![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cos posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
davis_square[from the Somerville progressive announce list]
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 20:09:11 -0500
From: "JK"
Subject: Somerville Theatre Projectionists Win 2 year Contract
YOU ONLY GET WHAT YOU ARE ORGANIZED TO TAKE:
'Pissed Off Projectionists' Declare Victory Over Somerville Theatre
After having been locked-out for over ten weeks, projectionists at the Somerville Theatre have emerged victorious in their struggle for union recognition. The management has agreed to voluntarily recognize the union, sign a fair contract, and pay full back wages to all locked-out employees. Although this was a modest struggle in and of itself, we see it as a significant victory for young, exploited and pissed off workers everywhere.
PROJECTIONISTS WIN A LIVING WAGE!
At the time we struck for union recognition, projectionists were paid minimum wage ($6.75/hr), were not offered benefits, and worked in an unhealthy and undemocratic environment. Under the current two-year contract, the starting wage for projectionists is now in accordance with (and fixed to) the
Somerville Living Wage Ordinance (currently $9.55/hr), which is a 40% increase; all full-time employees will be offered health benefits and vacation; and most importantly, the Somerville Theatre is now a 'union shop' for projectionists, which allows for more control over the work environment by the workers themselves and preference for hiring new employees in the hands of the union.
Although this was a clear victory, it was a victory that came at a price. It became clear during the lock-out that the management of the Somerville Theatre did not want some of us to return to work specifically because of our political beliefs. Rather than further stall the contract negotiations, we agreed to voluntarily step aside and be replaced by other union projectionists in order to ensure a speedy resolution that would benefit all. In exchange we will have the opportunity to work in other Boston-area theaters where projectionists are organized through IATSE.
DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS!
We hope that our struggle is an inspiration to other workers, particularly younger workers just beginning to understand their exploitation at the hands of their bosses. Our struggle was won primarily through direct action and community pressure. Although we did indeed file for an election with the National Labor Relations Board, from the beginning of our campaign we had no faith in State-mediation. We felt that the whole NLRB process played into the hands of the bosses and government bureaucrats, and effectively removed the class struggle from off the streets and out of the hands of the workers and confined it to the court rooms of the State.
In the end it was not through the NLRB that we gained union recognition, but through a sustained campaign of public pressure and direct action. We were successful in utilizing tactics and strategies such as economic strikes, informational pickets, and publicity campaigns while simultaneously relying on the pressure from the community (in the form of boycotts, rallies, and phone actions) to win this struggle. We think we were successful in proving that, as workers, our greatest strengths are in the refusal of our labor and our ability to organize effective resistance that goes beyond the workplace and into the community.
ANARCHISTS IN THE WORKPLACE?
Absolutely! Through out the dispute at the Somerville Theatre, there have been attempts by Mel?s lawyer to 'red bait' certain projectionists by publicizing the fact that some of us are anarchists. Well, as one trade unionist who walked our picket line a few times eloquently stated: "Every workplace could use a few anarchists to ensure the boss takes a good ass-kicking every now and then." We couldn't agree more. Politics aside, the fact of the matter was that we were being exploited by a wealthy boss, and no amount of 'red baiting' changed this fact in most people's eyes. As for the actual politics in question, those of us who do identify as anarchists have been up front about it and have no problem defending out beliefs. We would like to see a society in which the needs of people are valued over profits, and exploitative bosses are a thing of the past. However, we are not hopeless dreamers. We recognize we are a far way off from this sort of society, and in the meantime we need build power in our communities and workplaces and work towards class victories
that directly benefit people's lives.
THANKS TO ALL OUR SUPPORTERS
One of the most inspiring aspects of this struggle has been the wide support we have received from trade unionists, activist groups and members of the surrounding community. Thanks to fellow unionists from SEIU, UE, CWA, IBEW, IWW, AFA, AFSCME, Teamsters, Greater Boston Central Labor Council, and our own union IATSE; also activist groups such as NEFAC, BAAM!, Jobs With Justice, Somerville Greens, and the Student Labor Action Project; and lastly, a very special thanks goes out to all the Somerville residents who supported us, everyone who made a phone call (or ten) on our behalf, and anyone else who may have helped our campaign that we forgot to mention.
THE STRUGGLE CONTINUES...
The struggle at the Somerville Theatre may have come to a close, but there are other labor disputes heating up around the city. At this moment, the union contracts covering thousands of Boston-area workers at Verizon are set to expire. Up to this point negotiations have been unsuccessful and the possibility for an East Coast strike is very likely. We hope that everyone who has supported us though out our struggle will also support this important strike if it does occur, and defend workers' right to job security and health benefits. Further information on the impending Verizon strike can be found at: www.massjwj.net.
Solidarity is our greatest weapon for a better future!
