Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Linkedin button

Skip to content

Friday, Feb 3rd 2012


Where is our strike and what are ICTU up to?

The cancellation of yesterday’s strike was a blow to the developing movement against the cuts on the scale of the cancellation of the March 30th strike at the start of the year. The so called compromise ICTU have been negotiating for is a further blow, it seems designed to drive a wedge between workers and fails to answer the main problem public sector workers have, the inability to take further cuts. But the strike that did happen on 24th November has brought 250,000 workers into their first experience of the power we collectively hold and points towards an alternative.

This is a table of what public sector workers in Ireland really earn based on the data given in the reply to a Dail question in Feb 09.

The announcement from ICTU while we were picketing during the national strike on the 24th that a second strike had been set for December 3rd caught most strikers by surprise. Initially workers, most of whom were on strike for the first time ever, were concerned that we would be going out again so soon. But once the news sunk in the idea of having a second strike before the budget cuts made sense, its much easier to stop cuts happening then reversing them.All over the country union sections and branches began the work of organising for a second day of striking and effective pickets.

As news leaked that Peter McLoone was offering the government 10 or more days unpaid leave many of those union militants doing this organizing were perplexed and a certain level of demoralization set in. This unpaid leave ‘compromise’ made little sense when the main issue was our inability to take further pay cuts. We were already down in the region of 13% in comparison with what we should be taking home once you factor in not only the ‘pension levy’ pay cut but also the tax hikes and the failure to pay the partnership increases. Another 5 to 7% pay cut is not an option, whether or not extra holidays are added as a sweetener. 54% of public sector workers were earning less that 40,000 before the cuts had taken place. In particular those with families are already seriously struggling to make ends meet. For them unpaid leave is not much of a compromise as they cannot afford the loss of earnings in the first place.

Divide and rule

This ICTU proposal also plays into the hands of the main strategy of the capitalist class in attacking workers in Ireland. We are many and they are few (very few) so what they fear more than anything else is all workers uniting against them. To prevent this they have played a very successful media strategy of getting one group of workers to fight another. So private sector workers target the public sector workers and public sector workers target the unemployed etc. Anyone listening to talk radio cannot but be horrified by the ease with which large numbers of workers have failed for such a simple trick. Sure these shows are manipulated but they do highlight the glaring problem in the ICTU ’strategy’.

This ICTU negotiating strategy plays into the hands of those who want to build on this division. Unpaid leave will not only mean a further serious reduction in pay for public sector workers it will also mean a serious deteroriation in services for all workers. For all the hot air about the ‘unsustainable’ public sector when it gets down to the services provided the same workers who fall for this rhetoric quickly realize that they need the medical, education and other services that public sector workers provide. Unpaid leave will mean fewer workers providing these services on any given day, that has to have a knock on in terms of services. Already too few workers are trying to cover for all those public sector workers who have already lost their jobs because they were on temporary contract or through other means. The unit this writer works in has about 25% fewer staff then 18 months previously.

On the positive side the leaking of the ‘compromise’ meant that for the first time serious discussions about the need for an all out indefinite strike started to take place. It was becoming increasingly clear that nothing else would force the government to back down in its offensive on pay and conditions and switch instead to targeting the super rich to pay for the crisis. The discussions of whether or not to accept the ICTU ‘compromise’ was simply one of whether workers thought we were organised enough for such a fight and for each individual how long they thought they could afford to go without pay during such a strike. Such a decision will not be taken easily but it it now on the agenda.

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice ..

This is the context in which ICTU’s announcement that the December 3rd strike is off has come in. Back in March they called off the strike on the 30th for no reason other than the promise of talks which turned out to be meaningless. This had a massive demoralizing effect on the membership and took all momentum out of the struggle against the cuts until this Autumn. Now it appears they have made the same ‘mistake’ all over again, called off a strike without anything having been agreed by the other side. And what is on offer is not only crap it is counter productive in terms of uniting workers against the capitalist class.

The problem appears to be that the ICTU leadership have no concept of what to fight for or how to fight for it. Twenty years of social partnership means they are used to accepting the premise of neoliberal economics and restrict themselves to tweaking that logic into in a gentler form. And in terms of tactics to ICTU its all about negotiation and more negotiation with strikes being a very, very last resort to be used only to demonstrate that the negotiators have some muscle behind them and should be treated seriously.

