't. n/t

[coalition_unwilling]

43. Who is this 'they' you refer to so contemptuously? And why

should Occupy Oakland have asked unions 'FIRST' (sic)?

[Bandit]

63. Unions have become meaningless.

Nothing but paper tigers with no strike clauses...It is no wonder their numbers are dropping faster than a lead balloon

[htuttle]

2. General Strikes are very hard to proactively organize

We learned that in Madison last winter. One of the big problems is that Taft-Hartley effectively bans strikes while a union is under contract, such as solidarity strikes, etc... If a labor union officially condones a solidarity strike, it's leaders are charged pretty severely -- including possible jail time, IIRC.

[Imajika]

4. Seriously, quit with the general strike stuff...

...it's not going to happen. Nowhere near enough people will participate even in the most progressive cities.

[tcaudilllg]

14. You are wrong...

but people need to step outside of fantasy land first. What's in it for the unions, eh?

[Cal Carpenter]

5. Yeah, it takes a lot more time and organization to do something like this

Unfortunately there are a lot of people at OWS sites, primarily young people, who don't really understand the risk and likely sacrifice it would take for unions to do this.

I went to a working group meeting at OWS and this was brought up, and fortunately myself and a few others were able to provide some context about the reality of this sort of action.

I love the idea of it, but we are likely years away from it. Unless the Occupy movement escalates very rapidly along with workplace organization, but I think it is years away. I deeply hope that the ball is rolling in this direction though and that this all doesn't fizzle out.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

15. Occupy may well burn out...

but if it does it will leave embers burning. The message that the banks are looting the treasury and our polititions are bought and paid for won't be forgotten like last year's dance craze.

[Puzzledtraveller]

40. agreed, and that is one success

[ChandlerJr]

6. Cat Brooks comes off looking like Harold Camping

He couldn't deliver on the Rapture either.

Never over promise. You come off looking a fool.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hack89]

19. Nobody cares that much - not right now at least

step out off your fantasy world and look around. A general strike is a good idea but there is no way America is ready for one - more time and more work is needed.

[Downtown Hound]

Self delete, stupid computer

[Downtown Hound]

21. Self delete, stupid computer

[Downtown Hound]

22. It's funny, just a few months ago I proposed engaging in mass civil disobedience

and one of my suggestions was that we set up camp in Wall Street and refuse to leave. Not long after that, people actually did it. No, I'm not crediting myself with starting OWS. I mention this only because there were countless people on this board that told me I was dreaming and that we didn't have the numbers and that it was all just a fantasy.

Well, look what happened.

[hack89]

23. But the gulf between supporting OWS and a general strike is huge

Many support OWS - but they still have to go make a living. They won't risk everything unless it is clear there is a chance of success. That is why there is a need for more time and education.

[EFerrari]

27. When heard the idea from Anonymous,

my very first thought was dismissive, too. And I've been living the unemployment, foreclosure, no health care dream here so, not unaware of how bad things are / can be out there.

[coalition_unwilling]

44. +1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - n/t

[2pooped2pop]

25. I agree

I thought they made an error and acted way too soon to call for a general strike. First missing a days pay hurts most of us living week to week. So we won't be doing it very often. I just don't think we are big enough at this time to call a general strike. Even the unions refused to call a general strike over Wisconsin. That should have told us that they can't just call strike.

I think maybe they should call it off rather than do it show that we have no hand. Just announce that there was not enough national support and it has been postponed to an unscheduled date.

[pintobean]

26. self delete

[EFerrari]

8. It looks like the idea is to shut down the ports and have the unions

not cross the line.

@alyssa011968 Alyssa
by 48thave
#OccupyOakland SEIU guy said unions would endorse march close down ports for their 7pm shift switch nd ppl meet14Broadway at 5 PM. Brilliant
2 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone

http://twitter.com/#!/alyssa011968/status/130087909163405312

[socialist_n_TN]

29. Yep, see my post #28.........

I've been here before in personal experience. :)

[EFerrari]

32. There are posters who I've never seen get behind any protest

whatsoever. :)

[yodermon]

9. national sick-out, then?nt

[socialist_n_TN]

30. Yep. Post #28

nm

[loyalsister]

10. People have too much to lose in a general strike

That might be an indicator of how excessive such a measure would be under current circumstances.

[pasto76]

11. Anyone versed in modern union reality knows that the only people who lose in a strike is Labor

No on is forced to use a union workforce. They can choose to use non union at any time. Im beginning to fear that OWS is unraveling, much like Cain, under national review.

Calling for a strike is a Jr High move when the rest of us are working on our doctorates.

