[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/labor/ - Labor

Labor & Work
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


File: 1745162515052.jpg (1.03 MB, 1513x1995, One_Big_Union_02.jpg)

 

Does anyone here help organize like labor unions and tenants unions and so on?

I was thinking that the nonprofit industry/social worker sector might be very useful to unionize. It could help mitigate some of the harms of the nonprofit activist industrial complex by giving more power to the workers instead of the CEOs. I'm sure lots of NEETs here interact with social programs. It takes five seconds to ask your support workers if they've looked into unionizing.

Anyhow would love to your thoughts on praxis in general

>>662
>Does anyone here help organize like labor unions and tenants unions and so on?
Yes, I'm a "protection agent" working for my labour union to ensure adequate work place safety, the workplace allocates time and actually pays for this service.

>>663
I thank you for your service sir 🫡

File: 1745163738392.jpg (52.95 KB, 720x1008, 44877351792.jpg)


>>664
Most of my colleges think I'm a naggy asshole when I tell them to report any cut or prick injury, use a biohazard hood and a disposable apron so thank you.

pointless economism, if you're not organizing an army you're objectively wasting your time.

Something I've noticed about praxis in general is that the imperial core left fails to form a United Front (anti-sectarianism at least for some duration), engage in diversified tactics (don't put all your eggs in one basket), and venerates legality, civility, purity and martyrdom at the expense of armed struggle.


Look at the imperial core bourgeoisie. They are anti-sectarian. Basically the theocrats, libertarians, petty bourgeois, haute bourgeois, law enforcement, intelligence, legislators, judiciary, executive, etc. are all able to more or less form a united front to crush the left nonstop.

How do we change this state of affairs? I find a lot of the time that if you suggest diverisfied tactics and united front on here you get accused of being a kiddie, lumpen, degenerate, criminal, liberal, petty bourgeois etc.

People (bots?) are very desperate to affirm sectarian biases, squash a united front, dismiss diversified tactics as impure, etc.

Is it OVER for online communication? Are people like this in real life or is it only a fedbot thing?

>>667
Auxiliary movements supplement armed struggle in a united front. the guerilla is a fish and the people are the water

>>669
auxiliary to what?

you have an entire sea worth of water without a fish in it.

File: 1745165552466.png (236.41 KB, 850x400, ClipboardImage.png)


I am involved with trying to form a tenants union but the organizers are like, fundamentally opposed to vanguardism. "We are creating a space where people can determine for themselves how they want to organize" like tf. You need to tell these people what they want. I've also tried to get involved with my (right to work so no bargaining, just larp with wallet cards) union whose leadership is made up of actively rotting octagenarians for whom action is finger wagging at legislators every couple of months.
>>668
The western left seems totally uninterested in united front organizing. I think it has to do with individualism and maybe the legacy of religious sectarianism. "Fuck you I'll start my own denomination." I really think america in particular needs a Left Intranational to bring orgs together at least on the shit they can agree on right now. Idk, shit is bleak. Idk how you're supposed to do this. Reading about the movements of the 20th century is so fucking depressing. We have nothing in comparison. No class consciousness, much fucking less any organization

>>669
>>674
>>662
Have you guys ever considered that the reason why union organizing isn't a thing anymore is because people don't feel a need for it?
If this was 1925 or 1825, people would lend a sympathetic ear and even help you.

But now? "Labor organizing" seems more like people who don't want to do any serious labor that can contribute to society. And who can blame them?
A lot of people on this site look down on college students and blue collar worker.

>>675
>wanting to organize unions means you hate blue collar workers actually
ok langley

>>674 (me)
Attended an "organizing" call yesterday, which was just people from various unions talking about their union and how Trump bad. They kept saying "we need to organize! We need to fight back!" There was one old trucker who looked like death and sounded like an insane person who actually laid out the dynamics of the situation and explicitly called it class war," and another old head who said we need a general strike, but on the whole the thing had nothing to do with how you actually organize or to what purpose you would even do so. Also the thing was very obviously structured like a webinar but the organizers instead just set up a standard zoom meeting so the speakers kept getting interrupted and confused by random people coughing and shit. I really think labor organizing is a total dead end in this country unless things get bad enough that wildcat strikes and illegalism become popular again. Capital has very effectively cut the labor channel such that it funnels people into this useless protest and growing the union for the sake of growing the union mindset. If you abide by the rules capital has put in place you are necessarily not challenging its power! Idk man I think the American people are doomed.

>>706
And people accuse me of generalizing others on this site. This is what I'm talking about. The stramen rebuttals on here.
No, not everyone wants to be preached to about unionization. I'm being for real. Not everyone who disagrees with you is some fed or reactionary

And yes, trade unions aren't too hot right now especially since the amount of people working in trades has declined .

>>743
especifismo

>>674
Been organising 10+ years in trade unions, all rank and file stuff mostly. A soft push with positive results will get these people over the line. At least thats what I've found anyway, just take the lead on something small, get it done and then use it as a crutch to convince others that if they actually set goals that aren't just painting a canvas banner that they might achieve something.

Push from behind like a border collie instead of running at the front of the pack. There is always a wakeup call when organisers in any social or labor movement realise that synthesism doesn't get the goods. I've never seen tenants unions do well, but I would like to be wrong.

>>745

>And yes, trade unions aren't too hot right now especially since the amount of people working in trades has declined .


Service worker organising is blowing up and there are many gains to be made for all working people. There's no need to get all CIO>AFL here

>>662
>I was thinking that the nonprofit industry/social worker sector might be very useful to unionize. It could help mitigate some of the harms of the nonprofit activist industrial complex by giving more power to the workers instead of the CEOs.
So in my city we have a very strong "Social Sector" branch of a major trade union in part because of this and it works pretty damn well. The skills people who work for charities can bring to practical union organising are immense and ideologically they are already pretty onboard. Same with the tenant union, a lot of htem come from an ant-homelessness and housing advice charity so all of the knowledge is built-in and shared pretty effectively through the organisation.

>>799
>synthesism doesn't get the goods
How so?

In December 1912, the UMWA had sent 21 "recruiting teams" to the Southern Colorado coalfields. These recruiting teams generally consisted of two union men: one who would embed himself among the miners and another who would find employment with the local management. Working in tandem, each pairing would locate miners who were opposed to unionization and report them to the company as union sympathizers—an offense that generally resulted in contract termination—in order to covertly replace them with genuine union members. It is possible that up to 3,000 UMWA members were introduced to the coalfields in such a manner.[20]: 10–11 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colorado_Coalfield_War

>>966
hmmmm


Unique IPs: 15

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]