Multimedia
Audio
Video
Photo

Developing Workers' Autonomy: An Anarchist Look At Flying Squads

Anonyme, Dimanche, Janvier 4, 2004 - 17:02

Jeff Shantz

Recently much interest and discussion has been generated by the emergence of union flying squads in Ontario. Flying squads -- rapid response networks of workers that can be mobilized for strike support, demonstrations, direct action and working class defense of immigrants, poor people, and unemployed workers -- present a potentially significant development in revitalizing organized labor activism and rank-and-file militancy.

Developing Workers' Autonomy:
An Anarchist Look At Flying Squads


by Jeff Shantz, Punching Out Collective (NEFAC-Toronto)

Recently much interest and discussion has been generated by the emergence of union flying squads in Ontario. Flying squads -- rapid response networks of workers that can be mobilized for strike support, demonstrations, direct action and working class defense of immigrants, poor people, and unemployed workers -- present a potentially significant development in revitalizing organized labor activism and rank-and- file militancy.

Here are organizations with rank-and-file participation working to build solidarity across unions and locals and alongside community groups, engaging in direct action while striving to democratize their own unions. No wonder then that the re-appearance of flying squads in Ontario, in a context of halting resistance to a vicious neoliberal attack, notably among some sectors of the labor movement, has been cause for much excitement.

Militant anti-capitalists of various stripes, recognizing the crucial roles played by workers within production relations, have viewed the flying squads as important in the development of workers' organization against capitalist authority and discipline. Anarchists, maintaining the necessity of working class self-organization and autonomy from bureaucratic structures, have been encouraged by the possible emergence of active networks of rank-and-file workers bringing collective resources to defend broad working class interests.

At the same time the struggles over the make up and control or direction of flying squads has reflected struggles between rank-and-file members and union bureaucracies more generally. Most accounts have been so caught up in the excitement generated by the emergence of the flying squads that they have not addressed critically the obstacles and difficulties faced by flying squads as they attempt to build on a truly rank-and-file basis. Similarly, these hopeful accounts fail to take stock of the current, diminished, status of the flying squad movement in Ontario, substituting promise for reality.

Rank-And-File Groups

The flying squad is a rapid response group of members who are ready to mobilize on short notice to provide direct support for pickets or actions. It may or may not be a recognized body of the local. The flying squad structure may consist of little more than phone lists and meetings but, significantly, should maintain its autonomy from the local and national union executives. Generally flying squads should be open only to rank- and-file members since they must be free to initiate and take actions that the leadership may not approve of. Some flying squads refuse even a budget line item so that they are in no way dependent upon leadership. In Canada, flying squads have offered crucial support to direct actions around immigration defense, tenant protection, squatters rights, and welfare support by mobilizing sizeable numbers of unionists who are prepared for actions without regard to legality. Flying squads take direct action to interfere with bosses' abilities to make profits. Not limited in their scope of action by specific collective agreements or workplaces, flying squads mobilize for community as well as workplace defense.

Working groups are generally recognized bodies that are established to deal with specific areas of need. They step beyond the limitations of traditional unionism to assist both members and non- members. Rank- and-file and community alliances offer one example of how to make the connections which are crucial to developing militant working class solidarity. They can bring anti-capitalist activists, community members and unionists together to work on a day-to-day basis.

Rank-and-file committees and flying squads can become important parts of struggles over a broad spectrum of issues affecting working class community life, including those which the mainstream unions ignore such as housing and unemployment. They can offer spaces for building bridges between workers, across unions and industries and between union and community groups. Autonomous from traditional union structures and organized around militant non-hierarchical practices, rank-and-file working groups and flying squads can provide real opposition to conservatism within the unions as well. They provide a better approach than the more common model of the "left caucus" which tries to reform union policy, usually, again, through resolutions at conventions (Clarke, 2002). The rank-and-file committees actively and directly challenge the leadership within their own locals and across locals.

Flying squads of various types have long been an important part of labor militancy internationally. In Britain, community flying pickets successfully mobilized to defend hospitals in working class neighborhoods against closure in the 1970s. In India several farmers' unions recently formed flying squads to confront officials at purchase centers to ensure that their demands for proper payment for their crops were satisfied. Members of the Carpenters Union in southern California, who were primarily immigrants, many of them undocumented, used flying squads and direct action effectively during the framers' strike of 1995.

While some type of rank-and-file organizing, along the lines of what we now call flying squads, has been a constant in labor movements, the contemporary flying squads in Ontario are inspired by the flying pickets that emerged during the CIO strikes of the 1930s. Flying squads played an important part in the 1945 UAW strike against Ford in Windsor. That strike, which won the rights associated with the Rand Formula (union recognition, dues check off and closed shop) for workers in Canada, turned when strikers organized an incredible vehicle picket in which the entire Ford plant was surrounded and shut down by several rows of vehicles. Flying squads were used effectively to mobilize people for actions throughout the strike and to spread information throughout the community.

Not coincidentally, the contemporary flying squads in Ontario made their reappearance in several Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) locals in Windsor during the mid-1990s as a mobilization force for actions against the newly elected neoliberal provincial government (See Levant, 2003: 20). The network within the CAW spread during organizing of the Ontario Days of Action, rotating, city-by-city one-day mass strikes against the Tories. In the midst of a lengthy strike against Falconbridge mining, during which picketers were subjected to ongoing violence by company goons and security thugs, members of CAW local 598 initiated a regional Northern Flying Squad to reinforce and defend the lines and step up the struggle against the company. They helped to organize a solidarity weekend that brought flying squads from across Ontario for militant actions against Falconbridge, actions that many consider to have been the high point of the strike.

