Organise to stop attacks on the unemployed

by [email protected] Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:06

We would like to hear from readers for any ideas or suggestions, post here or email us at [email protected]

by James Flynn Fri Aug 21, 2009 17:49

I have been unemployed for 9 months now and I think this is a great idea.
Unemployed people are an easy target for government attacks because they have no collective bargaining representation and if unemployed workers don't organise, further attacks on their quality of life will surely follow.
The government have halved job seekers payments for under 20's-We stood back and did nothing to stop it.
The government have scrapped the Christmas bonus-We stood back and did nothing to stop it.
The McCarthy report has advised the government to cut Social Welfare by 5% in the next budget and this time we must stand up and do something to stop it.
Its bad enough that our standard of living has been savaged by our loss of work. Its bad enough that we are constantly villified by the media but to try and take away our benefits when we need them most is a real kick in the teeth.
There is massive anger about this among unemployed people but that will amount to nothing unless it is channelled into a concerted campaign of resistance.
Enough is enough. Lets get together and FIGHT THESE CUTS!

by Bohemian Fri Aug 21, 2009 18:40

Would it be possible to know who is organising this and paying for the room in the Teachers Club? I'm interested in campaigning, not joining a political organisation or a front.

by Bazra B Sat Aug 22, 2009 14:11

Great idea, smaller version than yours was mutted around Newbridge but its just in its early stages.

If we stand back this will be the first of many welfare cuts I think.

by unemployed Sun Aug 23, 2009 03:00

There is a real need for an organisation for the unemployed. The INOU is entirely bureacratised at this stage, a recent chair being Fianna Fail East Galway hack Anne Fergus. Something along the lines of the National Union of Unemployed Workers, which developed during the 1930s in the UK is called for.

by Joe Dole Sun Aug 23, 2009 08:00

In 1957 an unemployed protest committee was set up after a meeting outside Werburgh unemployment offices in central Dublin, and subsequently a man with left republican leanings, Jack Murphy, was selected to contest the 1957 election as an unemployed candidate. He was elected after getting over 3200 votes.The story, from a WSM source, can be read here:

http://flag.blackened.net/revolt//ws91/unemptd33.html

by James Flynn Sun Aug 23, 2009 11:12

This meeting is being called by myself and another unemployed man. We are both Socialist Party members but this is a private initiative without the official support of the Socialist Party and we are paying for the room at the Teachers Club ourselves (70 euro).

This is not a front for the Socialist Party and we welcome any unemployed workers or their supporters regardless of any party or non-party affiliation. We intend that the campaign will be run democratically by its members with policies and actions decided by its members.

The NUWM in England during the 1930's would certainly be the kind of movement this could hopefully become. This emphasises the national aspect of the struggle we are facing and we would definitely welcome the contingent from Newbridge to attend. As you will know, the NUWM used to organise hunger marches leaving from different towns to convene in a central location and this was a highly effective tactic which we could discuss using.

If anyone knows of any other groups of unemployed workers from around the country please let us know so we can contact them.

by Joe Dole Sun Aug 23, 2009 13:23

Good to read that the organisers of the meeting intend it to be a broadly and nationally based non-party campaign.

Here's a wikipedia account of the life and short political career of Jack Murphy who was elected to the Dail in 1957 as an independent unemployed candidate. Some lessons can be learned from the initiative and activities of his contemporaries, and some inspiration can be gleaned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Murphy_(Irish_politician)

by IamSam Sun Aug 23, 2009 22:59

I sympathise with the recent unemployed but folks instead of pointing the finger and those lucky enough to still have jobs (and still paying taxes) how about looking at those that have not gotten of their asses to look for work in the past twenty years?

And Im sorry but if the public sector has to take a cut and all workers have to pay extra taxes then you have to tighten yuor belts as well. We cant just keeping taking the hits or we would be better off on the dole and then who would pay taxes to fund welfare?

by Ordinary Joe Soap Mon Aug 24, 2009 03:01

Here goes another Anti-Worker, Anti-Public Service, Anti-Unemployed rant from 'IamSam'.

To rebuff your first point "I sympathise with the recent unemployed but folks instead of pointing the finger and those lucky enough to still have jobs (and still paying taxes) how about looking at those that have not gotten of their asses to look for work in the past twenty years?" Yet another attempt to portray the unemployed as useless; good-for-nothing bums who wouldn't work in a fit. What about all the speculators; whether they be financial speculators playing Russian Roulette with people's money on the stock market or wherever; or property speculators. Many of those deals are done via the Internet without the need for those individuals to ever have to leave their homes/mansions. And what about the mega-rich 'IamSam'? Many of these have inherited their wealth through the likes of inherited property holdings and stocks and shares. Again; they never have to leave their homes/mansions to earn money.

