|
irenechsk
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Name: Samkee
Country: Hong Kong
Metro: Hong Kong
Birthday: 2/6/1983
Gender: Female
Interests: listening to soft music, writing, hiking, travelling, cooking (in the memory of slo), meeting friends from all around the world
Occupation: Student
Industry: Other
Message: message me
Website: visit my website
Member Since:
5/28/2004
|
|
| A War Against OrganizingAngel Warner, an employee at a Rite Aid distribution
center, sat next to me recently in a congressional
briefing room and described what happened when she and
her fellow workers tried to form a union in their
California workplace. She talked about the surveillance,
constant threats and harassment they endured; how she
and other workers were repeatedly taken aside and
interrogated, one on one, about how they planned to
vote; how two co-workers were fired; and how the rest
lived in fear that any day they, too, might get a pink
slip. The union filed numerous charges of unfair labor
practices and eventually won the organizing election.
But three years after the campaign began, Warner and her
fellow Rite Aid workers still don't have a contract.
Like most U.S. companies, Rite Aid takes full advantage
of current labor law to try to keep workers from
exercising their full rights to organize and
collectively bargain under the National Labor Relations
Act. Far from an aberration, such behavior by U.S.
companies during union organizing campaigns has become
routine, and our nation's labor laws neither protect
workers' rights nor provide disincentives for employers
to stop disregarding those rights.
Late last month I published a study, "No Holds Barred,"
that was presented at the hearing at which Angel spoke.
I looked at a random sample of more than 1,000 union
elections over a five-year period to determine the
parameters of employer behavior during union
representation elections in the private sector and the
limitations of the labor law system established to
regulate that behavior.
In 34 percent of the elections I studied, companies
fired employees for union activity. In 57 percent of
elections, employers threatened to shut down all or part
of their facilities, and in 47 percent, employers
threatened to cut wages and benefits.
In 63 percent of campaigns, supervisors met with workers
one on one and interrogated them about their union
activity or whether they or others were supporting the
union. In 54 percent of the elections, supervisors used
these one-on-ones to threaten individual workers.
The bottom line is that there has been a steady decline
of workers' rights in the past several decades.
Colleagues and I have examined this issue in a series of
studies over the past two decades. My new data show that
employers are more than twice as likely as they were in
the 1990s to use 10 or more tactics -- including threats
and firings -- to thwart workers' organizing efforts,
and they are more likely to use more punitive and
aggressive tactics such as interrogations, discharges
and threats of plant closings, while shifting away from
softer tactics such as social events, promises of
improvement and employee involvement programs.
For the vast majority of workers who want to join unions
today, the right to organize and bargain collectively --
free from coercion, intimidation and retaliation -- is
at best a promise indefinitely deferred. In election
campaigns overseen by the National Labor Relations
Board, it is now standard practice for companies to
subject workers to threats, interrogation, harassment,
surveillance and retaliation for union activity.
The failure of the system to defend workers' rights in a
timely manner multiplies the obstacles workers face when
seeking union representation, creating delays that favor
employers. Employers appeal a high percentage of the
cases to the NLRB, and in the most egregious instances,
the employer can count on a final decision being held up
by three to five years.
A key aspect of proposed labor law reform, the Employee
Free Choice Act, concerns revisions to the rules
surrounding arbitration of the first contract. My
findings show that this provision may be among the most
crucial of the legislation. Fifty-two percent of workers
who form a union are still without a contract a year
after they win an election, I found, and 37 percent
remain without a contract two years after the election.
For employers, labor law provides yet another means to
indefinitely delay unionization.
It doesn't have to be this way. My survey data from the
public sector portray an atmosphere in which workers may
organize free from the kind of coercion, intimidation
and retaliation that so taints the election process in
the private sector. Most of the states in the public-
sector sample have laws allowing workers to choose a
union through card check or voluntary recognition. And
more than a third of public-sector workers in the United
States are members of unions.
Unless Congress passes serious labor law reform with
real penalties, only a small fraction of the workers who
seek union representation will succeed. If recent trends
continue, there will no longer be a functioning legal
mechanism to effectively protect the right of private-
sector workers to organize and collectively bargain. Our
country cannot afford to make workers defer their rights
and aspirations for union representation any longer.