[christx30]

13. Just like with the banks

you don't like what the bank does (extra fees, ripping off customers, ect) we can find another bank or credit union very easily.
Bosses don't like what their employees do (strike, ect), they can find other employees.

I would really love to be able to stand in solidarity. But I gotta keep a roof over my family's head, and food on the table.

[EFerrari]

12. Oakland Education Association endorses the @occupyoakland Mass Day of Action/General Strike.

@OaklandEA OEA
by occupyoakland
Oakland Education Association endorses the @occupyoakland Mass Day of Action/General Strike. We are...We teach the 99%
53 minutes ago via Twitter for BlackBerry®

http://twitter.com/#!/OaklandEA/status/130147328781860865

[Goldstein1984]

16. Too soon for a general strike...

There hasn't been enough suffering. A critical mass has to have more to gain than to lose by such an action, and too many people are still too invested in the status quo--mortgages, rent, utility bills, children to feed, a retirement dependent on the stock market...

The banksters know this, and they know they can wait out OWS. We think the system is "broken," but the banksters know it was designed this way and it's running just fine. Globalization has made the need for global peasant revolt necessary, but the embers that light that fire are unlikely to ignite the tinder in the U.S. Only one in five children live in poverty. Only one in ten workers is unemployed. Nobody wants to be a solo stampede. Even globally, only 0.000034% are watching the Occupy Movement live feed. If for every person watching there are 100,000 willing and capable of acting, that's only a revolt of about 3% of the world's population.

When we do cross that threshold of suffering, and there's a long way to go, U.S. peasants will be following the rest of the world, not leading. Wall Street may be the symbol of global greed and corruption, but the the peasant revolt began in Tunis, not in the U.S.

Too many Americans are sitting on the status quo limb to want to saw it off the tree, even as that tree rots from the inside.

[Marazinia]

39. You might be right

But in that case, isn't it also too soon for these protests?

[Goldstein1984]

17. Duplicate deleted

[wobblie]

20. It is the people united

It not now when? If not us, who?
While the arm chair politicals pontificate over tactics and strategies, the people engaged in action will change our reality. Evan a partial G.S. in Oakland will demonstrate power of the people. While we wait for leaders to tell us the right strategy, the people on the move will be changing our reality. Destroy that which destroys you, join the people on the march, and trust its collective judgement. A popular assembly (some 2000 strong) of my fellow-workers and citizens say now is the time in Oakland. They have stood up to the state (and have you noticed the city of Oakland has backed down) and said we are not going home, we are not sheep. Who are you or I to second guess their judgment.

[socialist_n_TN]

37. Well I agree with the thrust of your post comrade........

but for a while we'll have to observe the legalities. At least those in positions of officialdom in the unions will. That doesn't mean the membership can't get "sick" that day. But we also must ALWAYS remember that when push comes to shove, if it benefits the working class and hurts the bosses, IT WILL BE ILLEGAL! One day soon, we'll (ALL of us even the labor aristocracy) will have to make that choice.

But we're not there yet. As a Trotskyist I know that timing is everything! :)

[coalition_unwilling]

46. +1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - n/t

[socialist_n_TN]

48. LOL! I guess that means you agree

:rofl:

[coalition_unwilling]

51. Paradoxical and contradictory as it may seem, I agree with you and with 'Wobblie'. See

my post #49 for the distinction between 'tactical' (language from the OP) and 'strategic'.

[socialist_n_TN]

54. Hey that's fine. I ususally agree with the IWW too

especially on tactics. The far left has been (and still is really) SERIOUSLY sectarian for a long while, from it's inception really, but there are a LOT of places for agreement. :)

A Wobblie is usually as anticapitalist as I am. I recognize that and appreciate it.

I was mostly just commenting on the enthusiasm. :) You KNOW that you and I agree more than not coalition.

[Magoo48]

24. Keep trudging.

It really doesn't matter: Some actions proposed will take root and some won't. We just keep moving, gathering information and strength as we go. Nobody should give furry rat's ass if we look a little "unsophisticated" at times.That makes us human. look where sophistication has landed us as a nation. We can be joyous and unselfconscious as we truck along, because something powerful is definitely happening here.

[socialist_n_TN]

28. But the last paragraph tells the tale

The union legally CANNOT call for a strike. They can be fined and the leadership arrested if they do. That won't necessarily stop the MEMBERSHIP from striking on their own.

I had a similiar situation in the early 70s when I was a Boilermaker shop steward. A subcontractor union set up a picket line and my Chief Steward told me I HAD to tell people to cross the line and do so myself. It was legally required. So I had to either resign my union position or cross the line.

I resigned my position. I don't cross picket lines.

