It's Official: Race and Sex Discrimination Can Work Together

An interesting Employment Appeal Tribunal case has ruled that although workers have to submit claims of race and sex discrimination separately, Tribunals can consider their combined effects.

In Ministry of Defence v Debique, the EAT considered the case of a female single mother from St Vincent who had to resign from the army because she could not meet her employer's requirement that she be available to work 24/7. This was discriminatory on the grounds of sex because women are more likely to be single parents; and discriminatory on the grounds of race because commonwealth soldiers do not have the right that British national soldiers do, to have a relative live with them to help with childcare.

If the army had relaxed either the requirement to be available 24/7, or the bar on having a relative live with her to help with childcare, then there would not have been discrimination. Because it did neither, there was discrimination. Hence, the discriminations combined: she was discriminated against as a black woman.

It is my firm belief that lots of black women workers experience discrimination in which sexism and racism combine rather than simply co-existing. The extent to which this ruling will help other workers remains to be seen, but however small, it does appear to be a step forward.

If you are a union rep reading this, then you might well have a case in which this EAT ruling is useful to you.

Nick Griffin on Question Time

Just watching clips of this on Sky,released by the BBC before the main programme later tonight.

First impressions are he seems on the backfoot , grinning inappropriately (that was picked up by Dimbleby re holocaust denial) and defensive.

I'll watch the full programme and comment more.

If you watch the programme, comment on how you think it went .

Update :Will post about the programme, and the media/internet responses, over the weekend. I have had a quick look round and to be honest, one I'm too busy to post and two I have read/heard enough about the slimy Nick Griffin for the time being .

This is not their victory. It is our failure.

An eyewitness report of today’s anti BNP demonstration in Manchester.

At 7pm, a small crowd of anti fascists began to assemble outside Manchester Town Hall. Unite Against Fascism erected a gazebo and played a soothing medley of reggae tunes while the latecomers began to appear. A few stray fascists were chased away, before a handful of speakers addressed the crowd. It began to rain, and I cannot recall the speakers’ names, or indeed much of what was said. From here on, braving bouts of rain and freezing cold (whatever happened to June?), Manchester’s anti fascists waited around, occasionally running here, there and everywhere as rumours of Nick Griffin’s presence reached us. The majority of protesters eventually assembled outside a side-entrance of the Town Hall. The entrance was guarded by large numbers of police and BNP security, most of whom openly admitted to supporting the fascists. At around nine, two large cars pulled up outside the entrance and the BNP security attempted to block the anti fascists from the vehicles. Some protesters hurled eggs, while others attempted to break the windows, or block the vehicles’ progress with their own bodies. They were hauled away by the BNP’s security thugs. One woman was injured.

Chasing the fascists’ cars round to another entrance, most of the anti fascists were forced into a police cordon. Myself and a few others avoided this, and were left free to hang around the Town Hall, waiting for the BNP to make their next appearance. At around this point, the only arrest of the night was made, when Chris S was handcuffed by plain clothes officers and arrested under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, ostensibly for saying the word “fuck”. The officers, who repeatedly refused to give their names and numbers, then dragged Chris away to a police van. He was removed to a police station miles away in North Manchester.

In the meantime, two anti fascists were left to confront three fascists sitting on a bench outside the Hall without aid from the majority of the crowd, who continued chanting “the BNP is a Nazi party” nearby. The fascists ran off, shouting “BNP!”. At the same time, police cleared a path outside the same entrance to the Town Hall where the cars had previously been attacked. As BNP security amassed here, the cars once again pulled up and were surrounded by growing hordes of angry anti fascists. As the police and the BNP’s own louts combined to crush the mobilisation against the vehicles, the first rumours that Griffin might already be inside began to circulate. It turned out to be true; the cars and security had been a decoy… Griffin had sneaked in through a back entrance.

The anti fascist protest continued for about two and a half hours. Chants of “black and white, unite and fight!” and “build a bonfire…” began to ring hollow, as more protesters drifted off. At its peak, the mobilisation was perhaps 200 strong. But by midnight, scarcely forty were left. Two brief interludes of fighting broke out in the meantime: the first when police assaulted a drunk woman who was not part of the protest and the second when one of the BNP’s team, wearing a BNP identity badge, was spotted attempting to make a quiet phone call scarcely a few yards from protesters. After news of the BNP’s victory in Yorkshire and Humberside, everything became subdued. Hearing stories of the BNP trailing behind the Greens at the count taking place within the Town Hall, the mood was one of anger and, in some cases, disbelief. The Greens appeared particularly shocked.

A Labour Councillor addressed the anti fascist mobilisation poorly, omitting the fact that the degeneration of her own party had driven many working class people into the hands of the fascists. UKIP candidates came to join the protesters, and were met with fierce accusations of racism from several anti fascists. A SWP member and UNISON steward intervened, arguing that it was not the time to be exposing UKIP. A while later, at around quarter past twelve, the protest disbanded.

