Amicus (section of Unite) Gen Sec election

[belboid]

yes, it suits you so well.

Now then, are you seriously telling me that you think Derek Simpson would have defended a notorious anarchist in person against one of hie unions' main employers? Or that having the General Secretary doing the representation didn't help AL at all?

 

[nightbreed]

KC has been back here for about a year, he replaced LF. Apparently they are waiting to see which of them gets the most nominations and the other one will withdraw. LF is the favourite though, and Simpson is apparently very worried.

.

KC moved to the NW in the early summer. LC returned to the SW where he lives.
My view is that the more candidates stand the more chance Simpson has on getting elected.. he controls the 'election machine' and the leaning on activists has already started. I think he will get in . Thankfully it will only be for a year.

 

[sevenstars]

KC moved to the NW in the early summer. LC returned to the SW where he lives.
My view is that the more candidates stand the more chance Simpson has on getting elected.. he controls the 'election machine' and the leaning on activists has already started. I think he will get in . Thankfully it will only be for a year.

Is it only a few months KC's been back then, it feels like he never left to be honest!

 

[Urbanblues]

Simpson is an embarrassment but he got where he is with gazette backing, I thought he was still supported by the gazette and it will be interesting to see what happens there..

No, the Gazette aren't supporting Simpson. In fact Simpson, along with his failed candidate for the Unite Executive Chair, Steve Davison, and John I'd-sell-me-soul-for-a-place-at-Warwick-3 Aitkin have formed their own left group, 'Workers' Uniting'.

Basically a rag-tag centre-left Simpson election machine. They met recently at Wetherby with Simpson ranting and raving in his usual way.

 

[nightbreed]

They met recently at Wetherby with Simpson ranting and raving in his usual way.

Apparently the current chair is referred to as 'that fuckin trot'!!

Charming!! But not unexpected.

 

[belboid]

Hicks' election address:

JERRY HICKS
An election has been called as a result of a challenge made by Jerry Hicks over the unlawful attempt by Derek Simpson to extend his period of office beyond retirement without an election. Derek Simpson should have known this was illegal;
he challenged Sir Ken Jackson on this very point in 2002 and forced an election which he then won. The Executive have now voted through a rule change to overturn the 95.3% majority ballot of members held three months ago, delaying the implementation of the new Unite Rulebook and instead holding an election for an Amicus Section General Secretary. Instead of electing a new General Secretary for the whole of Unite for the next five years there will now only be an election among former Amicus members for a period of one year only.
SUPPORT JERRY HICKS FOR GENERAL SECRETARY
Jerry Hicks is standing in this election, called by the Unite Executive, for General Secretary of the Amicus section of Unite.
Jerry Hicks started work at Rolls Royce Bristol in 1975 as an apprentice and was elected as a Shop Steward in 1984 and elected as Deputy Convener in 1987. He was elected as Convener for the Test Areas in 1990 and elected to the Amicus National Executive Committee (NEC) in 2003, polling the highest vote in the Aerospace and Shipbuilding sector. He was offered a full-time officers job with the Union in 2003 by Derek Simpson but declined the offer as this would have been an appointment and he believes in elections by the members, answerable and accountable to the members.
In June of 2005 a 48 hour occupation of the 'Test Areas' saved the jobs of two fitters who were facing dismissal. Six weeks later Jerry was sacked by Rolls Royce using trumped up charges, unfounded allegations and anti-union legislation. A tribunal pre-hearing found in his favour and that in all probability he was victimised and sacked for Trade union activities.
Jerry Hicks stands for

• Election of all officers of the union.

• A Campaign pledge that if successful he will only draw an average skilled member’s wage.

• Pursue a merger strategy that would increase democracy and strengthen the union.

• Support for independent combine committees and lay democracy in negotiations

• Repeal of all Anti union Legislation to include rights to re-instatement following a tribunal victory.

• Absolute opposition to any attack on final salary pension schemes and a strengthening of government legislation on this.

• State Pensions linked to earnings.

• Public ownership programme opposing privatisation of jobs and services.

• A programme of building affordable rent council housing which will also provide jobs for our construction members.

