Shannon workers to strike on St. Patrick's Day

by ec Sun Mar 07, 2004 04:17

That the reason Aer Lingus have a reduced demand for labour at the airport is because the handling of US Military traffic - which they are involved in has lessened. Yes folks Aer Lingus was involved and is involved in the war effort. Crazy World - As Christy said leaving the aeroplane.

by rose Sun Mar 07, 2004 13:08

The SP now has got its striking workers...to get the us warplanes back to shannon!

Can't wait to see Joe Higgins & Co. heaping adulation at these brave workers defening their right to have jobs like the proletarians in uniform in the north (RUC), like our brave working class gardai who were arresting people while joe little stalin higgins was calling them virtual warriors

and don't get me started on the swp!

by Get rid of this tripe Sun Mar 07, 2004 23:01

Of your anti working class rant? btw. It's not the 1st time that you've posted anti working class rants on IMC rose.

by anarcho Sun Mar 07, 2004 23:25 anarcho at geocities dot com

"Of your anti working class rant?"

I was under the impression it was obviously an anti-Socialist Party rant.

Since when was the SP the "working class"?

And has anyone told the working class the good news?

by Socialist Party (personnel capacity) Mon Mar 08, 2004 09:32

100% support for the baggage handlers fighting to defend their jobs.

by Handler Tue Mar 09, 2004 08:39

Who is this ‘rose’ who compares workers going out on strike to save jobs with the sectarian RUC or the southern police force? I have heard of ultra-left claptrap, but this takes the biscuit.

Irrespective of the reasons for the alleged decline in business in Shannon, these workers are trying to protect jobs in a region that is crying out for development, not privatized retrenchment via Aer Lingus and Seamus Brennan. It is not their fault or responsibility if the state betrays its neutrality stance and they can't be expected to individually substitute for the lack of a movement capable of reversing the government's policy. How likely is it that they will tlook sympathetically at the anti-war movement in the future if they are greeted by insults when they propose take action to save jobs.

Has this ‘rose’ person an ounce of (political) sense? She (or he) should can it.

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:04

After the strange statement by the SP Member above I think it should be clarified. These "workers" got their blood stained pieces of silver by handling the US Terror Machines. They are now whinging because not enough yankee murderers are using Shannon.

There are more important issues than supporting those who happily handled US Warplanes. Workers are being made redundant all over Ireland every day. Why do this lot of shoneens deserve special attention?

by Rimbaud Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:25

"How likely is it that they will tlook sympathetically at the anti-war movement in the future if they are greeted by insults when they propose take action to save jobs."

They never looked sympathetically at the anti-war movement in the past. Not even when bombs were raining down on Iraq. Only a bunch of brain dead trots would bring up this nonsense. These handlers along with the 'Workers In Uniform' in the Airport Police can rot. Hopefully with the fall off in business some of the SPs airport cop mates will lose their jobs as well.

by Andrew Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:33

I'm amused by the 100% anonymous support offered above. I can imagine the scene down at the canteen, 'good news lads, some anonymous person is supporting us 100% on indymedia'.

That aside the strike is obviously a good thing for those that oppose refuelling of warplanes. As long as the company can make pay and conditions subject to US military traffic then most/a lot of workers will accept such traffic in order to 'defend' their pay and conditions. If the strike is successful in winning 'there should be no loss of pay or conditions if military traffic drops' then the argument that we should accept such flights to 'protect jobs' vanishes. A one day strike is a little step in the right direction and anti-war people should support it.

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 11:40

These "workers" dont give a damn about how many Iraqis are killed due to their handling of US planes. They would be happy to have the business back to the old levels. In a situation where there is a fall off in business its not unusual that jobs would be under threat. Support then now and they will laugh in your face as they handle US warplanes agian as the US starts the next phase of its terror campaign.

Every week there are announcements of hundrds of workers being made redundant. Should this lot be made priveliged just because they have blood on their hands? There are more important issuies to deal with.

by Andrew Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:06

Pundit I'm not sure how you know workers in Shannon don't 'give a damn' about deaths in Iraq. I've talked to a few locals in Shannon in the bar beside Lidl before demonstrations. Most seem deeply disturbed by what their work now entails, if you can get them to talk about it. Some don't care, some have put their minds through mental hoops in order to forget about it, some are just unhappy.

