... and the baby starvers

The other thing today was that I heard the words of Jock Barnes in my ears. Some time ago I read “Never A White Flag” the memoirs of the Watersiders Union leader.

I had to travel up to The Swamp for a Union meeting to vote on ratification's to the contract, including a pay increase and a few other odds and ends. It was interesting experience and the fact that it was rejected unanimously was both satisfying and hardly surprising. I imagined how it must have felt back in ‘51 when up to ten thousand Workers rejected management's offers as one body. Because we rejected this first offer, as a Union Delegate, I’ll have to travel back up and enter into negotiations with management. Unfortunately Union movements are still growing after being decimated by the last National Govt.

I am doubtful that the next offer will be accepted by the Union and there are certain issues that could split the members because the Mental Health Trust I work for has branches in P.N. and Wellington. As we have to cover our own shifts and travel to P.N. for the meetings we will always be outnumbered by the P.N. members. This has all sorts of implications that I wont go into here but will be obvious to those who understand any Union decision is based on a 50% majority.

It’s also possible that it could lead to strikes. This in turn got me thinking about the strike of ‘51. That lasted for 151 days.

When I read Barne’s Memoirs I noticed he used a phrase often about the Govt., the Ship Owners and all those who had forced the lockout, he referred to them as “Babystarvers.” The way he used the phrase made me think that it was a term which must have been part of the dialectics among the Union movement and the the strikers. I was intrigued by the phrase, as up 'til now I have been using the phrase "false-bottomed" to describe managment. Now, with a baby of the way, I feel like reclaiming that phrase "baby-starvers". As our negotiations start in earnest, that phrase sits in my pocket like a small sharp flick knife and I wonder if we will need to use it. I can well imagine jubbery chins of management quivering if I were to pull it out. There's something very sharp about it.

To me, this election, in many ways has come to that. While certain leaders make a great show of kissing babies, how many of them have a falsebottom? And how many of these political leaders have a baby starving agenda in those false bottoms? At present, along with negotiations I am involved in, there are many others all across the spectrum of Unions, indeed we already are starting to see lock outs and strikes (for example the striking at Southward Engineering in Lower Hutt after 13 workers were suspended. I imagine, if National get in, these fledgling Unions will once again be forced deep underground.

The main problem as I see it is that we don’t need tax cuts we need better wages. We’re having a baby and it’s due date is 1st of April. Funnily enough it's the same date Labour’s “Working for the Family” scheme kick in.