Bulletin of Socialist Party members working in retail and distribution
December 2008
Issue 13
New Year Greetings From Robbie (Robina) Segal (Usdaw President Candidate)
Dear Sisters and Brothers
Unfortunately, 2009 will be one of the hardest years faced by retail workers for decades. During my campaign for Usdaw’s general secretary, I said that what was at stake was the future direction of the union. My socialist message received 40% of the vote. If the election had taken place today, I am sure the bankruptcy of the present leadership’s policies - as shown by their response to the economic crisis - would have given me even more votes.
My warning that there needed to be a change of attitude because the union would not be ready to face the challenges of the impending economic crisis has proven correct. It is clear from recent reports that two of the major UK banks came within hours of collapse and New Labour came to their rescue and the tax payer paid the bill. Our members have contributed millions to save the banks and yet when our jobs are threatened there is no help for us.
What is needed is a militant programme of action which includes: demonstrations, lobbying the government, occupations of the stores and workplaces, and the nationalisation of the major retailers. The trade unions have been silent, Usdaw must demand at the TUC that a progamme of coordinated action be planned which must include one day stoppages.
John Hannett and the policies of Usdaw leaders’ have been tested with their response to the Woolworth closure. They have failed.
I ask you to help mobilise your members in the President and EC elections to ensure they vote for candidates who want change. Have a good new year but let us make 2009 the year that Usdaw starts the fight back.
Comradely
Robbie (Robina) Segal
The slaughter of retail jobs
We reported in the last issue of the Activist of the slaughter of retail jobs and unfortunately it has been proven correct. Woolworth is now gone and so as many other high street names and thousands of jobs will be lost in the coming months. Already in the days following Christmas the following have announced problems: Whittard, tea sellers; UCS, fashion; Zavvi, music; Olan Mills, the photo shop; and Adams, the children’s clothing retailer. How many more jobs will be lost before our leader start the fight back?
Understanding the recession
The Activist welcomes the decision of the Union to try and come to grips with a strategy to fight the recession. At the officials’ jamboree, in Alton Towers at the beginning of the New Year, there is a session on the recession. We have to ask will it establish the fighting programme that is clearly needed by our Union. The key is to understand the nature of the crisis. The Activist argues that it is a crisis of capitalism. And without a understanding of capitalism then there can be no real strategy to defeat the onslaught of the bosses.
Increase the minimum wage
The British Chamber of Commerce, the bosses’ organistion, has demanded that there should be no increase in the national minimum wage in 2009. They argue that any increase would undermine jobs and lead to unemployment. They stated:
"We're not opposed to the minimum wage going up when employment is high and the economy is doing well, but when jobs are being lost daily and a recession is in full swing, it makes no sense to increase it," said director general David Frost. "Most businesses are prioritising survival at the moment. A rise in the minimum wage would not help firms hold on to staff and would simply add to unemployment."
This is a declaration of war against the low-paid workers. The words should act as a warning for our negotiators; the bosses will want us to pay for their crisis. Our members are paid little more than pence above the minimum wage and, therefore, what is needed is a coordinated programme of action. Why not increase the minimum wage to give us workers the extra money we need to spend to make ends meet and at the same time put back into the economy?
The Activist pointed out months ago that the economic crisis, which had been caused by the wealthy and their capitalist system, that the bosses would demand the low-paid workers to pay. This is why the trade unions should be raising the need to change the political system. If capitalism is failing then we should be demanding a socialist system. Socialism would defend the rights of the majority rather than keeping a few fat cats in luxury. For a full analysis of the current economic and political crisis then check out www.socialistparty.org.uk
Email addresses needed
If you have a colleague who would like to receive
a regular copy of the Activist or other materials to democratise the our union then send their
e-mail address to shopworker@socialistparty.org.uk
Saturday, 17 January 2009
Christmas is Over and the Cutbacks Begin
by a Morrisons Worker
After dragging almost the entire workforce in over the Christmas period to do extra shifts to capitalise on the usual higher sales of that period, the Morrisons I work at (and the others in the area) have decided to repay the workforce by cutting back on hours. Of course, there are usually cutbacks on temporary staff that are taken on for Christmas, but this is much more.
In the name of saving money (or in reality keeping up their profits), staff have had their hours cut on a temporary basis with someone losing 24 hours of work per week! Others have been moved from working on Sundays (for which we get paid time and a half) to other days of the week. Although it is not a large proportion of the staff who are affected directly, it will affect everyone indirectly as we’ll all be expected to pick up the slack. Its another story of workers who have mortgages and rents to pay, suffering for the effects of the capitalist economic crisis.
Shop workers need a fighting trade union to represent them and fight for better conditions, and that’s why I’d urge all USDAW members to vote for Robbie Segal in the upcoming elections.
After dragging almost the entire workforce in over the Christmas period to do extra shifts to capitalise on the usual higher sales of that period, the Morrisons I work at (and the others in the area) have decided to repay the workforce by cutting back on hours. Of course, there are usually cutbacks on temporary staff that are taken on for Christmas, but this is much more.
In the name of saving money (or in reality keeping up their profits), staff have had their hours cut on a temporary basis with someone losing 24 hours of work per week! Others have been moved from working on Sundays (for which we get paid time and a half) to other days of the week. Although it is not a large proportion of the staff who are affected directly, it will affect everyone indirectly as we’ll all be expected to pick up the slack. Its another story of workers who have mortgages and rents to pay, suffering for the effects of the capitalist economic crisis.
Shop workers need a fighting trade union to represent them and fight for better conditions, and that’s why I’d urge all USDAW members to vote for Robbie Segal in the upcoming elections.
Friday, 5 December 2008
Retail and Distribution Activist no 12
Bulletin of Socialist Party members working in retail and distribution
November 2008 Issue 12
Robbie to stand for President
After the excellent vote for her as a candidate in Usdaw’s general secretary election, Robbie Segal has been lobbied to stand for the position of Usdaw’s President. Robbie told the Activist, ‘I feel honoured to accept the nomination to stand for President on behalf of those in the union who want to change Usdaw into a union that’s fights for it members. I will be a campaigning President. I will fight to protect members’ jobs, and terms and conditions. I will argue for a national campaign to mobilise our membership to win a decent wage. I will see it as my role to defend the democratic traditions of the union and put the members’ first.’
