NIPSA - all out strike

by Davy Carlin - Uncivil servant supporter Tue Aug 24, 2004 11:22

From the onset 'uncivil servant activists' have agitated, mobilised, and taken the lead in not only calling for such escalation of action but had actively been to the fore in mobilising thousands of workers in unofficial walkouts and militancy within this dispute from the onset.

The reason why I state this {as it is important to the dispute} is that huge momentum, support and workers militancy was built up with these actions with workers constantly calling from the onset on the civil service executive to call all out strike as workers realised a long drawn out dispute would play into management hands.

Eight months on civil service executive after a long drawn out dispute have now arrived at the position that the workers were actively calling for and attempting to mobilise on from the start.

I will go into greater detail on this dispute after it is over but I agree with TfC that presently we need to work to win a rejection of the offer and for all out strike. Although many of the workers have remained solid as have the selective strike action picket lines, we need though to re -create the momentum and militancy that we had seen created and supported at the onset by thousands of workers.

For example in my workplace of 1200 or so NIPSA members 95 plus % at my workplace where active in offical actions from the onset and many hundreds took part in street protest, marches etc in unofficial actions and walkouts, and this can be reflected elsewhere.

If we can re - create that then I believe we can win.

First we have to win workers to reject the offer. So lets get down to it and we can discuss the ins and outs and merits of the various stratagies seen, 'not voiced', in ' real terms' after the dispute is won.

by Pat the Rat - Rambling Davy Association Wed Aug 25, 2004 11:15

It will be a historic development
will you ever fuck of.
The socialist Party tfc front which is on the civil service exc has lead NIPSA to the biggest defeat of its history.
The have allowed all the workers milant stuff to burn of and by selective action played into governments hand by getting a few to take
on the fight for all, over months and months with government easily dealing with it.

In the act of desperation they now call on workers who have been up for the fight from the start who have put their necks on the line in unofficial action who have called and walked on masse at the start for all out action who where then put to the side while a few hundred took on the fight for the thousands of milant workers, to now take all out on going action with no pay.
In other words put it in the workers corner after burning out the militant stuff through a demoralising long drawn out dispute with a few taking on the fight for the many and the most militant workers pushed to the side

SP, TFC hang your heads in shame. All out strike action at the start with the massive support and thousands of militant workers marching unofficially was the time to strike The workers where calling out to the exc for this you heard us but did nothing.

This was the time to stike we had management and governemnt crapping themselves by the mass unofficial and offical stuff but it also had the exc crapping themseves. So it was boxed and selective action by a few was chosen, with it so died the militant stuff and the mass offical and unofficial walkouts, and the chance to win. So SP TFC EXC you are responsible for NIPSA's greatest defeat . l

by No way Wed Aug 25, 2004 16:19

Sure the post just above is a parody? There can't be another Davy Carlin rambling away about the evil Socialist Party and the heroic SWP can there?

by Unhappy and Uncivil Wed Aug 25, 2004 16:37

Totally agree now lets wait and see how the sp tfc executive explain how they lead NIPSA to it's greatest ever defeat, even after seeing some of the most militant action by civil servants ever. The workers in their thousands screamed for all out action from the start from the SP, tfc executive when thousands were taking to the streets in unofficial action. That leadership though, not the management were the people that eventually pacified our struggle with 'SELECTIVE ACTION’, as the government wiped its brow. History will tell how we lost, when our leaders ignored and feared our calls in our thousands for all out action at the start when we could have won. Yes we could have won, but you pacified us and put the whole dispute on the backs of a few. Suddenly you forgot UNITY is strength, now you have remembered it so to attempt to wipe your hands of defeat Yes, Shame on you Shame.

by Unhappy and Uncivil - UC Wed Aug 25, 2004 16:53

I hope not but this is a bit like the last one on NIPSA when all those supposed Davy's eventually ended up putting their names as actual uncivil servant activtists. Spoilsports, as bang went the SP's complete politcal intervention and response to issues put to them. Davy million names and Rambling Davy though has now got its own fan club, seriously, thanks to the SP.

by No Way Wed Aug 25, 2004 16:59

His fan club consists of more and more identities for the same rambling nutter. You don't have to like the SP at all to see Davy for the buffoon he clearly is.

