Visteon: victory or failure?

When the workers at Visteon plants across the UK were sacked back in March without any pension or backpay they didn’t put up with this, but fought back by occupying the factories, finally forcing the company to honour the agreements it had made when it had taken over the factories from Ford. They didn’t get their jobs back, but they did get the redundancy packages they had a right to. The question now is whether this was a victory or a failure when considered in a larger context. At Socialist Democracy, John McAnulty didn’t think so:

Almost 600 jobs were lost at Visteon’s three plants in Belfast, Basildon and Enfield, with staff being given less than an hour’s notice. At the end of a 34-day occupation the job loss stands, as does the loss of pension rights that the workers contributed to. If the union leadership consider this a victory what would defeat look like?

The unions weren’t alone. Sinn Fein, through their cover sheet the Andersonstown News, had front-page headlines proclaiming a victory for ‘Peoples’ Power.’ At an earlier meeting discussing Visteon, Socialist Workers Party spokesperson Eamonn McCann had claimed that there was no such thing as defeat in industrial struggles – to struggle was in itself a form of victory.

[…]

‘Visteon Victory’ means something different to workers. It means that organisations like the UNITE bureaucracy and the Sinn Fein leadership cannot possibly be considered as useful aids in the battle against capitalism and must be removed from the field of play if workers are to have a fighting chance.

At Socialist unity, Andy Newman disagrees:

The recent Visteon strikes are a good example. In an exemplary show of initiative and militancy the workers occupied in Belfast, Enfield and Basildon, which then became the foci of networks of trade union and community solidarity. It was an heroic and inspirational fight, that blew away the cobwebs of inertia that had greeted the closure of Woolworths, and other job losses.

But before we get too carried away with our assesment of the workforces’ bargaining position, let us consider that Visteon were seeking to close the factories, so the occupations were an interruption to cash flow stopping the selling the assets, but were not hitting their production; and secondly that through the use of threats of courts, police and bailiffs, only Belfast was still in occupation at the time a deal was reached.

[…]

Now it is true that the workforce didn’t get their jobs back, and the pensions issue was unresolved. But what were the realistic chances of getting the factories reopened?

To have done so would have needed a political context where there existed pressure on the government to step in. That is not the current political reality, and occupations by relatively small factories in the recession stricken car industry were not going to be able to change that.

On balance I’d say Andy is more right than John. While it is true that union bureaucracy and leadership does often hold back workers’ militancy, in this case the workers were supported by their union and the result was clearly as good as it could be. What John wants to have happened just was not on the cards. There’s this sort of “fantasy football” idea of the socialist revolution where the workers spontaneously rise up, start doing factory occupations and sweeping aside the deadweight of the cowardly union bureaucracy march into the glorious sunrise of the socialist paradise. What John proposes is the Green Lantern theory of revolution, that as long as the workers have enough willpower they can overcome all obstacles. Real life just doesn’t work that way.

Visteon wasn’t a complete victory, but it was an important step towards victory. It showed us that we can fight the bosses and win, even if it didn’t bring the revolution overnight.

RedTube: BMW and Visteon

Compare and contrast the difference between the mass firings of agency workers at the BMW mini plant this February: workers angry and upset, but cannot do anything with their anger while their union abandons them in favour of staff workers.

With what happened when the workers at various Visteon plants in the UK and Ireland got told they were all sacked: quite spontaneously the factories were occupied in an attempt to force the owners to at least give all sacked workers the compensation they had a right to.

In one case, justified but ineffective anger, in the other equally justified anger and well directed action. What’s the difference? Better union reps? A more militant climate in general? some proper lefties on staff that took the lead here? Seeing examples from abroad that inspired the Visteon workers?

It is important to get answers to these questions, as this sort of direct action is the first line of defence of us workers against the crisis. in the BMW sackings the union knew since before Christmas that these people -socalled temp staff that in many cases had been working there for years– was going to be sacked, but did nothing to defend them, but deemed these sackings a necessary sacrifise to safeguard the jobs of staff workers. This will happen again, as the current unions are ill prepared to handle the crisis, have evolved to be part of the system and think in terms of compromise rather than resistance. As just one example we have the shameful spectacle in the Netherlands of unions agreeing to fifteen percent pay cuts to avoid firings at the post office despite massive profits, without even bothering to fight these cutbacks. You cannot trust the unions to defend your rights, so we need to get back to the roots of worker solidarity and do it ourselves, as the Visteon workers seemed to have realised.