Rabbitte & O’Connor play race card

by x Tue Jan 17, 2006 15:33

"The best response would be an aggressive campaign to make sure that Irish and foreign workers get exactly the same pay and conditions, and therefore make sure that there is no financial incentive for employers to replace exising staff."

This would be the best response and its idealistic, but is it realistic? Union membership is approximately 35% of the workforce at the moment (I think - I am happy to be corrected) and many positions dont have the same measures of security as many SIPTU members would have. There are small, private companies out there who have always been well outside the glare of the unions, and will always take on the cheapest labour available. They've had problems in the past recruiting Irish people to do shitty, manual work, but now they have a huge labour pool of migrant workers to draw from.

And this hasnt gone un-noticed by larger employers and businessmen. As time goes on, and more people arrive here, the labour pool of people willing to work for less will be bigger and companies will be happy to draw from it - to the point of letting Irish people on higher wages go quietly, citing downturn reasons, but in reality plumping for the cheaper labour (= higher profits for them).

What I'd be interested in is - is there any sense of labour organisation or solidarity among the immigrant workers here? How do they feel about the situation in Irish Ferries where Irish people have been laid off, and they're in their employment positions now? Have they made any attempt to unionise? Why are they so willing to take lower paid positions? Are they being 'scabs' - taking jobs from unionised workers?

This isnt a 'divide and conquer' supporting article, but somehow imagining that SIPTU workers in cosy state and public sector jobs are going to down tools, pens, or phones in continued industrial action for people in shitty fast food and low pay sector jobs they cant even communicate with due to the language barrier, never mind the cultural divides, is total anarchist utopian fantasy...

by Joe Tue Jan 17, 2006 16:03

One word - GAMA

by Randomer Tue Jan 17, 2006 18:57

LABOUR PARTY AND WORK PERMITS

Madam, - As members of the Labour Party we wish to distance ourselves from comments made by party leader Pat Rabbitte in which he flagged the idea of a "work permits system" for workers within the EU (The Irish Times, January 3rd). This bears no relation to Labour Party policy on migrant labour, current or previous.

We believe there is a clear role for the Labour Party in fighting exploitation and raising employment standards for all workers.

Political pressure for an increase in the number of labour inspectors needs to be stepped up, and a more intensive campaign to defeat the EU services directive should be launched.

Ultimately, the best way to guarantee decent employment standards for workers is through trade union membership. The Labour Party can assist the unions in efforts to organise unionised workers by introducing proposals to improve legislation on trade union recognition and calling for the repeal of those elements of the 1990 Industrial Relations Act which restrict trade union activity.

We believe the concept, introduced by Mr Rabbitte, that workers from other European Union countries would have their freedom of movement between member-states severely curtailed under any work permit regime is disgraceful and flies in the face of what Labour stands for.

We wish to make it clear that the Labour Party leader's commentary is not being made in our name. - Yours, etc,

PAUL DILLON, Milltown, Dublin 12; DERMOT LOONEY, Greenhills, Dublin 12; JANE HORGAN JONES, Clontarf, Dublin 3. ENDA DUFFY, Stillorgan, Co Dublin; CHRIS BOND, Greenhills, Dublin 12; CIARAGH NÍ NÉILL, Kilmacthomas, Co Waterford; BRIAN AYLWARD, Newport, Co Tipperary.

by Ijack white - wsm Tue Jan 17, 2006 20:19

those Labour heads. Fair play.

by John Tue Jan 17, 2006 21:31

Your claims are inaccurate. Wages are not being driven down in Ireland. In the past 5 years real wages have risen more in Ireland than in any other Western European country. In 2005 wages rose by around 6 per cent against an inflation rate of about 2.5 per cent. Real wages in Ireland have never been higher. That's one of the reasons you can hardly move when you go to one of the large modern shopping centres that have been built to facilitate the resultant consumer boom. Why don't you take off your socialist spectacles and recognise that capitalism in Ireland is leading to unprecedented prosperity for the Irish working-class. Name one socialist country where the workers have as high a standard of living as in Ireland today.

by gurley flynn Wed Jan 18, 2006 01:29

A "worker permit" system is reminiscent of the South African pass system. Its aim is similar: to create apartheid amongst the working class in Ireland, which includes workers from other countries. It promotes scapegoating and lowers wages. It is an attack on worker solidarity. Those who support this system are enemies of the working class, and should be driven out of the union movement.

by McNabb Wed Jan 18, 2006 02:55

Come on. Pat Rabbitte... Jack O'Connor... playing the race card?

