I always find that so frustrating when watching these types of videos. The camera person is so often so involved with making commentary at the participants that the camera angles are bad, and it's hard to see the bad stuff happening.

That said, I hope those goons were arrested. I won't hold my breath though.

[ 13 September 2005: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

I remember a time not that long ago where you risked life and limb to cross a picket line.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
Caution: Watching this will make you want to go to the picket line and kick the crap out of a security goon.

---

I did read this morning that Supreme Court judge Grant Burnyeat has stated that TWU picketing workers did use harassment, intimidation, and physical assault against Telus works at their homes, restaurants, etc. The TWU is acknowledges that the incidents did happen.

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:
I did read this morning that Supreme Court judge Grant Burnyeat has stated that TWU picketing workers did use harassment, intimidation, and physical assault against Telus work[er]s at their homes, restaurants, etc. The TWU is acknowledges that the incidents did happen.

---

quote:

---

Do 'scabs' bring harrassment and intimidation upon themselves?

---

Intimidation means nothing without the violence.

This would be like saying that it's wrong to hit your spouse, but it's OK to threaten to hit them. What would the threat be, if it were not backed up by the violence?

When they get agressive, engaging in arguments with the workers on the line, restraining people, walking among the picketers, then they have crossed the line. They are no longer security, they are acting as employment relations personel for the employer, and should be treated as such. If they see a violation of an injunction or a law, they should record, report to the police or courts, thats it. We have police to arrest people, we don't need rented security personnel with little or no training dediding who should be arrested and doing it independantly.

quote:

---

Originally posted by flower:
The longer the lockout the more violent and extreme the management will become.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:

And the evidence to support your statement is?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by flower:
See post above mine.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:

Huh?

---

Telus calls workers at home and/or mails them letters inviting them to meet with Entwhistle. This is ok, but calling a scab at home to ask him or her to respect the picket line is not? Telus security goons follow picketers down the street, but a picketer follows a scab down the street and the cops are called immediately.

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
If this lockout goes on long enough, there will be picketers who are desperate, see themselves as having nothing to lose, and willing to do whatever it takes to keep the scabs out.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:

Huh?

---

Jesus, talk about a circular argument. Both sides have documented abuse allegations floating around.

No TWU member I talk to wants to get violent. The real issue is the right to express ourselves and the right to engage in non-violent protest.

For example, Magoo's example above: telling a scab to fuck off or letting them know how rough its' going to be when this is over, can result in the speaking member being fired and perhaps arrested.

TELUS is getting awfully picky about the injunctions against us, too. We can't be in the driveway. A 'flying squad' can't wait outside a restaurant in a mall for the scabs to finish their lunch break. A member gets arrested for telling off a scab a little too closely. The RCMP tell us that if we don't want water bottles dumped on us, we shouldn't call them scabs.

Extreme and violent? Sounds like protest to me.

Hell, a lot of members are so timid right now because they're afraid to get arrested. They're afraid to yell at scabs, they're afraid to even walk across the driveway when no ones' there.

A lot of older members say 'this isn't how it was in 81'* - were people bolder or the institutions' less stacked against us?

I don't know, sometimes, it sure seems like they are. A friend got arrested today - a kind, and generally cool individual. I would be shocked if he had abused anyone. So I'm a little hot.

Go down to a picket line ferabit, scooter, introduce yourself. See how extreme and violent we are.

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:
I'm with Michelle, I'm not sure what the heck happened after watching the video.

---

I don't know...reading your posts in this thread, I don't think you're with me on this one.

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:
I did, during the first week of the lockout and I don't care to do it again (see Topic: Telus work stoppage).

---

Sorry, I forgot. But what kind of abuse were they hurling at the general public walking by? Why would they do that? I'm sorry, I'm just skeptical - if they were really randomly verbally abusing people, I will totally stand corrected.

1. It was Telus that engaged this company AFI to come in and play the heavy with the union. Has there been any similar things happen in the CBC dispute or the Teck Cominco dispute? These goons, (and that's what they are, they are hired strikebreakers and will do anything possible to get the picket lines taken down) are nothing more than glorified Pinkerton idiots. If you don't know what I'm talking about, google the Homestead Strike from the 1800s, or the Ford Motor Company strikes in the early 20th century.

2. I would differntiate between management doing the work vs people actually crossing the picket line. Managers have their bosses to answer to, if they don't do what they're told to do, they're out of work, and not just for the duration of the lockout... permanently. Deep down they have a personal choice to make, their livlihoods and career, or their principles. But unfortunatley middle managers principles are dictated by their masters.

3. A true scab is someone who consciously goes to work and crosses the picket line. This could be a returning Telus employee or some schmo loser idiot who wants to make some $$$. If you are going to engage in the practice of actively stealing someone's job, you should expect that there will be consequences and dire ones at that.

4. These Pinkerton wanna bes, are spineless and cowardly. I have evidence of this directly. Last night I went to the "line in New West." I sat in a wheel chair on the picket line, turned it around, so my back was to the Stinkerton wanna bes, and said.... "here, come and get me. I'm in the right position for you tough guys." And not one of them made a move. I guess you have to be legitimately disabled to have them come and do a number on you.

5. This dispute is one of the most caustic in recent history. And Telus, as stated previously, instigated it by hiring these piece of crap cowardly thugs. They don't go anywhere alone, because they fear that someone may come after them (actually when they go to the can, its so that one can tell the other one how to take a leak or a dump, as it would require a brain cell to be able to even accomplish this simple task. Something once again lacking in this idiots.) At the end of the day, Entwhistle has gone too far in his tactics, and I believe that inspite of the press sympathy (By calling it a strike rather than a lockout and other biased BS) people know the real truth.

6. I believe that if it wasn't for the AFI goofs, that these parties would be sitting across the table from one another, trying to hammer something out. But because Entwhistle engaged these idiot rent a goons... I don't think that that's going to happen until Entwhistle resigns.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The yodelling brakeman:
SCABS deserve whatever happens to them. Lowlife scum.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Anarchonostic:
I'm sorry, I'm just skeptical...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:

That's it, lets dehumanize them to demonize them.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by keglerdave:
I would differntiate between management doing the work vs people actually crossing the picket line. Managers have their bosses to answer to, if they don't do what they're told to do, they're out of work, and not just for the duration of the lockout... permanently. Deep down they have a personal choice to make, their livlihoods and career, or their principles. But unfortunatley middle managers principles are dictated by their masters.

---

I'm glad that someone has made this distinction. I've been reluctant to speak up, because I really don't want to be attacked, but my father was in management during two newspaper strikes in the 70s & 80s.

During the second strike, we were chased by cars full of strikers on three different occasions; constantly harrassed by the local police (who were Teamsters, of all things); our house and car were vandalized at least three times; my father's girlfriend was hunted down, beaten and threatened with rape; and after an incident wherein I was threatened with kidnapping, I was thereafter driven to school everyday by a guard and had to keep a walkie-talkie in my backpack.

I'm not claiming that the animosity in the Telus strike is at the level of the strikes I saw close-up as a boy, and I imagine some would feel that these events were visited upon us rightly by people desperate to save their jobs.

quote:

---

Originally posted by The yodelling brakeman:
SCABS deserve whatever happens to them. Lowlife scum.

---

quote:

---

Scooter, they have dehumanized themselves.

---

This is always rich.

Criminals are human and have rights. Murders should not be "beaten" by other inmates. Even terrorists have their "reasons".

But scabs? They're not human, and they deserve "whatever they get" (wink-wink).

I find this endlessly fascinating. Which is good, I guess, since the number of people who believe that scabs are somehow less than human seems similarly endless.

If I suggested, with a straight face, that someone who commits a crime and ends up in prison "deserves whatever they get" I'd have babblers all over me, decrying vigilantism, decrying violence, decrying the idea of assaulting someone out of revenge.

But here, in this forum, and when the topic is "scabs", it's OK. Good even. Something high-fiveworthy.

Likewise, if I suggested, with a straight face, that drug addicts are less than human, I'd expect fierce resistance. Doesn't matter if they're robbing their neighbourhood blind, defecating in doorways, or cursing at bystanders, they still retain an essential and unsinkable humanity. But if they cross a picket line, they're animals. Worse than nothing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
Likewise, if I suggested, with a straight face, that drug addicts are less than human, I'd expect fierce resistance. Doesn't matter if they're robbing their neighbourhood blind, defecating in doorways, or cursing at bystanders, they still retain an essential and unsinkable humanity. But if they cross a picket line, they're animals. Worse than nothing.

