Il Partito Comunista 392

„It used to be that if a place treated you like crap, you’d just go somewhere else. It’s got to the point where there’s nowhere else to go. We’ve reached a tipping point. We’re on minimum wage, on zero-hours. There’s no such thing as overtime anymore, and now they’re starting to mess with our tips. There’s only so much more we can take”.

With these words a young English worker describes his and many other’s condition on the eve of an important and unprecedented direct action in the catering sector. On October 6, fast food workers belonging to McDonald’s, TGI Fridays and Wetherspoons set up a joint strike to conclude, or give a new start we might say, to the particular struggles of which we saw several episodes happening in the last year. The cases of sexual harassment at McDonald’s or the disputes over tips at TGIFridays had only been the sparks on which the unavoidable need to end miserable wages and zero-hours contracts, as well as the disparity in remuneration that affects people under 25 had blown. And from isolated and scattered initiatives, the understanding that a coordinated action was necessary to give a greater impulse to the struggle had been gaining ground, mostly young people with no family support and no prospect of professional advancement, crushed by a labour market in a continous downward trend, these workers have formed or joined grassroots trade unions impenetrable to bureaucrats and collaborative strategies of all kinds, that are mostly run by the workers themselves to meet their immediate interests, incompatible with those of their bosses. And where the consciousness that their situation will be difficult to improve if the existing production relations remain as such begins to spread.

The strike was mainly promoted by the Bakers, Food and Allied Workers Union (BFAWU), but GMB Union and the larger Unite the Union also back it up and push their members into action. Obviously, however, the anger was not limited to members of these unions. And so, when the strike action had already been defined, gig economy workers from the food delivery industry decided decisively to participate in the walk out. They were united by a very similar living condition, with very low wages and unguaranteed work hours, and also saw in the unity of the workers the only possibility of salvation. It must be said that this segment of workers lives in a condition at the limit of sustainability, since they are denied even the most basic rights. Although in most cases these are actual full-time jobs as well as the only source of income, these riders are told that they should see themselves as „entrepreneurs”, who work when and how they want, who are real arbiters of their own destiny. The reality is that they have no choice but to suffer a wild exploitation with the incessant uncertainty of not being able to keep up with rent and bills. Working without holiday pay, sick pay and incentives in the event of adverse weather conditions.

As many as 9 cities in the United Kingdom have seen the joint mobilization of UberEats and Deliveroo drivers, with a very participated event in the city center of Cardiff. These workers are almost entirely organised by two other major grassroots trade unions, IWGB and IWW in a single network, the Couriers Network. It certainly seems rather premature at this stage to talk about the establishment of a single trade union front, but it is surprising how quickly and easily these unions can reach full agreement on unity of action, so as to inflict as much damage as possible on the opponent by means of the strike. In a very precarious sector where it has always been difficult to organize the workforce due to its fragmentation, as many as 5 unions have managed to combine their efforts in a relatively short time.

But this was not the only episode of bold struggle that crossed the United Kingdom in recent months. Much attention deserves the genuine organizational experience of London cleaning workers at the hands of the United Voices of the World trade union. Nearly all immigrant proletarians, these workers toil at the city’s most renowned public offices only to make the misery of the national minimum wage, set at £7.83 per hour. This, if perhaps it will be enough to guarantee a wretched life outside London, in the financial capital is equivalent to being able to pay for rent and little more. As a matter of fact, the minimum wage for living in London, called the „London living wage”, is indicated at £10.20 per hour and highlights the significant difference in the cost of living between the capital and the rest of the country.

With 100% of votes in favor, the cleaners at the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) and the Kensington and Chelsea Council (RBKC) decided to be on strike for three days from 6 to 8 August. The main demands were to raise wages to £10.20 per hour for all, plus an end to unequal treatment and rights between internal workers and outsourced ones. The action seemed very energetic and loud right from the start: in addition to the pickets, the cleaners entered both buildings, interrupting the regular business operations. An initial acceptance of dialogue expressed by a spokesman for the RBKC was followed by the reversal of the press office, which finally expressed the refusal to listen to the workers’ requests. But the fuse had already been lit.