Can we get a bit of intelligence on here please? They're two of the biggest liberals in the book. The fact is that Irish immigration policy is an ass and needs to be brought back to reality.

Pat Rabbitte is merely saying what the a large section of the country is thinking. He's an opportunist, not a racist.

by Topper Wed Jan 18, 2006 13:38

Sorry McNabb, but intelligent thought allows us to reach one conclusion here and one alone. They have chosen to place the blame for wages being driven down on the shoulders of foreign workers and not employers. Instead of demanding that the state do more to restrict the freedom of employers to exploit workers and force down wages, they have demanded that the state restrict the freedom of foreigners to work in this country. Alan's analysis is spot on.

Nobody LIKES being accused of racism. Even the BNP say "we're not racist, we're just pro-white". If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, well...

by Anti-Fascist Thu Jan 19, 2006 11:05

This type of hysterical screaming of racist merely desenitises people when a real rascist starts to operate they won't pay attention. I dont agree with Rabbitte on this issue (I dont agree with him on most) but to say hes playing the race card....

Fucking ejiets

by Joe Thu Jan 19, 2006 12:25

That is a nice illustration of the limits of anti-fascism where all criticism must be sacrificed on the alter of anti-fascist unity. It doesn't work and it never has.

The only thing hysterical here is the suggestion that 'playing the race card' is equivalent to joining the BNP - as if the only problem with racism is an outfit with no (public) membership in the 26 counties.

It is quite clear that the Labour Party and union leaderships have found a scapegoat for the crap deal they 'won' on Irish Ferries, a scapegoat needed to defend partnership. That scapegoat is migrant workers. This is indeed playing the race card but on its own this does not make them racists and it certainly does not make them fascists. The equation that claims it does is quite hysterical and not at all useful.

But if you can only look at this from the viewpoint of anti-fascism consider this. We saw elsewhere in Europe in the 1990's how mainstream politicans playing similar race cards made the politics of the far right respectable to the electorate. Playing the race card in relation to Irish Ferries has already given a visible boost to the handful of Irish internet nazis. A great pity especially considering a number of migrant groups made the effort to join the demonstrations.

by observer Thu Jan 19, 2006 13:28

Pointing out that the unrestricted supply of immigrant labour places downward pressure on wages is not racist. It is junior cert economics and simple common sense.

Placing restrictions on it therefore is a logical response and the one favoured by most workers and trade unionists. Opposing that with utopian proposals for uniting everyone in an heroic struggle for socialism is naive, impractical and unworkable.

by pat c - AFA (pers cap) Thu Jan 19, 2006 14:01

It was Topper who introduced the BNP into this storyline, Anti Fascist may have been disagreeing with him/her. I have no idea of who Anti Fascist is, but I agree with the analysis put forward by Alan.

The important thing to remember about the Irish Ferries dispute is that unofficial action was taken by the SIPTU members not just in defence of those who wished to stay but also in defence of the new contract workers. This won a 120% increase in pay for the contract workers. It is also quite clear (from subsequent interviews) that those SIPTU activists had an Internationalist and Anti Racist attitude. More could have been achieved if they had not been stabbed in the back by the SUI.

by SH Thu Jan 19, 2006 14:18

Observer your knowledge of economics is similar to your knowledge of everything else. You know sweet FA. An economy is not stagnant it constantly expands and contracts. On a simplified level the more workers in an economy the more goods and services are demanded in the economy and following on from that more workers are needed to produce the goods and services. By your naive outlook countries would have to maintain strict population controls so that the population would maintain current employment levels and not exceed them, this is obviously completely untrue . Perhaps you should toddle of and study economics for your leaving cert considering it is not on the Junior Cert.

by anon Thu Jan 19, 2006 14:43

Pointing out that the unrestricted supply of immigrant labour places downward pressure on wages is not racist. It is junior cert economics and simple common sense.

Yes but unrestricted and unregulated importation of immigrant labour is method of forcing down wages and conditions using race to deflect the anger and cause.

by observer Fri Jan 20, 2006 09:55

Prove that Rabbittee has tapped into the real feelings of working class people on the immigration issue. Biggest rise in Labour support in long time and at time when Rabbitte's comments on cheap migrant labour was main issue associated with him. SF's decline is probably linked to what seems to many people to be a policy of unrestricted immigration.

by SH Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:52

Observer,

The only people who hold similar views on Sinn Fein are the Immigration Control Platform or the usual nazi's, which one are you?. Opinion polls are fickle and the Independents poll or the examiners poll will have widely different results. Pat Rabbitte's work permits rant will have very little to do with the rise of approval ratings, if they did the PD's would be far stronger than the 3% ratings they consistently have. It would be more realistic to suggest that the increase in ratings would be down to the increase support for trade unions after the mass demo on Irish Ferries than it is to Rabbitte's rant. To suggest that the Labour party has a large working class vote does not hold under scrutiny either and once again a post from you is utter nonsense.

by observer Fri Jan 20, 2006 10:58

I see you are as good at interpreting opinion polls as you are at understanding work permit and asylum statistics.