---

People do not go out on strike or get locked out to enjoy a summer picnic. They are fighting for better working conditions and yes, even compensation. When someone comes along and says, "screw you guys, I'm ok Jack, I'm crossing the line and to hell with you." they are in effect meddling with those people's ability to provide for their families and to also provide for future employees of whatever company is being stuck / locked out.

A lot of people seem to think that labour disputes are about the here and now. But that's only 1 facet of a dispute. You have to look at the history of the company and the relationship there between the bargaining unit and management. As well, people have a responsibility to those who are coming up behind them. Too often this second point is overlooked, and while current people go forward, alot of times it's at the future employees expense.

The line about "I have a family to feed." woe is me bullshit, is just that... bullshit. You don't think that the thousands of TWU members out on the line don't have families to feed, mortgages to pay, bills to pay, and obligations that would be better looked after if they were working? Chubbybear used the example of the single mother with 3 kids. Well... read the above.

Lockouts / Strikes are never easy. And yes, there will be some financial hardship involved. But better to suffer now, fighting for a principle called "free collective bargaining" than to accept Entwhistle's vision of labour relations, which involves looking after shareholder's investments at the expense of people's livlihoods. What Entwhistle hasn't plugged into yet, is that a lot of Telus workers are also share holders.

The same person who will cross a picket line, will also line up to receive whatever the union wins out of this fight, without ever having to actually fight the fight to get it. And that person more times than not, wouldn't think twice about doing that, because to be a scab, you have to be a gutless coward.

So people who pooh pooh over strong language used against SCABS, should consider for the moment, someone coming to their place of work, and usurping their job, right out from under their noses. Its great to opine and say "that's not right" when you don't have to walk a mile in the person who's fighting for their livlihood's shoes.

quote:

---

Originally posted by chubbybear:
So if that so-called scab is a single mom with three kids facing homelessness, they 'deserve' whatever happens to them?

---

Well, they don't have to scab. The union has told its' members again and again: if you're having trouble keeping ahead financially, talk to us, and we should be able to help you out. That's as it stands right now.

Scabs will use any justification they can find. The fact is, when you start at TELUS, you sign a contract with the union, stating you will abide by its rules and regulations.

And re: the management thing.
Managers can refuse to do the work of bargaining unit employees during a labour dispute, as per the Grundy decisions (
1, and 2, warning PDF's).

Sure, you can say that TELUS would just find another way to fire the supervisors. My response is to advise supervisors to organise - we can, why can't they ?

I don't give a hard time to managers I know. They were union once, for the most part, and they don't look happy about this situation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by keglerdave:
Hmmm. A drug addict is a person with an addiction issue. A SCAB is someone with a moral issue. ... There is no treatment for a SCAB. ... The line about "I have a family to feed." woe is me bullshit, is just that... bullshit. ... because to be a scab, you have to be a gutless coward.
...And when it comes to violence and intimidation, sorry, the Employer started it.

---

'You can always tell a stool (scab) though, and that's a fact, he's got a yellow streak running down his back. He doesn't have to stool, you know. He'll always make a good living. On what he steals out of blind mens cups.'

The 'I have to scab to pay my bills' argument is crap. There are other jobs out there, and lots of people that I have talked to, including single parents, have taken on a part time job, so they can make a paycheck and do thier picket duty for the picket pay. Some are actually making more this way than when they were working for Telus.

The 'I have the right to make my own choice' argument is crap too. Legally, the union does not have the right to make it's choice when bargaining to exclude scabs from any gains in the collective agreement, such as wage increases or protection against contracting out. The choice that scabs want to make is to continue to get a paycheck while other people fight hard and suffer to win a contract that will benefit everyone, even the scabs.

Here is yet another example of Telus lies. They are claiming, based on a payroll audit, that over half of the workers in Alberta have crossed the line.

web page

quote:

---

So people who pooh pooh over strong language used against SCABS, should consider for the moment, someone coming to their place of work, and usurping their job, right out from under their noses. Its great to opine and say "that's not right" when you don't have to walk a mile in the person who's fighting for their livlihood's shoes.

---

I couldn't care less about any "strong language". I'm talking about excusing, promoting, or masturbating over the possibility of, actual violence.

We don't condone vigilante violence for crimes here at babble. Not even heinous crimes like murder, rape or child molesting. We don't support corporal punishment in our penal system. So again I wonder why there are always more than a few babblers who'll either directly endorse violence and intimidation against scabs, try to rationalize it, or simply ignore the call to "give them what they deserve".

If we wouldn't accept the argument that criminals who get beaten in prison "got what they deserved", why on earth would we accept the same attitude when it's a scab?

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
'You can always tell a stool (scab) though, and that's a fact, he's got a yellow streak running down his back. He doesn't have to stool, you know. He'll always make a good living. On what he steals out of blind mens cups.'...The 'I have to scab to pay my bills' argument is crap.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

I couldn't care less about any "strong language". I'm talking about excusing, promoting, or masturbating over the possibility of, actual violence.

We don't condone vigilante violence for crimes here at babble. Not even heinous crimes like murder, rape or child molesting. We don't support corporal punishment in our penal system. So again I wonder why there are always more than a few babblers who'll either directly endorse violence and intimidation against scabs, try to rationalize it, or simply ignore the call to "give them what they deserve".

If we wouldn't accept the argument that criminals who get beaten in prison "got what they deserved", why on earth would we accept the same attitude when it's a scab?

Oh, and for what it's worth, your paycheque, like all money, is simply property. If a scab steals your $500 paycheque, or a thief steals your $500 bike, you're out $500. Should we endorse the idea of curb-stomping some bike thieves and giving them what they deserve? All on board with that?

---

I believe you had a different opinion in the following.

Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469
posted 08 August 2005 02:12 PM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you've ever been assaulted (physically, sexually, whatever...) then the difference is obvious. One relates to your (well) being and the other relates to "things". Of course, if you're possessed by the idea that "things" do somehow relate fundamentally to your "being" then perhaps there is no difference, in your mind, between the two. Fortunately, I have no such views.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I certainly don't confuse myself with my television set, but my home and me? Well, security for one is security for the other. If my home isn't secure, how is my person secure??

In my perfect world, if you broke into my house, for any reason whatsoever, I feel I should have the right to do whatever I wish. I will assume you have similar intentions. You, the intruder, obviously feel no obligation toward the law, so why should I, the honest and innocent homeowner, have them?

I should be well within my rights to come at you with a Skil Saw, or a pot of boiling water, or a flamethrower, if I feel that's the best way to protect my security.

And personally, I don't think it should matter one bit if it looks like you might be leaving. Unless you're "leaving" to go turn yourself in to the police then I'll have to be concerned about when you're coming back to finish what you started, and I shouldn't have to worry about that. If I can take care of you now then I, and my neighbours, can sleep easily.

quote:

---

I believe you had a different opinion in the following.

---

A different opinion with regard to threats to my safety and security?

quote:

---

Originally posted by flower:
In my perfect world, if you broke into my house, for any reason whatsoever, I feel I should have the right to do whatever I wish...I should be well within my rights to come at you with a Skil Saw, or a pot of boiling water, or a flamethrower, if I feel that's the best way to protect my security...And personally, I don't think it should matter one bit if it looks like you might be leaving. ..If I can take care of you now then I, and my neighbours, can sleep easily.

---

quote:

---

The night of April 3, armed vigilantes camped along Border Road in a series of watch posts set-up for the Minuteman Project, a month-long action in which revolving casts of 150 to 200 anti-immigration militants wearing cheap plastic "Undocumented Border Patrol Agent" badges mobilized in southeastern Arizona. Their stated goal was to "do the job our government refuses to do" and "protect America" from the "tens of millions of invading illegal aliens who are devouring and plundering our nation."

"It should be legal to kill illegals," said Carl, a 69-year old retired Special Forces veteran who fought in Vietnam and now lives out West. "Just shoot 'em on sight. That's my immigration policy recommendation. You break into my country, you die."