In the European elections, the BNP gained two MEPs. They gained a platform in Europe, and large amounts of taxpayers’ money with which to propagate their fascist lies. They managed it not just because of wide mistrust in the Labour Party, or the expenses scandal, or even the economic recession. They succeeded because the Left is fractured and weak. Because the Left didn’t stand candidates (the soft nationalism of No2EU and its pathetic results notwithstanding). We have a political alternative to fascism, we have the answers, and we need to start putting them forward. If the Left doesn’t learn this, things are only going to get worse.

Finally, we can say with utter sincerity that the “vote anyone but the BNP” strategy of UAF, Hope Not Hate etc. has been a decisive failure.

Defend Jobs - Blame The Bosses Not Foreign Workers

Over the last few days, workers have been walking out of oil refineries around the country in support of their workmates at Lindsey refinery in North Lincolnshire where a contract has been awarded to an Italian firm.

Lindsey, owned by Total, is building a new diesel refining plant. Diesel is cheaper to produce than petrol, but in Britain is more expensive (96p vs 85p ish per litre at present), partly because of lack of refining capacity in this country. There is also a shift from petrol towards diesel at present, with, for example, more diesel cars being produced. Hence, new refining plant needed. The contract for the new plant went to Jacobs, who have sub-contracted to an Italian company, which pre-recruited its workforce in Italy and has allegedly stated that it will not take on British labour (although this may be an urban myth).

I do not buy into the view prevalent on parts of the left - and in my own union's leadership - that all bad things come from the EU, but in this case, the European Court's Viking and Laval rulings have added a poisonous element to the situation. Under these rulings, the contractor is allowed to employ workers in Britain under conditions that would not be allowed under British law (eg. wages below the minimum wage) because it pre-recruited them in another country. It can apply the other country's legal standards if it wishes too ie. if it enables it to pay workers less and rip them off more.

Following a meeting at 7.30 yesterday morning, hundreds of workers walked out of Grangemouth oil refinery in Scotland in sympathy with protesting Lindsey workers. Similar walkouts have taken place at several other refineries.

The Grangemouth workers' resentments have some history. Every so often, the refinery has a 'turnaround', the most recent of which was in 2007 and lasted about six weeks. During a turnaround, the refinery is closed down, and loads of maintenance, inspections, etc carried out. Although some of this is done by Grangemouth workers, most is done by contractors. Thousands of workers are needed, with a whole village of temporary accommodation set up for them.

In the past, the contractors have used local labour. However, especially with future turnarounds likely to be longer, there is not enough skilled local labour (partly because many skilled British workers are overseas being 'foreign labour' themselves!), so more and more foreign workers are being used. In particular, there is a shortage of fitters, electricians, plumbers and other skilled labour in the local area. In the 2007 turnaround, resentments had already started about foreign workers "taking our jobs".

Despite the nationalist rhetoric, there is a genuine issue here for workers. They are entitled to fear for their jobs, and the whole system of contracting has a corrosive effect on both wages and conditions, and on unionisation and working-class unity. Employers deliberately use contracting-out, not only to save money, but to divide the workforce into separate chunks, on different pay and conditions and harder for unions to organise. Where contractors are bringing in workers from outside the area, they are often physically separating them from other workers in temporary accommodation and with working conditions designed to keep the union out.

Meanwhile, both the New Labour government and the trade union leaders are reaping what they have sown. Remember that conference speech in which Gordon Brown said the word 'British' how many times? He can hardly complain when workers call him on his word! And the union leaders who have been willing to use nationalist slogans in the past (only recently, we had 'Keep Burberry British') are now allowing jobs to go and recommending wage cuts, hardly inspiring their members' confidence.

None of this, of course, is an excuse for turning workers' anger against fellow workers of a different nationality. We don't want 'British jobs for British workers', we want decent jobs for all workers. We need workers of each country organising co-ordinated action with each other, not making demands against each other. The BNP are salivating over the last few days' events, seeing a nationalist struggle from which they can build their influence and through which they can spread their poison. And the xenophobic element is being played up by the press, who seem to be reporting 'wildcat strikes against foreign workers' rather than actions against contracting out and fear of job cuts.

For socialists, self-organised working-class militancy is the beginning of wisdom. That does not oblige us to support reactionary strikes: the most commonly-cited is London dockers walking out in support of Enoch Powell, and I also seem to remember telecoms workers refusing to work on the Gay Switchboard in the early 1980s for fear of catching AIDS. But although they are showing some unpleasant nationalist, even racist, manifestations, the current refinery walkouts are not straightforwardly reactionary.

There are two ways in which socialists and trade unionists could do a disservice to these walkouts: by cheering them uncritically, or by denouncing them. We need to get in there, and mobilise our support to encourage them in the direction of genuine militancy and international solidarity, rather than down the dead-end of nationalism. For these walkouts to become a rallying point to oppose contracting and defend jobs, they need to turn their back on counter-productive and poisonous nationalism.