Socialist Action (US)

The monthly paper of Socialist Action, San Francisco, 1983–2010

Boston labor activists discuss fightback tactics

Socialist Action, Vol. 6, No. 2, February 1988 · scan p. 6 · about 660 words

Read it in the scan (PDF at ETOL), page 6 →

Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.

Scan page 6

By W.I. MOHAREB BOSTON-On Dec. 12, the Boston branch of Socialist Action hosted a small but important forum titled "New England Labor vs. Corporate Greed."

Mike Fliss, a worker at the General Motors plant in Framingham, Mass., was the first speaker. Fliss, a member of United Auto Workers Local 422, examined the recent "indefinite" closing of the plant in the context of growing capitalist overproduction and the class struggle.

The auto industry suffers from massive overcapacity, with U.S. manufacturers alone capable of producing an estimated 5 million more cars than the market can absorb by 1990; non-U.S. makers are facing even greater overcapacity.

GM is laying off tens of thousands of workers and has announced plans to close a dozen or more plants in coming months. These closures are by no means indiscriminate.

As Fliss pointed out, Framingham and five other factories in North America, including one each in Canada and Mexico, produce two of the top five best-selling cars in the United States (the Cutlass Ciera and the Chevrolet Celebrity).

Sales of these models have fallen far less than for other comparable GM cars. Yet Framingham was closed while GM management stepped up production in Mexico.

The reason Framingham was singled out, Fliss explained, is that workers there had refused to submit to the speed-up scheme otherwise known as the "team concept." In fact, the bosses went out of their way to cite "problems with labor relations" as a factor in the decision to close the plant.

Cornerstone principles

The ultimate responsiblity for the thousands of layoffs at Framingham and elsewhere lies on the bosses and their anarchic system. But Fliss pointed out that the GM management has been capable of whipsawing union local against union local only because of the weakness and conciliationism of the present labor leadership.

For example, Donald Ephlin, UAW vice president, is a leading supporter of the "team concept." And the UAW leadership has been compromising individual contracts by dealing with each car company separately. It then paints the contracts in unjustified rosy terms.

Pliss discussed the efforts of the StandUp Coalition at Framingham and of similar caucuses in other plants in providing an alternative program more faithful to the "cornerstone principles of our union: to increase our standard of living, to eliminate competition between workers, and to create Dave Walsh/Socialist Action jobs for all who need work."

Laurie Haapenen, an organizer for UAW Region 9A, was the second speaker. The focus of her talk was the service sectorand office workers in particular. Traditionally unorganized, these people "generally don't consider themselves workers or part of the working class," she said.

Haapenen described common work conditions for an office worker—long days, low pay, speed-up, no respect, sexual harassment. Stress is "nearly as high as that of an assembly-line worker," emphasized.

Unfortunately, a relatively small proportion of office workers is organized. But the picture is changing as growing numbers seek unionization; the Boston area alone boasts several major drives. [Excerpts from Haapenen's speech are reprinted on this page.] The unions in Maine Greg Guckenberg, a member of Shipbuilders Local 6 in Bath, Maine, was the final speaker. "Maine unions have been very much in the news over the past three years," he pointed out.

Four major strikes, "steps in a progression of learning experiences," have occurred during the last three years: Bath Iron Works (1985); Guilford Transportation and the Maine Central Railroad (1986); Boise-Cascade at Rumford, Maine (1986); and International Paper (IP) at Jay, Maine (ongoing since June 1987).

All of the strikes were against concessionary contracts. With the Jay strike, however, "the solidarity and preparedness of the union was a surprise to many unionists" as well as to the bosses, Guckenberg said.

The Jay local's public meetings of more than 1000 (in a town of 4000) were "inspiring and unlike anything I've seen in the labor movement before," he reported. The local's leaders have taken it upon themselves to lead the entire union.

← Contents of Vol. 6, No. 2, February 1988

Something wrong on this page? Tell us →