Workers from other buildings in the city, including London’s luxury private hospitals joined the UVW en masse and immediately organised a vote to decide whether or not to strike. Upon news of possible strike actions, the company that employs these workers offered them a pay rise from £7.83 to £9.18, which is a 17% increase. A move that could have made the conflict fall back. But that did not have the desired effect as the workers went ahead their own way and with another total consensus decided to continue to strike until all their demands are met. A few days after the news breaks: the management of the Kensington Council recognizes an increase in salary to £10.20 per hour starting from December 2018 and going retroactively from October 2018. In addition, their precarious contract will be reviewed and the possibility of early termination by the contractor eliminated.

Even before this victory and in the following days, other segments of the workforce employed by the Ministry of Justice also joined the UVW. Security guards and receptionists, both with lower pay than the London Living Wage, decided to fight alongside the cleaners and continue with new strikes in the coming months. The battle will also continue at the private hospitals. It is worth saying that the greatest result of the fight is the improvement of the organization and its extension.

On the Facebook page of the UVW union there are three publications concerning the strike of October 6 in the fast food industry. And the message is clear: „Your struggle is our struggle and we need maximum unity and solidarity to grow in strength”. At the same time, the country’s largest reformist party, the Labour Party, sends its own Members of Parliament to the pickets, declaring its support to the strikes and its intention to legislate for an increase in the minimum wage to £10. We have no doubt that this is yet another deception, in a narrative that would be very similar to the Italian one where reformism initially embraces working class’ radical demands for the purpose of winning the elections, then ends up only adopting workfare measures that are perfectly functional to the perpetration of exploitation. At this moment the Labour Party and the regime unions show a false support but they always remain the representation of the pacifying force of the movement. They are waiting for the first opportunity to harness it and force it to the path of collaboration and sacrifice, always with a view to the national interest, which is claimed, in bad faith, common to both exploiters and exploited. The English working class therefore has a task: not to listen to those who want to feed them with crumbs and continue on their valiant path of struggle

1400 Alcoa workers at two bauxite mines and three refineries in WA have vowed to continue an indefinite strike against the corporation. Workers from the Kwinana, Pinjarra and Wagerup refineries, the Huntley and Willowdale bauxite mines, and the Bunbury port went on strike early August after 20 months of painful negotiations over an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement, with the corporation failing to budge.

Alcoa is an American corporation that has bauxite mines and aluminium refining facilities in Australia. Just three of these refineries produce 8.8 million tons of aluminium a year. They definitely have a large stake in the game. Alcoa claims to act with integrity, operate with excellence, and care for the people, stating that „We treat all people with dignity and provide a diverse, inclusive work culture. We work safely, promote wellness, and protect the environment.

The workers maintain that the strike is not over salary but job security and the casualisation of work. The workers are scared that they will be replaced by cheap casual labourers or will be forced into redundancy. Even the permanent workers who have been there a long time feel that they are not secure.

Alcoa has responded by refusing to negotiate with them over job security, instead offering the workers what they call a „generous EBA” which offers a 14% superannuation contribution, an extended sick leave program with two years’ income support, a 36 hour work week, and an opportunity to earn extra income through supplementary shifts.

But the workers are not being fooled into stopping the strike or backing down and are maintaining solidarity with each other. Lots of these workers will be losing $4000 to $6000 in wages by keeping this strike going. Their militancy should be applauded.

Following the retaking of a large part of national territory by the Damascus regime, the phase of relative stabilization of Syria has led to a temporary shift of the fault line separating the spheres of influence in the Middle East region. Outside the control of the Syrian Government only the north-western province of Idlib and the Kurdish region of Rojava remain. In this latter region there have been clashes with the Turkish armed forces. At the end of this phase, during which the support of Russian forces and Shiite militias linked to Iran has been essential, it is in Yemen where the maximum energy of inter-imperialist frictions is discharged.

Epicentre of a furious battle (which at the time of writing has not yet ended) is the strategic city of Hodeida on the Red Sea. This is situated 200 miles from the Strait of Bab el-Mandeb through which 5 million barrels of oil pass daily. The fierce battle sees the Houthi Shiite militias, supported by Iran, who control the western part of the country, clash with the Yemeni forces allied to Saudi Arabia, which receives military support from Riyadh and Abu Dhabi.