My union, CUPE 3903, inspired by the CAW flying squads and the direct action movements against capitalist globalization, formed a flying squad three years ago to support OCAP's direct action casework around immigration defense and welfare support as well strike solidarity and organizing direct actions within mass anti-capitalist demonstrations. The flying squad is currently made up of more than 80 members who are ready to mobilize on short notice to provide direct support for pickets or actions. Significantly, the flying squad maintains its autonomy from the union executive, refusing even a budget line item. 3903 has already made it known that it is willing to do direct action training and to hold workshops on forming and developing flying squads.

In early September, 2001, OCAP along with the 3903 flying squad went directly to Pearson International Airport to demand an end to threats of deportation against three families. Leaflets were given to passengers alerting them to the situation and a visit was paid to the Immigration Canada deportation office in the basement of Terminal One. OCAP demanded and received a meeting with the airport's Immigration management and gave a deadline of the end of the business day for management to issue stays of removal in all three instances. All three deportations were eventually cancelled. This unusual result, in which the removal dates were cancelled prior to a Federal Court challenge, is a testament to the powers of direct action.

It must also be stressed that the presence of flying squads has been crucial in the success of this and other actions. Clearly government officials, security and cops respond differently when confronted with a room packed with workers holding union flags and banners than when confronted with a smaller numbers of people that they are willing to dismiss as activists. Through such actions, the flying squad demonstrates how organizations of rank-and-file workers can step out of traditional concerns with the workplace to act in a broadened defense of working class interests. The expansion of union flying squads, with autonomy from union bureaucracies, could provide a substantial response to the state's efforts to isolate immigrants and refugees from the larger community. The emboldened aggressiveness of Immigration Canada after September 11 makes such actions in defense of working class people absolutely crucial.

In addition 3903 is home to vital working groups with real links to community struggles. In November, 2001, 3903 provided an office and resources for OCAP to work along with members of the 3903 Anti- Poverty Working Group. The working group moves beyond the limitations of traditional unionism to assist people (members and non-members) experiencing problems with collection agencies, landlords, bosses and police and to help anyone having difficulties with welfare or other government bureaucracies. The new office provides a possibly significant example of a rank-and-file initiative that forges community alliances while fighting the local implementation of the global neoliberal agenda. This type of alliance offers one example of how to make the connections which are crucial to growing our movements. Indeed, it brings anti-globalization activists and unions together to work on a day-to- day basis.

Bureaucracy Against The Flying Squads

The national and local executives of some unions in which flying squads have emerged have clearly shown concern about this development. This has played out particularly badly within the CAW.

During the summer of 2001, people in cities, reserves and towns throughout Ontario were gearing up for a campaign of economic disruption which would directly confront and interfere with the political programs and economic practices of the government and their corporate backers. This effort suffered something of a setback when the CAW leadership decided to withdraw support from the campaign in June. The decision came following a mock eviction of the Finance Minister from his constituency office by OCAP, students and members of CAW and CUPE flying squads. The National President of the CAW, Buzz Hargrove, was so upset by the action that he agreed to meet with the Labor Minister to discuss union support of OCAP. In an inexplicable act of collaboration, Hargrove sat down to establish union policy with the man who had only months before introduced legislation gutting the Employment Standards Act and extending the legal workweek from 44 to 62 hours.

Significantly, not only did Hargrove cut OCAP's largest source of funding, but he also clamped down on the CAW flying squads which were only beginning to grow. CAW flying squads were brought under control of the National by requiring approval of the National or of local presidents prior to any action. The National even tried to prohibit use of CAW shirts, hats and banners at actions not sanctioned by the National. Thus the CAW leadership cynically used the excuse of the eviction to camp down on a rank-and-file movement that it saw as a possible threat to its authority. The strangling of the flying squads by the bureaucrats may be one of the sharpest blows rank-and-file activists have suffered recently and will deeply hurt fightback efforts in Ontario.

These actions effectively derailed actions in major industrial centers like Windsor, where activists, recognizing the vulnerability of just-in-time production in Windsor and Detroit, had initially planned to blockade the Ambassador Bridge, the main U.S.-Canada node in the NAFTA-superhighway. Stopping traffic on the bridge for even a short period of time would have caused millions of dollars in damages because of the reliance on just-in-time production in the factories on both sides of the border. This possibility was not lost on Hargrove, who let it slip during a meeting with representatives of OCAP Allies when he angrily voiced his concern that in Windsor some members were talking about shutting down production at "our plants."

At this point it seems that the CAW bureaucracy's clampdown on the flying squads is complete. At a panel discussion on creative tactics that I took part in at this year's Labor Notes conference, Michelle Dubiel, a CAW "Ontario Chapter" flying squad representative, stated with great satisfaction that marshals had finally been instituted in the CAW flying squads. Dubiel noted that there had been much discussion and some resistance to this but happily concluded that members were eventually brought to see the necessity of marshals.

The impact of this takeover of the flying squads has been lethal in some areas. A comrade in Sudbury recently told me that the northern flying squads were virtually extinct. Similarly the rank-and-file, cross- local flying squad in Windsor has not been able to get off the ground.

Leninist Reformism: Flying Squads As Left Opposition

Some Leninists and their Trotskyist sidekicks have viewed the flying squads primarily as a means of union reform, a companion piece of the left caucus' loyal opposition to the union leadership. A prime example of this approach is expressed by Alex Levant, (who has put much work into building my union's flying squad and is currently a vice president in the local), in a recent article in 'New Socialist' magazine (March/April, 2003).