This approach could sort of work during an economic boom. The capitalist class was making so much money that it could afford to throw workers in Ireland the odd bone in return for industrial peace. But for every cent they gave us they took a euro and they were careful to give the cent’s in a way that would be automatically undermined once a crisis hit.

In general wage rises under partnership were at or slightly above the inflation rate. But workers saw significant increases in take home pay, a trick that was achieved by repetitive reductions in the percentage of our wages that went on tax. That trick was only made possible because the boom and in particular the housing bubble provided the vast sums through stamp duty that were needed to keep public services going. But when the boom ended this was no longer true and it meant the means to destroy the limited gains workers in Ireland had made were built into the system.

Where should the money be found

ICTU have so bought into this logic that when the government demanded a further 7% cut in public sector pay to save 1300 million ICTU immediately accepted the logic of the governments position that the 1300 million had to come from the pockets of workers and not from the rich. This is not even remotely the case, for instance a 1% wealth tax which would hit the richest 1% the hardest would bring in around 1500 million. We should be striking for this and more as an alternative to the pay cut, more because a 5% wealth tax would provide the money to reverse the cuts and launch a job creation program though expanding the provision of services. That demand is something all workers, public or private could unite around.

Our unions should not be agreeing to cut our wages and arguing with the government about how exactly to do so. Our unions should be refusing any such cut and insisting that the needed finance be raised by going after the rich, whether through a wealth tax or some other means. Our unions should be seeking out ways to unite all workers in a common struggle and included in this the tens of thousands of private and public sector workers who have already lost their jobs.

It’s a waste of time to look at the existing ICTU leadership to lead that sort of fight. Nor is it the case that there is an alternative leadership in the wings or even that all union members are already in the mood for such a fight. The truth is that although workers are starting to get ahead of the ICTU leadership for the most part until recently most workers also saw no alternative.

The question of leadership is not a question of who is at the top of the unions giving directions but rather of what the base believes. The alternative leadership we need is not to be found sipping tea in a back room of Liberty Hall but rather is a set of ideas and methods that we need to collectively develop together. Chief amongst these is that we, and by we I mean all workers, unite around a demand that it is the capitalist class and not the working class that must pay for the crisis. Until that unity is achieved they will continue to play the game of setting one set of workers against another.

We also need to develop the ideas that will enable the hundreds of thousands of unionized workers to not only take control of our struggle against the cuts but to bring in the over one million workers who are not currently organised and build solidarity with the further half million thrown out of work. That is no small task but it is what we have to achieve unless we want to continue to face further attacks on on pay and standards of living and if we want to see jobs being created rather than destroyed.

One minor step in that direction is the creation of the Social Solidarity Network in Dublin. “The Social Solidarity network is a grouping of people who have come together to provide a forum for workers and communities to unite to resist the attacks and to build links across the many struggles which will break out over the coming months.” This is the sort of initiative that needs to be spread across the county. The SSN has called a protest for Budget day from 5-7pm outside the Dail, you’ll find more details at http://www.indymedia.ie/article/94987

Discussion

We welcome and encourage lively discussion from the public about articles on Irish Left Review. You can leave a comment using the form at the bottom of the page. Please read through the existing comments before posting your own.

  1. Comment by: Pope Epopt

    Dec 5th 2009 at 14:12

    Social Solidarity Network - I like the name, and I like the action. Well done all for organising this.

    I was at a public meeting recently where an ICTU insider was asked why they were wasting their time being suckered into diversionary negotiations and not leading the fight to bring down the government. Her answer was that there is not sufficient activism at the base to build such a fight upon.

    In one sense that’s a fair statement of the state of union branches but equally it’s fair to point out the leadership seems emotionally invested in preserving of the old model of ‘partnership’ at all costs. That that was a dead duck even from a social-democratic standpoint should have been obvious from the beginning of this year, if not before. A year spent encouraging grass-roots militancy and alliances outside the public sector with the unemployed and mortgage debt-slaves threatened with homelessness may have had a weak government on the back foot at this stage.

Leave a Comment

(required)

(required, will not be published)

Sins of the Father

Sins of the Father:

Tracing the Decisions

That Shaped the Irish Economy,

by Conor McCabe

from The History Press

Now Available as an e-Book.