I mean is there anyway that they could make the stuff above less coherent? If they removed every third letter it wouldn't make any less sense. I've read it twice and I still can't work out what they are accusing Time for Change of other than being nasty betrayers of everything right.

by Unhappy and uncivil Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:15

What a re action! A Buffon! What a great intervention and what a response. Sorry though to say I am not Davey but I am sure if you read through the points you would see what is being said by all concerned.

by Major Woody Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:31

What do you make of Rory Ahearn describing Uncivil Servants as the SWPs front in NIPSA in the IS International Bulletin?

by Ramblers club Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:44

Here SP, have you not learnt that it is better to answer that to try to avoid as it makes you look pathetic. There are many people who support the views expressed above who are civil servants. Either take on the argument or move over and provide an SPer who can at least start to articulate a position.

What is being said is that the leadership have most likely lost the workers this fight because of their timid approach. The workers where far more militant, their calls were ignored, the SP time for Change are on the leadership that took that timid approach that may have lost them this struggle .

Don't blame workers for being angry especially as it was they who took to the streets in their thousands in unofficial action calling on the leadership for an all out strike when we could have won. We may now then lose so the workers are angry ,they were up for it, and the leadership and their timid approach may have lost us our victory. And yes history will write that., and I have no doubt that the likes of Davy Carlin will write it.

by Major Woody Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:48

I'm not an SPer (choke) but the grouchy sectarian alter-ego of an anarchist. I just thought that Rorys comment was a dumb one to stick on something going on the internet and wondered what the non-SWP non Davy NIPSA people like yourself thought of it :-)

by RA Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:51

Don't know who Rory Ahearn is but the SWP have only two members I believe involved in uncivil servant
It is not a front so I am not interested in his remarks. Again why not take on the issues rised instead of old ground as I read the last debate mentioned. I am not interested in SWP against SP just the issue of the strike and agree with a lot that has been said as do many workers I know...

by Major Woody Wed Aug 25, 2004 17:59

I would have thought that if as you say there are only two SWP members involved you would have been annoyed that the SWP is calling Uncivil Servant "our rank and file group". The quote is on page 36 of the SWP International Bulletin at http://www.istendency.net/pdf/bulletin_5_2004.pdf

It is odder again that Rory fancies he owns your group and you don't even know him!

by Brian C. Wed Aug 25, 2004 18:00

The opening article is about the possibility of the most important industrial action in Ireland for a generation. Something that deserves some serious attention. The first comment, for all that I disagree with its analysis, was at least concerned with the issue at hand.

After that the thread degenerated into vitriol. An article which had the potential to start exactly the kind of interesting discussion the newswire needs more of has turned into a slanging match. What trade unionist is going to come here for news if the good stuff is drowned in this kind of rubbish? It makes everyone look stupid.

Time for Change is a broad alliance of NIPSA members who want to see a fighting democratic union. It includes the union president and nine members of the executive, but they form the left minority in the leadership structures of NIPSA. The right wing is still in control of the union.

I am saddened but not really surprised that some other "socialists" seem to feel that attacking the left grouping is the appropriate response to this news. Time for Change members amongst others have fought for an escalation of industrial action and that campaign is culminating in the call for rejection and all out strike action. NIPSA is now on the brink of something very important. Whatever disagreements there may be, socialists should keep their eyes on the bigger picture.

by Civil Servant - NIPSA member Wed Aug 25, 2004 19:54

NIPSA is not on the brink of something important it has been defeated and they will not win the ballot. Workers are demoralised and dis unified due to the cutting out of the majority of workers from the dispute. The militant and masse walkouts had been taken over by selective action for a few, which tfc initially agreed with but which workers and management knew would never win the dispute. TfC, SP did call for steps in escalation as the dispute continued, although others went out and actually actively set about it. You seem to think that if tfc had a majority it would be different. Reading the past article on this the last time they where in a majority they did very little and NIPSA members therefore voted in a different committee.

Why would there be any difference?. The committee has lost the workers this dispute, it is over. Just by asking around workers I have found that many believe that the tfc sp executive had at the start took members up to the top of the hill. Then with the masse official action combined with unofficial action they then marched them all back down again with selective action for a few. Workers have a right to be angry. Of course we have to try to win the vote but by talking to workers anyone can see that they are angry as much with the leadership as they are with management. It is the demoralisation of the long drawn out dispute, the strike action for a few and the ignoring of their voices at the height of militant and masse walkouts that will have many I believe throwing in the towel.

by TFC - NIPSA Wed Aug 25, 2004 20:44

Just to clarify.