"I agree completely," Michael said. "You get up there with a rifle and start shooting four or five of them a week, the other four or five thousand behind them are going to think twice about crossing that line."

"The thing to do would be to drop the bodies just a few hundred feet into the U.S. and just leave them there, with lights on them at night," he said. "That sends the message 'No Trespassing,' in any language."

"I don't really like violence, but if we did start doing what you're talking about, it would show we mean business for a change," said the group's only woman, and the only person who didn't carry a gun. "It would say, 'This is the USA, don't fuck with us! ... Well, this may sound a little weird, but I just have more respect for the lives of stray cats and dogs than I do illegal aliens."

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:

A different opinion with regard to threats to my safety and security?

Yes. So? What does that have to do with the loss of a paycheque, or even several?

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
Get real. You're talking about financial security, and I'm talking about someone breaking into your home. If you can't see the difference between someone breaking into your home, and someone who isn't sure if they're going to be able to pay their phone bill then I'm not sure how to explain that to you.

---

I reserve the right to defend myself from a corporation that wants to send jobs overseas. I reserve the right to defend myself from a substandard wage and benefit package. I reserve the right to defend myself from human rights violations like the refusing of bathroom breaks, sexual harassment, and religious or racial discrimination. I defend myself from these things by organizing into a Union and seeking the collective strength that the Union brings. I defend myself by being an active member of the labour movement and fighting for the rights of workers everywhere. You may say that none of these things is violent. I disagree.

If it is wrong for me to go to a scabs residence and disturb her peaceful home, then it is also wrong for Telus to outsource jobs and put my peaceful home life in jeapordy.

If it is wrong for me to swear at a scab, then how much more wrong is it for Telus to not let me go to the bathroom when I am working?

And if it is wrong for me to intimidate a scab, then how much more wrong is it for Telus to hire security to videotape my and my children, attempt to provoke me into an illegal action on the picket line, tell a lady the same age as my mother that he thinks that she is too old and dried up for his enjoyment, or to threaten me with the loss of my job if I don't cross the picket line?

When Telus comes back to the bargaining table, agrees to put job protection in the contract where it has to be if it is to be enforced, reinstates those workers fired for alleged picket line violations, and makes those security guards who are guilty of wrongful conduct apologise in public for thier actions, then I will stop my actions toward scabs.

quote:

---

I reserve the right to defend myself from a corporation that wants to send jobs overseas.

---

How? By threatening a scab with a good beating? I don't follow.

And anyway, it's the company's job, not your job. I don't own the position I work at, my employer does. Anything else is a fiction. If my company decides they no longer need my services, that's for them to decide. I cannot legally say "Oh, but it's MY job, and you must continue to pay me whether you like it or not!". This doesn't mean they have a right to fire me without cause, but if they have cause then they can do as they please.

Imagine you've hired a kid from the neighbourhood to shovel your driveway. Who calls the shots? You, or the kid? If you decide you'd rather shovel your own driveway the next time it snows, do you owe the kid money? Or a new job? What do you owe him besides perhaps back pay? Nothing.

quote:

---

If it is wrong for me to swear at a scab,

---

It's not. Unless you're talking about a threat. But if you mean telling them to fuck off, I don't have a problem with that.

quote:

---

And if it is wrong for me to intimidate a scab, then how much more wrong is it for Telus to hire security to videotape my and my children, attempt to provoke me into an illegal action on the picket line, tell a lady the same age as my mother that he thinks that she is too old and dried up for his enjoyment, or to threaten me with the loss of my job if I don't cross the picket line?

---

If they've broken the law, use the law. If they haven't then please don't try to rationalize vigilante retribution.

I could as easily say "if it's wrong to put rapists in the general population in the hopes that another prisoner will cripple them for life, how much more wrong is it to molest a child?"

Many try to make that argument. Do you go along with it? Raping a child is pretty bad stuff. Does that mean "anything goes" for the rapist?

If you wouldn't accept that kind of self-serving rationalization in the case of someone raping a child, why would you use it in the case of someone insulting your mother??

quote:

---

However, in the interest of fairness, you must also examine the actions of the employer before condemning the actions of the picketers.

---

No, actually, I don't. Unless I believe that the end justifies the means, or I believe that violence is an appropriate response to the loss of money.

And again, I could just as easily demand that everyone must "examine the actions of the rapist", presumably to arrive at the same conclusion: they did something bad, so anything bad that we do to them in retaliation is OK.

1. The laws were made by a government formed by a political party that dances to the tune of the corporate donors. They are not fair at all, and I believe that I referred to that in my post. If they were fair, they would treat both sides equally. So don't give me that crap about using the law, because it isn't a fair game for the workers.

2. If someone was going to rape my child/wife/sister/mother/any female, I would use whatever means I could to get him to desist. The 'rape', to use your analogy, is occuring right now. During the actual offence, I see nothing wrong with using whatever means necessary to get it to stop. Your reference to putting rapists into general population is talking about what happens after the crime has been committed. And no, after the crime is done, there is nothing gained by a retaliatory attack. However, while the crime is being committed, there is a lot to be said for a spirited defence.

Lets follow your rape analogy a little further. If someone punches you in the mouth for no reason, that is wrong. If you are in the process of raping someone, and that someone punches you in the nose, do you call the cops and demand that they charge her with assault? Please. That is what I meant when I said that you have to look at the actions of the employer.

To make it clear, because you seem intent on misunderstanding my post. I am not advocating retaliatory measures. I am advocating and practicing self defensive measures against a situation that is happening as we speak.

quote:

---

The laws were made by a government formed by a political party that dances to the tune of the corporate donors. They are not fair at all, and I believe that I referred to that in my post. If they were fair, they would treat both sides equally. So don't give me that crap about using the law, because it isn't a fair game for the workers.

---

Ah, the 'ol special case. The laws aren't fair, so let's just disregard those laws.

Wouldn't it be great if you only had to obey laws you agreed with?

Anyway, I'm only suggesting that if, to use one of your examples, a manager insults a female employee then either use the law, assuming he broke a law, or suck it up the same as any other insult.

For the record, I see that going both ways. I really couldn't care less if insult management or their security staff ceaselessly. I don't care if you make them cry. I'm only talking about violence and the threat of violence, both of which do fall under the umbrella of the law. If a manager insults an employee, that's not grounds for phoning someone up and threatening their safety, or telling them you'll "be waiting for them after work" or whatever. Feel free to insult them back though; you won't hear me object.

All I've been pointing out, or trying to, is the incongruity of turning a blind eye to actual or threatened violence when the recipient is "just a scab". That doesn't fit with the progressive slate of beliefs, no matter how near or dear to your heart your job is.

quote:

---

I am advocating and practicing self defensive measures

---

Edited to take out my knee jerk reaction to being compared to bush and to add that if you think that there isn't a war on workers and workers rights, then you have your head somewhere secluded.

Have you been on the Telus picket line, Bacchus? If so, when, and if not, why not. And if not, you seem to know a lot about something that you haven't been involved in.

I am not a member of TWU, however I support them in this struggle. That means that I am on the line with them. If you aren't there, then don't tell me about who is acting how on the line.

[ 16 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

[ 16 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

---------------------------------
Resistance!
Struggle for the Rights of All Working People:
Support the Telus Workers Strike!

By Ivan Drury

In BC, flag waving fans of Telus are about as common as proponents of rush hour traffic or line ups in hospital emergency rooms, and through the last couple years most people in BC have grown as familiar with 45 minute waits on the phone to pay our phone bills (or beg for an extension) as we are with sitting in traffic or in an emergency room. It is the memory of hold music made to erode patience and monstrous phone bills that first come to mind when we hear about the Telus lockout, and this is no accident. Even before the full lockout began on July 21st Telus began an ambitious “public relations” campaign to spin the company’s well-earned negative image against the union workers.