It is a collision between Saudi Arabia and Iran for the control of access to the Red Sea, and is of vital importance. As always, the Yemeni forces in the field are forced into partisanship, subordinate to the major powers. To dispel the journalistic legend which represents the Yemeni conflict as a war of religion that would oppose Shiites and Sunnis, supported by the Saudi orthodox champions, it is worth remembering that the leader of the land offensive against the Houthi is the Shiite Tareq Saleh. This is the grandson of the deceased Yemeni president Ali Abdullah Saleh, killed by the Houthi themselves after breaking their alliance and changing sides. Quite a clear sign that the interests at stake are very different from what simple ethnic and religious divisions would suggest. Meanwhile the clan of the Saleh, of Zaidite Shiite religion and at the centre of Yemen’s political life for 40 years, wavers between the two camps fighting for hegemony in the region.

Saudi Arabia’s commitment to the fight against the Houthi does not seem to have strong support from the United States. Riyadh’s claim to play a leading role in the determination of the price of crude oil has probably cooled down American enthusiasm for the military successes of her traditional Saudi allies, who have now penetrated deep into the urban center of Hodeida. The dispute over seizing portions of the oil revenue, always the subject of imperialistic appetites, takes on a central role at a time when the worsening crisis of overproduction is dissuading large groups of capital from investing in manufacturing.

This is how the US decision to cancel the international agreement on Iranian nuclear power, in order to reduce Tehran’s share of the oil revenue, should be regarded. Also in this light should be seen the decision of Saudi Arabia to cut oil production by 500,000 barrels a day to avoid a drop in the price of crude oil. But Trump reacted to this on 12 November by effectively ordering Riyadh to refrain from any attempt to pursue a policy of pushing up the price of the barrel, which would have the effect of stopping or slowing down economic growth which is already very sluggish.

The reintroduction of sanctions against Iran by the United States becomes a way of promoting US trade through other channels. Italy is exempted from the sanctions imposed on those who buy Iranian oil for a period of six months: is this in exchange for the multi-billion dollar purchase of the large F-35 patrol recently ordered? Moreover, the US administration is pressing for Italy to complete the Trans-Adriatic Pipeline („TAP”), falsely opposed in the electoral program of the 5 Star Movement. The TAP would allow the supply of Middle Eastern gas, reducing Italy’s dependence on Russia.The same applies to the development of Muos, the advanced satellite system for military communications in the Mediterranean installed in Sicily. The exemption from sanctions against Iran also concerns seven other countries: China, India, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Greece and Turkey; certainly in exchange there are equivalent counterparts in the American trade war on world markets.

The story of Jamal Khashoggi, the journalist savagely killed in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul on October 2, has provided a pretext for Turkey and other ancient and stable allies of Saudi Arabia to express their disagreements and distrust towards the young and megalomaniac crown prince Muhammad Bin Salman. MBS is the expression of a particularly dynamic and fierce bourgeois faction, whose politics could harm the interests of the United States in the region. In particular, Washington won’t like Riyadh’s desire to isolate Qatar and even, as a threat to MBS, transform it into an island by digging a 60km long and 200m wide canal in Saudi territory. In fact, it should be remembered that the USA has the important military base of Al Udeid in Qatar, near the capital Dohha.

Another conflict occurred at the beginning of the second decade of November between Gaza and Israel. An Israeli operation in the Strip with the achieved objective of killing a military leader of Hamas, has also caused the death of six other Palestinians and of an officer of the Israeli army. This was followed by missile launches in the Negev and the Israeli retaliation with air raids that hit 150 targets in the Strip. A truce, which has put an end to the umpteenth skirmish, will allow aid from Qatar to arrive in Gaza. This concession of the Netanyahu government has resulted in the resignation of the Minister of Defense, Avigdor Liberman. He would have liked a „stronger” military reaction, a sign of frictions within the Israeli ruling class on the manner and timing of the inevitable war for capitalist economic ends and social conservation in the region.