The dispute is controlled by the Civil Service Executive not the General Council.

TFC does not have a majority on the CSE.

At no stage did TFC believe or argue that selective action alone could win the dispute.

The dispute can be won.

by The Rambler - Nipsa Thu Aug 26, 2004 11:43

It is clear whether or not there had been a tfc majority little change would have occurred as we had seen previous. That is why members and supporters did not vote for them that next time round.
Where the change and victory would have come from was by the immediate escalation to all out strike at the start when the militancy, solidarity and support were bubbling over onto the streets on mass..

Instead of using that, tfc SP executive instead pushed it to the side, and brought in selective action of a few on behalf of the many.

So while thousands of militant workers where crying out at that stage for all out action with a real chance of victory you instead agreed a stand that everyone knew would lead to a long drawn out demoralising dispute. Which very well could mean ultimately defeat, government knew that as well.
TFC did agree for selective action. If you go around the workplaces you will find many of the workers demoralised by the path civil service executive had all agreed to and followed. It will be very hard to get them to agree to such a call of all out strike with no pay 'at this stage'. The vote therefore will be hard won but I personally agree tfc, it though can be won. We need to start to on that right away.

by NIPSA Member - NIPSA Thu Aug 26, 2004 13:31

This article was supposed to get NIPSA members to Vote YES to Strike action. So why attack DAVY, SWP or even the SP and TfC, NIPSA members need to win this dispute otherwise its all over, and that means everything will be thrown into the fire, all terms and conditions, pay rises for the future, and even security of the job.

Forget what TfC failed to do, forget the differences in SP and SWP, forget even the Uncivil Servant (which i am a supporter of) and NO I am not in the SWP.

Let us NIPSA members join together and Fight for our right to a decent wage.

END LOW PAY

by Aye Thu Aug 26, 2004 14:04

The SP are being criticised because they misled the strike. They squandered a lot of the existing militancy in useless skirmishes.

by The Rambler Thu Aug 26, 2004 15:56

You are right it is about much more, and workers fully realised what they may lose.
That is precisely why they walked out unofficially, calling for all out action, and putting their very lively hoods at risk. That is why we seen mass unofficial walkouts of literally thousands of civil servants, with such militancy, never seen before by civil servants over such matters. This was combined with mass official walkouts and also having initially huge support from other workers and massive support from people around Northern Ireland. By having this, we would have without doubt won the strike within two weeks.

Workers called out for this from the rafters knowing this was the time to strike, that this was they way to win. Unfortunately, very unfortunately, instead the SP tfc executive 'agreed' selective action of a few on behalf of the many.

With that the growing militant momentum, mass support and official and unofficial mass actions were sidelined to the huge sighs of relief from government and management. Therefore after eight long months with that mass militancy buried and workers demoralised by a long drawn out dispute, seeing strike action only for the selected few. The leadership ‘now’ look to ask the workers for all out action without pay?

It was the workers screaming out for all out action and in fact leading and shown the way with their militancy that had the potential for victory. The government feared this; they knew that this mass united action could bring the state to a close if such was sustained for several days. It was the case of the workers against the state and at that stage I believe we could have won.

The workers in their thousands where calling out for it, and showing the way with their mass walkouts. The workers knew what was at stake, and they where up for it, they did every thing and more the leadership asked of them. Yet this unified power of the workers in mass unofficial and official action, with mass support around society, was sidelined and selected action of the few commenced as agreed by Tfc sp executive. Will history tell a case of defeat from the jaws of very possible victory? I hope not

While workers and militants will battle, and it will be a battle 'now' to win this vote, we should not attempt to brush the lessons of this under the carpet. Yes, let’s leave the attacks out, but this is workers history in motion. Whether victory or defeat lessons need to be and are already being learnt. So again let’s ALL unite and try to revitalise, claw back, and include the masses to win firstly the vote and then the dispute..

by Brick Wall Thu Aug 26, 2004 16:20

How many times do our Uncivil Servant friends need to be reminded that Time For Change, the main left body is a minority on both the Civil Service Executive and the union general council?