Levant poses the problem for rank-and-file activism largely as one of "conservative leaders who practice 'business unionism'" (Levant, 2003: 22). Levant (2003: 22) suggests that flying squads "pose a threat to such union leaders' positions by fostering membership activism, which bolsters left opposition currents in these unions." Business unionism, far from being a preference of specific leaders, however, is a structured relationship, legally and organizationally, within unions and between unions and bosses. Levant (2003: 22) is correct to suggest that such locals "contribute to the crisis of working-class self-organization by discouraging members' self-activity", but this crisis will not be overcome by replacing conservative leaders with leftist ones. Nor should we accept that social unionism is not still a form of business unionism. This is shown clearly in the case of the CAW, which has long practiced "social unionism."

Taking the left opposition perspective, Levant is unable or unwilling to openly or directly criticize bureaucrats in the CAW for their ongoing efforts to control that union's flying squads. In his article Levant quotes CAW representative Steve Watson approvingly while making no mention of his role in the CAW breaking of the rank-and-file aspects of the flying squads. Notably, at the above-mentioned anti-deportation action at the airport, it was Watson who intervened at the last minute to keep CAW flying squads from participating, even though many workers at the airport are CAW members, and could have played an important part in stopping the deportation.

Similarly, while Levant is rightly critical of the Ontario Federation of Labor Solidarity Network, which required permission of the OFL bureaucracy to undertake any action, he has been less critical of similar developments within our own flying squad. At a meeting in July 2003 it was determined that the flying squad would be coordinated by no more than 3 members who have a number of responsibilities including, crucially, the responsibilities of maintaining the membership list and calling and organizing the flying squad's actions. Ideally all members should have access to the membership list and be able to initiate calls for actions. Creating coordinator positions with this authority is a troubling and potentially dangerous development. During an earlier meeting where the coordinator structure was challenged by members who favored getting the lists to every member and canceling the coordinator positions, several members who take the Trotskyist approach and supported the coordinator structure walked out, purposefully blowing quorum just before the vote.

I do agree with Levant that the flying squads have a tremendous potential in building rank-and-file militancy and self-organization. However, that potential can only be met if autonomy from the leadership is established and defended with vigilance. Flying squads do NOT "work best" when they "respect" the roles of the leadership as Levant advocates. Flying squads work best when they understand the roles the leadership plays, including the role of taming and reigning in members' self-organizing initiatives.

Notes On The Buearucracy

For all of their potential power, the trade unions are restricted by a leadership that cannot allow decisive force to be unleashed. To understand the difficulties facing rank-and-file resistance we must understand the roles and structures of leadership beyond a focus on conservative or progressive union leaders. In Ontario, during the 1930 and 1940s waves of union organizing, wildcat strikes and occupations pressed a tactical retreat on the bosses and their state, leading to the extension of new rights to workers' organizations.

In place of open class war, a process of limited and uneven concession granting was established. This truce had the effect of regulating and compartmentalizing workplace struggles to keep them below the level of serious disruption. Each industry, workplace or section of workers was viewed as having its own issues to attend to or, indeed, to bargain over. A new layer of union functionary emerged to broker and execute this deal. These union executives needed to placate membership with regulated contract gains while simultaneously ensuring labor force stability and an environment conducive to accumulation for the bosses. Negotiation is presented as a reasonable and effective solution to most problems. Bureaucrats strive to get the best possible deal for labor power rather than attack or end the overall system of exploitation. Emphasis is placed on bargaining power within the capitalist labor market.

Strike action became a last resort to be deployed only under very limited and legally defined conditions. Wildcat strikes and varieties of worker-initiated shopfloor actions are negotiated away and prohibited within contracts. Workers who engage in such actions are open to sanction, a point the union leadership often reinforces within the membership.

While limited outbursts were permitted, leaders were obliged to police the deal and restore order in the ranks of the workers when the bosses deemed necessary. Bosses are not going to negotiate with people who can't or won't deliver what is agreed to. The bureaucracy developed centralized structures and methods of control and direction which fit its role and function. In times of mobilization the union leaders, rather than helping to overcome hesitation, view those who are mobilizing as a threat to be isolated or stopped entirely. Critically, all of this is related to structural pressures on the union leadership based on their role within capitalist relations of production rather than on personal characteristics or perspectives as the left reformists would have it.

At times bureaucrats will call on the services of left militants when a show of strength is tactically advantageous only to abandon, isolate or purge them when things have gone as far as the leadership deems necessary. This is a crucial lesson that must be kept in mind when we consider flying squads with marshals under the direction of national and local executives. Militant activists must reject the role of "left critics" of the bureaucracy, refuse the terms of the compromise with the bosses and directly challenge those who seek to enforce it. It is necessary to build a rank-and-file rebellion in the unions that actually works to break the hold of the bureaucracy.

Conclusion: Rank-And-File Autonomy

Real rank-and-file autonomy means being prepared and willing to fight independently of the bureaucracy and against it when required. As anarchists we must be upfront, open and direct about confronting the bureaucrats and conservatives within our unions. We should not put any gloss on efforts to contain rank-and- file militancy or excuse it for any reason. We must contest reformist and Leninist approaches to rank-and-file movements which would position them as conscientious pressure groups.