According to Telus’s media story, well stated in an article in the ‘Business’ section of the Vancouver Sun way back in January 2004, “To survive in the digital era, industry leaders like Telus need to respond to change with unprecedented speed and agility, to allow the organizational equivalent of a 747 to perform fighter-jet maneuvers demands more than simple tinkering. It requires deftly and humanely trimming operations…” Of course, the writer (on behalf of Telus) argues in the main that these changes are being made by a “visionary management” and are opposed every step of the way by the “Jurassic” / “Bigtooth” / “small time” / “smokestack” union. Variations on this line run through all of Telus’s company materials: they, the “value creating” “growth oriented” company, are for technological progress. And, on the other hand, the Telecommunications Workers’ Union (TWU) is “unable to cope in a deregulated, global, market-driven industry,” and is therefore against progress. However, this media spin is just a fiber-optic neon curtain covering the same old landscape of the historical struggle between bosses and workers. The Telus lockout is not a matter of the union being for-or-against technological advance; it is a struggle of the profits and power of capitalists against the rights and lives of workers. It is also an important struggle that could play a major part in determining the future struggles of all working and poor people in BC.

Telus attacks on the TWU

The key to understanding the Telus lockout is to look at the issue itself: the irresolvable conflict between Telus’s profit driven agenda and the rights of the TWU workers.

For five years Telus has refused to negotiate with the Telecommunications Workers’ Union (TWU), leaving Telecommunications workers in BC and Alberta without a contract. On April 25th 2005 Telus began to “implement certain lockout measures in an attempt to encourage the settlement of a replacement collective agreement” that included cutting back wages, rolling back benefits and contracting out jobs altogether. Telus CEO Darren Entwistle announced that the company-imposed contract would come into effect in full force at 12:01am on July 22nd. Left with no choice, on July 21st the TWU responded to these attacks with job action, exposing the lock-out in full and setting up picket lines outside all Telus locations in BC and Alberta.

The roots of this lockout go back to the merger of Telus and BC Tel in October of 1998. At that time BC Tel was a larger company than Telus but the “merger of equal partners” took the name Telus because it was better suited to the company’s international “aggressive growth” strategy. The press release issued by the company at the time defined growth as “most importantly, expanding our customer base beyond our provincial boundaries.” For this imperialist business plan, one that saw Telus quickly rise to the second largest telecommunications company in Canada, the company saw the TWU – and especially the TWU in BC – as their greatest enemy.

Telus worker, A Proud History

This is because the TWU workers in BC had fought out and won incredible strikes and job actions against their former employer, BC Tel, throughout the 1990’s. The victories of these strikes had secured BC Tel workers the best protections against contracting out of any telecommunications company in North America. These collective agreement protections insulated telecommunications workers in BC against Telus’s drive to contract out call centres to other countries – most notably to non-union workers in India and the Phillipines.

With the merger of BC Tel and Telus, the TWU gained thousands of members in Alberta and then, when Telus took over a major phone company in Quebec and the national company Clearnet, thousands more nationally. However, horrified that such a growth in the union would strengthen the position of the workers against the company; Telus launched an offensive against the TWU. A series of legal battles took place in the labour board around the main question: the strength of the TWU against Telus, comparative to other telecommunications unions in Canada and especially on the question of contracting out jobs.

After much to-ing-and-fro-ing, the labour board ruled that while the TWU was to take over the union certification of all the companies Telus gained in Canada, their BC contract with the company would not extend to their new members. Rather than recognizing the TWU’s collective agreement with Telus as applicable to all employees of Telus, the Labour Board ruled that every previously existing company’s contract with their employees was to remain the same; that the TWU was to merely take over the administration of these different agreements until a new agreement could be reached. However, despite the ruling from the labour board demanding it, Telus refused to hand over the names or positions of the thousands of employees it had gained in its $6.6 Billion buy-out of Clearnet Cellular in 2000.

Telus workers’ jobs in BC are protected from being contracted out to non-union workers, but not against being farmed out to other TWU members (or supposed members, as with the former-Clearnet workers) in Ontario or Quebec where the provisions against contracting out don’t stand. Once moved out east where they are not protected, these jobs can then be contracted out to union-busting companies in Canada or Telus subsidiaries internationally. For the five years that Telus has refused to negotiate a new collective agreement with the TWU, they have not been idle. They have been frantically snatching up phone companies and contracting out jobs through this back door, unguarded by the TWU-BC contract, buying time and gaining what ground they can against the TWU, knowing that it will be much harder for the union to win back rights for workers than to protect rights already in place.

Lockout! And the TWU strikes back

“[Telus’s actions are] insidious and designed to undermine the union bargaining committee.”
- A Chair of the Canada Industrial Relations Board in finding against Telus

In 2003, the labor relations board found that Telus had violated the Canada Labour Code by bargaining directly with employees over the head of the union. In 2004, the board passed this ruling again. However, in neither instance did the board press Telus with any penalty. Then, this spring the labour board forced Telus to give the TWU the names of all former Clearnet employees. The credit card that Telus had been using to buy time had finally maxed out, and they were forced to act. In response to the TWU’s demand of wage parity for all Telus employees in Canada and a collective agreement in favor of all TWU members, including and especially the protections against contracting out, Telus began their lockout of TWU members in BC and Alberta.

On top of the struggle and gains of the TWU against the company, Telus has broader economic reasons for locking out Telus workers now. Although Telus’s profits grew by 49% between 2003 and 2004 (while employees wages grew 0%), the company’s propaganda about an increasingly competitive marketplace is partly true. Telus is one of the hands of big Canadian capitalism that is reacting to an international economic crisis by reaching out into the international marketplace. Telus is therefore vulnerable to the vicious whipping winds of imperialism that can change direction with the cracking of knuckles. In January of this year “Telus International” invested in a call centre in the Philippines, where they boast of hiring only 5% to 10% of all applicants every month and have little to worry about in the way of unions. At the same time, at the same press conference in fact, Telus International also announced that they were establishing their world headquarters in Singapore to show “a strong endorsement of our key value propositions and a further boost to our status as a leading Asia-Pacific telecoms hub.”

Telus, an Anti Union, Anti Labour Company

But all their “growth” is, in reality, high stakes gambling and investment. For example, immediately after Telus CEO Darren Entwistle bought Clearnet Cellular for $6.6 Billion in 2000, the bottom fell out of the stock market and within 2 months of this investment, the value of all of Telus had fallen below the price tag of Clearnet. In a desperate bid to continue Telus’s monopoly position in BC and Alberta, Entwistle responded by cutting a third of Telus’s employees, mostly through buyout. Telus hopes to rake in billions through their imperialist adventures, but on the international market the stakes are even higher and Entwistle cannot afford to keep a loose cannon at home. In order to maintain monopoly in BC and Alberta, Telus must compete with the crawling giants (Sprint, Microcel, Rogers etc…) who are seeking a place in Telus’s market. To do this, they must go “beyond provincial [and national] boundaries.” But, at the same time, to adventure abroad, they must make sure all is quiet on the home front. This means taking out the TWU.

Since the full lockout began, the struggle between Telus and the TWU has intensified. On July 21st, the labour relations board found again, for the third time, that Telus had violated the Canada Labour Code, and again neglected to penalize Telus. The company has held to its position that any contract with the TWU must be re-negotiated from scratch, while the union has stuck to its guns that any contract must be based on the BC-won collective agreement that contains the measures against contracting out. Going to any lengths to avoid this, Telus has continued to refuse to negotiate at all, including refusing TWU’s request for binding arbitration. They have countered TWU’s public information campaigns with slander, lies and even the censorship of a website that has been launched by TWU supporters, www.voicesforchange.com. However, even these company maneuvers are stumbling. On July 28 the BC Supreme Court ruled that Telus must lift the block it had placed on its Internet servers against the Voices for Change website.

Union and Workers Fight Back

Telus’s goal is to increase profits by lowering wages. To do this they must break the TWU directly by refusing the union’s collective bargaining rights. If this attack on the most fundamental of all rights of labour organizing succeeds, the implications for the labour movement overall could be staggering. This is the reason that the feeling at the picket lines and rallies in support of the TWU have a feeling reminiscent of the Hospital Employees Union strike in 2004; the attacks on the TWU are the opening cannons of a new level of attacks on all unions in BC, and therefore the struggle against these attacks is for the rights and future of the whole union and working class movement.

Rights are not freely given. They are fought for, and you must be vigilant every day to keep them. Rely on the courts, and you will quickly find that the courts are not your friend. Rely on your employer, and you will quickly find that they are not your friend. Rely on Bacchus, and you will quickly find that he/she will happily stand there saying, 'Come on, guys, don't send my job overseas, please, please, please....oh poopy. There it goes.'

