[Marxism] How Ineos humiliated Unite in Grangemouth | Richard Seymour | Comment is free | theguardian.com

Ralph Johansen mdriscollrj at charter.net
Sat Nov 9 12:12:47 MST 2013

'The union's retreat was humiliating. They conceded everything: pay 
freezes, an end to final salary pensions, the end of full-time union 
convenors on site, and no strikes for three years. Employers across the 
country will look enviously on what Jim Ratcliffe, the billionaire boss 
of Ineos, has achieved.

Why did they lose so badly?'


What does this amount to, other than the obsolescence of traditional 
union short-term defensive tactics? I agree for the most part with what 
shaun may has been posting here about needed changes in the way workers 
organize [for example, [Marxism] On Revolutionary Agency: From Trade 
Unions towards Social Unions: Four Transitional Proposals for 
POSTED Sat Oct 5 10:38:16 MDT 2013 and many other entries on his website].

If workers don't figure out how to take the offensive, we're all down 
the tubes. Why is there no response here, by savvy comrades in a 
position to do something about it, to what shaun proposes?

More information about the Marxism mailing list