None of this is meant to imply that the leadership is holding back an otherwise radical membership. That is romantic silliness. Rather, the point is that developing militancy within union movements requires a clear recognition of the necessity for developing experiences of effective struggle that go beyond what the bosses or governments would permit and, at the same time, viewing honestly how the current unions leadership impedes this.

Rank-and-file movements offer a space for radicalizing workers to come together and focus our energies. When people engage in struggles, whether strikes or demonstrations against neoliberalism, we develop at least some sense of collective power, confidence and an experience of doing things differently. This can encourage an openness to more radical ideas and practices with which to address to problems we find ourselves facing. Mainstream unions, even where some resources are given to political education, are generally not going to present and develop radical alternatives. Certainly the leadership of mainstream unions cannot be expected to do so. As anarchist workers this is one area in which we can and should be active. Putting forward radical alternatives, agitating for those alternatives and working to make them real should be part of the work we do within rank-and-file networks.

These are merely first steps in a long process of building rank-and-file opposition. They are initiatives for working class self-activity that should not be limited to being a democratic complement to the bureaucracy. We need to think beyond this to see something more in the emergence and growth of autonomous rank-and- file networks. The need to build a resistance that includes rank-and-file unionists, non-organized workers, non-status workers and migrants is critical.

The capitalist offensives of the last decade in Ontario have broken down working-class organization and resistance. Dismantling employment standards, freezing the minimum wage, eliminating rent controls and deepening cuts to social assistance for unemployed workers have made life more precarious for broadening sections of the working class.

This situation is not just a matter for deep humanitarian concern but a serious warning to the workers' movement. If the working class is reaching such a level of polarization and a section of it is experiencing such misery and privation, we are in a profoundly dangerous situation.

The working class is potentially a force for moving struggles beyond rebellion to fundamentally transform social relations and actually create society anew. This force must, however, break down many of the constraints and limitations that keep its development from realizing this anti-capitalist potential. Currently unions are largely defensive organizations geared to protect and improve workers' wages and conditions of work. They are not revolutionary, or even radical, organizations. At the same time, radical movements do emerge within existing unions.

Many workers are becoming tired of engaging in struggle only to find themselves under attack, not only by the boss, but by the officials of their own unions. The questionable actions of the OFL, especially during last year's Tory convention when the OFL organized a separate action and then left the scene when activists were attacked by police, have convinced some grassroots activists and rank-and-file workers alike of the need to make end runs around the unions officialdom and develop real alliances. Certainly this is a healthy development, one which anarchists must take seriously. This means meeting with rank-and-file workers and having serious discussions about what sort of assistance anti-capitalist movements can offer in their struggles against conservative leadership, policies and structures in their own unions.

Too often the measure of labor involvement in coalitions in Ontario has been the amount of money given to a campaign, the forcefulness of rhetoric from high profile leaders, or the winning of a motion at this or that convention. The only way that any sort of credible resistance movement is going to be forged in Ontario, however, is through a redoubling of efforts to make connections between grassroots community groups and rank-and-file workers. Indeed direct action workshops are something anarchist activists can and should offer. We should also be ready to provide picket support, help build flying squads or industrial unions among unorganized workers, as the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW) have done among squeegee workers in Vancouver and involve ourselves in the creation of joint union- community anti-racism and anti-poverty working groups. Anarchist workers must play an active part in building truly rank-and-file flying squads and working groups whether we are in a union, in unorganized workplaces, or unemployed.

===========

REFERENCES

Clarke, John. 2002. The Labor Bureaucracy and the Fight Against the Ontario Tories. Unpublished Manuscript.

Neill, Monty. 2001. "Rethinking Class Composition Analysis in Light of the Zapatistas." In Auroras of the Zapatistas: Local and Global Struggles of the Fourth World War, edited by Midnight Notes. Brooklyn: Autonomedia, p.119-143.

===========

Jeff Shantz is a member of the Candian Union of Public Employees local 3903, the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW), and Punching Out Collective (NEFAC-Toronto).

Punching Out
PO box 79538
1995 Weston Rd.
Toronto, Ontario,
M9M 3W9, Canada
punc...@nefac.net

===========

This essay is from the newest issue of The Northeastern Anarchist. The theme this issue is 'Anarchists in the Workplace' with essays focussing on class war strategies and analysis for anarchists that go beyond orthodox syndicalism... Anarcho-communist approaches to labor organizing, strike solidarity, workers autonomy, base unionism, flying squads, and much more!

ORDERING INFORMATION:

To order a copy of this forthcoming issue, please send $5ppd ($6 international). For distribution, bundle orders are $3 per copy for three or more copies, and $2.50 per copy for ten or more.

Checks or money orders can be made out to "Northeastern Anarchist" and sent to:

Northeastern Anarchist
PO Box 230685 Boston, MA 02123

nort...@yahoo.com

See also: http://www.nefac.net/newswire/display/792/index.php

nefac.net


Sujet: 
alex responds
Auteur-e: 
Val
Date: 
Jeu, 2004-01-15 16:53

Flying Squads
by alex

Jeff Shantz' article in the latest issue of The Northeastern Anarchist, "Developing Workers' Autonomy: An Anarchist Look At Flying Squads," provides a good introduction to the historical context in which the current flying squads have emerged. It is also especially strong in its insistence on flying squad autonomy from union structures, and in its critique of union bureaucracy, particularly with respect to the de-clawing of the CAW flying squads. Overall, there is much to be learned from this paper; however, the article unfortunately misconstrues some things about the CUPE 3903 flying squad, as well as my own article, "Flying Squads and the Crisis of Workers' Self-Organization", which appeared in the New Socialist magazine last Spring. I would like to clarify how the CUPE 3903 f/s works, respond to his conception of 'Leninist reformism,' and offer a few thoughts on the significance of flying squads and the challenges facing flying squads today.