FOR FURTHER DETAILS OF WHAT JERRY STANDS FOR GO TO JERRY4GS.COM
A Union too often ‘out of sight and out of mind’
Jerry says “The union has recently held elections for the ‘New NEC’ where only 10% voted, which means of the 2.1 million members 90% never felt sufficiently engaged to be involved. Only a few months ago we voted to create Britain’s biggest Trade union and only 17% were inspired enough to vote. Our union leadership has not managed to touch the lives or minds of massive numbers of our members enough for them to feel the need or worth of becoming participants in affairs of the union.
There has to be a better way, a different way!

• When a member is in need of support they should know that the full weight of the union is behind them. When a Rep is victimised then the General Secretary will be there for them.


• A union that is, visible, accessible, approachable and available. If you can’t get to a union full-time official then they must come to you.


• Officials of the union who are elected by the membership and accountable to the membership, not appointed by the General Secretary.

A leadership in touch with the members
For more information visit the web site
www.jerry4gs.com

 

[In Bloom]

yes, it suits you so well.

Now then, are you seriously telling me that you think Derek Simpson would have defended a notorious anarchist in person against one of hie unions' main employers? Or that having the General Secretary doing the representation didn't help AL at all?

I think that the threat of strike action by AL's workmates might just have had something more to do with it. I suppose you think that Crow would have bothered to turn up if it had been a shop with low levels of membership and no threat of further action?

 

[Fisher_Gate]

he might well be too old to stand again in Unite (unless he wants to look a bit hypocritical for going on past 65 as well! Or is he younger than he looks?). It would help him a little with standing for Respect again somewhere tho I supposel

He says in his election address he started work as an apprentice in 1975. If he was 16 at the time then that would make him, at youngest, only 49. Even if he had been 21 he would still only be 54.

The ward he stood in in 2006, Bristol Lockleaze is up for election again in June 2009 - same day as the European Elections. There are only two councillors so it is up two years in four, there were no elections in this ward in 2007 or 2008. In 2006, he leapfrogged Labour pushing them into second place in this previously strong Labour ward (10 years ago Labour had 57% of the vote in this ward, in 2006 they got 20% with Jerry on 25%). See:
https://www.socialistworker.co.uk/sw_election02.php?w=32&e=1

 

[belboid]

I think that the threat of strike action by AL's workmates might just have had something more to do with it. I suppose you think that Crow would have bothered to turn up if it had been a shop with low levels of membership and no threat of further action?

well, I'm glad you avoided the point so badly Nothing but pisspoor anarchist cliches from you, what a waste of space. Good thing Andy isn't quite as fucking dumb as you, huh?

 

[belboid]

He says in his election address he started work as an apprentice in 1975. If he was 16 at the time then that would make him, at youngest, only 49. Even if he had been 21 he would still only be 54.

if he is, he aint looking that well on it!

I wonder if SW will report his next campaign as well?

 

[In Bloom]

well, I'm glad you avoided the point so badly Nothing but pisspoor anarchist cliches from you, what a waste of space. Good thing Andy isn't quite as fucking dumb as you, huh?

I wish I could say that throwing this kind of tedious tantrum in response to disagreement was beneath you.

So what was your point? And how did my post fail to address it?

 

[belboid]

learn to read you stupid waste of space. Either that, or just fuck off with your worthless snippets from the Janet & John book of Anarchism

 

[In Bloom]

learn to read you stupid waste of space. Either that, or just fuck off with your worthless snippets from the Janet & John book of Anarchism

I love that I'm supposed to be the one spouting cliches, while this Trotty little twat continues to get all hot and bothered over some leftist union candidate with a list of silly demands that we all know he has no chance of actually putting into practice.

 

[Fedayn]

And yet somehow, I'm the predictable one. Got any more cliches for me?

I mean, never mind the fact that I have been active in my own union, or the fact that I actually lost my fucking job a copule of years ago partly because I was trying to recruit people to T&G. I'm just sitting on the fucking sidelines, hey ho.

Yes you are, so what's your point. I've lost jobs in the catering industry due to political activity. Perhaps that makes my remarks as important and worthy as yours?!

 

[belboid]

oh dear, you aren't doing a very good job defending yourself here. You clearly know nothing about Amicus, or Trades unionism, which is why you are coming out with this entirely vacuous drivel.

good to know you think taking a workers wage, election of officials, defending pensions etc are all just 'silly demands'. i'm sure Simpson will be delighted with your de facto support.