[htuttle]

36. That's exactly right

Here in Wisconsin, the Union rank and file seemed to be in favor of a general strike. In fact, the South Central Federation of Labor, a regional organization of members of different unions, voted to support a general strike. But none of their locals or nationals could officially endorse it, due to Taft-Hartley. The teachers here in Madison went on a sick-out several times (to great controversy), but at the same time, the head of the teacher's union was forced to tell them to go to work (and the teachers generally didn't obey them...).

I think the only action that could approach a general strike would be a regional wildcat strike with no official union endorsements. Something like that could actually be organized nowadays (with The Twitter, et al), if you laid a lot of groundwork.

[socialist_n_TN]

38. Yep those regional wildcat strikes will be the way to go

for now. And you're right about organizing it. It should be easier now than ever. A generalized wildcat strike could almost as effective as a called general strike. And actually more impressive if not as effective.

[coalition_unwilling]

47. +1,000,000,000 x 1,000,000,000 - n/t

[xchrom]

31. from the OP:

'ILWU members have a recent history of taking the day off on their own volition when there's a cause they support. In 2008 about 25,000 members walked off the job at ports along the West Coast to protest the war in Iraq. In 2003, workers joined protesters at the Port of Oakland to protest the U.S. invasion.'


you could still get significant participation.

[Missy Vixen]

33. I've noticed the steady stream of anti-OWS articles

Thanks for your concern!

[Cal Carpenter]

34. This is actually a very valid issue - it is not time for such a strike

I am a supporter and attendee of OWS and have spent time at 2 sites including NYC. You are oversimplifying the situation.

The idea of organizing an actual general strike in a matter of days without a foundation of union participation is not a good one.

A general strike - when unions strike in unison in an organized way - is very much illegal and those participating are risking a lot. It requires union votes (even voting on it can be illegal) and a major commitment of participation of millions of people. It can't just be announced and assumed that workers can/will participate.

The call for a general strike for next week was made by someone who clearly did not understand what it takes to make this happen. Greece's general strike last week took months and months of planning in a country with strong labor unions and a major social movement happening. Here in the US our labor force is not organized (thanks to decades of union-bashing by the ruling parties) and we are not ready for a successful general strike with strong participation. Not only is it risky for those who do have union represenation, it is near-impossible to consider for those who aren't in unions (eg the vast majority of the population) because they will risk losing their jobs and have no negotiating power at all.

OWS will learn as it goes, this situation is unfortunate because it provides fodder to those who want to discredit the movement as a whole, but as long as OWS learns from its mistakes (and makes an effort to study labor history and social movements) this can benefit the movement in the long run.

[Slimconnors]

41. greater awareness is needed

Adam Martin's blog failed to acknowledge that unions and their members are actively supporting/defending the occupation in Oakland. Members of the Peralta Federation of Teachers were camping/visiting Occupy Oakland. OEA, CFT, ILWU, etc. members have been standing with the occupation movement.

Unions are member driven organizations with democratic practices (the primary reason for a union-wide vote on a strike) with constitutions/by-laws and legally binding contracts so thank you Cal Carpenter and others for your comments. There are legal notice considerations & requirements for unions too - private sector hospital unions must give at least 10 days notice for a strike. Such time was not afforded here.

Still, unions will be there on Wednesday, Nov. 2nd, in the streets!

[sendero]

42. Union contract with no-strike order.

.... essentially a working oxymoron, without the power to strike what it their point?

[JCMach1]

45. Then what good is a Union???

If you have surrendered your right to strike.

[socialist_n_TN]

50. Don't blame unions so much for that.......

They've been hamstrung by legislation SPECIFICALLY designed to curb their power to get in the boss's pocketbook with a strike. Or the political system with a strike.

Remember if it helps the working class to the detriment of the capitalists, IT WILL BE ILLEGAL! And it's not the right time to challenge these anti-strike laws publically and head on. Soon comrade, soon :). But not yet!

[coalition_unwilling]

49. "Calling for a strike you can't deliver is a major tactical error". Ah, but

so was the Tet '68 offensive. Tet '68 wasn't just a tactical error, it was a massive tactical defeat for the Vietnamese Liberation Forces. BUT . . . Tet '68 was a HUGE STRATEGIC VICTORY for the Vietnamese people, because it demonstrated the utter bankruptcy of Westmoreland's strategy of victory by attrition.

So this Call for a General Strike (which has now been endorsed by Occupy Los Angeles at its October 28 GA) may fail tactically, but strategically may open up whole new vistas for the movement.