How the CUPE 3903 F/S Works

Shantz gives the following account of the role of coordinators in our flying squad:

"At a meeting in July 2003 it was determined that the flying squad would be coordinated by no more than 3 members who have a number of responsibilities including, crucially, the responsibilities of maintaining the membership list and calling and organizing the flying squad's actions. Ideally all members should have access to the membership list and be able to initiate calls for actions. Creating coordinator positions with this authority is a troubling and potentially dangerous development."

While Shantz is correct that coordinators have the 'responsibility' to maintain a membership list and to call meetings, they do NOT have 'exclusive authority' over these things. ALL members have access to the membership list, and ALL members can call meetings. Our basis of unity (which I have included below) is absolutely emphatic that the coordinators do not have any more authority than other activists in the f/s. These positions carry no authority; they are simply a way to ensure that basic work is done. The coordinators' responsibilities include ensuring that meetings are called if no one else calls them and ensuring that a membership list is maintained, as well as a number of other tasks that have to be done for the flying squad (f/s) to function. Perhaps the term 'coordinator' is a misnomer; 'facilitator' or 'worker' would be a more accurate title? (.However, I insist on being addressed as 'commissar'.;)

Shantz wrote:

"During an earlier meeting where the coordinator structure was challenged by members who favored getting the lists to every member and canceling the coordinator positions, several members who take the Trotskyist approach and supported the coordinator structure walked out, purposefully blowing quorum just before the vote."

This is simply NOT the case. If these members left the meeting to block the elimination of coordinator positions, as Shantz suggests, why would they unanimously agree to eliminate those positions at the very next meeting? These allegations are based on a desperate effort to box people into certain categories (such as Trotskyist, Leninist, Anarchist, etc), exaggerate their differences, and denounce their activities - hardly a recipe for movement-building.

Our f/s has altered its structure over the years in various ways in an effort to make it more effective. It has always been structured on a decentralized and anti-authoritarian basis, and is autonomous from all decision-making structures of the local. Returning to a model with elected coordinators was not motivated by some Leninist agenda (just as the previous decision to eliminate coordinators was not motivated by an Anarchist agenda), but by a sincere attempt to experiment with our structure, to figure out what works best in practice in the here and now.

Another change that was recently made was to require active participation in the f/s as a condition of membership. (.While to some this might appear as a blatant Leninist commemoration of the centennial of the Bolshevik split from the RSDLP in 1903 [which centered on the question of requiring membership activism], I assure you that this was purely a coincidence.)

Leninist Reformism

I find it amusing that my article "Flying Squads and the Crisis of Workers' Self-organization" could be understood as 'Leninist reformism.' (I am more accustomed to being dismissed as an ultra-leftist, which I am no more than a 'Leninist reformist'!) But in all seriousness, Shantz's account greatly exaggerates whatever differences we might have. I'm not sure why the need to caricature my article and then to critique this caricature when we really seem to be on the same page? Below are some of his most striking mis-readings of my article:

1. "Flying squads do NOT "work best" when they "respect" the roles of the leadership as Levant advocates."

I have never advocated such a position in my article or anywhere else.

2. "Levant (2003: 22) is correct to suggest that such locals "contribute to the crisis of working-class self-organization by discouraging members' self-activity", but this crisis will not be overcome by replacing conservative leaders with leftist ones."

I have never argued for replacing conservative leaders with leftist ones as a means to overcome this crisis, or as a political strategy in general. The crisis of self-organization has a lot to do with overcoming the very separation between leaders and rank-and-file members. The crisis of self-organization is not a crisis of leadership.

3. "Some Leninists and their Trotskyist sidekicks have viewed the flying squads primarily as a means of union reform, a companion piece of the left caucus' loyal opposition to the union leadership. A prime example of this approach is expressed by Alex Levant"

I cannot understand how my article could be so misread? Its central theme is that flying squads facilitate militancy BEYOND the limits of unions, NOT as a means to reform unions, or to replace right leaders with left ones.

4. "Levant is unable or unwilling to openly or directly criticize bureaucrats in the CAW for their ongoing efforts to control that union's flying squads. In his article Levant quotes CAW representative Steve Watson approvingly while making no mention of his role in the CAW breaking of the rank-and-file aspects of the flying squads."

Fair enough. The loss of the CAW flying squads is probably the most significant negative development in the recent history of flying squads in Ontario. The CUPE 3903 f/s was created by activists who were inspired by the old active CAW flying squads. The current CAW flying squads are neither inspiring, nor effective. They no longer work with us to stop deportations, or join us in the streets to fight for housing, etc. This is shameful and sad. I hope that activists in the CAW revive their old independent flying squads and get back to using direct action tactics to get the goods.

5. "Nor should we accept that social unionism is not still a form of business unionism. This is shown clearly in the case of the CAW, which has long practiced "social unionism.""

This appears to be a genuine disagreement between us (one of the few real ones I could find). I don't think social movement unionism (SMU) is a form of business unionism. There are significant differences between SMU and business unionism. There are also significant differences among various conceptions and practices of SMU. To dismiss SMU because the CAW claims to practice it, is like dismissing socialism because the USSR claimed to practice it. There is clearly more going on here. Those of us working within the union movement would do well to take SMU more seriously, to struggle against business unionism, to engage in theoretical debates around SMU forcing the boundaries of the concept, and to critique unions that claim to practice SMU when they impoverish the concept. However, I do not think that SMU can adequately prepare us for the struggle against the bosses; there are structural limits to unions (as Shantz correctly acknowledges), and we must ultimately look beyond unions if we want to fight to win. This is where flying squads can be most useful.