I am not saying that we should be killing scabs. I am saying that we should let them know that there are consequences if they cross the line. And those consequences need to be a little more compelling than Bacchus.

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
I am not saying that we should be killing scabs.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:

doing wrong doesnt make it right, if your on the right side. You just make might makes right the motto and then management will always win

---

And what you are doing is trying to bully or intimidate me now, with person's help

Stupid and futile. And you have not taken back your "I can do what I want to scabs , except kill them and its self defense" crap which still make syou like bush

quote:

---

moralistic mumbojumbo

---

Morals is what attracts people to the left in many ways. Enviromentalist morals, socialist morals, workers rights morals. Treating people and the world right and being honest.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:

Morals is what attracts people to the left in many ways. Enviromentalist morals, socialist morals, workers rights morals. Treating people and the world right and being honest.

Be as the others, and you become a uncertain choice for the majority to avoid.

---

(I have a feeling that the above question likely strays into Unionism 101 territory, so please ignore it if it's been answered a thousand times in this here progressive forum. I know how explaining the same points over and over can be tiresome.)

[ 19 September 2005: Message edited by: Tape_342 ]

And as for bullying, oh well. Is telling you that I don't agree with you bullying? Is telling you that I don't like being compared to Bush and management bullying? Is asking you to say these things in person bullying? If so, then guilty.

Tape, the reason that people fight against horrible employers rather than just quit and try life somewhere else is simple. If you leave, then they will just continue thier antics against the next person who replaces you. And if enough people leave, then the employer will continue it's antics, and the rest of the employers out there will do the same thing. Also, wages, benefits and quality of life issues tend to level off at the same place in an industry. If one employer lowers wages and contracts out, the rest of them will want to do the same thing. Thus the Union slogan 'an injury to one is an injury to all'. The excuse that the employer uses is that they have to remain competitive in the industry, and, well, the other guys only pay this much, and we have to keep our prices the same or better than them, so we have to pay you the same or worse than them as well. The disgusting part is when workers (and sometimes Unions ) buy into this and negotiate concessionary contracts to 'help keep the business afloat', or 'save jobs'. Shame on my own Union out east as well for doing this.

Also, talk to the nurses, or anyone else in Alberta who works in an industry where the right to strike is either restricted or non existent about what happens when during negotiations they attempt to quit en masse.

quote:

---

Slimp I sent u a PM with my name, phone number and email.

---

I think the idea is that you're supposed to meet him out by the bike racks after school, unless you're a chicken.

Let's see if you're "man enough" to disagree with him face to face.

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
I am not saying that we should be killing scabs. I am saying that we should let them know that there are consequences if they cross the line.

---

And I was surely not challenging Bacchus to meet me at the bike racks. Ask him yourself if there was any sort of schoolyard challenge.

What I was saying was that it is one thing to call someone names from a safe, anonymous place. I was also saying that it is one thing to scab your brothers and sisters and insist on anonymity and not having your name or picture out there in the community so that people who disagree with you can let you know that they disagree. Bacchus shed his veil of anonymity, and I respect that because he is putting his actual identity behind his choice. I may not agree with him, but I respect him for telling me who he is and why he feels the way that he does.

So scabs should voluntarily identify themselves? To make retribution that much easier? Seriously?

How about this then, in fairness: when some hothead decides to phone the manager, or a scab, to make vague threats, they similarly have to identify themselves, and leave some contact information for the police to follow up on. Sound fair?

It's about the violence and the threats. They have no place on either side of the dispute. It still amazes me that there are so-called progressives who think it does.

The few times that I have been involved in a labour dispute, I always tell everyone that will listen that if they scab, they will have to deal with the consequences. I have never hurt anybody (except thier feelings) and that isn't how I operate. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with phoning thier houses (I always identify myself when asked), standing outside thier homes when they are leaving to scab (if you don't like it, stay inside), publishing thier names in a handout for thier union brothers and sisters (again, if you can't stand the heat....) and generally making it very difficult for them to be a scab.

Nobody has pointed out yet that if there was legislation to prevent scabs, as there is in progressive provinces and countries, there would be no need to discourage scabs.

Lets take a look at the players in a labour dispute, and what they do and for who.

1. Government, ranging from scab legislation to downright interference with a legal strike the day before it is to commence (in Brooks).

2. Courts, who will grant an injunction at the drop of a hat, if it will benefit employers, especially in Alberta. And if the Labour Board rules against an employer, the 'remedy' is an order. That's it. Unions can and do face fines, and charges individually against it's officers and collectively as a Union. And the order? If they don't follow it, then back to the Labour Board for yet another order. There are never any penalties for employer nonperformance of a Labour Board order.

3. Cash, to hire rentacops who act like vigilantes, performing arrests, restraining picketers, videotaping workers (and children, including my 7yo and 5yo) on the line. Unions have cash too, but it is spent on picket pay, legal costs to fight all those injunctions, and making sure that people don't lose thier houses, cars, furniture, paying school fees, etc.

4. Cops, who will investigate incidences of harassment by management against picketers when there are 3 seperate, documented incidences (in Calgary anyways) but come running, sirens blaring and lights flashing when a scab calls to complain that a picketer used the f word.

Is that a good enough reason to retain the law of the jungle? Because it's more effective, and that's all that really matters?

You want to see what you sound like? Take your second and third paragraphs and replace "scab" with "perform abortions" or (when scab is a noun) "abortion doctor":

quote:

---

The few times that I have been involved in a labour dispute, I always tell everyone that will listen that if they perform abortions, they will have to deal with the consequences. I have never hurt anybody (except thier feelings) and that isn't how I operate. However, I see absolutely nothing wrong with phoning thier houses (I always identify myself when asked), standing outside thier homes when they are leaving to perform abortions (if you don't like it, stay inside), publishing thier names in a handout for thier union brothers and sisters (again, if you can't stand the heat....) and generally making it very difficult for them to be an abortion doctor.

Nobody has pointed out yet that if there was legislation to prevent performing abortions, as there is in progressive provinces and countries, there would be no need to discourage abortion doctors.

---

See how thuggish and regressive that sounds?

There are numerous examples in history where a certain group of people have resorted to means that others at the time thought excessive, illegal and yes, even violent. All of these have one thing in common, an inability to achieve justice through the current political system. The Civil Rights movement in the US, Several revolutions (French, American, and Cuban to name a few), and let's not forget that great Canadian hero, Louis Riel. I am sure if you were around at the time, you would have been telling Louis Riel that he was no better than the government that was taking away his rights because he resorted to rebellion.

The struggles facing workers in todays global economy, and pro business government and economic model take away the more peaceful avenues, and cause workers to resort to whatever will work.

Rather than take shots at me as some sort of regressive, why don't you just change the system, so that workers have the same rights as thier employers, and the courts treat employers and workers with equality, and the police treat workers and employers with equality? If peaceful discourse would win the struggle, then I would be the first one there. However, it won't do the trick, and you have yet to suggest anything better, so I'm going to keep on doing what I do.

quote:

---

If any scab wanted to stop being followed and photographed...

---

quote:

---

I see absolutely nothing wrong with phoning thier houses..., standing outside thier homes when they are leaving to scab..., publishing thier names in a handout

---

quote:

---

There are numerous examples in history where a certain group of people have resorted to means that others at the time thought excessive, illegal and yes, even violent. All of these have one thing in common, an inability to achieve justice through the current political system. (Emphasis mine.)

---

Slim, everytime you almost have me convinced that you're not one of the sorts of people that attacked my family back in 1978-83, you come out with lines like the above.

And you wonder why your opponents hire guards?

I can sympathize with your explanation of why the aggrieved workers don't just go get jobs where everything is sweetness and light. (Thanks for taking the time, BTW.) But in the end, the argument is over a job. It's just a job.

I trust that outside of a strike situation you wouldn't think it was alright to stalk a boss in the ways you've described, even if he or she had fired you unfairly. What about a co-worker who got you canned by falsely laying blame on you for a work mistake?

When security types beat up pickets, it's wrong. When strikers seek to intimidate, threaten, and/or do violence to 'scabs,' it's wrong.

[ 19 September 2005: Message edited by: Tape_342 ]

In 78, I was in grade 1, so it wasn't me that took exception to someone in your family that was scabbing, if I read your post right. If not, then sorry for calling you or your family member a scab.