The right wing control both bodies. Again, the right wing control both bodies. A third time, the right wing control both bodies. If you need me to say it a few more times I will. So what's all this "tfc-executive" stuff?

The General Council is controlled by the right wing in part because Uncivil Servant (openly described by the SWP as their group) split the left vote in the recent elections. Uncivil Servant did not get a single person elected but they did manage to ensure that Time for Change narrowly missed out on taking control of the General Council.

Then you have the cheek to come on here and complain about the union leadership being conservative... and blame it on Time for Change!

What the hell is with you people? Time for Change have been arguing for an escalation of the industrial action for a long time. Now that some real progress is being made on that score, all you do is whine and spew out the worst kind of defeatism.

This is a ballot that can be won, but it isn't going to be won by people like some of those on this thread who seem more concerned with marking themselves out some space by bitching about the main left group.

by Brian S - Uncivil Servant Thu Aug 26, 2004 17:47

Quite agree with you Brick Wall, but how can TFC blame Uncivil Servant on Splitting the Vote of the left, when TFC stand 18 -20 candidates (maybe less) and Uncivil Servant have 4 (yes 4) canidates by my count that equals 22 - 24 from the Left standing.

Uncivil Servant is not blaming TFC on the failures of NIPSA CSGE.

I am involve in Uncivil Servant, and do take great exception in being called a SWP group. I am not in the SWP and will not be.

We have only one member who is a part of the SWP and by no means does this person lead us or have a control over our decisions.

Let me make it clear Uncivil Servant knows who is in control of the dispute.

Lets work to get the Yes to Strike vote, after all NIPSA have let each of its members down for taking so long to take this road, lets not waste it. Vote for Strike action, Vote NO to the pay offers. This is our chance now, lets grab it with both hands and strangle the money out of them.

by Rambler Thu Aug 26, 2004 18:15

Would tfc in a leadership majority have made a difference?

If you are interested read the recent link on this debate. It will give you an understanding of both groups positions on the elections.

That is, the tfc again blaming uncivil servant for them not winning the election as repeated above {arguing with the deaf?}. Or if you just want to get a better overview of the differing positions then click into the link.
In the meantime , once again, let's fight for a yes vote

by Time For Change - NIPSA Sat Aug 28, 2004 12:02 tfc.nipsa at ntlworld dot com

CIVIL SERVICE PAY
REJECT THE OFFER – TIME FOR ACTION – VOTE YES

Across the country NIPSA Civil Service members should be receiving letters explaining the latest developments in the pay dispute. Thousands will be debating the issue, weighing up the alternatives and preparing to attend meetings. The democratic process has begun and we, TFC, must play a full role in it. There are crucial steps we can take.

• Ensure every member has access to the necessary information. Let members know that info is on the NIPSA web site at http://www.nipsa.org.uk/

• Make sure every member has an opportunity to attend a meeting to discuss the issues.

• Ensure every meeting has a speaker from the CS Executive (don’t take no for an answer).

No one is under any illusion about the issues involved. This dispute was never just about pay. Away back at the beginning of the dispute the government tried to tie in attacks on fundamental terms and conditions and they tried to use the issue of pay to break NIPSA in the Civil Service. These issues are still underlying. When we vote we will not just be voting on the latest pay offer we will be voting on the whole future of our working lives in the Civil Service.
NIPSA members are facing a very difficult choice. Either accept a pay offer which frankly nobody could be happy with and put the day of reckoning off until another time or take very serious industrial action now.

In such circumstances it is important that the message gets across that NIPSA is an extremely powerful force in Northern Ireland. We have tens of thousands of members; we have the strength to shut down major parts of the economy. If we take all out action the government will not be able to sit back and ride it out. So far in this dispute we have only used a tenth of our strength. The determined struggle of our members who took selective action, the one day strikes, unofficial walkouts, and the huge sacrifice made by the members who stopped overtime were drops in the ocean when compared to the effect of closing down every Civil Service Department. Literally within hours of such action being taken the government would be in a crisis in Northern Ireland.