The Significance of Flying Squads

The most important significance of flying squads, in my opinion, is not their impact on unions (although this is important) but their impact on unionized workers. Our actual life-experience under capitalism (the way our activity is organized) damages our capacities to self-manage our workplaces, our society, and our lives in general. For example, life under capitalism trains us to follow orders rather than follow our own creative initiative, to watch rather than do, to compete rather than cooperate, to dominate rather than coexist, to possess rather than share, etc. But more than that, it presents us with a nightmare world and offers us commodities as an escape, commodities that keep us in a dream-like state, frustrating our awakening. These effects of capitalism (which arise from the various ways in which our activity is organized, including top-down unions) form, in my opinion, the greatest barriers to tossing out the bosses, smashing the state, and organizing our lives on an egalitarian, anti-authoritarian, and sustainable basis. Our challenge is to counter-organize our activity in ways that help us to regain these capacities. Flying squads are a small step in that direction (I discuss some of the ways they do this in my article, which I have included below).

Challenges Facing Flying Squads Today

Our main problem is that there are not enough of them. The few that remain have largely been de-clawed by paranoid (and self-interested) porkchoppers who sit at the head of some of the most progressive unions in the country. Flying squads need to be formed in workplaces independently from their union structure. For this to happen, it is vital to demonstrate in practice the efficacy of independent flying squads to activist workers. Why should workers form flying squads? Why fight their own union officials to maintain their autonomy? These are questions we need to answer conceptually, but most importantly in practice. In my experience, the CUPE 3903 f/s attracted the most members after a successful action. There is nothing that will help the formation of flying squads more than a series of victories. This is where I believe we must apply our immediate efforts.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The CUPE 3903 Flying Squad Basis of Unity

The CUPE 3903 Flying Squad is an association of members of this local who confront corporate bosses and their lackeys by disrupting the normal functions of their operations, much like during a strike. This body is autonomous from all decision-making and financial structures of the local. It organizes actions in a manner that is transparent and accountable to its members.

Principles of Unity

« Flying Squad members are the highest decision-making body of the Flying Squad.

« Any 3903 member can become a member of the Flying Squad by agreeing to the basis of unity and attending one meeting

« Membership involves participating in the activity of the F/S: attending meetings, joining phone tree for actions, joining email list for discussion and updates, and fulfilling responsibilities as outlined below.

« A F/S member shall lose her/his membership upon missing 3 consecutive meetings without a reason that is acceptable to members at the third meeting of her/his absence

« Any member who has lost her/his membership may rejoin by expressing interest and attending one meeting

« The Flying Squad shall be coordinated by (up to) 3 members who shall be elected for one semester at a Flying Squad meeting called for that purpose (which is open to all members).

« Flying Squad Coordinators shall follow the collective authority of Flying Squad activists and shall be recallable by majority vote at a Flying Squad meeting called for that purpose.

« Flying Squad coordinators shall be responsible for:

« calling Flying Squad meetings

« calling and organizing Flying Squad actions

« keeping minutes and attendance of all meetings

« maintaining a phone tree and email list of F/S members

« facilitating membership participation in the F/S

« reporting on F/S actions

« maintaining F/S finances

« Flying Squad activists participate in the affairs of the F/S, such that the coordinators' responsibilities shall not be the exclusive domain of those coordinators.

« Flying Squad activists are responsible for facilitating the participation of members of their departments in the F/S, mobilizing their department for F/S actions, forwarding relevant F/S postings to department lists, and ensuring the availability of F/S pamphlets in department lounge areas.

« Quorum for organizational meetings shall be 10% of the F/S list with a minimum of 5 members, and notice of all such meetings shall be advertised over the F/S email list.

« The Flying Squad shall function on a de-centralized, anti-authoritarian basis, and its members shall work to eliminate internal hierarchies (including ableism, sexism, racism, and hetero-sexism).

« The Flying Squad shall function where practicable as an affinity group or as a cluster of affinity groups that shall work together but remain autonomous decision-making units.

Goals (what do we want to do?):

« to use the strength of our collective labour to work toward embodying social relations not defined by the capitalist state

« to mobilize workers in the struggle against hierarchical structures as they are manifested in various forms of oppression, such as ableism, sexism, racism, and hetero-sexism

« to mount a coordinated self-defense of all subordinate groups against the corporate bosses and their lackeys

« to unite workers across the labour movement with non-unionized and unemployed workers

« to encourage workers to explore new forms of direct action in addition to striking

« to facilitate the mobilization of workers during the life of their collective agreements

« to use the strength of our collective labour to influence government policy between elections, and corporate policy (where there are no elections)

Objectives (how are we going to do it?):

« doing strike support (picketing and other disruptions)

« stopping deportations by visiting immigration offices and advocating on behalf of refugees

« working with anti-poverty groups to ensure that workers (employed or not, organized or not) receive social assistance and affordable housing

« stopping evictions

« using direct action and participating in mass protests with other activists to disrupt and defeat the corporate agenda

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Flying Squads and the Crisis of Workers' Self-Organization

by Alex Levant

(from New Socialist magazine March/April 2003)

On Sept. 7, 2000 over 100 people from the Somali community and union supporters visited an immigration office in Toronto in defence of four families facing deportation and waiting for decisions on their appeals to stay on humanitarian and compassionate grounds. Although they were confident that their appeals would be successful, they feared that they would be deported before a decision was made (a common practice for Immigration Canada). At the families' request, an action was called to secure a commitment from the authorities that this would not happen.