And to rebutt your second point "And Im sorry but if the public sector has to take a cut and all workers have to pay extra taxes then you have to tighten yuor belts as well. We cant just keeping taking the hits or we would be better off on the dole and then who would pay taxes to fund welfare?" What about NAMA and it's €90 billion bail-out using our (The tax-payers') money; which if they succeed in getting through; will bankrupt this country for a generation. Instead of squandering money at the banks to prop them and their property developer friends up; use this money to invest in a public works programme to provide jobs for the unemployed; or does your deep-seated and patholgical hatred of anything to do with the unemployed; workers and the public service prevent you from seeing that this is a better course rather than kow-towing to the banks and the property speculators 'IamSam'?

by hs - sp (personal capacity) Mon Aug 24, 2009 13:17

Already as a previous commenter demonstrates we have an idelogical attack on the unemployed. We are told benifits are a 'disencentive' to work. Its not the benifits that are a disencentive, its the lack of work. We the unemployed workers, will also be used a a"reserve army of labour" to push down wages and conditions for everyone else. The states plan is to downgrade pay and conditions until we again become "competitive" and can attrack transnationals, then than they can tax workers wages and fund the state. They seem to have given up on Irish capitalism for the moment. Mass unemployment will be used in this strategy to frighten workers with jobs. This type of deflationary strategy was attempted in the 1950s and failed. The alternative is direct employment (an end to outsourcing) to put people to work for socially useful works. This does not have to be loss-making. Socially useful jobs or public enterprise can quite easily make a surplus. Schools etc can be quite easily be built by direct employment, instead of contracters creaming off the funds for personal profit.

Direct employment should be on of the major planks to this campaign.

Hs

by IamSam Tue Aug 25, 2009 02:52

Whats your point OrdinaryJoeSoap? That we should only blame one part of society and ignore the rest? Yes the banks screwed us but stating the fact doesnt fix it. Yes I think NAMA is a bail out for the rich bankers but again thats not the point is it? Simple reality is the bankers will not save this country so we have to. If that means getting rid of the current government (which I personaly think it does) then so be it but dont expect every other sector of society to take the pain if you wont share it. I dont understand what you have against people who inherit. Thats not a drain on the states cash and you pay inheritence tax.

In the end, Im not a banker nor am I rich under any definition of the word but I have had to take reductions in pay and extra tax so again I ask, if I have to why not the unemployed?

Please also read before replying. I clearly stated it was the long term unemployed. You can put your head in the sand if you want but ten years ago during the boom times when the country couldnt fill jobs fast enough there were still over 50,000 on job seekers benefit. Not disability, not short -term sick or temporary unemployed but long-term job seekers allowance. Now can you honestly say these people tried to gain employment? Cause if you believe that I have a bridge to sell.

by James Flynn Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:29

IamSam,

Thanks for your comments.

I am sorry to hear that you have had to take pay cuts and extra income levies. This is another example of the wrong headed Fianna Fail goverment attempting to deal with the economic crisis in an ineffective way. These cuts and levies have left you with less money in your pocket to spend and support businesses. This means that those businesses make less money and then potentially have to cut wages or lay people off which causes the vicious circle to start again.

Pay cuts are not a way of showing solidarity but in fact exacerbate the situation. We would call on all workers, public or private, to resist cuts to their pay and conditions.

With reference to your comments about the long term unemployed, I don't dispute that there were some scroungers during the boom as unfortunately there are always certain elements who will attempt to take advantage of the welfare state. A culture of dependency and entitlement can exist. However, the worst offenders of this are undoubtedly the banks who are getting a massive bail out to compensate for their failure. They are far more costly to the country than the benefit cheats.

The 50,000 you mentioned who were claiming JSA during the boom now pale into insignificance as the number of unemployed approaches10 times that number. These people cannot be accused of not having worked during Celtic Tiger years as clearly they worked hard and payed their taxes, and yet when their time of need has come, they are being scape goated and attacked as a drain on society.

This is not right and we hope that others will recognise this and show true solidarity by supporting the efforts of job seekers to protect what remains of their income. The unemployed have already taken more than their fair share of the pain and should not be forced ot endure more.

by unemployed - none Tue Aug 25, 2009 14:53

There is officially 420,000 unemployed. In reality including sparks and plumbers its could be 500,000. We have debts and bills and houses to pay for. We get 204 euro a week. If there was some lazy people during the boom so be it. That doesn't account for the other 450,000 of us and growing who are at our wits end with bills and debts. If they can have 90 billion of good money to throw after bad why can't we find some money to employ people to build hospitals and other things we need?

by hs - sp (personal capacity) Wed Sep 02, 2009 18:37

related article here:

http://www.indymedia.ie/article/93894&comment_limit=0&c...58747