Subscribe by Email

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner



Irish Left Review on Facebook

Best of the Web

  • Ireland has one of the most attractive tax rates for fracking companies in the world

    Very important point made by Natural Gas Europe here (posted on Shell to Sea) about the licencing agreement around Shale Gas (Fracking) and needs to be understood in the context of the news today that Tamboran Resources initial exploration in  north Leitrim has found that they could ultimately reach 2.2 trillion cubic feet of gas, worth $55 billion at today’s prices. Meanwhile Pat Rabbitte has asked the EPA do an environmental study, but this is very, very unlikely to veer from the assessment of the European Commission consultancy study on licensing hydraulic fracturing which found that there is no need for specific new legislation governing the mining activity.

    Besides the environmental impact, the financial cost of both that gas line and the potential shale gas excavation has caused consternation. Currently, Ireland has one of the most attractive tax rates for companies in the world. Companies in Ireland are, in most cases, required to pay only 25 per cent corporation tax, a much lower rate than most other countries with possible shale gas reserves; Ireland also does not require companies to pay any royalties to the government on saleable gas. Tamboran, Lough Allen Natural Gas and Enegi may be required to pay between five and fifteen per cent over this rate, but, even at a higher rate, the gain for the government will be lower than for most other countries in comparable situations. Pundits and protestors alike say that the government is effectively giving away a valuable resource, owned by the Irish people, to outside companies, for very little in return.

    2 comments »
  • Conflict of interest is so deeply embedded in Ireland, no one seems to notice

    The cops were very swift to close down the demonstration in the NAMA building that  Unlock NAMA occupied on Saturday the 28th. They haven’t been as swift though to investigate Anglo Irish Bank. A big blow to that investigation is due, apparently, to the fact that the cop leading it went to work for Bank of Ireland. It is not unusual for people from the fraud squad to move into the private banking sector, we are told, just as we were told that it isn’t unusual for people to move from the regulators office or the Central Bank (when they were separate bodies) to the boards of private banks. Unlock NAMA revealed that the building they occupied was in a very bad state of repair. Add to that the difficulty in establishing that it was a NAMA building at all, considering that it was added to the foreclosure list incorrectly. This should open up discussion on what is happening to all the other NAMA buildings, at the very least. At the most there should be uproar about the massive stock of properties that NAMA controls the loans of which is being allowed to rot and devalue. These properties are being held on to simply to try and artificially hold the price on property and provide the means for future speculation.

    Senior garda fraud specialist retires to work for Bank of Ireland

    The senior garda detective who was in charge of the Anglo-Irish investigation for 18 months took early retirement at the end of last year and is now working with Bank of Ireland, it has emerged.

    Former detective superintendent Pat Collins, 52, was regarded as the Garda’s top expert in corporate fraud investigation. He spent much of his career in the Fraud Squad and before taking charge of the Anglo investigation he spent time on secondment with the Office of the Director of Corporate Enforcement working with its director, Paul Appleby.

    Former colleagues say his departure — on full pension after having served 30 years in the force — will be a major blow to the investigation.

    Coveney adviser’s patriotism stressed to secure special pay

    Elsewhere, Minister for Agriculture Simon Coveney is in the news for asking for a €130,000 salary for his special advisor Fergal Leamy, a former chief executive of Greencore USA. The cap as we are well aware after all the breeches of it is €92,672. Leamy didn’t last long, despite Coveney pleading that he was desperate to do the state some service he left after four months. He got an offer from an equity firm in the London that he couldn’t refuse. However, the story also reveals that Simon  Coveney’s brother, Patrick Coveney is chief executive of Greencore. Of course Greencore has a long and controversial history, which Shane Ross referred to as a template for the worst excesses of corporate Ireland, a close rival to DCC.

    No comments »
  • Can We Still Write Big Question Sorts of Books? | David Graeber

    David Graeber and the model of his ‘popular’ yet scholarly book Debt: The First 5000 Years

    So: what was to be the model for a big questions sort of book, and how to write a book that would still be scholarly, but not academic?

    This is what I came up with:

    Of all the models I considered, the most amenable turned out to be the approach adopted by Marcel Mauss. This might seem odd. especially because Mauss never actually wrote a book; he’s mainly famous for a series of essays. Yet many of these essays-not just the Gift, but his essay on the person, techniques of the body (where he coins the term “habitus”), sacrifice and magic-really have had a profound effect both on all subsequent scholarship, and, to differing degrees, political and social debates ever since. Mauss had an uncanny ability to ask the right questions-often, questions he was the first to pose, and which have become mainstays of theoretical debate ever since. His was also an appealing model because Mauss was both a serious, committed activist (he was especially active in the French cooperative movement), and a scholar of remarkable erudition. His problem-and this, I suspect, is why he never did write a proper book, despite numerous attempts-was that he was also almost unimaginably disorganized, and therefore, terrible at exposition. I suspect if alive today he would have been quickly diagnosed with severe ADD.

