The Radical Lefts and the Current Postal strike.

[merson01]

By
Merson01

With the results of a national ballot for strike action only a week away the Socialist Workers Party has finally produced a copy of its rank and file paper The Postworker. The absence of the paper has coincided with a number of SWP activists becoming increasingly integrated into CWU Bureaucracy. Leading SWP member Jane Loftus is now vice president of the union. It would seem that the SWP has entered into some kind of Faustian Pact with the CWU Bureaucracy.

The new issue is significant for its political blandness. The paper is empty of its previously mild criticism of the CWU leadership. It also offers no other political perspective other than limited strike action (which in reality is already taking place)and to pressure the Labour Party into backing down over privatisation..

The most ‘political’ article of the current issue is the report on the lobby of the Labour Party Conference. The SWP has invested considerable man power in trying to persuade postal workers that it is still possible to pressure the Labour Party into backing down over its still alive plans to privatise the Royal Mail.

This comes as postal workers in London have come to the conclusion that they are flogging a dead horse when it comes to the Labour Party and are now beginning to look for alternatives. It is precisely at this moment that the SWP and other radical groups seek to stop a rebellion against the CWU leadership which is still peddling the myth that Labour party can change.

During the current strike the SWP has worked to prevent postal workers from gaining a reckoning with the treacherous leadership of Billy Hayes and Dave Ward. The SWP has no political differences with the Ward/Hayes leadership.

This leadership over the last few years has agreed to massive job cuts, speed ups and casualisation of the industry dictated to by the Royal Mail. The agreement to the 2007 Pay and Modernisation deal was perhaps the most damaging attack on postal workers interests than in the proceeding 50 years of struggle. It gave the Royal mail complete flexibility in imposing its privatisation agenda.

The introduction of part time/casual labour, speed up, job cuts; cuts in pay that the Royal Mail has imposed since June were all agreed by the Union. The union is seeking to use the current national ballot as a bargaining chip in order to persuade the Royal Mail in order to negotiate the changes of work practices. The Union is offering its decade’s long experience in imposing difficult changes. It has called for a “Joint CWU/Royal Mail vision for the future of the service”.

The SWP has said nothing on this. The SWP in its treachery has been ably supported by the other radical groups the largest of these being the Workers Power Group.

The workers power group has sought to ply illusions that by “. Putting the maximum pressure on Dave Ward and the Postal Executive for an immediate national strike is the key demand at the moment that all should unite around.”

The WP rather than leading a fight for its own programme is subordinating its forces inside the post to the SWP and through them to the CWU Bureaucracy itself. It states
“The Socialist Workers Party, which runs the Post Worker bulletin, and has Jane Loftus on the union's NEC, should take a lead in organising such a conference.
Many SWP members see the need for a rank and file movement in general but don't think it is possible now. But when would it ever be possible if not now - when thousands of post workers are furious with the union leaderships' inaction?
Jane Loftus should be giving a lead but she has barely said anything about these strikes - she hasn't criticised the delay or done anything to develop an activist movement to expand and speed up the action. This is a mistake. We urgently need to take steps to greater rank and file coordination in the union; otherwise we'll never develop an alternative leadership to Hayes and Ward”.

The WP group never explains why it is supporting a leader (Loftus) and an organisation that is so close to the CWU leadership that one cannot work out where it begins and the other ends. Both parties have not raised a single difference of principle with the strategy of the CWU leadership. Both have refused to discuss the implications of the CWU’s policy statements and how they support job losses, rationalisation, efficiency drives and depot restructuring based on the 2007 agreement brokered by the TUC.

Another group that has forces inside the CWU is the Workers Liberty group. Pete Keenlyside who is a supporter of the WL sits on the CWU executive. Keenlyside has been somewhat sidelined buy the WL after his vote to accept the 2007 Pay and Modernisation agreement. The WL has so far remained silent on this sell out and has made no public statement on Keenlyside.

A common theme to all the radical groups is a recognition that a huge battle is looming inside the post against the Hayes and Ward leadership. Many groups have called for rank and File committees or organisations inside the post. While to the untrained political eye this might seem radical it is nothing of the sort. None of these groups are seeking to break workers from the labour supporting bureaucracy. They wish to keep any political discussion well within control of the Labourites in the bureaucracy and not a break with it.
A successful struggle against privatisation and job losses depends on postal workers taking the dispute out of the hands of the CWU apparatus and mobilizing politically against the Labour government and its big business backers. Independent rank-and-file committees must be established to coordinate action with workers across the whole postal sector, Tube workers and others who face similar attacks.