Your answer to everything is to accuse someone of being a eacist or a nazi. Prat. You share the same immigration policies as IBEC.

by SH Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:37

Every post you make is utter nonsense. When you are confronted with this you lie and say you are being called a racist. Nobody has called you a racist here, yet there are numerous posts from you attempting to claim that they have. This is a clear lie and an attempt by you to make yourself look like a victim when clearly you are just a troll who knows nothing. You haven't a clue what you are talking about.

You also haven't answered why you hold similar views to the ICP and Nazi's, is is that you are one of them, or just as idiotic as they are?

Also the pathetic comment about IBEC, do you even know what their immigration policy is?

Such idiocy

by Pat Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:43

"SF's decline is probably linked to what seems to many people to be a policy of unrestricted immigration."

According to the IT a 1% drop. What is the error margin on these polls? Isn't usually about 3% one way or the other?

by pat c Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:47

the usual margin of error used in these polls is + / - 3%. So the 1% drop for SF, 2% rise for Labour and 3% rise for FF and 1% drop for FG is with the margin of error. Statistically then this poll proves nothing. It must be a slow news day otherwise pundits would not be reading things into it.

by observer Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:53

You may be confusing me with another 'Observer" (capitalised). Not my fault. I have used this for two years.

It was myself last week who gave you the stats on migrant workers and asylum seekers from Africa which prove that majority are in the latter category. You responded with a statistic from the 2002 census showing that over 20,000 people were from Africa. Now, even you will understand that at least half of the 20,000 were children and therefore in the same category as their parents - the majority of whom were/are asylum seekers!

And yes I do, as a trade unionist know exactly what IBECs policy on migrant workers is. Same as yours: unrestricted access.

by SH Fri Jan 20, 2006 12:07

I am not confusing you with observer2, whom I know. Also it was the case that you tried to concentrate on Nigerians and not africans also your statistics were completely untrue. Remember your fantastical 85% of asylum seekers are from sub saharan africa, complete and utter nonsense like all your posts. The census figures have also, obviously, increased since 2002.

As for IBEC you must be a pretty pathetic trade unionist since you don't know what their policy is on immigration. They do not want unrestricted access and it is a complete fabrication to say that they do. In fact IBEC favour the work permit system.

" IBEC calls for 'a single, streamlined immigration system with one single administrative procedure combining entry visa and a work/study permit applications and renewals, should be established"

by observer Fri Jan 20, 2006 13:27

My statistics are correct. They are not mine in any event, they are from official sources and from up to the end of November 2005.

They prove as I said, that the majority of Africans here are asylum seekers. You countered that by citing the 2002 census figures on the number of Africans resident here. Nowhere in the census does it refer to the status of the individual.

At least half of the 20,000+ Africans are children. Therefore they do not change the statistics which show that the majority of Africans are asylum seekers.

As for IBEC, they were the first organised body (in 1999) to call on the Government here to allow migrant workers from non-EU states to be allowed work in Ireland.

by SH Fri Jan 20, 2006 13:43

We have had people from outside the EU working here for over a quarter of century and what you are saying is utter nonsense. You stated that IBEC support unrestrained immigration which is patent nonsense. It is a lie. You tried to back yourself up by saying you know this because you are a trade unionist. It was completely untrue.

Previously you stated that the majority of black people in Ireland were asylum seekers, not africans. This is patent nonsense. You then refer to the "at least half are children". This is also untrue. Up until january 1st 2005 all children born in Ireland were Irish citizens including those born to asylum seekers. Hence now we have the IBC scheme which around 17,000 people will have residency because of their Irish children. Seedot also raised with you the number of visitors from the UK whom would be black also.

Also you never produced links to your statistics and in fact made most of them up, including your fantastical "85% of asylum seekers are from sub saharan africa" which was a statistic pulled out of your nether regions.

Now you are coming on to another thread, trolling again and continuing to fabricate things, not just about what you previously said but also what IBEC's policies are.

by WatchingFromMars Fri Jan 20, 2006 13:58

Late 1980s - massive net migration out of Ireland. Presumably a time of low unemployment.

Today - net migration into Ireland. Presumably a time of high unemployment

The facts speak for themselves