    1 comment »
  • Irish ‘SOPA law’ another under the radar attack on digital rights by a craven government pandering far too easily to corporate interests

    Very strong and accurate piece from Karlin Lillington in the Irish Times today, making no bones about the motivations behind the changes in copyright law that Sean Sherlock and the Irish government are trying to sneak in. It’s odd at a time when the SOPA law in the US, which is similarly motivated to the Irish law, has just been dropped.

    FOR THREE governments in a row, “short-sighted” and “sneaky” seem to have become the relevant terms in operation when bringing in controversial, high-impact legislation on digital issues.

    In the past, from the government’s perspective, this approach has worked well in shoving in poorly drafted, unscrutinised law on the controversial area of data retention, giving the Republic one of the most severe, internationally criticised, anti-business retention regimes in the world.

    This time around, the Government is trying again to use secondary legislation - a statutory instrument requiring no discussion and no debate in the Oireachtas - to (supposedly) protect intellectual property for a narrow band of hard-lobbying entertainment industries.

    For despite what the ‘hard-lobbying entertainment industries’ might say internet piracy is not killing off its profits. That assumes for a start that the amount produced is static, which given the amount of ‘content’ flooding towards us each day is absurd.

    But more importantly, there is evidence (from numerous mainstream studies and reports) that industry claims about piracy decimating revenue, jobs and creativity are vastly overstated. A careful analysis of such claims by Julian Sanchez on Ars Technica ( iti.ms/wT8l02), picked up and further discussed by Forbesiti.ms/xQJXhg), indicates piracy has actually had only a minor impact on these industries.

    The record industry in the US, for example, has about double the new releases it had a decade ago, when piracy was barely on its radar. The film industry also has more releases now than in pre-piracy days and its most pirated movies are also those that made staggering box office profits. Sanchez cites evidence that the music industry is making back profits lost to piracy through “complementary purchases” such as concert tickets. And a recent report issued by a US anti-piracy lobby group rather farcically indicates its clients are doing quite well, thank you.

    3 comments »
  • Davos dilemma | Michael Roberts

    The majority of those at Davos think that Capitalism isn’t working, but don’t feel there is a need to change anything because its working rather well for them. It’s up to those not in the 1% then to change it.

    The strategists of capital are attending their annual jamboree in the snow playground of the super-rich in Davos, Switzerland for the World Economic Forum. Many of the top 0.1% of income earners are there. And this year the main theme is whether capitalism works and is fair.

    Capitalism is in crisis - and this time the word ‘crisis’ is not hyperbole. Even the 2600 attendees at Davos recognise that. According to a survey by the financial broadcaster, Bloomberg, almost 70% of those asked believed that the capitalist system is in trouble, with 32% saying it needs “radical reworking”. Less than 20% reckoned ‘free enterprise’ is working. Most Davos 0.1 percenters are really worried that this failure of capitalism to work could lead to ’social instability’ in one form or another.

    And more than half who were asked at Davos thought that inequality of income and wealth under capitalism was damaging economic growth. But only one in five wanted any urgent action on the issue! It seems that greed triumphs over economic logic - or should we say, class interest rules

    No comments »
  • The Promissory Notes | Tom McDonnell

    Economist Tom McDonnell of TASC provides a brief primer on IBRC promissory notes, which is available on Slideshare. Click here to view it in it’s own web page.

    No comments »
  • Michael Taft talks to Doug Henwood of Left Business Observer about the Irish Economy| 7th of January

    Michael Taft talks to Doug Henwood of Behind the News in a detailed 30 minute discussion about the Irish economy which was posted on the 7th of Jan. The second half of the show is given over to a discussion with Jodi Dean about Occupy Wall Street and ‘demands’. It’s also worth reading Jodi Dean’s article on Occupy Wall Street and the Left which was published today on Critical Legal Thinking.

    MP3 Link.

    [display_podcast]

    No comments »
  • What are bankers doing inside EU summits? | Corporate Europe Observatory

    Important information here on the extent of bank lobbies influence in the resolution of the Greek debt crisis, particularly when it comes to plans which require ‘private sector involvement’.