Crisis in the retail sector
Woolworths and MFI have called in the receivers and Dairy Farmers have declared mass redundancies. 100,000 retail jobs have vanished in the last year and at least another ten companies with 60,000 jobs are likely to go down the same road. A managing director of one company said, ‘the worse time for job losses will be the first six months of next year, which will be a bloodbath for many retailers.’
The question is posed does the leadership of the largest retail union, Usdaw, have a strategy that can defend members’ jobs. So what has been Usdaw’s approach to the pending crisis faced in the retail sector?
Usdaw’s Woolworth’s press release states, ‘seeking urgent talks with the administrators’ and ‘we will do everything we can to help communicate the situation to the staff’ and ‘we will be doing everything we can to help them through this difficult time.’ As far as the Dairy Farmers press release it demanded, ‘an urgent meeting with the company in order that we can understand the business case behind this decision and to receive guarantees on jobs in the remaining localities.’ These are mere platitudes rather than a strategy. Usdaw members are demanding that our union must start fighting back now.
Woolworth had sales of over £1.7 billion and has a major share in many products sold in the high street. Who decided the fate of Woolworths and the other hundreds of thousands jobs likely to be axed. The various companies that own Woolworth’s debt decided it was in their interest to pull the plug. It is their interests rather than those of the workforce – profits before jobs – that determines the outcome of thousands of jobs.
From press reports it seems that the government intervened but failed to get a deal to save Woolworth. It is strange when bankers jobs are on the line there are millions to save jobs but when low-paid retail workers are about to lose their jobs New Labour don’t have a penny to spare. They can nationalise struggling banks but there is no mention of public ownership to save retail jobs.
This approach by the government, Usdaw slavishly supports all things New Labour, is the real weakness of our union’s strategy. For so long they have follow a partnership with the bosses and the government, Usdaw is tied to the strategy of the government. – which is pro-business. The Activist argues that the only real way to solve the problems faced by retail workers is to take into public ownership the major retail companies.
Defend our jobs and terms and conditions
Everyone is talking about economic crisis now. The Socialist Party has been explaining for years that there was going to be a massive economic downturn. Now it has happened the bosses will attempt to make saving my cutting our wages and conditions.
One of the problems is that Usdaw’s leadership have rolled over and accepted changes to contracts rather than fight to preserve existing terms and conditions. Jon Hannett even commented in the latest issue of Arena that ‘the distribution network of many big players is being overhauled.’ What does this mean? What have the leaders done? When members have been willing to fight, there has been no real struggle and the officials arguing for acceptance of the changes. In the new distribution sites new starters are employed on worse conditions when compared to the older sites.
The situation is no better in the establish distribution sites. Again there has been an acceptance of worse contracts for new starters. Having members on different contracts will mean that the management will divide and split the workforce when joint action is needed.
The situation is as bad in Tesco’s stores, where workers are on different terms. Using the excuse of the economic crisis, it will make it easier to attack the conditions of those on the better contacts. These show a major weakness in Usdaw’s strategy.
Another problem we are facing is that companies have stopped replacing leavers and as the economic crunch continues the bosses will implement permanent freezes on new recruits. This will force members to work harder. It will create a stressful working environment which in turn will lead to more absence disciplinary hearings.
Nationalisation and the trade unions
The Activist and the Socialist Party has always argued for nationalisation of the commanding heights of the economy and this includes the banks. When we have raised this issue, we were attacked by the establishment especially New Labour supporters. We were utopians and recently this idea was rejected as being outdated. We were told that the problems of economic growth were solved and never again would we return to the days of boom and bust. Most shop workers never experience any real boom. It was a boom where the rich became even richer while the gap between the wealthy and the poor increased.
Now the rich are the enthusiastic advocates of nationalisation. Their institutions faced bankruptcy and they demanded that Gordon Brown bails them out and he readily agreed. But when workers demanded their companies needed saving, Brown’s answers in the negative. We need a socialist government and a new workers’ party.
Email addresses needed
If you have a colleague who would like to receive
a regular copy of the Activist or other materials to democratise the our union then send their
e-mail address to shopworker@socialistparty.org.uk
November 2008 Issue 12
Robbie to stand for President
After the excellent vote for her as a candidate in Usdaw’s general secretary election, Robbie Segal has been lobbied to stand for the position of Usdaw’s President. Robbie told the Activist, ‘I feel honoured to accept the nomination to stand for President on behalf of those in the union who want to change Usdaw into a union that’s fights for it members. I will be a campaigning President. I will fight to protect members’ jobs, and terms and conditions. I will argue for a national campaign to mobilise our membership to win a decent wage. I will see it as my role to defend the democratic traditions of the union and put the members’ first.’
Crisis in the retail sector
Woolworths and MFI have called in the receivers and Dairy Farmers have declared mass redundancies. 100,000 retail jobs have vanished in the last year and at least another ten companies with 60,000 jobs are likely to go down the same road. A managing director of one company said, ‘the worse time for job losses will be the first six months of next year, which will be a bloodbath for many retailers.’
The question is posed does the leadership of the largest retail union, Usdaw, have a strategy that can defend members’ jobs. So what has been Usdaw’s approach to the pending crisis faced in the retail sector?
Usdaw’s Woolworth’s press release states, ‘seeking urgent talks with the administrators’ and ‘we will do everything we can to help communicate the situation to the staff’ and ‘we will be doing everything we can to help them through this difficult time.’ As far as the Dairy Farmers press release it demanded, ‘an urgent meeting with the company in order that we can understand the business case behind this decision and to receive guarantees on jobs in the remaining localities.’ These are mere platitudes rather than a strategy. Usdaw members are demanding that our union must start fighting back now.
Woolworth had sales of over £1.7 billion and has a major share in many products sold in the high street. Who decided the fate of Woolworths and the other hundreds of thousands jobs likely to be axed. The various companies that own Woolworth’s debt decided it was in their interest to pull the plug. It is their interests rather than those of the workforce – profits before jobs – that determines the outcome of thousands of jobs.
From press reports it seems that the government intervened but failed to get a deal to save Woolworth. It is strange when bankers jobs are on the line there are millions to save jobs but when low-paid retail workers are about to lose their jobs New Labour don’t have a penny to spare. They can nationalise struggling banks but there is no mention of public ownership to save retail jobs.
This approach by the government, Usdaw slavishly supports all things New Labour, is the real weakness of our union’s strategy. For so long they have follow a partnership with the bosses and the government, Usdaw is tied to the strategy of the government. – which is pro-business. The Activist argues that the only real way to solve the problems faced by retail workers is to take into public ownership the major retail companies.
Defend our jobs and terms and conditions
Everyone is talking about economic crisis now. The Socialist Party has been explaining for years that there was going to be a massive economic downturn. Now it has happened the bosses will attempt to make saving my cutting our wages and conditions.
One of the problems is that Usdaw’s leadership have rolled over and accepted changes to contracts rather than fight to preserve existing terms and conditions. Jon Hannett even commented in the latest issue of Arena that ‘the distribution network of many big players is being overhauled.’ What does this mean? What have the leaders done? When members have been willing to fight, there has been no real struggle and the officials arguing for acceptance of the changes. In the new distribution sites new starters are employed on worse conditions when compared to the older sites.
The situation is no better in the establish distribution sites. Again there has been an acceptance of worse contracts for new starters. Having members on different contracts will mean that the management will divide and split the workforce when joint action is needed.
The situation is as bad in Tesco’s stores, where workers are on different terms. Using the excuse of the economic crisis, it will make it easier to attack the conditions of those on the better contacts. These show a major weakness in Usdaw’s strategy.
Another problem we are facing is that companies have stopped replacing leavers and as the economic crunch continues the bosses will implement permanent freezes on new recruits. This will force members to work harder. It will create a stressful working environment which in turn will lead to more absence disciplinary hearings.
Nationalisation and the trade unions
The Activist and the Socialist Party has always argued for nationalisation of the commanding heights of the economy and this includes the banks. When we have raised this issue, we were attacked by the establishment especially New Labour supporters. We were utopians and recently this idea was rejected as being outdated. We were told that the problems of economic growth were solved and never again would we return to the days of boom and bust. Most shop workers never experience any real boom. It was a boom where the rich became even richer while the gap between the wealthy and the poor increased.
Now the rich are the enthusiastic advocates of nationalisation. Their institutions faced bankruptcy and they demanded that Gordon Brown bails them out and he readily agreed. But when workers demanded their companies needed saving, Brown’s answers in the negative. We need a socialist government and a new workers’ party.
Email addresses needed
If you have a colleague who would like to receive
a regular copy of the Activist or other materials to democratise the our union then send their
e-mail address to shopworker@socialistparty.org.uk
Saturday, 4 October 2008
Retail and Distirbution Activist: Issue 11
Retail & Distribution Activist: Bulletin of Socialist Party members in USDAW
October 2008 Issue 11
Usdaw leaders shaken by election results
Socialist Party member Robbie Segal shook the entire shopworkers' union USDAW by gaining 40% of the vote for General Secretary in the ballot result announced today. Robbie is a Tesco worker who on shoe-string resources with a tiny band of activists in a David and Goliath battle faced the entire USDAW official machine. The whole right wing union full time bureaucracy was mobilised to crush her, but she still managed to gain over 18,000 votes winning the moral victory by far.
The incumbent, John Hannett, had the entire union behind him – except the members. He appears in the union journal and other union publications every month. Robbie was virtually unknown to most of the members other than those that have known her first-hand as a fighter over the years. As an example, three officials, one of whom a EC member, were flown into the Central London branch meeting to argue against one Socialist Party member to secure the nomination of all the London branches for Hannett. But Robbie’s programme clearly appealed to the members by calling for an £8 minimum wage for all, no to partnership between the union and the employers- as there is in Tesco, for democracy within the union, and for an alternative to New Labour for ordinary people to have a party that genuinely represents them. Robbie also pledged to reject the £100,000 Hannett took and to continue on her Tesco wage.
The result is in no way a ringing endorsement of the current leadership. The low turnout of 13.2% reflected the fact that Hannett did his very best to subdue the issue, by calling a summer election, calling no debates with Robbie and producing no other material other than the ballot paper and a letter to the branches demanding their support. So Hannett's 7.8% support in USDAW must be seen as a massive vote of no confidence in his performance in the job.
This result, for a clearly socialist candidate in the USDAW General Secretary election is testimony to the changing mood in the unions. USDAW has for many years been the bastion of the right wing with an avid New Labourite leadership. John Hannett pulled all the stops out to use the union bureaucratic machine in his favour for this election. Robbie proved his leadership severely lacking.
This article first appeared in The Socialist. www.socialistparty.org.uk
John Hannett – you are doing well
After a week of turmoil on the financial markets, it about time we looked again at our general secretary’s income. Inflation for the basic necessities is going through the roof, so John certainly needs a ‘substantial increase’. The recent copy of Arena publishes the details of the general secretary’s income.
Income National insurance Pension Car TOTAL
September 2008 £81,742 £9,801 £16,389 £6,532 £114,464
September 2007 £78,050 £10,053 £15,172 £5,494 £108,769
No mention of the GS election?
Why is the result of the General Secretary election not posted on the Usdaw website? Can you help us? Is the conspiracy to keep the 40% vote for Robbie a secret? In the EC minutes it mentions the election but again no figures. Why is there a campaign of silence?
Campaigning for a decent living wage
‘The £8 minimum wage is unrealistic.’ This was one the main arguments out of the mouths of my opponents during the general secretary election campaign. However, they never told us what would be a ‘realistic’ minimum wage.
Every wage claim submitted by Usdaw asks for a substantial pay rise. It is never explained what a substantial pay rise is nor an amount mention.
Is the Tesco pay rise for their retail workers of 3.8% a substantial rise? Of course not! The general secretary’s pay (not including the other benefits) increased by £3,692. Now that would be a substantial increase for our members in retail.
The secret election
Since the announcement of the result for Usdaw’s general secretary election, I have been asked numerous times why there was such a poor turnout. All the comments from friends and foes considered my vote good to excellent and John Hannett’s very poor.
Of course, Hannett’s one comfort was that he won. With the whole fulltime machine supporting him, he believed they would get out his vote which he did but it was only a fraction of the membership. Some of the officials commented to me privately that they believed the letter sent by him to Usdaw employees, which contained a near instruction to ring him and pledge their allegiance, was a form of bullying. His undemocratic and unfair methods at the start of the campaign repulsed many of the officials and members
There were a number of reasons for the low turnout. When John Hannett raised the election at the EC, I complained that if it was being held over the summer period and this would decrease the numbers voting. I was proved correct.
Another factor why so few of our members voted was because they had no idea that an election was taking place. It was truly a secret election – the Union’s members had no idea that there was an election until the ballot paper dropped through their letterbox.
There was a single letter to the branches, which is attended by a mere handful of members, informing the branch of the election. There was no mention of the election in the members’ magazine Arena which is delivered to every member’s home. There was not even a mention in the activists’ journal Network. Clearly Hannett expected the fewer members knew about his opponent’s programme and strategy all the better for him and would give him an advantage in the contest. The blame for the low turnout is the fault of Hannett’s unfair running of the election,
In fact Hannett’s whole strategy was flawed. However the real weakness of his campaign was that his promise for more of the same never found an echo with the bulk of our members. What has the Union really achieved over the five years of Hannett’s control? In the present economic crisis, many members fear the effect of the economic crisis on their living standards. They will be demanding wage increases to defend their living standards. In response to my demand for a £8 minimum wage, the officials called it ‘unrealistic’. What is realistic? The union normally submits a claim for a substantial increase. What is a substantial increase? The only thing unrealistic is members are expected to survive on or just above the minimum wage.
If Hannett had conducted a serious campaign to increase wages then the members would have voted in their droves for him. But constrained by the Union’s support for New Labour’s pro-employer policies meant that a real campaign against the big retail companies is a massive ‘no no’. With capitalism in crisis, what can Hannett and his New Labour supporters really offer the hard working and low paid members of our union.
At the start of the campaign, I suggested the Executive Council should write guidelines for the election that would take the power away from the incumbent to dictate the timing and conduct of the election. This the EC rejected. However my vote has frightened the bureaucracy. They could have lost the ballot so now they will panic and try to change the rules to ensure the bureaucracy can never be threatened again by a real challenger. We will have to be on our guard against attacks on the democracy in our Union.
After my 40% vote, the members should be aware that there is a strong possibility that right wing leaders of our Union will launch attacks against those officials who never gave their support to John Hannett. It is rumoured that a list was kept of the officials that rung pledging their support for him.
Finally after what has turned into a rather curious campaign, it appears that the union is trying to keep the result secret. The result has not been published on the Usdaw’s website and even in the EC minutes the result was not published. Curious, to say the least!
Email addresses needed
If you have a colleague who would like to receive a regular copy of the Activist or other materials to democratise the our union then send their e-mail address to shopworker@socialistparty.org.uk
October 2008 Issue 11
Usdaw leaders shaken by election results
Socialist Party member Robbie Segal shook the entire shopworkers' union USDAW by gaining 40% of the vote for General Secretary in the ballot result announced today. Robbie is a Tesco worker who on shoe-string resources with a tiny band of activists in a David and Goliath battle faced the entire USDAW official machine. The whole right wing union full time bureaucracy was mobilised to crush her, but she still managed to gain over 18,000 votes winning the moral victory by far.
The incumbent, John Hannett, had the entire union behind him – except the members. He appears in the union journal and other union publications every month. Robbie was virtually unknown to most of the members other than those that have known her first-hand as a fighter over the years. As an example, three officials, one of whom a EC member, were flown into the Central London branch meeting to argue against one Socialist Party member to secure the nomination of all the London branches for Hannett. But Robbie’s programme clearly appealed to the members by calling for an £8 minimum wage for all, no to partnership between the union and the employers- as there is in Tesco, for democracy within the union, and for an alternative to New Labour for ordinary people to have a party that genuinely represents them. Robbie also pledged to reject the £100,000 Hannett took and to continue on her Tesco wage.
The result is in no way a ringing endorsement of the current leadership. The low turnout of 13.2% reflected the fact that Hannett did his very best to subdue the issue, by calling a summer election, calling no debates with Robbie and producing no other material other than the ballot paper and a letter to the branches demanding their support. So Hannett's 7.8% support in USDAW must be seen as a massive vote of no confidence in his performance in the job.
This result, for a clearly socialist candidate in the USDAW General Secretary election is testimony to the changing mood in the unions. USDAW has for many years been the bastion of the right wing with an avid New Labourite leadership. John Hannett pulled all the stops out to use the union bureaucratic machine in his favour for this election. Robbie proved his leadership severely lacking.
This article first appeared in The Socialist. www.socialistparty.org.uk
John Hannett – you are doing well
After a week of turmoil on the financial markets, it about time we looked again at our general secretary’s income. Inflation for the basic necessities is going through the roof, so John certainly needs a ‘substantial increase’. The recent copy of Arena publishes the details of the general secretary’s income.
Income National insurance Pension Car TOTAL
September 2008 £81,742 £9,801 £16,389 £6,532 £114,464
September 2007 £78,050 £10,053 £15,172 £5,494 £108,769
No mention of the GS election?
Why is the result of the General Secretary election not posted on the Usdaw website? Can you help us? Is the conspiracy to keep the 40% vote for Robbie a secret? In the EC minutes it mentions the election but again no figures. Why is there a campaign of silence?
Campaigning for a decent living wage
‘The £8 minimum wage is unrealistic.’ This was one the main arguments out of the mouths of my opponents during the general secretary election campaign. However, they never told us what would be a ‘realistic’ minimum wage.
Every wage claim submitted by Usdaw asks for a substantial pay rise. It is never explained what a substantial pay rise is nor an amount mention.
Is the Tesco pay rise for their retail workers of 3.8% a substantial rise? Of course not! The general secretary’s pay (not including the other benefits) increased by £3,692. Now that would be a substantial increase for our members in retail.
The secret election
Since the announcement of the result for Usdaw’s general secretary election, I have been asked numerous times why there was such a poor turnout. All the comments from friends and foes considered my vote good to excellent and John Hannett’s very poor.
Of course, Hannett’s one comfort was that he won. With the whole fulltime machine supporting him, he believed they would get out his vote which he did but it was only a fraction of the membership. Some of the officials commented to me privately that they believed the letter sent by him to Usdaw employees, which contained a near instruction to ring him and pledge their allegiance, was a form of bullying. His undemocratic and unfair methods at the start of the campaign repulsed many of the officials and members
There were a number of reasons for the low turnout. When John Hannett raised the election at the EC, I complained that if it was being held over the summer period and this would decrease the numbers voting. I was proved correct.
Another factor why so few of our members voted was because they had no idea that an election was taking place. It was truly a secret election – the Union’s members had no idea that there was an election until the ballot paper dropped through their letterbox.
There was a single letter to the branches, which is attended by a mere handful of members, informing the branch of the election. There was no mention of the election in the members’ magazine Arena which is delivered to every member’s home. There was not even a mention in the activists’ journal Network. Clearly Hannett expected the fewer members knew about his opponent’s programme and strategy all the better for him and would give him an advantage in the contest. The blame for the low turnout is the fault of Hannett’s unfair running of the election,
In fact Hannett’s whole strategy was flawed. However the real weakness of his campaign was that his promise for more of the same never found an echo with the bulk of our members. What has the Union really achieved over the five years of Hannett’s control? In the present economic crisis, many members fear the effect of the economic crisis on their living standards. They will be demanding wage increases to defend their living standards. In response to my demand for a £8 minimum wage, the officials called it ‘unrealistic’. What is realistic? The union normally submits a claim for a substantial increase. What is a substantial increase? The only thing unrealistic is members are expected to survive on or just above the minimum wage.
If Hannett had conducted a serious campaign to increase wages then the members would have voted in their droves for him. But constrained by the Union’s support for New Labour’s pro-employer policies meant that a real campaign against the big retail companies is a massive ‘no no’. With capitalism in crisis, what can Hannett and his New Labour supporters really offer the hard working and low paid members of our union.
At the start of the campaign, I suggested the Executive Council should write guidelines for the election that would take the power away from the incumbent to dictate the timing and conduct of the election. This the EC rejected. However my vote has frightened the bureaucracy. They could have lost the ballot so now they will panic and try to change the rules to ensure the bureaucracy can never be threatened again by a real challenger. We will have to be on our guard against attacks on the democracy in our Union.
After my 40% vote, the members should be aware that there is a strong possibility that right wing leaders of our Union will launch attacks against those officials who never gave their support to John Hannett. It is rumoured that a list was kept of the officials that rung pledging their support for him.
Finally after what has turned into a rather curious campaign, it appears that the union is trying to keep the result secret. The result has not been published on the Usdaw’s website and even in the EC minutes the result was not published. Curious, to say the least!
Email addresses needed
If you have a colleague who would like to receive a regular copy of the Activist or other materials to democratise the our union then send their e-mail address to shopworker@socialistparty.org.uk
Tuesday, 16 September 2008
Results of USDAW General Secretary election:
Socialist Party member Robbie Segal shook the entire shopworkers' union USDAW by gaining 40% of the vote for General Secretary in the ballot result announced today. Robbie is a Tesco worker who on shoe-string resources with a tiny band of activists in a David and Goliath battle faced the entire USDAW official machine. The whole right wing union full time bureaucracy was mobilised to crush her, but she still managed to gain over 18,000 votes winning the moral victory by far.
The incumbent, John Hannett, had the entire union behind him – except the members. He appears in the union journal and other union publications every month. Robbie was virtually unknown to most of the members other than those that have known her first-hand as a fighter over the years. As an example, three NEC members were flown into the Central London branch meeting to argue against one Socialist Party member to secure the nomination of all the London branches for Hannett. But Robbie’s programme clearly appealed to the members by calling for an £8 minimum wage for all, no to partnership between the union and the employers- as there is in Tesco, for democracy within the union, and for an alternative to New Labour for ordinary people to have a party that genuinely represents them. Robbie also pledged to reject the £100,000 Hannett took and to continue on her Tesco wage.
The result is in no way a ringing endorsement of the current leadership. The low turnout of 13.2% reflected the fact that Hannett did his very best to subdue the issue, by calling a summer election, calling no debates with Robbie and producing no other material other than the ballot paper and a letter to the branches demanding their support. So Hannett's 7.8% support in USDAW must be seen as a massive vote of no confidence in his performance in the job.
This result, for a clearly socialist candidate in the USDAW General Secretary election is testimony to the changing mood in the unions. USDAW has for many years been the bastion of the right wing with an avid New Labourite leadership. John Hannett pulled all the stops out to use the union bureaucratic machine in his favour for this election. Robbie proved his leadership severely lacking.
Voting returns are:-Voting papers distributed............348'278 100%
Ballot papers returned..................46'002 13.2%
Hannett.....................................27'320 59.4
%Segal........................................18'673 40.6%
USDAW national public meeting
'Fighting for a Democratic Usdaw'
to discuss union perspectives, election results and plans for future action
is this Saturday, 20th September 12-3pm, Lucas Arms, 245A Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8QZ. Nearest station, Kings Cross St Pancrass.
The incumbent, John Hannett, had the entire union behind him – except the members. He appears in the union journal and other union publications every month. Robbie was virtually unknown to most of the members other than those that have known her first-hand as a fighter over the years. As an example, three NEC members were flown into the Central London branch meeting to argue against one Socialist Party member to secure the nomination of all the London branches for Hannett. But Robbie’s programme clearly appealed to the members by calling for an £8 minimum wage for all, no to partnership between the union and the employers- as there is in Tesco, for democracy within the union, and for an alternative to New Labour for ordinary people to have a party that genuinely represents them. Robbie also pledged to reject the £100,000 Hannett took and to continue on her Tesco wage.
The result is in no way a ringing endorsement of the current leadership. The low turnout of 13.2% reflected the fact that Hannett did his very best to subdue the issue, by calling a summer election, calling no debates with Robbie and producing no other material other than the ballot paper and a letter to the branches demanding their support. So Hannett's 7.8% support in USDAW must be seen as a massive vote of no confidence in his performance in the job.
This result, for a clearly socialist candidate in the USDAW General Secretary election is testimony to the changing mood in the unions. USDAW has for many years been the bastion of the right wing with an avid New Labourite leadership. John Hannett pulled all the stops out to use the union bureaucratic machine in his favour for this election. Robbie proved his leadership severely lacking.
Voting returns are:-Voting papers distributed............348'278 100%
Ballot papers returned..................46'002 13.2%
Hannett.....................................27'320 59.4
%Segal........................................18'673 40.6%
USDAW national public meeting
'Fighting for a Democratic Usdaw'
to discuss union perspectives, election results and plans for future action
is this Saturday, 20th September 12-3pm, Lucas Arms, 245A Gray's Inn Road, London WC1X 8QZ. Nearest station, Kings Cross St Pancrass.
Friday, 5 September 2008
Manifesto for Usdaw Democracy
Compiled by Robbie Segal
As part of my candidature for General Secretary, I launched a discussion on democracy in Usdaw. I would like to thank all those who have sent me comments on this document or who have suggested changes to the rules. Many of the comments have been included in this current document.
Many contributions have commented on the unfair nature of the election. They have called for the ending the general secretary’s power to dictate the timing and conduct of the election.
This manifesto to democratise Usdaw will be discussed at the meeting on the 20th September in London. If you want to attend then please contact me at robbie.segal@aol.com
However if you are unable to attend and would still like to participate in the debate then please contact me at either robbie.segal@aol.com or on my blog
General Secretary Election
As you are most probably aware the letter informing the branches that the General Secretary Election had been called was sent out with an endorsement for John Hannett, the current general secretary. Although individual EC members were asked point blank (I believe that this was intimidating and never gave members the chance to reflect on the question} whether they supported the General Secretary. More importantly no written motion was presented to the meeting and therefore to consider this as an EC endorsement of John Hannett is wrong.
I consider the distributing the endorsement of John Hannett on the same circular that informed branches of the election was a major infringement of the democratic traditions of the trade unions.
I will be proposing that the timing of the any future General Secretary elections will be governed by Rule and not on the whim of the incumbent general secretary. Further the conduct of the election will be decided by guidelines that will be presented to the ADM for endorsement.
Rule 11, Section 1:
The General Secretary shall be elected by a national vote of members by way of a statutory postal ballot as prescribed by the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidations) Act 1992. All branches shall have the right to make nominations. She/he shall remain in office during the will and pleasure of the members who, through the Annual or Special Delegate Meetings, have power to dismiss or call upon her/him to resign.
Executive Council
The EC meets once a month and the meetings last about 2 hours. This time is not adequate to ensure the role of the EC is fulfilled under rule.
Rule 9, section 10:
The Executive Council shall have full control of the business of the Union, and shall have power to do anything not inconsistent with these Rules or the Acts of Parliament under which the Union is certified as an independent trade Union. In the event of any questions arising on which the Rules are silent or obscure, the Executive Council shall have the power to decide thereon.
Minutes of the Executive Council
The minutes circulated to the branches are considered by many members as a joke.
I will ensure that the branches can understand the workings and decisions of the EC. I will publish an account of the major decisions in Arena.
Rule 11, Section 4:
The General Secretary shall be in attendance at all Delegate Meetings and meetings of the Executive Council, and shall keep a correct account of the minutes of the proceedings.
Add at the end of the paragraph, ‘The General Secretary shall provide for publication in Arena a summary of the decisions of Executive Council meetings.’
A lay members Executive Council
There have been a number of comments on whether the rule book should be clear about whether only lay members should serve on the EC. This arises because there is now a member of the EC from the North East who has been appointed to the position of an Area Organiser in the Eastern Division. He now neither works nor lives in the Division and remains on the EC.
Control of employment issues
This is interpreted as being that it is the provocative of the general secretary to deal with all employment matters. The Union has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on consultants and the Leap Project. The EC have never had a full report or updates on the spending of this money or the recent Leap Project developments.
Rule 11, Section 15:
The General Secretary shall superintend and direct the work of all employees of the Union.
Add at the end of the paragraph, ‘the General Secretary will make a full written report on all employment matters to the Executive Council every three months.’
Serving on outside organisations
Rule 11, Section 3:
The General Secretary and the Deputy General Secretary shall devote their whole time to the work of the Union, and shall not be eligible to be a Parliamentary Candidate to the United Kingdom, European or Scottish Parliaments or a candidate for the election to the Welsh Assembly whilst continuing on office as General Secretary and Deputy General Secretary.
Add New Rule 11, Section 4.
‘The General Secretary and the Deputy General Secretary shall seek permission from the Executive Council to serve on all outside organisations, and any remuneration other than expenses shall be paid to the Union.’
Renumber all subsequent Sections.
The Standing Orders Committee
The SOC is governed by rule and there has been a number of comments concerning the EC’s control of the ADM. First, whether it was appropriate for an EC member who had been appointed to the position of Area Organiser to chair the committee. Second, whether the EC should control the agenda for the ADM and would it be more democratic for the conference to be controlled by a lay Standing Orders Committee.
New technology and information
One of the election claims by John Hannett has been his boast that with Arena is now delivered to every member’s home and that they are better informed about the union. However I have received a number of comments that there is no useful information contained in Arena or Network. It has been suggested that the EC should investigate whether the branch circulars could be distributed via email and all member should be able to request copies.
Women in Usdaw
I have received many messages supporting my complaint that there has been a lack of any improvements in the position of the number of women in positions in Usdaw. There are many capable women in our union, so it has been suggested it must either be the selection process or the fact that the panel is dominated by men is the reason dor the lack of progress.
Robbie Segal.
As part of my candidature for General Secretary, I launched a discussion on democracy in Usdaw. I would like to thank all those who have sent me comments on this document or who have suggested changes to the rules. Many of the comments have been included in this current document.
Many contributions have commented on the unfair nature of the election. They have called for the ending the general secretary’s power to dictate the timing and conduct of the election.
This manifesto to democratise Usdaw will be discussed at the meeting on the 20th September in London. If you want to attend then please contact me at robbie.segal@aol.com
However if you are unable to attend and would still like to participate in the debate then please contact me at either robbie.segal@aol.com or on my blog
General Secretary Election
As you are most probably aware the letter informing the branches that the General Secretary Election had been called was sent out with an endorsement for John Hannett, the current general secretary. Although individual EC members were asked point blank (I believe that this was intimidating and never gave members the chance to reflect on the question} whether they supported the General Secretary. More importantly no written motion was presented to the meeting and therefore to consider this as an EC endorsement of John Hannett is wrong.
I consider the distributing the endorsement of John Hannett on the same circular that informed branches of the election was a major infringement of the democratic traditions of the trade unions.
