In Reply to: Re: Sacking McDs workers posted by John Cable on May 08, 1996 at 17:45:23:
: > Why are you people making an issue out of the working conditions
: > in McDs when the reality is that if you had your way, these
: > people wouldn't have a job at all?: > Isn't it your agenda to close the whole corporation down? Making
: > an issue of working conditions of those in employment is
: > somewhat hypocritical in the light of that fact.: ______________________________
: : McSpotlight replies:
: : We feel it's important to investigate and portray the reality of
: : what's going on around us, especially behind the closed doors of
: : Corporations - to understand the effects they are having on our
: : lives, our communities and our planet. Armed with such information
: : people are better able to weigh up the situation and to decide for
: : themselves whether multinationals etc are something society would
: : be better off without IN THE LONG TERM. Meanwhile, in the here and
: : now, the aim is to encourage people to fight for their rights - as
: : workers trying to improve their pay and conditions, as parents
: : trying to protect their kids from being brainwashed etc etc. The
: : labour movement has always fought for workers' rights, and workers
: : are always threatened by their employers (and the media) that
: : 'things will get worse' if they take any action. The truth is that
: : things get BETTER precisely because people DO take action.: : Isn't it impossible to separate one part of the jigsaw from the
: : whole picture? If people get organised to stand up for what's
: : right - to defend forests, to resist new stores etc - eventually
: : the balance of power will swing away from the rich and powerful
: : who control things now, and concentrate in the hands of
: : ordinary people. Then it will be up to people together to create
: : a society worth living in, without oppression and exploitation.: I must say I cannot recall ever reading such a shallow rationale in
: a long time as this. The labour movement does indeed fight to
: improve workers rights and conditions, but not with an agenda of
: closing the work place down! If this is the sort of vacuous
: defence you intend putting up, you're in serious doo-doo!The point raised by Mr Cable, albeit in a rather aggressive way, is
valid one. It seems equally valid to say that McDonald's is a dreadful
employer, paying lousy wages.Arguments of a similar kind about the arms trade lend themselves to
resolution through "conversion", as for example in the proposals by
Lucas Aerospace workers to use their skills and technical expertise in
the production of socially useful equipment, rather than armaments.
(For details see Wainwright & Elliott - "The Lucas Plan".) However,
the management of Lucas were unwilling to put the plan into operation,
and even greater difficulties arise with McDonald's, given the unskilled
nature of the job, and high turnover.Given that the revolution which will overthrow capitalism isn't expected
this week, how is the campaign going to reconcile the elements of outright
opposition to McD's and all it stands for with concern for the company's
workers?Alan Harrison
None.