With so much at stake we can expect no favours from the government. Their propaganda machine will be in full swing; already they have restricted the right of members to receive information. They will use the press to attack and undermine the dispute and as the history of this dispute shows they are capable of threats and intimidation to get the result they want. TFC will be doing all it can to counter their propaganda.

by Civil Sevant Sun Aug 29, 2004 16:48

is that the SP in NIPSA dont decide on their own policy. Peter Hadden decides it and hands it down to them. Just as Haddens interference at the Airport messed things uip in the ATGWU now hes messed it up in NIPSA. After the next NIPSA elections there wont be very many SP members elected to its leading bodies.

by . Sun Aug 29, 2004 22:08

'civil servant' the real problem is trolls like you who couldnt give a F**k about NIPSA members as long as you get to stir s**t.
You are anti union and anti working class.

by Civil Servant Mon Aug 30, 2004 10:33

I do care and I despair at the mess that is caused in NIPSA by the interference of Hadden. He knows nothing about Trade Unions. For the last 30 years he has been stuck in a sectarian cocoon cut off from reality. Someone like Hadden should not be telling the SP NIPSA what to do.

More importantly those SP members should realise that they were elected to represent their members, not take orders from Hadden.

by Time For Change - NIPSA Tue Aug 31, 2004 19:43

To those who think this ballot can not be won please note the huge vote in favour of action in the CSA.
This shows that although it will be a close result a majority can be won if members feel there is a clear leadership given.

Well done CSA - Victory to the Civil Service workers.

by Bill McKeown Fri Sep 03, 2004 01:17

I am a civil servant and a NIPSA member and I have given my full support to the campaign of selective industrial action,which was successful in bringing senior management to the negotiating table.
However,although the two pay offers fall far short of what I would consider a reasonable pay increase ,i nonetheless feel that all-out strike action will get us absolutely nowhere.Thereare more than enough non-union members to keep offices "ticking over" and it is most unlikely that very many members,especially those of us with family committments,could endure the severe financial hardship which would result from several weeks(or possibly months) of unpaid strike action.
Consider also the fact that such action would have a disastrous effect on our pension entitlement and that it would be a very long time before we made up the amount we had lost through the strike,even if we were to achieve another percentage point increase .
i would urge all members to seriously consider the issue realistically and not be influenced by a bunch of left wing hotheads who are only using this dispute as a means to their political ends

by Bill Mckeown Fri Sep 03, 2004 01:32

At the next nipsa election I sincerely hope that members will vote for people who represent THEM and not some totally unrepresentative organisation on the lunatic fringe of poitics like the SP or the SWP.
If either of these "parties" were to stand in elections the chances are they'd be lucky to get more than a handful of votes.I fail to see how they can earnestly purport to represent "the working class".They represent no-one but themselves and their seriously distorted and outdated world-view .
It's time for a change in in nipsa all right,i.e. high time the rank and file members told the communists to get on their bikes to cuba ,north korea or whatever "workers paradise" will have them and elect committed trade unionists who work for ALL their members and leave their politics at home

by patrick mcginley - nipsa Tue Sep 07, 2004 13:26

Uncivil Servant SUPPORTED Time for Change Candidates. Time for Change did NOT SUPPORT Uncivil Servant.

They now wonder why the right have a majority.

You are certainly as thick as a "brick wall".

By the way, what do the letters SWP stand for?

I am the Editor of Uncivil Servant and I have not come across these before. I hate acronyms anyway.

by uncivil servant member Tue Sep 07, 2004 13:30

I am sick of hearing about the SP and SWP political differences. I have been involved in the Uncivil Servant since the start. In reply to BRICK WALLS comments on us being a SWP publication, do you believe everything that you read. They (the SWP) have done this off their own bat. But in your own language so that you understand WE ARE NOT AN SWP PUBLICATION, SECONDLY WE ARE NOT AN SWP PUBLICATION, AND A THIRD TIME WE ARE NOT AN SWP PUBLICATION. If you don't believe this then look at the Uncivil servant issue 8 where in the article called "election news", several of us insisted on the line "the rank and file group is not affilliated to any political group". Right have we all finally got this. Now the differences between TFC and the Uncivil Servant are negligible, they think the way things is through elections to NIPSA General Council and CSGE. The Uncivil Servant believes the way to change things is through building a Rank and File movement. We have demonstrated this by going out to stormont and leafletting them, going to Derry and leafletting there and many of the selective strike picket lines. We did this on our own time and not for political gain. It is more important for us to win a strike vote than to blow our own trumpet. If we do not combine our forces at this time, then how do we get rid of the right wing for good. The comments made about the Uncivil Servant denying TFC a majority on the Council/Executive are getting frankly boring. We campaigned and delivered the CSA vote for most of the TFC candidates, remember that this is 1000 members, a sizeable vote. The fact that TFC on the orders of the SP did not vote for the Uncivil Servant candidates is a matter for themselves. But I will not be accused of letting the right wing in. I don't take orders from anyone and this is the real reason why we are looking at a right wing victory. Can TFC supporters not see that by voting for us, there would have been a left majority, obviously not.
When people like Bill McKeown start writing in stating that we should not go on strike, then I get really sick. What happens Bill when we get sod all next year. I have a mortgage and a child on the way and still know that an all out strike vote is required. What happens when the mortgage rates go up as they inevitably will and the rates and we have a further £600pa to pay in water rates. Will we have the impetus to go forward with industrial action next year if we lose this year, I doubt it. My advice to you Bill is to continue on burying your head in the sand and let the "left wing hotheads" do your fighting for you. I am hapy to do this for you as I am a working class person with no affilliations to any parties. Vote for strike, vote for a better deal for the working man.