As one specific, there is a lot of concern about 'legality' needing to be observed at least in the short term. Taft-Hartley is invoked as the legal underpinning for such a concern. But, if every labor union in the country simultaneously struck on November 2, no amount of police, national guard and army could enforce TH and attempts to enforce it would merely hasten the end of the current system.

Can you now see that whole new vista opening up? I can. I say Oakland can become our Tahrir Square. I was greeted with scorn and derision here when I first made the comparison. But then the OPD rioted on Tuesday. Those who previously scorned and derided are nowhere to be found (at least under thier erstwhile screen names).

[brooklynite]

52. Tet was a strategic success because...

it showed that the Viet song could launch an unexpected attack against the Americans (which knocked the US out of it's confidence). The risk for OO is that, effectively , nobody notices their "General Strike". If the buses are running, the schools are open, gas stations are selling fuel and people are shopping, it's as if the strike never happened. That's what I expect will happen on Wednesday.

[coalition_unwilling]

58. Tet '68 did not knock "the US out of it's (sic) confidence." Westmoreland

and his flunkies had long promulgated a strategy of attrition, i.e., if we could just kill enough NLF and NVA forces, eventually we would win by wearing them down, exhausting their will to fight and forcing them to sue for a peace predicated on making the Geneva '54 lines of demarcation permanent. It went so far as Westmoreland landing at Tan Son Nhut airport in November of 1967 and saying in front of the assembled television cameras that he was beginning to see "the light at the end of the tunnel." In the two-plus years leading up to January 1968, Westmoreland and his flunkies distinguished themselves with such features as bogus 'body counts' delivered with mind-numbing regularity. Why body counts? The entire strategy was predicated on our killing enough of them to sap their will to fight. And the only way to know whether we were succeeding was by 'counting' the numbers of enemy corpses. This fixation on numeric counts led to a lot of 'book cooking,' as you can probably imagine.

Talk about Support our Oops!

Along comes Tet '68 where the NLF and NVA demonstrated that they were able to mount sustained attacks in over 50 provincial capitals, thereby proving that Westmoreland's strategy was an EPIC FAIL (to use modern parlance). Cronkite goes to Vietnam and delivers his infamous 'quagmire' speech and that's all she wrote. From that point forward, it's a matter of how many more will have to die. (Answer: a fuck of a lot.)

Look, I agree with you that Occupy Oakland's calling of the general strike may prove to be a tactical failure the same way Tet was a tactical failure for the Vietnamese. By the same token, though, I hope you would recognize that calling a local general strike may serve the strategic aim of sharpening the class struggle still further. I'm willing to experience the occasional tactical failure if doing so serves the larger strategic purpose.

[socialist_n_TN]

56. Good post on the differences between strategy and tactics

One way that a general strike call COULD be strategically beneficial is that it gets the idea out into the consciousness of the people. I was just discussing this today with some people.

It's my firm opinion that even a year ago, we wouldn't have been having a serious discussion about evem a LOCALIZED general strike on this board. And this is probably one of the most left of the centrist online communities. That's progress in my book.

So what's changed? The Wisconsin union busting campaign and the futility of the results of it when channelled into "electoral" resistance and then the Occupy movement. They are two poles of resistance. One was based in the unions and the working class and the old style system of redressing grievances (elections) and the other is based in social groups and action OUTSIDE of that electoral system. They started out as separate types of groups, but QUICKLY found the common ground involving goals. NOW it's time to find common strategies and tactics.

Occupy Oakland called for a general strike over an issue without much prep time. The unions can show them that you have to lay the groundwork for these types of actions with strong organization. And the unions can see from the Occupiers that the sentiment is there for militant action outside of the electoral system. The more they fuse in strategy and tactics, the more long lasting and effective they'll BOTH be.

[DeSwiss]

53. ''....and divided we fall.'' :-/ n/t

[CrackersMcGee]

55. "...because all contracts have no-strike clauses..."

[tama]

60. Civil disobedience!

All the demands boil down to one demand - reboot the system. To do that, all programs need to be temporarily shut down. Call for general strike was not error in any way, it's just what needs to be done - on global scale.

[EFerrari]

57. SEIU local 1021, biggest union in Oakland, is joining the strike. nt

[tama]

59. Occupy unions nt

[EFerrari]

61. Kick

[EFerrari]

62. Oakland’s Port Shuts Down as Protesters March on Waterfront

By MALIA WOLLAN
Published: November 2, 2011
OAKLAND, Calif. — Thousands of Occupy Oakland protesters expanded their anti-Wall Street demonstrations on Wednesday, marching through downtown, picketing banks and swarming the port. By early evening, port authorities said maritime operations there were effectively shut down.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/03/us/occupy-oakland-protesters-set-sights-on-closing-port.html?_r=1