The logic of this strike is anti-war even if many of those that strike will be doing so to protect jobs (something worth supporting in its own right). It makes no sense for someone who claims to be anti war to be cutting off their nose to spite their face. But perhaps you know that already?

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:11

There are many more cases of workers being made redundant . Far more deserving of support than these twats. Why are they given special status? They never took action against the US planes, they are now taking action to get the planes back.

There are mor important things to do than to support these creeps. But I suspect you know that anyway.

Incidentally, if the Airport Cops were being made redundant, would you support strike action by them?

by SP member Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:44

There has been a spate of unwarrented sectarian comments on this thread from people showing obvious immaturity.

Some facts:

To Pundit - despite your clear intention to sh*t stir against the SP, an answer. No, the SP do not want to see US warplanes land, refuel, be catered for or anything else at Shannon Airport (or any other airport for that matter).

The baggage handlers do not have any role to play in servicing the US planes. The attacks on the baggage handlers comes from the privatisation programme of Aer Lingus and would be happening irrespective of the landing of US planes at Shannon.

To Pundit: Yes many workers are losing their jobs each week in this country. Yes all deserve our support and when a group of workers are willing to fight against redundancy then activists should do everything in their power to support them. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that you will only support people if they dance to your tune irrespective of the merits of their case. The workers movement does not need supporters like you.

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:53

The Shannon "workers" themselves have admitted that their jobs are at risk due to the drop off in US Military flights. The handlers (not just baggage) move planes, refuel them etc. They are an integral part of the US Terror machine. To hell with them and the so called "Socialists" who support them.

The Workers Movement does not need those like the SP Member who support "workers" who never took any action against the war and who now are striking to get more US Warplanes into Shannon.

by Yossarian Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:57

There seems tp ba a clear effort by somebody to create divisions between Shannon workers and anti-war protesters (dressed up in the SP/anti-SP rhetoric, a common trolling device on this wire).

Who could benefit from that?

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 13:40

I really dont see why this bunch should get special treatment. They serviced the US Warlanes while IRAQ was being bombed and invaded. Now they are moaning because there are less blood stained flights to handle. This is a genuine opinion.

Yossarin , you are staring to sound like the SP, they see any criticism or even disagreement with them as trolling. If they are going to come here and call for support for these "workers" then why shouldnt I express my disagreement.

Its also more than just a pro/anti SP thing. 2 other anarchists have posted here. 1 was critical of the SPs equating themselves with the working class, the other while critical of the SP gave qualified support to the Shannon "workers" action.

by curious Tue Mar 09, 2004 14:25

Do you support the Aer Rianta workers at Cork and Dublin airports (Not Shannon) fighting against privatisation? Dou you support the CIE workers, also fighting against privatisation? Or are they also complicit in the US/UK war machine because they didn't go on strike and stop the trains running? Do you support the Communication Workers Union (CWU) members in An Post, who've voted by 83% in favour of industrial action? Or are they also complicit in the US/UK killing machine because they didn't go on strike and block all mail coming in from the US/UK? Finally have you Pundit and Rimbaud ever supported workers in a dispute? And gone done to the picket lines to support them? I have, on several occasions, and organised fundraisers. And before you ask, I would have Libertarian leanings myself.

by Pundit Tue Mar 09, 2004 14:39

Maybe you are a Libertarian but if so why do you throw in red herrings like CWU, CIE and other airports? This thread is specifically about Shannon and "workers" ,who had serviced US Warplanes, being laid off. I have pointed out that hundreds of workers are made redundant every week and dont get this type of attention.

It should be obvious from my mention of these lay offs to any non trot that I support workers in struggle. Yes, I have done so actively. What I wont do is give special status to a gang who were happy to serve as part of the US Terror machine.

The possibility of them ever taking action against the handling of US Warplanes only ever existed in the fertile imaginations of the stupider and more cynical members of the SP.

by Rimbaud Tue Mar 09, 2004 14:49

Curious I wonder about u. Stopping the mail from US/UK would not have affected the war but blacking US airforce planes would. It would have made things more awkward for the logistics of getting supplies and troops and munitions to the Gulf.

The pundit is right all your other stuff looks like redherrings. I dont have to prove anything to u. I bet u r a puppy.