by patrick mcginley - nipsa Tue Sep 07, 2004 13:40

In the last number of elections I have voted Alliance, PUP, DUP, Socialist Environmental Alliance, and Women's Coalition, so I suppose I must be in a lot of fronts.

Lots of people pretend to know famous people so I suppose Rory Ahern, whoever he may be, is trying to act the lad by letting on he knows me.

It happens all the time. Just ask David Beckham.

by Geoff Cowden - Uncivil Servant Tue Sep 07, 2004 15:57

I would like to thank everyone in the CSA who voted for strike action. We should have concentrated on the vote rather than the next elections. It is good to see that we can still deliver in the biggest branch.

by pat c Tue Sep 14, 2004 11:50

"Nipsa has been involved in strike action since December. Civil servants in Northern Ireland have accepted a pay offer from the government, voting narrowly against an all-out strike.

The public service union, Nipsa, announced on Monday that it has decided to call off industrial action, which has lasted 40 weeks.

Union leaders had urged members to reject the government offer and back strike action.

But the civil servants rejected that and their decision marks the end of 10 months' industrial action which led to widespread disruption to the workings of government. "

by Civil Servant Tue Sep 14, 2004 12:34

I posted here previously and was abused because I had the audacity to criticise the role of the SP in NIPSA. These people actually believe that they are above criticism. Think of what they would do if they ever had any real power.

The militancy of the NIPSA membership was frittered away in a series of futile limited actions. The result of this ballot is hardly any surprise twith the members having being misled for so long by the SP. The Damascene conversion of the SP to all out action was greeted with cynicism in many areas.

The real scandal is that the policy carried forward by the SP in NIPSA was handed down to them by Peter Hadden. Once again Haddens hybris and interference has led to a defeat for the Trade Union movement.

by Bill McKeown Wed Sep 15, 2004 00:33

The result was more or less what I expected.Most Civil Servants had the good sense to accept(albeit reluctantly) the best deal that we could possibly get without causing more hardship for ourselves.
The militants of the SP and SWP who were behind the call for an all-out strike clearly haven't done their sums ,or they don't know how to! If we had followed their advice and gone on strike for the gods know how long-a month,two months,until Christmas(aye right :O),we might just have squeezed another 1% out of the Government,but would have lost so much pay(even if we could have afforded to),that we'd have been considerably worse off as a result.
It's not as if we achieved nothing.Most people should be 600-700 pounds better off thsi year as a result of our selective action,and it is very likely that a restored assembly will be much easier to negotiate with in the future.We should think positively and build on what we have achieved.
It's time that the rank and file sent all their left-wing "activists" packing and elected people who represent THEIR opinions.the only marxists are the self-appointed "dictators of the proletariat" who make unrealistic demands and charge about barking orders like the fascist control freaks they are.
We can fight our own battles without them and we can make the unions truly democratic.I don't expect much support for my views here but I will do everything I can as a member of my own Branch Committee to make ordinary members wake up to the real danger in our midst and I can assure you all there are many more who feel the same way.

