SWP/RTW (UK)

by non-voter Sun May 23, 2010 16:00

SWP members in Britain yesterday disrupted and forced the cancelation of a meeting between Tony Woodley joint-leader of the UNITE trade union and Willie Walshe head of British Airways. The meeting at Britain’s Arbitration and Conciliation Service (ACAS) London headquarters in Euston Tower , had been billed as a last ditch attempt to avert all-out strike action by British Airway cabin crew who have been engaged in a long-running dispute with BA over pay and conditions .

At the same time as the ACAS talks were taking place, an emergency conference of the SWP-dominated Right to Work Campaign was in session close to Euston Tower . According to the SWP 200 of their members and supporters marched to Euston Tower to show solidarity with the BA cabin crew .

“The door was open and protesters rode up to
the 23rd floor. They came across Walsh
talking on his mobile outside the talks and
chanted at him, "Willie Walsh, who are
you? We support the cabin crew!"

: http://www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=21303

The action has been branded “a stunt” by most of the rest of the left in Britain and as a self-promoting exercise by the SWP at the expense of the cabin crews - none of whom seemed to have been present when the ACAS talks were stormed.

by upandcoming Sun May 23, 2010 22:08

The Socialist Party has condemned the SWP occupation and stunt at the BA talks saying that it was up to the BA workers themselves to decide democratically what should happen not the SWP.
http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/latest/9563/22-05-2010...dated

by non-voter Mon May 24, 2010 02:02

The Socialist Party's call for no victimisation suggests there may have been BA workers involved in the confrontation .

by Sean Mon May 24, 2010 12:57

It was nothing less than an anti-worker stunt and shows that the SWP are prepared to do anything to promote their party. Whatever someone thinks of a particular proposal or deal, workers have the right to negotiate without interference from anyone - the same applies to the present process on the Croke Park deal. Personally I believe it is an appalling deal and would vote no -- but I am not a public sector worker and it is a decision that can only be made by those who will be affected by it. Piling in and disrupting talks between workers and their employer is of no help to the workers concerned and only helps the likes of Willie Walsh who can brand all workers and trade unionists as troublemakers.

by Thomas Mon May 24, 2010 15:37

The idea of Unite withdrawing their support for the Right to Work campaign has been raised. Very foolish of the SWP to storm in on the joint general secretaries engaged in high profile talks of a union who has been sponsoring one of their campaigns. Unite has two million members in Britain and Ireland, this act will do the SWP no favours in their eyes.

by non-voter Mon May 24, 2010 15:53

Interviewed by Channel 4 News, the SWP’s UK national secretary Martin Smith defended the protest at ACAS saying that any intimidation of Walsh was nothing compared to the intimidation of workers by BA management. Smith denied that the SWP had been responsible for the disruption of talks insisting that the demonstrators had come across Walsh by chance when they got out of the lift on the wrong floor in Euston Tower.

“Far from us being the people who disrupted the negotiations, it’s clear that Willie Walsh does not want to negotiate with the union. He wants to bully and intimidate workers, and I think it’s right that we make a stand against him.”

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/wi...57387

by John Cornford Fri May 28, 2010 15:12

Some intersting facts here which quotes from SWP Notes.

>Party Notes reports the union statement that the “widely reported distractions” at Acas “had little effect on the outcome of these talks”. It goes on to claim: “Also we have received a very warm welcome on the BA picket lines this morning - 39 copies of SW have been sold.” This despite the fact that Party Notes also fails to mention that the action was organised by the SWP.

The anonymous author complains of “a lot of blogging and Facebook chatter” and remarks: “I personally think it is best not to engage in these gutter debates, but, if you are, please try and find out the basic facts before firing off comments.” Obviously, the SWP has been left at sixes and sevens by its comrades attempting to justify the Acas invasion on the grounds that the Unite leadership was about to sell out.

Not at all the line that the leadership wants to pursue, as Party Notes explains: “... I think it is important we learn some lessons from the protest on Saturday. We are trying to bring together a serious coalition that can resist the cuts ... That means when we hold stunts and protests we need to point all our fire at the Con-Dems and the bosses, and should try and avoid at all costs protests that embroil Labour and trade union leaders in them.”[3]

In other words, we shouldn’t have done it. Perhaps the SWP leadership has forgotten that Party Notes can now be accessed by the public via its website, since neither the home page statement nor the Socialist Worker report expresses any such regret.<
http://www.cpgb.org.uk/article.php?article_id=1003957