Re: [Marxism] Re More on the TWU dissidents

[Brian Shannon <brian_shannon@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Jan 22, 2006, at 8:01 PM, robert montgomery wrote:

> Jon F: It is one thing to oppose a contract. It is another to take
> a union out
> on strike when it is split down the middle 50-50. To even get to a
> situation where the sentiment has shifted overwhelmingly in favor will
> require some very shrewd tactical thinking.
>
> The pressure for arbitration will be very strong. If that happens, the
> possibility of a worse outcome is there, opening the door for
> Toussaint
> to cast blame on his rivals. <
>
>  I share Jon's fears over this. There are areas that are unclear
> (i.e.) Is there a binding arbitration clause in the existing contract?
> That the Taylor law  makes striking illegal suggests there is no
> contractual requirement to arbitrate on the part of the City. Does
> this mean the gains that the Union made in the rejected contract are
> lost--"off the table." ?? Obviously the rank-and-file are angry. But
> the rejection is 7 votes over 50-50!! Which brings up the leadership
> question.


The temporary agreement by the leadership -- wasn't there a strike
committee? -- created a new situation and a narrow vote such as this
has to also be considered an additional situation on top of that.
Under these circumstances, and with Toussaint licking his wounds, a
campaign for adding new people to the negotiating committee combined
with a renewed campaign to educate the public on the issues would
seem to be in order.

Brian


________________________________________________
YOU MUST clip all extraneous text before replying to a message.
Send list submissions to: Marxism@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Set your options at: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism