The minimum wage is under attack, and not just in the US, not just on the Netherlands, not just in Britain. You may ask yourself “how did it come to this? Where did it start?”
I’ll tell you where: it started when prisoners were forced to work for pennies and many of us didn’t really try fight it because they were probably bad people, right? It started when disabled people were forced to work for pennies and many of us didn’t really try fight it because their work was just inferior to us, right? It started when unemployed and students were forced to do internship and ‘work experience jobs’ for free and many of us didn’t really fight it because we wanted to focus our intention on ‘real workers’.
But the bosses noticed, and learned, and looked for ways to expand these groups. Because they knew: if you don’t fight for one exploited worker, why fight for the next? If you let me have one forced worker for pennies, why not all of them? So when we say ‘no’ to that, we need to be sure to say it for all of us.In danger of going all Lefty Labour on you guys: THIS IS WHY WE NEED UNIONS.
Actually, most unions do jack shit to fix any of this because they only fight for their own particular group of workers and they will only start fighting once their own members are the target of this, by which time it is far too late.
The basics of unions, that the workers directly effected are the ones that go on strike, doesn’t work here. Prison unions and other unions of super exploited groups have existed and have been effective but they are far harder to organize and those who participate in it pay a far higher price. When prisoners have to organize their own strikes alone, they risk isolation cells and other forms of torture. When migrant workers have to organize their own strikes alone, they risk deportation and death, when disabled people have to organize their own strikes alone they also risk death. The strike funds, the basic human rights,etc. lie with the rest of the workers.
This is why we need radical revolutionary unions that fight for all of us. (or ya know, revolution in general would be good too)
I should note, I can only talk with authority on Great Britain, and to some extent to Republic of Ireland. I believe my statements also apply to most of mainland Europe, but I lack the direct knowledge to certify this.
This is actually ignoring one of the key points of the labor movement *Solidarity*. The way the process is supposed to work is when one union goes on strike *all* unions stand in solidarity with them. So, say the union of a particular factory goes on strike suddenly all deliveries stop, the catering staff refuse to serve the factory, the cleaners refuse to touch it, etc. This continues until the end of the strike crippling that place.
The last thing we need is a government whom supports the workers. Unfortunately in Britain this system has been dismantled by successive neo-liberal governments since the 80s, but if we look at the 1970s – for instance – there existed a time in which the government backed up your right to strike. Indeed, the government saw its role as to act as a mediator between the two parties to resolve the conflict.
Now, this has not raised the issue of disenfranchised groups in part because I have little historical information of them inside of my range of expertise. Here, prisoners largely do not participate in production so strikes are not an effective means of protest. There are however several support and advocacy groups that have worked in the union structure to encourage better living conditions. As for migrant workers… Historically that has been less of a problem for Britain. Seasonal migration is a comparatively rare thing, and until comparatively recently (the 20th century) the vast majority of migrants were already full British citizens on arrival due to the Empire / Commonwealth.
The last group, whom I feel deserve special mention is the disabled. I feel this needs to be split into two points. Firstly, Disabled workers are still workers!! They are just as welcome to join the same unions for thire fields as any other worker. So the teacher who requires a wheelchair can completely be a member of the National Union of Teachers, and chances are thire union representative will fight just as passionately about thire issues as they would any others (of course, if they do not then that’s a failure of the rep and time to replace them). As for those who are unable to work, then you have much the same situation as with prisoners – advocacy groups and pushing for the government to protect them.
A final note should be made, however, for those who received thire disability on the job. It was common practice for, say, the miners unions to keep those who were out of work due to disability on in the books. It was common for them to advocate for the disabled, and to use thire position with the labour party to push for the government to support these individuals. Of course, it was not just these causes they supported. The film Pride (2014) is an excellent adaption for cinema of a real life event. In it, a London based gay-rights advocacy group decides to stand in solidarity with the striking minors. There is a considerable amount more to the story, but the long and short if it is that as a result when it came to the issue of gay rights few have supported it more than the minors union. Still to this day, the old lodges march in gay rights parades, the union practically forced the labour party to include changes to law restricting LGBTQ+ individuals, and Wales (were the majority of the mines are and the mining community this group interacted with is) is very oddly pro-LGBTQ+ considering its rural, cut-off nature, and ageing population.
In short, Solidarity means if you have my back when I need it now, when the time comes I shall have yours.
That is one long winded answer.
I don’t really know where to start, with the idea that ‘prisoners don’t do production’, the idea that the British labor movement would back prisoners if only they did production work, the idea that work should be production related for a strike to work, the idea that a union focussed on production workers would have any meaning in the 21st century economy, the idea that migrant labor isn’t a thing in Britain, the idea that if you go on strike all unions will just automatically back you no matter what, or that fact that you’re using one romanticized movie which, if I remember correctly also shows how limiting the union can be when it disagrees with your cause.
And that’s just in your post, without even going into things like the disappointing lack of a union response to 21st century labor circumstances, the many times union leaders have held workers movements back because it interfered with their political grand strategy or the complicitness of unions in the mess that is the Labour Party.
Look I’m a big fan of unionising and solidarity and I know damn well that everything we have now was fought for by unions but that’s one hell of an overromanticized version of the labor movement you’ve got there.
QueerAnarchism 