Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Mar 12, 2014.
It's certainly feels exploitative when one is working for a boss. This isn't personal. It's what one expects a boss to do.
I fail to see what I've saying here is controversial.
Its based on personal experience and what friends and acquaintances say to me.
'Exploitative' to me looks like a company raking in ever-fatter profits off the backs of their staff every year while refusing to pay them what is independently deemed to the minimum required to live off in London
I think where I disagree is you seem to be saying anyone who works for any boss is being exploited. Correct me if I have misunderstood you though.
Support the workers!
How to support Brixton Ritzy workers fighting for the Living Wage: #1 Boycott The Cinema
But surely everyone (who works) effectively has a boss? Even if you're self employed, you are working for your customers who direct your work and pay your wages.... like a boss.
I did say in previous post that this wasn't being personal. I'm not being moralistic about bosses. My view is that this is a Capitalist society. That labour is a commodity that people have to sell. Following Marx. Which fits into my observations of how work operates. The relationship between boss and worker is an unequal one. One does not elect ones boss. The failing of bourgeois democracy is that it's partial. The economic sphere us excluded. So yes anyone who works for a boss is being exploited. There are however different degrees of exploitation. Picturehouse aren't the same as say Sports Direct. But exploitation of labour is fundamental aspects of how Capitalism works. In a Capitalist society ones labour is not free.
Getting back to Ritzy. The Living Wage dispute is example of class struggle. Picture house for what they might see as sound economic reasons don't want to be committed to Living Wage and other benefits. They would argue that Picture house workers get reasonable deal compared to other jobs in London. The Ritzy workers/ Picture house workers are trying to get maximum they can from the employer for no increased work load. It's quite understandable that Picture house oppose Living Wage on one level.
Well, to be fair, the workers are trying to get what has been independently deemed as the minimum amount required to live in London.
Fair enough, these are your observations, which I think are interesting, about how work operates. Following somebody who did their writing the thick end of 200 years ago. They are not my practical experiences in 2017, thankfully.
I think this is a country that wants to move to the left and wants more fairness for everybody. I worry when intelligent people on the left say things like "anyone who works for a boss is being exploited". It will scare people off. Everybody who works has a boss. Even powerful CEO's. It's just not true that everybody is being exploited.
I *do* think anybody who doesn't get a LLW and be expected to work in London is being exploited. I also think the LLW is too low and too simplistic. I mentioned it earlier, the retail sector in particular is a disgrace.
Nah. That's way too simplistic a claim. Many freelancers have no one who who fits the traditional definition of a 'boss' telling them what to do, how to act, when to start work, how to dress etc. They work with clients and companies and take on the jobs they choose, when they want and turn down the ones they don't want.
I'm not following somebody who wrote 200 years ago.
Last week read a good piece in the New Statesman about the rise of Corbyn. John McDonnell said after the failing out if the banks people started reading Marx again. This was a crisis if Capitalism. When Gordon Brown and New Labour ideology said this would not happen.
I was one of many who went back to read Marx in the original. I've only read Volume one of Capital so far . And on Butchers Apron recommendation watching the geographers David Harverys lectures on it.
Reading Volume one and I'm surprised how much of it resonates with now. The chapter on the working day for example.
I think a generational shift is going on. Corbyn appealed to young people. My brother's 18 year old daughter is Corbyn fan and has been asking me what to read. I'm pretty staggered as I thought my kind of attitudes were finished.
I don't think I'm scaring her off. Bought her a couple of books and she was delighted.
And I don't even think I'm a proper socialist. My background is second generation "alternative society".
I don't agree people, especially younger age group, are being put off by lefty opinions. The opposite is the case. I'm surprised.
I just wish the now in there 40s children of Thatcher would step aside. People like Chuka.
Most of the striking Ritzy workers are in the 20s/early 30s.
Here's the next action, I can't make it unfortunately
I passed by the this evening.
Had a chat with one of the the Ritzy workers who was there this evening. She recognized me as (former) Ritzy regular. She thanked those old regulars like me who had been boycotting Ritzy.
She also told me about this. From five pm on Sunday in Leicester square.
I used to be a Ritzy member, but since the boycott I've discovered the joys of Peckhamplex - only £4.99 every show!
Cineworld would have to do a lot to ever win me back.
The only thing Ritzy does and Plex doesn't is live Opera as far as I know.
I wonder how much Peckhamplex staff get paid?
Probably as much as me (i.e. not much above minimum wage.)
I have a life long interest in film. When I was growing up it was normal cheap entertainment. In my town going to cinema was no big thing.
When I was first in London it needs to be remembered that living in inner cities wasn't popular. With competition from TV it looked like cinemas were dying. Scala, Ritzy, Renoir, BFI were kept going by enthusiastics. Cinephiles and the "dirty mac brigade" kept alternative and foreign language film alive.
What I always liked about it was that it wasn't snobby.
Fast forwarding 30 plus years and its all changed. Thanks to loyal cinephiles cinemas in London have survived. Curzon and Picturehouse have gone upmarket. Curxon in particular. The old cinema goers like me are pushed out.
I don't know if Peckhamplex pay living wage. What they do have is long lease on the cinema. The Council want to " regenerate" the area. But Peckhamplex long lease is scuppering that. When I go to Peckhamplex it's always busy. The demographic isn't just the well off. Given the area hasn't been gentrified yet the business model works. Negotiated long lease when it wasn't popular, cheap prices mean lot of bums on seats. It's probably quite profitable.
What winds me up with Picturehouse and Curzon ( who to pay LL) is that there business model is jettison loyal customers from the ",bad times" in !London" and go for the new better off demographic. It's shit.
I've talked to people in Curzon and Picturehouse. They say they miss there old customers like me who find it hard to afford to go now.
I'm supporting the Ritzy boycott. If Peckhamplex workers did the same I would support that.
Some of us who post here only just scrape by. Options are limited. Do my best to support a long dispute at Ritzy. If Picturehouse workers win it will have knock on effect in other areas of industry.
If everyone got at least living wage and proper conditions at work there wouldn't be these arguments.
In the case of the Ritzy, it was kept going thanks to support from Lambeth so it's unforgivable that we've got to the situation where Cineworld are now pricing out the locals.
Probably not the best place for this but:
Separate names with a comma.