    At the Euro Summits in July and October 20111, crucial decisions “to save the Euro” and “to save Greece” were made. It was agreed to restructure Greek debts and banks were asked to accept a ‘haircut’ to their profits to avoid a Greek default and the risk that some banks might default as a result. In Summer 2011, the press was full of stories about the informal negotiations between EU leaders and the banks about the level of private sector involvement in restructuring Greece’s debts.

    The Institute of International Finance (IIF), a lobby group established in 1983 by the biggest banks and financial institutions in the world to deal with the question of sovereign debt2, became the EU’s interlocutor on the Greek debt issue. Its proposals -described as ”offers”- received red carpet treatment.

    No comments »
  • Is Ireland really the role model for austerity? | Stephen Kinsella | Cambridge Journal of Economics

    Abstract
    This paper describes the causes and consequences of Ireland’s economic crisis in the context of the policy solution implemented to contain that crisis: protracted fiscal austerity. I describe the causes of the recent crisis in Ireland and look at the logic of austerity with a simple model. I compare the current crisis to the crisis of the 1980s, when fiscal austerity was touted as the trigger for the Celtic Tiger. I discuss the measures implemented to date in the current crisis, tracing their effects on sectors of Ireland’s macroeconomy. I show that Ireland is not the role model for austerity policies.

    =======
    The full content of the January 2012 issue of the Cambridge Journal of Economics is available free online here. It is a special issue on the theme “Austerity: Making the same mistakes again - Or is this time different?”

    Contents
    Making the same mistakes again - Or is this time different?
    Lawrence King, Michael Kitson, Sue Konzelmann, and Frank Wilkinson

    Financial crisis and global imbalances: its labour market origins and the aftermath
    Pasquale Tridico

    Dangerous interconnectedness: economists’ conflicts of interest, ideology and financial crisis
    Jessica Carrick-Hagenbarth and Gerald A. Epstein

    Commentary: Contradictions of austerity
    Alex Callinicos

    The great austerity war: what caused the US deficit crisis and who should pay to fix it?
    James Crotty

    The end of the UK’s liberal collectivist social model? The implications of the coalition government’s policy during the austerity crisis
    Damian Grimshaw and Jill Rubery

    Iceland’s rise, fall, stabilisation and beyond
    Robert H. Wade and Silla Sigurgeirsdottir

    Commentary: Dire consequences: the conservative recapture of America’s political narrative?
    David Coates

    A note on America’s 1920–21 depression as an argument for austerity
    Daniel Kuehn

    US government deficits and debt amid the great recession: what the evidence shows
    Robert Pollin

    Fiscal deficits, economic growth and government debt in the USA
    Lance Taylor, Christian R. Proaño, Laura de Carvalho, and Nelson Barbosa

    The tragedy of UK fiscal policy in the aftermath of the financial crisis
    Malcolm Sawyer

    Is Ireland really the role model for austerity?
    Stephen Kinsella

    The macroeconomic stabilisation effects of Social Security and 401(k) plans
    Teresa Ghilarducci, Joelle Saad-Lessler, and Eloy Fisher

    The basic paradigms of EU economic policy-making need to be changed
    Kazimierz Laski and Leon Podkaminer

    Building faith in a common currency: can the eurozone get beyond the Common Market logic?
    Pascal Petit

    The four fallacies of contemporary austerity policies: the lost Keynesian legacy
    Robert Boyer

    Russia: austerity and deficit reduction in historical and comparative perspective
    Vladimir Popov

    Commentary: Austerity and fraud under different structures of technology and resource abundance
    Jing Chen and James Galbraith

    No comments »
  • The Newsfakers | Patrick Cockburn

    I enjoyed this nuanced article by Patrick Cockburn about journalism, accuracy, modern media, blogging, black propaganda and the use of social media by authoritarian regimes and advanced capitalist ‘democratic’ ones too. It also reminded me of this excellent review of Net Delusion by Oliver Farry that we published a while back.

    “So technical advances have made it more difficult for governments to hide repression. But these developments have also made the work of the propagandist easier. Of course, people who run newspapers and radio and television stations are not fools. They know the dubious nature of much of the information they are conveying. The political elite in Washington and Europe was divided for and against the US invasion of Iraq, making it easier for individual journalists to dissent. But today there is an overwhelming consensus in the foreign media that the rebels are right and existing governments wrong. For institutions such as the BBC, highly unbalanced coverage becomes acceptable.

    Sadly, al-Jazeera, which has done so much to shatter state control of information in the Middle East since it was set up in 1996, has become the uncritical propaganda arm of the Libyan and Syrian rebels.”

    No comments »

Link Archives »

Authors