The action was organized by the Ontario Coalition Against Poverty (OCAP) and supported by activists from a number of unions, including the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) Locals 40, 112, 199, 397, 504, 673, 707 and 1285, the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Locals 79 and 3903, as well as Hotel Employees Restaurant Employees (HERE) Local 75.

We all met at a nearby church, where members of each family explained their situation. After the briefing, we walked to the immigration office and unfurled our union flags in the lobby. Representatives from OCAP asked to meet with management to discuss the cases in question. Immigration Canada responded by calling security and the police. We continued to press our demands while two small groups negotiated with immigration officials and police. The presence of so many people in the office made it more appealing for the officials to meet our demands than to endure the disruption caused by our presence. As a result of our action a commitment was secured, and the deportations were prevented.

What is a Flying Squad?

Most of the union activists at this action were organized in flying squads. A flying squad is an association of union activists who confront our bosses and their lackeys by disrupting the normal operations of their organizations, much like during a strike. When workers go on strike we do not only withdraw our labour, but we also disrupt the functioning of our workplaces. Flying squads take this tactic beyond their own workplaces, challenging the effects of capitalism and forms of oppression that capitalism mobilizes. Supporting striking workers, as well as unorganized, unemployed, and unpaid workers, stopping deportations, challenging abusive landlords, and mobilizing for mass protests against capitalist globalization are some of the activities that flying squads in Canada have engaged in.

Recent History

There is no definitive answer to when flying squads first emerged. According to Joanne Beck of CAW 598 Flying Squad in Sudbury, flying squads first formed in the early 1900s in the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). In his book Teamster Rebellion, Farrell Dobbs contends that their prototype, cruising picket squads, first appeared during the 1934 Teamsters strikes in Minneapolis. However, they re-emerged as a promising force in Ontario in the CAW in the mid-1990s.

According to Steve Watson, a National Representative in the Education Department of the CAW, the first CAW flying squad was jointly started by locals 195, 200 and 444. "In 1995-96, with the election of the Harris government, in Windsor local activists first set up a flying squad to ensure that there would be a rapid mobilization capacity around social actions." This idea spread through the CAW Education Center and its Paid Education Program, as part of the mobilization for the Ontario Days of Action against the Tory government. Today there are flying squads in CAW locals across Ontario, with the largest ones in Ingersoll, Kitchener, Oakville, Hamilton, and Sudbury.

Inspired by the CAW flying squads, activists in CUPE began to form their own flying squads. CUPE local 3903 (contract faculty and graduate student workers at York University) formed its flying squad in July 2000. This quickly grew into the largest and one of the most active flying squads in the union movement, with 80 members on call. Flying squads also formed in CUPE locals 79 (City of Toronto inside workers), 1281 (a composite local of staff workers across Ontario) and 5500 (Ottawa transit workers).

Our success at making immediate visible gains sparked an interest in other unions. In the fall of 2002, following the opening of the "Pope Squat" organized by OCAP, members of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers' Federation (OSSTF), the Elementary Teachers of Toronto (ETT), and the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (OECTA) formed the Toronto Teachers Flying Squad. "The motivation behind this was to give teachers a more visible presence in protests as teachers," explains Rob, a founding member of the Toronto Teachers Flying Squad.

The Toronto Teachers Flying Squad is unique because it draws its members from several unions. "We are open to all educators," Rob continues. "The idea behind this coalition was to have a space, which crosses some of the unions, so that elementary teachers, secondary teachers, and Catholic teachers could all work together, which we don't often see from our unions." Although they just started a few months ago, they already have more than 20 members on call.

Significance

The power of flying squads to make a significant difference in people's lives has struck a chord among unionized workers with flying squads sprouting across the union movement in Ontario. Their potential is vast.

"My dream is that anywhere an injustice is taking place, and people call for help, to have union members there in force to help them in their battles," says Watson. "A lot of repressive laws would become inoperable."

The significance of flying squads goes far beyond their capacity to mitigate the effects of capitalism on specific individuals. What is particularly exciting about their emergence is not only their success at "beating back the corporate attack", but their potential to help end this attack altogether.

By focussing on employed and unionized workers, flying squads tap into the most potent source of resistance to the capitalist bulldozer. Employed workers occupy a unique structural position in society. Since the employing class depends on us selling our labour, we have a special power (and responsibility) in the struggle for social justice.

However, our power as employed workers remains largely untapped. Unions mobilize our collective strength to improve our wages and working conditions, but this tends to be the limit and only scratches the surface of our potential. In reality, we have much more power than our employers would have us believe. There is no reason why we could not operate our workplaces democratically, reaping the full product of our labour. Instead of following the dictates of our employers and producing whatever makes a profit for them, we could democratically decide what, when and how to produce, taking into consideration our collective needs and that of our shared environment.

But there is a gap between what we are objectively able to achieve and what appears possible in the minds of most workers. While the global justice movement has made considerable headway in recent years on this front, most workers in the overdeveloped world still believe that another world is not possible. This gap reflects the crisis of working class self-organization. This crisis often paralyses the working class, and flying squads are key to overcoming this paralysis.