by uncivil servant Mon Sep 20, 2004 13:42

Bill, you seem to be under the impression that a majority of members voted against strike action, I would just like to fill you in on the fact that 8405 members were part of this consultation exercise. What then happened to the other 14,000 approx members votes. This consultation was a farce handled by eejits from reclaim your union who are all overpaid and underworked. We have now accepted a 16 month pay deal which means less work for the dodgers in Harkin House. Oh how the NIPSA negotiating committee must be rubbing their hands together knowing they will have an extra 6 months of doing very little to forward the low pay campaign. Why did NIPSA not insist on meetings for all members on this issue. Maybe because like you, they are happy to do the bare minimum to end low pay. I work in the CSA and our return was 83% in favour of strike. Is this because we run the place like a gulag or because we inform our members of exactly what is going on. Get your facts correct and ask yourself how the members in the CSA are being represented by the collapse of this dispute. Nothing was ever won without a little sacrifice.

by kintama Tue Sep 21, 2004 00:26

that the result was unfavourable was not only down to eejits in reclaim your union asTfC were heavily involved in the consultation process. the failure of so many people to vote may in some small part be due to a large number of resignations in recent times in areas such as the CSA and the failure of TfC to deliver a united and coherent message

by Amused Tue Sep 21, 2004 12:26

The SP the leaders of everything and nobody come in for a bit of a ticking off from aul' davy boy.
Loved this bit:

"Yet two days later another meeting was called by the Belfast Socialist Party, on building a socialist alternative. Their platform of speakers included a President of the largest Trade union, the leading figure of another Trade union and a Socialist TD (MP) from the South of Ireland. That meeting attracted little more than a dozen persons, in fact no one outside of their own organisation. While I can hold respect for those on the platform as socialist activist I again learnt a lesson similar to the NIPSA issue. That is, that if one works in campaigns in a fraternal way putting the interest of the campaign as the priority then people will acknowledge that. More importantly that the campaign should be activist based and activists lead from below, where genuine activists can begin to feel empowered and equal participants."

Is Davy the northern version of Brian Cahill?

by bemused Sat Sep 25, 2004 12:00

Who is Brian as this knowledge would be essential in deciding if Davy is up there.
I seem to recall Davy indicating some time ago that he was a full time revolutionary , this could be wrong, but if correct Brian may fall short of the mark.

by Literary Criticism Sat Sep 25, 2004 16:15

I tried reading the article at that link, really I did. I mean a bit of sectarian baiting is always worth a gander. And if there is one thing you can rely on Davy for its a bit of sectarian baiting.

Thing is it was completely unreadable. I know that people take the piss out of Davy for his rambling style but that piece is beyond belief. It is so poorly written that trying to read it can cause actual physical pain. Does the Blanket not have an editorial process or do they just not read the pieces that are submitted to them?

As far as I can gather from ploughing through his piece, Davy thinks that the SWP are a really lovely bunch of people, respected by everyone who deals with them and that the SP are a shower of bastards. Nothing I couldn't have picked from any one of a hundred other articles by him on much the same subject.

I'm tempted to start some sort of award for "most incoherent article by a regular Indymedia contributor" off the back of this.

by madge Thu Sep 30, 2004 22:37

Just tripped over this thread - must have missed as I've been too busy with the other threads on the demise of the civil service dispute. Not surprised to see the same debate raging but I am bemused by "uncivil Servant"'s comments about the "farce" of the consultation. I heard that about 400 csa members attended their meeting which most people would recognise is a good turnout. However while your branch returned an 83% vote for action in reality less than half the members in your branch turned up so its just not as convincing unless you are suggesting that all of the other (600 odd?) members in the branch or the other 14000 civil servants who didn't vote either for that matter would have been in favour of all out action? Somehow I can't see that people who couldn't be bothered / weren't interested enough to go to meetings would be the stalwarts of an all out strike - more's the pity and thats what the union needs to look at now getting those members to participate in future. It is a real shame that more members didn't attend meetings but they can't be forced to!
I am also bemused by a trade unionist describing other members (elected by the membership) who, I presume from the tenor of your comment, because they are not in the lowest paid grades in the NICS are "overpaid and underworked" - what is this about - NIPSA represents members at all grades - are you suggesting that some of our members are "overpaid". I also can't see what relevance this has to either TFC or RYU when they appear to have people from all grades within their ranks. If you want to challenge other people's views or opinions then focus on the debate not what grade someone is - its divisive and destructive in a union that seeks to represent everyone.