I will be proposing that the timing of the any future General Secretary elections will be governed by Rule and not on the whim of the incumbent general secretary. Further the conduct of the election will be decided by guidelines that will be presented to the ADM for endorsement.
Rule 11, Section 1:
The General Secretary shall be elected by a national vote of members by way of a statutory postal ballot as prescribed by the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidations) Act 1992. All branches shall have the right to make nominations. She/he shall remain in office during the will and pleasure of the members who, through the Annual or Special Delegate Meetings, have power to dismiss or call upon her/him to resign.
Executive Council
The EC meets once a month and the meetings last about 2 hours. This time is not adequate to ensure the role of the EC is fulfilled under rule.
Rule 9, section 10:
The Executive Council shall have full control of the business of the Union, and shall have power to do anything not inconsistent with these Rules or the Acts of Parliament under which the Union is certified as an independent trade Union. In the event of any questions arising on which the Rules are silent or obscure, the Executive Council shall have the power to decide thereon.
Minutes of the Executive Council
The minutes circulated to the branches are considered by many members as a joke.
I will ensure that the branches can understand the workings and decisions of the EC. I will publish an account of the major decisions in Arena.
Rule 11, Section 4:
The General Secretary shall be in attendance at all Delegate Meetings and meetings of the Executive Council, and shall keep a correct account of the minutes of the proceedings.
Add at the end of the paragraph, ‘The General Secretary shall provide for publication in Arena a summary of the decisions of Executive Council meetings.’
A lay members Executive Council
There have been a number of comments on whether the rule book should be clear about whether only lay members should serve on the EC. This arises because there is now a member of the EC from the North East who has been appointed to the position of an Area Organiser in the Eastern Division. He now neither works nor lives in the Division and remains on the EC.
Control of employment issues
This is interpreted as being that it is the provocative of the general secretary to deal with all employment matters. The Union has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds on consultants and the Leap Project. The EC have never had a full report or updates on the spending of this money or the recent Leap Project developments.
Rule 11, Section 15:
The General Secretary shall superintend and direct the work of all employees of the Union.
Add at the end of the paragraph, ‘the General Secretary will make a full written report on all employment matters to the Executive Council every three months.’
Serving on outside organisations
Rule 11, Section 3:
The General Secretary and the Deputy General Secretary shall devote their whole time to the work of the Union, and shall not be eligible to be a Parliamentary Candidate to the United Kingdom, European or Scottish Parliaments or a candidate for the election to the Welsh Assembly whilst continuing on office as General Secretary and Deputy General Secretary.
Add New Rule 11, Section 4.
‘The General Secretary and the Deputy General Secretary shall seek permission from the Executive Council to serve on all outside organisations, and any remuneration other than expenses shall be paid to the Union.’
Renumber all subsequent Sections.
The Standing Orders Committee
The SOC is governed by rule and there has been a number of comments concerning the EC’s control of the ADM. First, whether it was appropriate for an EC member who had been appointed to the position of Area Organiser to chair the committee. Second, whether the EC should control the agenda for the ADM and would it be more democratic for the conference to be controlled by a lay Standing Orders Committee.
New technology and information
One of the election claims by John Hannett has been his boast that with Arena is now delivered to every member’s home and that they are better informed about the union. However I have received a number of comments that there is no useful information contained in Arena or Network. It has been suggested that the EC should investigate whether the branch circulars could be distributed via email and all member should be able to request copies.
Women in Usdaw
I have received many messages supporting my complaint that there has been a lack of any improvements in the position of the number of women in positions in Usdaw. There are many capable women in our union, so it has been suggested it must either be the selection process or the fact that the panel is dominated by men is the reason dor the lack of progress.
Robbie Segal.
Tuesday, 12 August 2008
Vote Robbie Segal
You have probably received your ballot paper for Usdaw’s general secretary and you are looking at my website to find out what I stand for. My policies are explained in a series of statements. If you want to comment on any of the points please email me at robbie@robbiesegal.org
I believe the election and the campaign has been unfair and undemocratic. The only aspect were John Hannett and I have been equal is on the ballot paper. When I am elected general secretary, I will ensure that all future elections will be governed by rule; thus insuring a democratic debate and an equal opportunity for all candidates to have access to the members.
If you like what you read and would like to become part of the campaign for a democratic and fighting Usdaw then email me with your name, workplace and branch to robbie@robbiesegal.org.
Thanks you again for your support
Robbie Segal
I believe the election and the campaign has been unfair and undemocratic. The only aspect were John Hannett and I have been equal is on the ballot paper. When I am elected general secretary, I will ensure that all future elections will be governed by rule; thus insuring a democratic debate and an equal opportunity for all candidates to have access to the members.
If you like what you read and would like to become part of the campaign for a democratic and fighting Usdaw then email me with your name, workplace and branch to robbie@robbiesegal.org.
Thanks you again for your support
Robbie Segal
Monday, 28 July 2008
Morrisons Pay Insult
Last week staff at Morrisons were voting over whether to accept a pay deal negotiated by the union. That is if they knew about the ballot at all. Okay so we had a poster in store saying there was a pay ballot, but if you have only started at the company within the last year (like majority of the staff, at least 5% of the staff are replenished each month) and you don’t know that much about unions you probably won’t realise you are of the people who has a vote. Even for someone who is slightly more clued up like myself, I had to wait until the day after to vote as the personnel office where the ballot box is was closed.
A Morrisons worker
The terms of the deal are even harder to find out. A conversation with our union rep led to me finding out that the deal would probably mean an increase of £5 a week in our pay with our wage going up to £6 an hour in February next year. Considering that most workers at Morrisons earn 4p above minimum wage, there perhaps is a sense of at least this is going in the right direction a bit. Later I found out more about the offer, but not from the union website which I looked at first and found absolutely nothing about the offer. Rather it was from an unofficial staff forum that I finally found out that with the deal pay will go up to £5.86 in October (when the minimum wage goes up to £5.73) and then £6 in February.
Whilst this increase means that we will be an extra 20p an hour above the minimum wage in February next year it still means our pay will be very low, far below the European Decency threshold which stands at £8 an hour. Furthermore, with inflation soaring this increase is likely to be swept away very quickly. Given the £612 million pre-tax profits Morrisons made last year, the surely much more could have been fought for?