 

[In Bloom]

oh dear, you aren't doing a very good job defending yourself here. You clearly know nothing about Amicus, or Trades unionism, which is why you are coming out with this entirely vacuous drivel.

good to know you think taking a workers wage, election of officials, defending pensions etc are all just 'silly demands'. i'm sure Simpson will be delighted with your de facto support.

If you think we're going to get state pensions linked to earnings or more social housing because Derek Simpson becomes general secretary of Amicus, you really are fucking stupid.

 

[In Bloom]

Yes you are, so what's your point. I've lost jobs in the catering industry due to political activity. Perhaps that makes my remarks as important and worthy as yours?!

Where did I say that my involvement in trade unionism somehow makes my posts "important and worthy"? My point was that just because I disagree with you and bellend, doesn't mean that I "sit on the sidelines" and I find it incredibly fucking annoying that this is seen as an acceptable substitute for reasoned political debate.

 

[belboid]

If you think we're going to get state pensions linked to earnings or more social housing because Derek Simpson becomes general secretary of Amicus, you really are fucking stupid.

oh dear, poor old In Bloom really cannot read. What a waste of an education

Calm down dear, and go and have a nice read of your Ladybird books

 

[belboid]

you and bellend,

teehee, InB said a rude word, oooohhhhh

 

[Fedayn]

Where did I say that my involvement in trade unionism somehow makes my posts "important and worthy"? My point was that just because I disagree with you and bellend, doesn't mean that I "sit on the sidelines" and I find it incredibly fucking annoying that this is seen as an acceptable substitute for reasoned political debate.

Aye, best to keep the left-wingers in power, so we can have shitty deals with a radical gloss.

Ignore the realities of life if a pro-Brown candidate wins? Or do they have to adhere to every teet of Rudolf Rocker or some other anarcho 'hero' before youu'll deign them with your vote?

Voting in union elections is not "fighting" for anything.

Just ignore one of the major parts of internbal union life then eh? Best keep away from those grubby trots and stals.....
And the second bit even more sneering at the reality of life in TU's at present. Do you have difficulty in accepting that there is a reason to vote in union elections?
No-one said that it's the be all and end all this election. But i'd rather have someone on the Left and with more of an ability to recall them than some idiot like Simpson.

 

[In Bloom]

Ignore the realities of life if a pro-Brown candidate wins? Or do they have to adhere to every teet of Rudolf Rocker or some other anarcho 'hero' before youu'll deign them with your vote?

I wouldn't vote in a gen sec election if the candidate was Rudolf Rocker, magically brought back from the grave somehow. It's not about who the candidate is and what they think, it's about the nature of trade union bureacracy. I'm a member of Unite (T&G section) myself, and I'd rather focus my time and energy on the actual work of organising at work than on campaigning for some leftist official who'll probably end up fucking the rest of us over anyway, whether he intends to or not.

 

[In Bloom]

oh dear, poor old In Bloom really cannot read. What a waste of an education

Calm down dear, and go and have a nice read of your Ladybird books

So I fucked up on the name

Would you care to explain exactly what Hicks would do, as gen sec, to make good on all these promises he's making?

 

[Fedayn]

I wouldn't vote in a gen sec election if the candidate was Rudolf Rocker, magically brought back from the grave somehow. It's not about who the candidate is and what they think, it's about the nature of trade union bureacracy. I'm a member of Unite (T&G section) myself, and I'd rather focus my time and energy on the actual work of organising at work than on campaigning for some leftist official who'll probably end up fucking the rest of us over anyway, whether he intends to or not.

But you seem unable to realise that it's not one or the other. Take it from me as a PCS rep it's fucking important who controls your union. Your attitude would have been to ignore the actions of a clique around the PCS Gen. Sec. and allow a CIA hack to continue his machinations. To allow the gradual erosion of any democratic procedures.

 

[In Bloom]

But you seem unable to realise that it's not one or the other. Take it from me as a PCS rep it's fucking important who controls your union. Your attitude would have been to ignore the actions of a clique around the PCS Gen. Sec. and allow a CIA hack to continue his machinations. To allow the gradual erosion of any democratic procedures.

I'm not familiar with that particular example, but as long as unions are controlled by anyone other than the membership, then the problem is still not the particular individual who happens to be gen sec.