In Struggle, Pissed Off Projectionists
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 20:09:11 -0500
From: "JK"
Subject: Somerville Theatre Projectionists Win 2 year Contract
YOU ONLY GET WHAT YOU ARE ORGANIZED TO TAKE:
'Pissed Off Projectionists' Declare Victory Over Somerville Theatre
After having been locked-out for over ten weeks, projectionists at the Somerville Theatre have emerged victorious in their struggle for union recognition. The management has agreed to voluntarily recognize the union, sign a fair contract, and pay full back wages to all locked-out employees. Although this was a modest struggle in and of itself, we see it as a significant victory for young, exploited and pissed off workers everywhere.
PROJECTIONISTS WIN A LIVING WAGE!
At the time we struck for union recognition, projectionists were paid minimum wage ($6.75/hr), were not offered benefits, and worked in an unhealthy and undemocratic environment. Under the current two-year contract, the starting wage for projectionists is now in accordance with (and fixed to) the
Somerville Living Wage Ordinance (currently $9.55/hr), which is a 40% increase; all full-time employees will be offered health benefits and vacation; and most importantly, the Somerville Theatre is now a 'union shop' for projectionists, which allows for more control over the work environment by the workers themselves and preference for hiring new employees in the hands of the union.
Although this was a clear victory, it was a victory that came at a price. It became clear during the lock-out that the management of the Somerville Theatre did not want some of us to return to work specifically because of our political beliefs. Rather than further stall the contract negotiations, we agreed to voluntarily step aside and be replaced by other union projectionists in order to ensure a speedy resolution that would benefit all. In exchange we will have the opportunity to work in other Boston-area theaters where projectionists are organized through IATSE.
DIRECT ACTION GETS THE GOODS!
We hope that our struggle is an inspiration to other workers, particularly younger workers just beginning to understand their exploitation at the hands of their bosses. Our struggle was won primarily through direct action and community pressure. Although we did indeed file for an election with the National Labor Relations Board, from the beginning of our campaign we had no faith in State-mediation. We felt that the whole NLRB process played into the hands of the bosses and government bureaucrats, and effectively removed the class struggle from off the streets and out of the hands of the workers and confined it to the court rooms of the State.
In the end it was not through the NLRB that we gained union recognition, but through a sustained campaign of public pressure and direct action. We were successful in utilizing tactics and strategies such as economic strikes, informational pickets, and publicity campaigns while simultaneously relying on the pressure from the community (in the form of boycotts, rallies, and phone actions) to win this struggle. We think we were successful in proving that, as workers, our greatest strengths are in the refusal of our labor and our ability to organize effective resistance that goes beyond the workplace and into the community.
ANARCHISTS IN THE WORKPLACE?
Absolutely! Through out the dispute at the Somerville Theatre, there have been attempts by Mel?s lawyer to 'red bait' certain projectionists by publicizing the fact that some of us are anarchists. Well, as one trade unionist who walked our picket line a few times eloquently stated: "Every workplace could use a few anarchists to ensure the boss takes a good ass-kicking every now and then." We couldn't agree more. Politics aside, the fact of the matter was that we were being exploited by a wealthy boss, and no amount of 'red baiting' changed this fact in most people's eyes. As for the actual politics in question, those of us who do identify as anarchists have been up front about it and have no problem defending out beliefs. We would like to see a society in which the needs of people are valued over profits, and exploitative bosses are a thing of the past. However, we are not hopeless dreamers. We recognize we are a far way off from this sort of society, and in the meantime we need build power in our communities and workplaces and work towards class victories
that directly benefit people's lives.
THANKS TO ALL OUR SUPPORTERS
One of the most inspiring aspects of this struggle has been the wide support we have received from trade unionists, activist groups and members of the surrounding community. Thanks to fellow unionists from SEIU, UE, CWA, IBEW, IWW, AFA, AFSCME, Teamsters, Greater Boston Central Labor Council, and our own union IATSE; also activist groups such as NEFAC, BAAM!, Jobs With Justice, Somerville Greens, and the Student Labor Action Project; and lastly, a very special thanks goes out to all the Somerville residents who supported us, everyone who made a phone call (or ten) on our behalf, and anyone else who may have helped our campaign that we forgot to mention.
THE STRUGGLE CONTINUES...
The struggle at the Somerville Theatre may have come to a close, but there are other labor disputes heating up around the city. At this moment, the union contracts covering thousands of Boston-area workers at Verizon are set to expire. Up to this point negotiations have been unsuccessful and the possibility for an East Coast strike is very likely. We hope that everyone who has supported us though out our struggle will also support this important strike if it does occur, and defend workers' right to job security and health benefits. Further information on the impending Verizon strike can be found at: www.massjwj.net.
Solidarity is our greatest weapon for a better future!