The lacklustre approach of the union leadership in relation to this is indicative of a great number of other problems Morrisons workers face and the union fails to take action over. One of the biggest problems is understaffing which means that workers effectively have to do the jobs of two or more people, unsurprisingly this leads to accidents and taking short-cuts with health and safety. My department alone has at least one accident a day if not more!
John Hannett (USDAW General Secretary) gets £100,000 a year salary plus a free Jaguar – I wonder how closely he feels the pains that the members he is supposed to represent have to endure. What we need is a leadership prepared to fight, if they took the pitifully low wage we have to accept then their might be a fight for a minimum wage of £8 for all retail workers. Such a demand is in Robbie Segal’s programme as she stands against Hannett in the General Secreatry elections, which is why I shall be building her campaign in my store.
A Morrisons worker
The terms of the deal are even harder to find out. A conversation with our union rep led to me finding out that the deal would probably mean an increase of £5 a week in our pay with our wage going up to £6 an hour in February next year. Considering that most workers at Morrisons earn 4p above minimum wage, there perhaps is a sense of at least this is going in the right direction a bit. Later I found out more about the offer, but not from the union website which I looked at first and found absolutely nothing about the offer. Rather it was from an unofficial staff forum that I finally found out that with the deal pay will go up to £5.86 in October (when the minimum wage goes up to £5.73) and then £6 in February.
Whilst this increase means that we will be an extra 20p an hour above the minimum wage in February next year it still means our pay will be very low, far below the European Decency threshold which stands at £8 an hour. Furthermore, with inflation soaring this increase is likely to be swept away very quickly. Given the £612 million pre-tax profits Morrisons made last year, the surely much more could have been fought for?
The lacklustre approach of the union leadership in relation to this is indicative of a great number of other problems Morrisons workers face and the union fails to take action over. One of the biggest problems is understaffing which means that workers effectively have to do the jobs of two or more people, unsurprisingly this leads to accidents and taking short-cuts with health and safety. My department alone has at least one accident a day if not more!
John Hannett (USDAW General Secretary) gets £100,000 a year salary plus a free Jaguar – I wonder how closely he feels the pains that the members he is supposed to represent have to endure. What we need is a leadership prepared to fight, if they took the pitifully low wage we have to accept then their might be a fight for a minimum wage of £8 for all retail workers. Such a demand is in Robbie Segal’s programme as she stands against Hannett in the General Secreatry elections, which is why I shall be building her campaign in my store.
Distribution and Warehouse workers join the Activist Network
One of the outcomes of this election already has been the call by many logistic workers to establish a rank and file network. If you want your name to be added to the list and receive updates on events in our sector then send your email address to robbie@robbiesegal.org
A Tesco distribution worker
A Tesco distribution worker
Tuesday, 8 July 2008
Argos warehouse workers vote to strike
From the National Shop Stewards Network (NSSN) newsletter
Argos distribution workers have voted by 67% to strike over pay. A senior steward for Unite at the Argos distribution centre in Basildon, spoke to The Socialist about the dispute and about organising distribution workers:
“We will be striking over our annual pay deal and the move from weekly to monthly pay. Argos make millions in profits, yet they only offered us a 3.8% pay rise when inflation was running at 4.1%.
They did say they would offer us 4.1% but that would be at the cost of eating into our sickness scheme. They have already cut into this before so it is clear the company want to get rid of it.
The directors give themselves big pay rises and bonuses, so it is an insult to us to say there is no money.
On the move from weekly to monthly pay, we’ve asked for a one-off payment to cover the transitional period when we have to go without money. The union’s concern is that our members don’t lose out financially.
At the moment they are offering us loans, with £40 a month repayments, which is completely unacceptable. With the cost of living going up, an additional payment of £40 a month could mean the difference between losing our home and keeping it. Yet the company seems quite miffed that we want money for this change.
As we’ve explained to them, we’re low-waged unskilled workers. Many are already up their eyes in debt with CCJs etc and they can’t afford loan payments.
On our site the manager originally said we would bring the union in over his dead body. But we have got organised so now we have 80% membership.
We’ve had about 15 people join in the last few weeks.
We’re trying to recruit agency staff at the moment. We have been successful in recruiting Polish workers who have been really supportive of us. They are some of the most vocal for the strike.
Originally they were tied to an employment agency and tied to houses but we’ve stopped that. Now the migrant workers have broken down the barriers by standing side by side with us trying to improve our pay and conditions. The company would prefer to divide and rule.”
send messages of support (and mention the NSSN) to
Formby Jennie, T&G. National Secretary General Workers' Trade Group [Jennie.Formby@unitetheunion.com]
Argos distribution workers have voted by 67% to strike over pay. A senior steward for Unite at the Argos distribution centre in Basildon, spoke to The Socialist about the dispute and about organising distribution workers:
“We will be striking over our annual pay deal and the move from weekly to monthly pay. Argos make millions in profits, yet they only offered us a 3.8% pay rise when inflation was running at 4.1%.
They did say they would offer us 4.1% but that would be at the cost of eating into our sickness scheme. They have already cut into this before so it is clear the company want to get rid of it.
The directors give themselves big pay rises and bonuses, so it is an insult to us to say there is no money.
On the move from weekly to monthly pay, we’ve asked for a one-off payment to cover the transitional period when we have to go without money. The union’s concern is that our members don’t lose out financially.
At the moment they are offering us loans, with £40 a month repayments, which is completely unacceptable. With the cost of living going up, an additional payment of £40 a month could mean the difference between losing our home and keeping it. Yet the company seems quite miffed that we want money for this change.
As we’ve explained to them, we’re low-waged unskilled workers. Many are already up their eyes in debt with CCJs etc and they can’t afford loan payments.
On our site the manager originally said we would bring the union in over his dead body. But we have got organised so now we have 80% membership.
We’ve had about 15 people join in the last few weeks.
We’re trying to recruit agency staff at the moment. We have been successful in recruiting Polish workers who have been really supportive of us. They are some of the most vocal for the strike.
Originally they were tied to an employment agency and tied to houses but we’ve stopped that. Now the migrant workers have broken down the barriers by standing side by side with us trying to improve our pay and conditions. The company would prefer to divide and rule.”
send messages of support (and mention the NSSN) to
Formby Jennie, T&G. National Secretary General Workers' Trade Group [Jennie.Formby@unitetheunion.com]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)