Such an industrial offensive can succeed only if it is linked to a socialist political strategy that rejects the capitalist market as the basis for organising economic and social life, and places social need above corporate profit. Please contact this author for any discussion on the above article

[Tman]

A successful struggle against privatisation and job losses depends on postal workers taking the dispute out of the hands of the CWU apparatus and mobilizing politically against the Labour government and its big business backers. Independent rank-and-file committees must be established to coordinate action with workers across the whole postal sector, Tube workers and others who face similar attacks.
Such an industrial offensive can succeed only if it is linked to a socialist political strategy that rejects the capitalist market as the basis for organising economic and social life, and places social need above corporate profit

Man the duffel-coats comrades, the revolutionary committee is here.....

Didn't know Loftus was a Loony-Leftie though.

[POSTMAN]

Oh you're back then,selected reading/posting as always,you should work for the telegraph dude.

[Tman]

Never been away POSTMAN old chap, but doesn't everyone "selected reading/posting"?
{Dude??? }

[CourtneyCox]

Never been away POSTMAN old chap, but doesn't everyone "selected reading/posting"?
{Dude??? }

Difference is others ADD to the debate all you do is snipe away from the sidelines and denigrate others views. You never actually come up with ideas or state your position on an argument just that you disagree with it. For instance your comment above about "duffel coat brigade" and "loony left" add nothing to the debate except show you are dismissive of them, and yet I see no counter argument to progress the discussion. Still on the plus side you did not disappoint me.

[Red Postie]

merson might want to give the whole quote rather than being selective. Workers Power doesn't see the establishment of strike committees, a rank and file movement, as running through the SWP - but given they have a leading member (who doesn't lead) it is absolutely right to demand that they should "take a lead" - the problem is for 5 years or more they haven't. Anyone reading the various bulletins put out by Workers Powerwould see that.

"All those who have taken action so far should call a conference to debate out a strategy to make the strike as effective as possible, and to develop an alternative leadership to take the action necessary - unofficial possibly - that Hayes, Ward and co. will not. Our jobs, livelihoods, pensions - there's too much at stake not to do it!
The Socialist Workers Party, which runs the Post Worker bulletin, and has Jane Loftus on the union's NEC, should take a lead in organising such a conference.
Many SWP members see the need for a rank and file movement in general but don't think it is possible now. But when would it ever be possible if not now - when thousands of post workers are furious with the union leaderships' inaction?
Jane Loftus should be giving a lead but she has barely said anything about these strikes - she hasn't criticised the delay or done anything to develop an activist movement to expand and speed up the action.
This is a mistake.
We urgently need to take steps to greater rank and file coordination in the union, otherwise we'll never develop an alternative leadership to Hayes and Ward."

http://www.workerspower.com/index.php?i ... 28,0,0,1,0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Misquotes and straw men - something the SWP is no stranger to, but unfortunately neither are the various sectarian groups, anarchists etc who use correct (sometimes, not in this case) criticisms as an excuse to fail to unite and call on leaders to act. We need to demand they act to push them to do so or expose them, while not relying on them or giving them a veto over the rank and file's own actions, and trying to organise directly a grassroots network of struggle and opposition.

[axeman]

bit diffucult to post on royal fails computers then tman ?? covering in scotland / london i dare say for your leader

[Tman]

Difference is others ADD to the debate all you do is snipe away from the sidelines and denigrate others views. You never actually come up with ideas or state your position on an argument just that you disagree with it.

The old "but you never argue or add anything to the debate" ploy? {Incidentally a bit like you've done here, then? }
It's a common enough cliche, but then lots do it. The post immediately above this one being a good example.

For instance your comment above about "duffel coat brigade" and "loony left" add nothing to the debate except show you are dismissive of them, and yet I see no counter argument to progress the discussion.

A counter argument against the duffel-coaters? Where would you start?
Thing is, after probably 100 years in existence and gains and successes numbering precisely nothing, maybe they're their own best argument "against".....

[merson01]

to Red Postie

Since I wrote the article I would like to answer your reply The quote I used from the Workers Power is accurate. Despite your protests it is clear that you want the SWP to run any committee set up during the strike.You need to explain why we need to ask this organisation anything since it has systematically refused to do so. It s leader in the CWU has a very comfortable position in the CWU and has no intention of leading the type of struggle needed.