The writer is director of labor education research at
Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor
Relations. Her paper "No Holds Barred -- The
Intensification of Employer Opposition to Organizing"
was published last month by the nonprofit Economic
Policy Institute. | | |
| Can't believe it is from Saad-Filho...Dear colleagues and students, We strongly and unreservedly condemn the raid on SOAS by the UK Border Agency on Friday 12 June, the deportation of several cleaners and the underlying government policies which will adversely affect UK higher education, and SOAS specifically, in numerous ways in the future. We think it is very important for all UK universities to challenge these policies and practices. We would like SOAS senior management to play an active and public role in this campaign. At the same time, we strongly oppose the way some students, staff and members of the general public have hijacked SOAS’ reaction, and have made, for the most part, unrealistic and impossible demands upon School management. The occupation of the Director’s office, the crass and disrespectful treatment of Professor Paul Webley, the use of cameras and the threats of French-style ‘kidnapping’ were intimidating, unjustified, and wholly out of order in a university environment.
We find it frustrating that the Director and senior management were unable to distance themselves immediately and explicitly from the Border Agency’s actions. However, we also find the allegations that SOAS senior management was ‘taking revenge upon the cleaners’ utterly ludicrous.
We are pleased to note that an agreement has been reached that led to the end of the occupation. We now urge senior management, the trade unions, the students’ union and other SOAS interest groups to engage in a constructive debate about what can be done to 1) help those cleaners still under detention in the UK, 2) prevent these deplorable events from happening again, and 3) identify the most productive avenues to challenge the underlying government policies most effectively. Nadje Al-Ali, Chair, Centre for Gender Studies Stefan Sperl, HoD, Near & Middle East Rachel Harrison, HoD, South Asia & South East Asia Michel Hockx, HoD China & Inner Asia Bernhard Fuehrer, HoD China & Inner Asia (term 2) Rachel Dwyer, Indian Cultures & Cinema (future HoD, South Asia) Jaehoon Hoon Yeon, HoD Japan & Korea Alfredo Saad Filho, HoD, Development Studies Akin Oyetade, HoD, African Studies Ulrich Kratz, AD Research, L&C Parvathi Raman, Chair, Centre for Migration & Diaspora Studies Lynn Welchman, HoD, Law Benjamin Fortna, HoD, History Dr Harry West, Chair, Food Studies Centre | | |
| JOINT STATEMENT FROM SOAS AND STUDENTS’ UNIONWhat follows is a joint statement from Professor Paul Webley and Nizam
Uddin (Co-President Students' Union) regarding an agreement that has
been reached following the protest in the Directorate office.
Students have agreed to leave the office within the next hour.
JOINT STATEMENT FROM SOAS AND STUDENTS’ UNION
Dear staff and students
Following the protest by students about Friday’s visit by the UK
Border Agency, we are pleased to confirm that a way forward has been
agreed by all parties involved.
The events surrounding last Friday have been deeply distressing for
everyone at SOAS and in particular the individuals who were detained.
Furthermore, we are disturbed by allegations that have emerged about
the possible role that ISS played in the visit.
We have agreed the following:
SOAS will write directly to the Home Secretary within 12 hours of the
end of the protest, requesting that he grants exceptional leave to
remain in the UK to those cleaners who are still being detained. In
addition, SOAS will request the immediate return of those who have
been deported and exceptional leave to remain for those forced into
hiding by Friday’s raid.
SOAS will open discussions with ISS, and separately with UNISON, UCU
and the SU, to review in detail the events of last Friday.
SOAS will discuss the possibility of bringing cleaning services
in-house at the next scheduled meeting of its Governing Body.
SOAS will meet with the relevant unions to discuss health and safety
issues relating to immigration raids and acknowledge UCU policy of
non-compliance with immigration raids.
SOAS will not take action against those involved in the protest.
This incident has highlighted the need for further debate regarding
this issue and, as has been mentioned in earlier correspondence, SOAS
will be speaking with other heads of universities about the wider
implications of the Government's policy on immigration and any likely
impact it may have on our staff and students.
We recognise the valued contribution of all migrants who have worked
at SOAS over the years and have a long tradition of welcoming people
from all over the world. In our personal capacity, we would also like
to indicate our support for the regularisation of non-documented
workers.
We would like to thank all staff and students for their valued
contributions, support and co-operation in recent days as we have
worked towards this agreement.