I wish to go on the record to say that I have never done anything to a scabs kids or spouse. They didn't make the choice to scab, and I have no quarrel with them. I do have a problem with any picketer who goes after a scabs family.

A cursory study of labour history shows that employers have used police, the armed forces, and private cops to break strikes from day one in North America. Nowadays, they use security corporations like AFI, and even the National Guard. Sometimes they don't even do that, they just legislate the Union out of existence. Ask the longshoremen or the air traffic controllers in the US about those tactics. And while you're at it, why not ask the nurses and social workers about laws that prohibit them from even criticizing thier employers during a labour dispute. Don't forget to ask the folks who work in mushroom factories about how they can't even form a Union because of the laws that are there to 'protect' farmers from having to pay overtime, WCB premiums, and vacation pay that somehow apply to them.

Whenever the laws oppress and deny a group the right to freedom of assosciation or the fair and just redress of thier grievances, there will be people who are willing and ready to do whatever is necessary to obtain justice.

Perhaps a better phrase would be 'No wonder picketers resort to intimidation and violence'. There isn't a whole lot left to us.

[ 19 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
In 78, I was in grade 1, so it wasn't me that took exception to someone in your family that was scabbing, if I read your post right. If not, then sorry for calling you or your family member a scab.

---

I didn't mean it was you, just someone who, perhaps, thought as you do. As it happens, my father was in management, but he was a 'scab' all the same to the folks on the picket line.

[ 20 September 2005: Message edited by: Tape_342 ]

Most times, being a manager is a pretty good job. You get paid more than the average worker, don't usually have to do the really hard or undesireable work, and some even strut around like they are somehow a better kind of person because they are in management.

quote:

---

The struggles facing workers in todays global economy, and pro business government and economic model take away the more peaceful avenues, and cause workers to resort to whatever will work.

---

That's as nonsensical and self-serving a rationalization as "when courts start sentencing criminals the way they should then we won't need vigilantes".

quote:

---

Rather than take shots at me as some sort of regressive, why don't you just change the system

---

Ah. So you're making your wish list a condition of you taking the high road. You'll stop with the intimidation if, and only if, society is restructured to be the way you like it?

quote:

---

I am still at a loss to how you can compare doctors who perform abortions with workers who are struggling for a decent job with decent pay.

---

I'm not comparing you to doctors who perform abortions. I'm comparing you to the violent thugs who think that because society isn't structured the way they like it (see above) that gives them the right to "do whatever they have to" to change that.

Sorry, but the comparison is very apt. You want to use intimidation to get what you want? You're going to get compared to others who also use intimidation to get what they want. If you don't think that phoning a doctor at his or her home and threatening them anonymously is cool, well, guess what: phoning a "scab" at home to do the same thing isn't any better. Not even if you're mad. Not even if you think the government should ban scabs. Not even if that scab is doing what you believe is your job.

As for what that tells people about the labour movement, consider this. Would you have more respect for someone who fights for what he believes to be right? Or would you have respect for someone who takes whatever the government, courts, or cops throw to them and says that it will have to do?

Edited to say that I await with bated breath Mr. M's response to person. Keeping in mind that I have seen Mr. M's posts on other issues.

[ 20 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by keglerdave:
[Managers] have to obey their bosses and owners, as they only really know what the bosses and owners want them to know and nothing more. Then on the flipside, whenever a dispute is over, they are faced with dealing with a workforce that knows damn well what that manager did during the dispute.

---

I've been a union worker and I've also been a manager in a union shop, and I gotta tell you that much of the time the mid-level managers know a heck of lot more about the reality of the workplace than the upper-level folks. They're not blind, for goodness sake.

quote:

---

To me the answer is simple... Don't become management if you have some morals and principles towards free trade unions.

---

Trouble is, if you're working in what you feel is a socially useful endeavor (say, the news business or the CBC), if you refuse to rise in the operation, you never get a chance to actually affect basic policy in the organization. If you do feel that what you do for a living is socially important, it seems to me that you would wish to put your stamp on the larger picture.

It's not necessarily a matter of avoiding 'the really hard or undesireable work,' as Slim puts in. Nor is it a function of 'strut[ting] around like [you] are somehow a better kind of person.' It is a matter of bringing what you know (or, alas, sometimes just what you think you know) to bear on what you all (workers & managers) work together toward. Sometimes humming a few bars of Working Class Hero just doesn't cut it.

And believe it or not, a great many managers take the job with the expressed idea of making sure that 'the people who work for me won't have to take the kind of BS I had to take coming up.'

Do they sometimes fail in that effort? You betcha. But does that make it an ignoble pursuit? I don't think so.

[ 20 September 2005: Message edited by: Tape_342 ]

quote:

---

magoo,
is it ever 'ok' to employ violence or intimadation? or is it a universal truth that they should never be used?

---

From what I've read on babble, it's never OK.

If that is what you are saying, here is a quick quiz that will let us all know if that is true or you are just a little anti worker.

American Civil War....good or bad?
World War II..........good or bad?
American Civil Rights Movement.....good or bad?
Fight for recognition of Unions....good or bad?
Anti NAFTA Movement.....good or bad?
American Revolution.....good or bad?
Cuban Revolution.....good or bad?
French Revolution.....good or bad?
American Revolution.....good or bad?

What you will find, as you examine these questions, is that the first question you will have is not 'is violence right or wrong?', but 'Is the cause just or unjust?' Once you have made that determination, then you will have to look at the options available to you.

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
If you were around during WW II, were you protesting against the use of violence to liberate Europe from the Nazis?

---

The point I am trying to make is that there are times and occasions where force, intimidation, etc become not something to be gloried in, but something necessary for the situation. I see that you think that I am mean. What is your position on what Telus, or Tyson for that matter, are doing to thier workers? Or do you know nothing about the situation but just can't pass up a chance to take a shot at someone?

I am not comparing myself to those who fought the Nazis, although several of my relatives lost thier lives, both in concentration camps and in the armed forces during WW II. However, if you would care to make the comparison, it isn't one that I would take you to task on.

[ 20 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

Edited to point out that you didn't answer my question about what you happen to know about Telus or Tyson's attacks on thier workers.

[ 20 September 2005: Message edited by: slimpikins ]

quote:

---

What you will find, as you examine these questions, is that the first question you will have is not 'is violence right or wrong?', but 'Is the cause just or unjust?'

---

Actually, the first question I'd ask is "is it big enough to be worth it". I'd say the defense of nations typically is.

Anyway, you're comparing the struggle for one particular job with some pretty lofty human endeavours. In reality, your job is not your freedom, nor your life. It's a job. That doesn't mean your employer should be able to take it from you for no reason, nor that someone else doing your job while you're on strike should make you happy. But let's have a bit of perspective here.

If someone steals $1000 dollars from me, very few here at rabble would say that I had a right to knock a few of their teeth out. Violence is to be reserved for self-defense (of the physical, not emotional, kind). Progressives don't assault people over property, I'm told.

But then it seems as though we do, if someone steals your $1000 paycheque. If they're a scab, then violence or the threat of such is "OK" by some, seemingly you included.

So (for the tenth time) I'm just asking why there's this one moral exception to the general rule? Your job, and your paycheque, are MONEY. If it's OK to get vigilante over money when it's on a picket line, why not everywhere else as well? Why shouldn't we beat the fuck out of people who steal car stereos then? Aren't they money, just like the money a scab is stealing from you?

Any person who threatens my ability to feed, clothe, shelter, educate, and otherwise provide the necessities of life to me, my wife or my kids is attacking me in the one place that I will not tolerate...my home. How's that for perspective?

And I don't think that I am off base when I say that if you attack me this way, and make it impossible for me to fix it through legislation, judicial process or peaceful means, then I am regrettably forced to defend myself and mine with whatever means are at my disposal.

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
...It is in some ways how we define ourselves...Any person who threatens my ability to feed, clothe, shelter, educate, and otherwise provide the necessities of life to me, my wife or my kids is attacking me in the one place that I will not tolerate...my home.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by slimpikins:
Examples, scooter?

---

ANTI-LEAD MINING ACTIVIST BEATEN AND BOUND IN OZARKS, MISSOURI

Where do you get the 'fringe right' thing from? Sure the one guy called her a commie, but in the US that's almost a generic insult and it sounds like these folks are just plain stupid.