 

[Fedayn]

I'm not familiar with that particular example, but as long as unions are controlled by anyone other than the membership, then the problem is still not the particular individual who happens to be gen sec.

But that's the point IB, yours and my, preferred method of union organisation won't happen by opting out of those elections.
Imho there should be in every union the absolute right of recall, no elected official on more than the average wage and rotation of tasks ie positions.

 

[In Bloom]

But that's the point IB, yours and my, preferred method of union organisation won't happen by opting out of those elections.
Imho there should be in every union the absolute right of recall, no elected official on more than the average wage and rotation of tasks ie positions.

My preferred method isn't likely to come about by opting in, either. Unless I can find a candidate who's willing to completely put himself out of a job

 

[Fedayn]

My preferred method isn't likely to come about by opting in, either. Unless I can find a candidate who's willing to completely put himself out of a job

So whilst imprtant elections are happening you'll simply ignore them? How helpful....

 

[belboid]

So I fucked up on the name

Would you care to explain exactly what Hicks would do, as gen sec, to make good on all these promises he's making?

do pay more attention! It clearly says they what he would stand for ansd support as far as possible. Many of them are eminently achievable:

• Election of all officers of the union.

• A Campaign pledge that if successful he will only draw an average skilled member’s wage.

• Pursue a merger strategy that would increase democracy and strengthen the union.

• Support for independent combine committees and lay democracy in negotiations

All of which are eminently within the remit of a GS.

• Repeal of all Anti union Legislation to include rights to re-instatement following a tribunal victory.

Extending existent union policy with a specific measure which could even be implemented by a right-wing labour government. Classic reformist politics.

• Absolute opposition to any attack on final salary pension schemes and a strengthening of government legislation on this.

Again, union policy, but actually campaigning for it, rather than shooting it down at the first hurdle.

• State Pensions linked to earnings.

• Public ownership programme opposing privatisation of jobs and services.

• A programme of building affordable rent council housing which will also provide jobs for our construction members.

Pretty much restating existing union policy, but putting it higher on the agenda (or actually on the agenda). how much will it be achievable? Depends how big a campaign outside the union bureaucracy can be developed. but all practical issues affecting the membership, and ones that should be fought for. Your sneering dismissal of the need to mention such things as 'politics' implies you think an organisation of 1.7 million people should have nothing to say about such issues. Or is it just the 'leader' who should have nothing to say about it? That would really help promote the idea (whichever idea) wouldn't it?

And, yes, of course the nature of the bureaucracy means it will probably sell you out at some point, but if you think it makes no difference whether it's at the first or the fifth hurdle, you're a fool.

Your proud abstinence merely goes to support the status quo.

and finally....

Unless I can find a candidate who's willing to completely put himself out of a job

bad choice there really, as a large part of the impetus behind hicks' candidature has precisely come from the fact that he is prepared to 'completely put himself out of a job'

 

[In Bloom]

do pay more attention! It clearly says they what he would stand for ansd support as far as possible. Many of them are eminently achievable:

• Election of all officers of the union.

• A Campaign pledge that if successful he will only draw an average skilled member’s wage.

• Pursue a merger strategy that would increase democracy and strengthen the union.

• Support for independent combine committees and lay democracy in negotiations

All of which are eminently within the remit of a GS.

I'll believe it when I see it.

As for the rest, Hicks has no power to effect any of that, he might as well demand that Gordon Brown performs all of his speeches in a tutu from now on. That kind of power lies with those 1.7 million members you mentioned and others like them. Then again, you seem to think they're too stupid to realise that lack of affordable housing and paltry state pensions are a serious problem without the appropriate leader to point it out to them.

bad choice there really, as a large part of the impetus behind hicks' candidature has precisely come from the fact that he is prepared to 'completely put himself out of a job'

Only in so far as he's going to help the merger go ahead, nothing will actually change, except that two huge bureaucratic edifices will merge into one. Somewhat different to what I had in mind.

 

[belboid]

aah, and he's straight back into the vague anarchist cliche. And now you're against representation of any kind. How quaint.

You'll "believe it when you see it"? You don't want to see it. You're scared of putting someone to a test, and to hold thyem to account, and you're scared to put your own idea's to the test.

And, just cos you vote for somebody, it doesn't mean you stop doing any other activity as well, you know.

All of which is far more time than your drivel deserves, frankly.