In Struggle, Pissed Off Projectionists
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2003-07-30 06:04 am (UTC)Will the strikers be passing the hat to raise money to pay for all the windows that were smashed?
no subject
Date: 2003-07-30 07:00 am (UTC)Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 07:15 am (UTC)The fact that a person makes inconsistent claims does not make any particular claim he makes false (although of any pair of inconsistent claims only one can be true - but both can be false). Also, the fact that a person's claims are not consistent with his actions might indicate that the person is a hypocrite but this does not prove his claims are false.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 07:28 am (UTC)Something is only a logical fallacy if it is made as a statement of fact. My statement is one of opinion (hence, "I have a hard time...") based on my dealings with them.
My story begins with an all volunteer event at which a number of Boston Teamsters appeared and threatened to picket unless they were paid off.
Relevant issues:
It wasn't a union shop.
No one was receiving pay for the work they did.
The event was run by a non-profit organization.
Am I a hypocrite for thinking that this was unjust? I suppose that depends on what your definition of justice is.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:14 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:00 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:12 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:28 am (UTC)this is a discussion about the projectionists, union, and things related. i am not seeing how about 75% of your posts fit in, and you're not countering half the arguments thrown your way with any sort of logical response. you're just ignoring them and going off on some other tangent. discussions work best when you listen as well as respond.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:43 am (UTC)No this is you going off on me for disagreeing with what someone said about projectionist, union, and things related. And now me defending my debating style.
If I made the argument that the projectionist strike was justified because I heard a rumor that the owner of the theater liked to torture kittens I'd expect someone to point out that it was an unverified rumor and even if true irrelivant to the issues of the strike. And I'd also consider such a corrections productive.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:45 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:55 am (UTC)Then might I suggest not asking me questions in a public forum. (Apologies to Cos and others on this thread, for responding to her.)
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:06 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:22 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:04 am (UTC)Unfortunately this analogy is off the mark. "False Analogy" is another fallacy.
komos mentioned that he has a hard time associating justice with the teamsters. he didn't mention anything about rumors or their relevence to the issue of the strike. He just stated his opinion -- that some actions of the teamsters lowered his opinion of them.
You replied with a definition of a logical fallacy that komos didn't even make. This certainly seems to me like unproductive off-topic nitpicking (not to mention a strawman attack), such that may come from a student in debate class who just recently memorized "Stephen's Guide to the Logical Fallacies (http://www.datanation.com/fallacies/index.htm)".
And, before you say it, yes that was some ad hominem there, just for color.
I also agree that this thread is meta-debate and way off-topic. But hey, that doesn't seem to be stopping anyone else here! (I'm sure this is another fallacy, but I can't remember its name...)
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:33 am (UTC)1. Rumor that most projectionist were anti-union.
2. That the involvement of the teamsters cast doubt on the just nature of the strike.
komos mentioned that he has a hard time associating justice with the teamsters.
Fair enough but in the context of a discussion about the just nature of the projectionist strike, the statement conveys an assertion about the projectionist strike not just about the past actions of one of the participants. If he does not believe that, then it was a communications and we don't disagree.
he didn't mention anything about rumors
Actually he did say this "perhaps I've been misinformed, but I heard rumors that there were only a couple of the ST projectionists who wanted the unionization" in a seperate comment on this thread.
It would probably have been more correct had I listed a rumor and seperate ad hominem attack.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:41 am (UTC)Is the rumor about a minority action false?
You categorically don't know.
Does the involvement of the Teamsters make me look upon the action favorably? (This is the real question since I've already explained that this is my bias. Your results may vary.)
Well, no, and I've not seen evidence to convince me that Teamster involvement was a good thing because you've been far too caught up in arguing that I'm not permitted to express this opinion.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 09:59 am (UTC)Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 10:14 am (UTC)Are the positions now irrevocably full-time in order to justify the benefits? Will the part-time projectionists lose their jobs as a result?
Are the projectionists now required to walk out whenever the local Teamsters engage in other collective action?
Wait... I'll answer all of these questions for you: you don't know.
I asked if a rumor was correct, clearly stating that it was a rumor and conceding that it might not be correct. In response, you chose to toss up one speculation after another without having any real facts to back up your assertions of the brilliant shining path these workers have embarked upon. Additionally, you've wandered off on tangents that brought you no closer to answering the original question.
If you can't answer the question, kindly concede that and stop spouting party rhetoric.
Re: Ad Hominem Tu Quoque
Date: 2003-07-30 08:53 am (UTC)As for relevance? The opinion is at least as relevant to the discussion as your idea that this union action is necessarily good and just. There are a few of us here seeking more information about the larger picture while you insist on continuing with your assumption that all of this is somehow a noble victory that sticks it to 'the man.'
no subject
Date: 2003-07-30 07:34 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-08-01 01:50 pm (UTC)