The crisis of working class self-organization is produced not only by deliberate disinformation and propaganda of the corporate media, but also by our actual life-experiences under capitalism. For example, the experience of having to compete with each other for work atomizes us and stunts our capacity for collective action. Similarly, experiencing our workplaces as dictatorships of our employers pacifies us. This contributes to our transformation into spectators rather than actors. A whole range of our abilities atrophy as a result of life under capitalism.

In response, flying squads help foster our capacities for collective action. They give us an opportunity to experience our collective power to effect change. Such experiences are transformative: they develop our abilities and feed our imaginations, extending the horizon of possibilities. By developing abilities that normally atrophy under capitalism, flying squads help overcome the crisis of working-class self-organization.

Flying Squads and Unions

Flying squads build on the achievements of unions and help to overcome the crisis of working class self-organization by facilitating collective action beyond the limits of unions. The "no strike, no lockout" clause that is part of every collective agreement in Canada pacifies us by cutting us off from our power to disrupt the functioning of our workplaces during the lives of our collective agreements. This "class truce" demonstrates both the power and the limit of unions today.

By mobilizing workers for direct action between rounds of bargaining, when disruption of workplaces is prohibited by collective agreements, flying squads maintain mobilization and continue to develop our capacities for collective action.

But in order for flying squads to be effective, they must work as autonomous organizations, rather than committees of union locals. This approach is vital if flying squads are to exceed the limits of unions.

The CUPE 3903 Flying Squad maintains its autonomy by structuring itself as a separate organization from the union with a common membership. It is completely separate from all decision-making and financial structures of the local. Similarly, the Toronto Teachers Flying Squad aims to maintain autonomy with respect to the unions from which it draws its members.

According to Euan Gibb of CAW 707 Flying Squad: "There is no formalized relationship" between flying squads and the local and national executives in the CAW. Watson characterizes the relationship as one of "give and take." "As a staff member of the union, I try to respect the autonomy of the flying squads. At the same time they appreciate any support they can get from the national union." Beck is more critical of how this relationship actually takes place on the ground. "Some local executives are still not completely for this method of getting the message out, but they are in the minority."

Flying squads have generally been received by union executives with caution and ambivalence. "They're not against it, but they're not wonderfully supportive either," explains Rob specifically with respect to the OSSTF executive. "They won't allow you to identify yourself as a union member" at flying squad actions.

Flying squads have become a pole of attraction for activists in locals dominated by conservative leaders who practice "business unionism" - treating unions as businesses that provide services to members in exchange for dues payments. Such locals themselves contribute to the crisis of working- class self-organization by discouraging members' self-activity. Flying squads pose a threat to such union leaders' positions by fostering membership activism, which bolsters left opposition currents in these unions.

But even unions that practice "social unionism" - making unions part of struggles for social justice - have not fully embraced flying squads. Progressive union leaders would be wise to recognize the different roles flying squads and unions are able to play. Both unions and flying squads work best by respecting each other's roles in our common struggle.

Perhaps the greatest mockery of the flying squad phenomenon has been the Ontario Federation of Labour's (OFL) Solidarity Network. While the objectives of this network were ostensibly similar to those of flying squads, its top-down structure prevented it from being effective. All actions had to be cleared by the OFL bureaucracy, including its President, Wayne Samuelson. Rather than fostering workers' participation, the Solidarity Network simply reproduced the same decision-making structures that turn people into spectators under capitalism. As a result, the Solidarity Network was a flop. The link to subscribe to it on the OFL website aptly leads to a dead end.

In contrast, flying squads help overcome the crisis of working-class self-organization and reduce the gap between what is objectively possible for us to achieve and what appears possible in the minds of most workers. They are a key next step in the development of workers' abilities to govern themselves and hint at the self-management of our workplaces that is vital if we are to build a truly democratic society.

Alex Levant is one of the founders of the CUPE 3903 Flying Squad and the list operator of flyi...@lists.tao.ca -- a discussion forum for flying squads across the union movement in Ontario


[ ]

Dossier G20
  Nous vous offrons plusieurs reportages indépendants et témoignages...

Très beau dessin: des oiseaux s'unissent pour couper une cloture de métal, sur fonds bleauté de la ville de Toronto.
Liste des activités lors de ce
« contre-sommet » à Toronto

Vous pouvez aussi visiter ces médias alternatifs anglophones...

Centre des médias Alternatifs Toronto
2010.mediacoop.net


Media Co-op Toronto
http://toronto.mediacoop.ca


Toronto Community Mobilization
www.attacktheroots.net
(en Anglais)

CMAQ: Vie associative


Collectif à Québec: n'existe plus.

Impliquez-vous !

 

Ceci est un média alternatif de publication ouverte. Le collectif CMAQ, qui gère la validation des contributions sur le Indymedia-Québec, n'endosse aucunement les propos et ne juge pas de la véracité des informations. Ce sont les commentaires des Internautes, comme vous, qui servent à évaluer la qualité de l'information. Nous avons néanmoins une Politique éditoriale , qui essentiellement demande que les contributions portent sur une question d'émancipation et ne proviennent pas de médias commerciaux.

This is an alternative media using open publishing. The CMAQ collective, who validates the posts submitted on the Indymedia-Quebec, does not endorse in any way the opinions and statements and does not judge if the information is correct or true. The quality of the information is evaluated by the comments from Internet surfers, like yourself. We nonetheless have an Editorial Policy , which essentially requires that posts be related to questions of emancipation and does not come from a commercial media.