If you have differences with the SWP then you should say so. In your last paragraph you criticise me for failing to call for united action with these traitors.,in order to expose them. My friend that stage has long gone. What is the analysis of the SWP on the death of New labour
“Talk of the ‘death of Labour’ is premature,” it insisted, “even if a Tory government is elected. The party could revive as a symbol of opposition and could even shift its rhetoric to the left. For people who are shocked by the scale of Tory cuts, Labour could become a beacon of hope, even if it maintains its right-wing policies.”Why should we unite with this organisation you need to clarify.

Merson

[goinpostal]

to Red Postie
The quote I used from the Workers Power is accurate. Despite your protests it is clear that you want the SWP to run any committee set up during the strike.You need to explain why we need to ask this organisation anything since it has systematically refused to do so.Why should we unite with this organisation you need to clarify.
Merson

But like it says you dont give the full quote, it says the fighting sections should call a conference but demand the left leaders like Loftus act, not ignore them which lets them off the hook. It says Loftus should lead, it doesnt say it should be left to her or the swp any more than it says they should run.

[merson01]

to Red Postie
The quote I used from the Workers Power is accurate. Despite your protests it is clear that you want the SWP to run any committee set up during the strike.You need to explain why we need to ask this organisation anything since it has systematically refused to do so.Why should we unite with this organisation you need to clarify.
Merson

But like it says you dont give the full quote, it says the fighting sections should call a conference but demand the left leaders like Loftus act, not ignore them which lets them off the hook. It says Loftus should lead, it doesnt say it should be left to her or the swp any more than it says they should run.

While you play with words for me they have a meaning. You still have not answered the point. Why should postal workers have any faith in jane Loftus. I mean really, you say nothing about this women or her partys track record in kow towing to the CWU bureaucracy. These people need to be exposed for the fraud they are, not called upon to lead a struggle they have no intention of leading. It is clear that your idea of an independent committee is not to be made up of the rank and file but staffed by left radicals who will tie it to the coat tails of the CWU.

[goinpostal]

How does putting demands on jane loftus tell workers to have any faith in her? The bulletin makes it clear we should not put any faith in her. Its like your reading it without reading what it actually says, so here it is:

Royal Mail: For a massive YES vote and an immediate strike

[goinpostal]

It is clear that your idea of an independent committee is not to be made up of the rank and file but staffed by left radicals who will tie it to the coat tails of the CWU.

Btw this quote seems to say you are against the CWU as a union? We need the union, we need to get rid of the bureaucracy. I'm proud to be in the CWU, i dont identify it with the leaders like Billy Hayes or Dave Ward or Jane Loftus for that matter. Its our union we need to take it back.

[merson01]

It is clear that your idea of an independent committee is not to be made up of the rank and file but staffed by left radicals who will tie it to the coat tails of the CWU.

Btw this quote seems to say you are against the CWU as a union? We need the union, we need to get rid of the bureaucracy. I'm proud to be in the CWU, i dont identify it with the leaders like Billy Hayes or Dave Ward or Jane Loftus for that matter. Its our union we need to take it back.

Okay this the quote, please explain why the SWPO should take the lead in organising this conference. It is clear you are putting illusions in the Role of the SWP. "The Socialist Workers Party, which runs the Post Worker bulletin, and has Jane Loftus on the union's NEC, should take a lead in organising such a conference.
Many SWP members see the need for a rank and file movement in general but don't think it is possible now. But when would it ever be possible if not now - when thousands of post workers are furious with the union leaderships' inaction?
Jane Loftus should be giving a lead but she has barely said anything about these strikes - she hasn't criticised the delay or done anything to develop an activist movement to expand and speed up the action.
This is a mistake.
We urgently need to take steps to greater rank and file coordination in the union, otherwise we'll never develop an alternative leadership to Hayes and Ward".

Your conception of of a struggle against Hayes and Ward is essentially replacing one set of bureaucrats with another.

As for the CWU i do not make a fetish out of the form of the Union. While not being opposed to unions per say, these organisations have not been a vehicle for socialism, in many ways they are obstacles. I beleive that in the coming struggles new organisations that are independent from the bureaucracy will form. Socialism will not come about throu the CWU. In many ways it will come about in a struggle against it

[IWW Fellow Worker]

It's certainly the case that reformist trade unions have always been there to ensure the system of capitalism can operate with the least possible obstruction from the working class. Along with the Labour Party, their role has always been to act as a cul-de-sac down which discontent can be safely parked.
As for Jane Loftus (and I'm no supporter of Trotskyist political parties) she gave a good speech at the 'Time to Fight Back' rally a few weeks ago. What a pity Billy Hayes and Tony Woodley couldn't be bothered turning up, but there were no TV cameras present, so what else can we expect?
Anyway, a good debate Comrades!