It seems besides the point to be justifying or condemning violence on the picket line, when it seems to happen in the heat of the moment - it's not planned, it's not well thought-out.

I'm not a violent guy, or even an angry guy, but I have nearly lost it on a few scabs - I'm angry after 9h of walking 25m west, then 25 m east, rinse and repeat. They're baiting, a little back and forth. I haven't done it because I've got a little bit of self-control and a little bit of fear. Some, not so much. I think that most members, were they to become violent or threaten to, would regret it. We've got other tricks up our sleeves.

The lockout is not violent. I haven't witnessed, in the flesh, an episode yet on the picket line. But there will be arrests - dear God, there will be more arrests.

TELUS has got a buffer zone around their driveways that is being constantly used as a tool to arrest the most vocal of members. I don't believe, from the reports that I've heard, that the police forces are being evenhanded in this dispute. RCMP have ignored scab violations of the 'injuction' while arresting our members. I met a guy in northern BC that was arrested the other day - a real Bolshevik radical, a easy-going family man that takes care of officiating amateur hockey in a town of 5000. He was not told what he was arrested for, just for 'violating the injunction', and will find out in court exactly what he's there for.

Fuck that. More members are getting arrested for minor offences - standing in front of a garbage truck to inform the driver that he's crossing a picket line, for example.

Telus Corp. says it's returning to the bargaining table amid a work stoppage that has stretched on for more than two months.

Small teams representing Vancouver-based Telus and the Telecommunications Workers Union (TWU) will start discussions Tuesday. The company said chief executive Darren Entwistle will be “personally engaged” in the negotiations.

"It's encouraging because you want to see them get over it so they can get on with other things," said Greg Eckel, a fund manager at Toronto's Morgan Meighen and Associates, which holds Telus shares. "Hopefully it's resolved in a way that seems equitable for both sides. You don't want a work force to come back that has an axe to grind either."

Thousands of workers in Alberta and British Columbia walked off the job on July 21, ahead of plans by Telus to unilaterally implement a new labour contract. The union had refused to take that offer to its members for a vote.

Since then, it appears a split has formed between union members in the two provinces. Telus says a majority of TWU members in Alberta have crossed the picket line and are working. In contrast, no workers in British Columbia have crossed the picket line.

Telling a worker who is on a picket line to quietly watch people do their work is cruel and unusual punishment. Historically there have been far more workers injured by over zealous police and security people than the number of scabs that have ever suffered real harm.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
There is only one way to end violence on the picket line and that is to ban scabs.

---

Do you have a link or two to support that?

"...I can list many strikes were workers were shot in the streets, how many scabs have ever been? Run a picketeeer over? no prob. Have a picketer hit a car with a sign then its a media feeding frenzy..."

Please list many strikes where picketers were shot in the streets.

As for running over picketers, I have personally seen that happen twice. Unfortunately, both instances involved a very slow moving transport truck and a picketer who stood in front of the truck. In one case the picketer was yelling "I dare you!". In the second, the picketer (a close friend of mine) turned her back to the truck and ignored the horn blaring. In these instances, there should have been a point where, if it was clear the truck was not stopping, you step aside having made your point. As for the picketer hitting a car and it making the news... what did you expect? When emotions run high, and people lash out, it makes good news. Sad, but true. Unfortunately, the cases with which I have been personally involved, management have always maintained cooler heads and their passive agressive approach worked. We became so volatile as a group, and so many people lashed out due to desperation (management tires slashed, paint on cars, threatening home phone calls), that management just pointed at us and said "See? How are we supposed to negotiate with those people?" We were being curshed under negative publicity. We eventually took the offer made to us just before we initiated job action. All we gained, in my opinion, was 7.5 weeks of maxed chequing account overdraft, credit card bills and strike pay. I have been fortunate enough never to have seen any picketer 'roughed up' by security for just picketing. The only instance I have seen... well, it was a toss up who started it. In the end it was a clutch, grab and dance episode. No punches, no pushing... just alot of 'back off!', 'NO! you back off!', NO! YOU back off!'.

Someone yelled "Hey! A scab! ...and he's got a security guard's hat!" and now everyone's 3 miles outside the city limits in hot pursuit?

quote:

---

Originally posted by bodhitrees:
The telus co. has a very cosy relationship with B.C. gov't being in the same building in Victoria , and not being picketed!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by scooter:

You mean Telus/BCTel and NDP were all in cahoots?!? Cause when BCTel and Telus merged the NDP was in government.

---

Yes, that's correct. But I don't think anyone said anything about TELUS and the NDP being in cahoots.

?

------------------------------------------
From:
Fire This Time newspaper
Issue #26-27
Sept/Oct 2005
www.firethistime.net
------------------------------------------

TWU Steps up the struggle against Telus and "Replacement Workers"

… The Telus Lockout Continues

By Ivan Drury

I'm going for decertification of the union."
- Telus CEO Darren Entwistle…

"One day longer!"
- Telecommunication Workers' Union picket slogan

Telus workers, CBC workers and Hospital workers all have two major things in common. First; they are all workers who are under attack by their bosses. Second; their bosses, all acting under the pressures of seeking greater profits in an international marketplace that is crushing weaker capitalists in fierce competition between monopoly corporations, are carrying out these attacks with their primary goal being breaking the union of their employees.

This struggle for the right to organize and for a strong union, is currently being led by the Telecommunication Workers Union (TWU) but it is destined to be a common struggle of all working people in Canada. And if the defence of the TWU is critical to the future of the labour movement in Canada, and to the rights of all working people; truly we have entered a new era of struggle for the rights of working people. It is no accident either that the very time that every boss in Canada has begun to seek the surest ways to cut costs and increase profits (scaling back wages and benefits of workers), that these attacks would be led by axe wielding maniacs seeking to behead the labour movement. If we allow them to succeed in their mission to decapitate the TWU, then all other unions will fall beneath the guillotine and workers in Canada will be set back by decades, both in the rights, wages and job protections we have won through previous struggle and in our ability to carry out future struggles in our own defence.

The historical fight for the right to organize

The struggle for the right to organize and hold unions is nothing new, but perhaps it is because it was won so long ago, it is difficult to recognize. When the labour movement first stood on its feet 70 or 80 years ago in Canada and the US, it was met with fierce attacks from the bosses and the government. The first strikes were organized around the simple demands of recognition of the unions by the companies, for the right to collective bargaining and the right to organize. The company would immediately hire, out of the massive leagues of the unemployed, scab workers. Then, when the newborn unions blocked jobsites and beat back the scabs they were met with deployments of company thugs, often made up of armed gangs of deputized businessmen and managers, and government thugs in police and army uniforms. The union workers armed themselves in self-defence and battles shook the streets, all in the name of the right to organize.

The ruling class capitalists were faced with a rising class polarization where, despite massive slander campaigns against the unions as "communists" and "gangsters," support for the strikers spread throughout the entire working class like a prairie fire and massive support rallies were organized. In an effort to break the strike and the unions, the companies issued bonuses to workers who would betray the union and cross the picket line and penalties to those who would not. It was only through following the principles of unity and solidarity that these maneuvers by the bosses were defeated and these critical strikes were won. This was more difficult the longer the strike went on, because workers and their families grew hungry and their confidence would begin to wane. Knowing this, it was critical that the strike be strong, that no scab be allowed to pass, and that the ranks of strikers not be allowed to diminish. The stronger the strike, the faster it would be possible to break the company and win. The bosses also knew this, and would do everything they could to keep business running, to buy time, tire the strikers out, and wear the union down.

For both sides it was a desperate struggle. For the unions and the workers it was a struggle for survival, and for the bosses it was a struggle for more profit off the backs of the workers. The victory of the unions set the entire future of the labour movement in the US and Canada.

Yet the struggle is not over; and now it seems that this dramatic stage in the history of the labour movement is about to be replayed. Faced with an international economic crisis, once again, bosses are attacking workers and trying to strangle unions in pursuit of greater profits. And, in self-defence, workers and unions are struggling for their survival. The TWU lockout sets the opening scenes of this play and, as before, the entire future of the labour movement and all working people hangs in the balance.