Professor Paul Webley
Director and Principal
Nizam Uddin
Co-President Students’ Union | | |
| soas' COWARDICEDear All
Please note that with immediate effect there will be changes to the
access of SOAS College Buildings.
The changes are as follows:-
All ID cards will be checked - only persons holding a valid ID card
will be permitted to access
Students are not permitted to sign in visitors until further notice
Staff may continue to sign in visitors.
Where possible, staff, students and visitors will be allowed to access
the building to conduct their work/studies.
Please be assured that these measures are temporary.
Thank you for your on-going cooperation.
Regards
Sian Jones
| | |
| In SOLIDARITYHere is a short update on the situation of the cleaners, so everyone has the same sort of information, although visiting http://www.solomonsmindfield.net/ will be helpful to get a recap to see the day's developments. There has also been a recent article on the issue in the London Student
http://www.london-student.net/2009/06/12/students-protest-sudden-deportation-of-soas-cleaners/.
There's also a facebook group about this which you can all join and promote:
http://www.facebook.com/groups.php?ref=sb#/group.php?gid=89511288639
To begin here is a list of the remaining 8 cleaners that were taken.
Most names are aliases and if Ive managed to get the real names they will be in ()’s.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Heidi Campos
Colombiana
Was held at Borough Immigration Centre
Last spoken to while on the plane about to leave for Colombia
Has a husband somewhere in london
Current Status: Deported - 12.06.2009
- Luzia Venancio
Brasilera, 37 years old
6 Months Pregnant
Partner with Milton Urquiza
Current Status: Deported - 13.06.2009
- Milton Urquiza (Martin Almagro Carrasco)
Is most likely with Luzia but may have been sent to Dover
Current Status: Deported - 13.06.2009
- Laura (Alba) Posada
Colombiana
Was held at Old Street
Was in Yarl's Wood Saturday Morning
Scheduled to leave for Colombia at 10pm on Saturday 13th June from Heathrow
Current Status: Uncontacted & assumed deported on 13.06.2009
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dover Immigration Removal Centre - 013 0424 4578
- Carlos Chapparo
1/2 Colombiano - 1/2 Venezolano
Family lives in Colombia
Was held at Borough Immigration Centre
Has been sent to Dover and is scheduled to leave on Monday to Venezuela
Current Status: Flying on Monday, does not want any support. Sounds very fatalistic and has very low morale.
- Manuel Zeballos Saldana
Boliviano
Was held at Old Street then taken to Borough
Has been transferred to Dover
Scheduled to be sent to Bolivia at 22.00 on Monday
Wife in UK - Not yet contacted
Curret Status: Flying on Monday, does not want any support. Says that more people should not be treated as criminals and they have done everything possible so that they could recieve little to no help. For this reason he does not want anyone to go to Heathrow to stop the plane. Hopefully he will have a statement written that we can later use for press releases.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yarl’s Wood Detention Centre - 012 3482 1000
- Rosa Aguilera (de Perez)
Nicaraguensa
Was Held at Old Street but thought to have been taken to Borough
Is believed to have been taken to Yarlswood
Home Office currently has her Passport. Came into country to visit hospitalised Husband
Rodolfo Perez - Partner 078 8250 7730
Current Status: Being held in room B206 and has been contacted before on number 077 3379 1086
- Marina Silva
Boliviana
Has been sent to Yarlswood Detention Centre
Current Status: Being held in room B204. Uncontacted
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you help?
Help one of the remaining Detainees
We have to try to ensure this is not treated as a group deportation
and is instead treated on an individual basis.
Find out the following about one of the Cleaners
. How long have they been in the country?
. Do they have family here?
. Any medical conditions?
. How will they be received in their home country?
Contact any Solicitors that may be helpful
. Will be difficult since it is the weekend
. 084 5345 4345 is a sort of communal Law Firm guide that will give
information on specialised solicitors
. One per case is the best
Brainstorm on Advice for other SU’s
. Gather information about cleaners, personal contact numbers, family
contact numbers
. Have a quickly accessible list of individual, supportive solicitors
that specialise in immigration
. Find out what nationalities are represented in the cleaning staff
. Begin to draft ideas for a general handbook/guidebook for cleaners
and hopefully get it translated into the appropriate languages
Come up with ideas for a Coherent plan for next Freshers fair
. In House for Sodexo staff and ISS Staff
In Solidarity,
Onward & Up
| | |
|