"Replacement Workers" are the enemies of workers

"The TWU submits that with that many managers [14,000!] TELUS has the resources and therefore the ability to perform bargaining unit work during a labour dispute. Therefore, the TWU submits that the only reason TELUS is using replacement workers on the huge scale that it is (ie. many thousands) is with the hope and intention of 'busting the Union' in violation of Section 94(2.1) of the Code."
- From the TWU complaint to the Canadian Industrial Relations Board (CIRB) against TELUS' hiring of scab labour

"The second principle is that an employer cannot use replacement workers for improper and illegal purposes, such as to rid the workplace of union representation, as opposed to pursuing a particular economic goal or bargaining objective. Thus, the employer's use of replacement workers must not be used to undermine the union's representational capacity."
- CIRB Decision No. 271, Citing Section 94(2.1) of the Code, pph. 106-107

As soon as it was clear that a lockout would occur, just as in the first strikes for union representation, Telus's first act was to begin to hire scab labour. At first this was done 'in-house' and involved the re-deployment of the army of 14,000 managers and non-bargaining unit members to union jobs. Since August 15th Telus has hired more than 130 "contract workers" to management positions to cover the jobs of some of these managers busy doing union jobs. An August 27th letter to the editor of the Edmonton Journal explained this move in its title alone, "Telus strike [sic.] is taking a toll on non-union workers."

But this has not been enough for Telus's goal of breaking the union. Since July the company has begun an aggressive hiring spree of so-called "replacement workers" (traditionally known as 'scabs') to staff locked out union positions to keep business going and extend the lockout to break the union.

The following ad appeared in the July 24th edition of the Vancouver Province from the Telus Subsidiary "Key Telecom":

"KEY TELECOM: Immediate openings across Canada. All experienced craft I and R, Cable and Repair, Central Office Toll Desk, DCPower Vehicles / Tools, expenses supplied. Email: [email protected]

And on August 17th Key Telecom signed a one year contract with "Evolve Technologies" in Surrey BC which stated that Evolve Technologies will provide its employees to Key Telecom to work as replacement workers for Telus at $34 per hour.

Similar companies that have placed similar ads and begun recruitment of scabs include: "Millenium Telus Services of Canada" in Kamloops and Cache Creek, "Ajlion Communications" through Monster.ca across Canada, "Neutron Telecommunications," "The Neutron Group," "The Bell Group," "RMH Call Centre," "Neucomm International" in the Phillipines, "Faneuil Group" in Winnipeg, "Adventis Personnel Group Inc." in Vancouver, and "Immigrant Services Society" - a government agency that dropped its promotion of scab work when confronted by the TWU.

Job fairs organized by Telus have also appeared at Vancouver universities UBC and SFU. Also targeting students, Telus keeps a posting on their website for "Coop Students" to get work experience through Telus.

On August 29th Telus even issued a press release bragging of $12Million in contracts through a new initiative of theirs, "CallCentreAnywhere." This strike breaking method, made possible through the technology developed and built by union workers, has them hiring scores of people ($12Million worth!) to work in Telus call centres from home.

The benefits of being a Scab: Selling your soul for an MP3 player

Telus is not particular to non-union members in the recruitment of "replacement workers" for TWU jobs. They have also launched a campaign to both bribe and intimidate TWU members back to work, across the picket line.

Telus has offered a premium "bonus" of $30 a day for every worker who crosses the picket line, plus... a free MP3 player AND a free cell phone! (and don't worry, if you already have a cell phone, Telus will pay for it for you!) Also included in this scab package is a dollar for dollar matching contribution from Telus for workers who cross the picket line to buy shares in Telus. That's right! You too can sell out the struggle of your brothers and sisters at work for a share in the blood sucking profits of Telus! Workers in Ontario and across Canada have been told that if they come to Vancouver to work for Telus as "replacement workers" they will be paid $35 an hour PLUS $200 a day to cover room and board costs.

These higher wages and benefits come from the company that has refused workers even a penny's wage increase almost six years, refused to negotiate a contract with the TWU for four and a half years and have already locked out their employees for two months in order to reduce costs by breaking the union and contracting out jobs for lower wages!

Threats against union workers

Honest workers who refuse to cross the picket line receive a different message. They've been told, by the CEO, president, vice-president and managers, "The day will come when the company is going to draw a line in the sand and after that day, employees who have not crossed the picket line will be out for a long time." In small towns in BC and Alberta, company managers have even approached striking workers' parents to "warn" them that if their son or daughter does not return to work then they will not have a job to return to. One TWU member who was given this message by his parents gave up and went to work for another company. Three days later he was told that Telus had contacted the boss at his new job and had threatened to cut all business with this smaller company if they hired this particular worker. He was fired.

On top of threats and intimidation that honest TWU members will not have a "job to return to," workers on the picket line have had to face the 21st Century's version of the armed gangs of thugs that beat up strikers in the 1930s. Telus has spared no expense in hiring one of the most prominent and 'battle tested' of these gangs: "AFI International," a security firm whose main business is breaking strikes and busting unions.

The AFI International home webpage boasts, "Our core business is focused exclusively on services that enable employers to manage work stoppages due to strikes, lockouts or plant closures safely and securely." Scrolling down the sidebar of this mainpage is a column that features news about risks of unionization in different industries and how capitalists can act to stop them.

Rather than swinging clubs or shooting strikers, which would certainly be considered 'over the top' in today's 'civil society' (at least at this point in struggle), these thugs are armed with video cameras as well as conventional weapons. Their tactics focus on ridiculing, insulting, prodding and provoking picketers to catch their responses on tape.

While the Supreme Court has issued strict rulings restricting the ability of the TWU to picket, the courts and government have not extended these same limitations to Telus and Telus's security thugs, who have routinely provoked picketers with verbal threats and intimidation and physical assaults. Everywhere that AFI International goons have been deployed, there have been arrests of TWU members shortly thereafter for "assault" and "harassment". The union is then tied up in court and Telus is armed with more ammunition to use in slander campaigns against the union. Working people should not be defensive about these charges of so-called "assault" and "harassment". To the contrary, what is needed is a further mobilization of support from working people in support and defence of the TWU picketers. The heavier a picketline is with TWU members and supporters, the more "intimidating" it will be for scabs to cross, the more easily the picketers will be able to drive the thug squads away and the more quickly the lockout will be won.

E ARE WITH THE WORKERS!

At the beginning of September the Communication Energy and Paper workers union (CEP) announced that it was taking action against Telus as an unfair employer. The CEP's refusal to work on jobs for Telus means that they will block Telus from running ads in the Vancouver Sun, the Province and eleven other newspapers in BC. These sorts of solidarity actions are exactly what are needed to bring more pressure against Telus and give a clear message to all bosses that strike breaking and union busting will not be tolerated by unions or working people.

From the other side, a grim reminder of the high stakes of this lockout struggle has emerged. On September 15th more than 1,100 Hospital Employees Union (HEU) members walked off the job as their strike began against Health Care contractor 'Sodexho'. Sodexho won the privatized health care contract in a bid from the BC Liberal Government last year. After thousands of jobs were privatized out in a vicious attack on the HEU by the provincial government last year, the workers had to fight to gain representation by the HEU against their new, private sector bosses. The attack by the government was made with the intent to destroy the union, which only survived at all thanks to a massive labour mobilization. Today negotiations with Sodexho have been impossible, as Sodexho has said that the union demands are "far too high." The demands of the union? Pay raises to reach $14.90 over a four year contract - pay rates that would still fall far below the wages that these same workers made before their jobs were contracted out.

As the lockout of the TWU passes its second month mark, the factor of solidarity from other unions and working and poor people across Canada becomes more and more critical. All the maneuvering of Telus (hiring scabs/bribing workers to cross the picketline/bringing in goon-squads/threatening TWU members jobs/slandering the union in the media) are the tactics used throughout history by bosses who are trying to break unions. The historic and winning response of workers and unions has been to stand their ground against all these attacks, and unite and fight harder.

The original struggles and strikes for the right to organize and hold unions were won by the entirety of working and poor people standing together for their rights against the companies and bosses. In the 1920s and '30s these strikes were won against tremendous odds. Today, we are called upon to fight with this same determination and solidarity again, for the TWU workers, hospital workers, CBC workers, and all working people in Canada.

DEFEND THE TWU!

WORKERS UNITE AGAINST TELUS!