Unite Name and Shame List : Melbourne Indymedia

The entire list of dodgy bosses and ethical employers on Brunswick St, Fitzroy, Melbourne
Ethical employers on Brunswick St. (recipients of Unite sticker)
Retro
Black Cat
Tea Too
Provincial Hotel
Holy Sheet!
Evelyn Hotel
Boscastle
Hunters and Gatherers
Vegie Bar
Marios
Gizmo Gifts
Toxic
Cafe Nova
Fitzroy Lotto
Madame Sou Sou
Lees Mart
OTC
Cape Lounge
Red Tongue Cafe
Bakers
Lucky Day Lotto
Brunswick St. Bookstore
Basilisk Bookshop
Labour in Vain
Douglas and Hope
Bangla Curry Cafe
Gutz Cafe
PG Printmaker Gallery
Spinach Bar and Cafe
Don Vincenzo
Viet Rose
Brunswick St. Foodstore
Sister Ray
Spinach Cafe
Planet Cafe
Sila Espresso Bar
The Colonial Inn
Scally and Trombone
Bosses on Brunswick St that we cannot confirm stick to all of the following: minimum legal health and safety standards; pay award wages; pay correct superannuation; Don’t discriminate against workers choosing to join a union; don’t run unpaid trial work
Endis
Hideout
My Chemist
Heading Out Hairdressers
Greenstore
Viva Zapatas
Cleanskin Kings Bottleshop
Red Rice
Bar Open
Akari 177
Zetta Florence
The Shoe Fitz
Aesops
7/11
Ghetto
Lounge Cafe
Shag
Perseverance
Kebabs, Felafel, Finger Food
Rhumbaralla’s Cafe
Joe’s Garage
Pane Provincial
Swimwear Centre
Let’s stop the rip off of casuals!
UNITE is the new campaign fighting for the rights of casual workers, starting with the shopping strip along Brunswick St. Fitzroy.
Australia has the second highest rate of casualisation in the world with over a quarter of our workforce being casual workers. Casuals don’t receive basic entitlements like sick leave, holiday pay, leave loading, or redundancy pay. Bosses have the luxury of hiring and firing at random, often keeping someone on as a 'trial' for a short period then terminating them to employ someone else that can be given the same treatment.
There is no notice requirements for casual workers, they can be terminated at any time. Applications for loans and credit cards will more often than not be turned down, as casual workers are not seen by banks as being able to keep up regular payments. With the current terms of casual work, they are probably right.
Casual work is bad enough without dodgy bosses ripping them off even more. So we are asking employers if they:
1) Comply with basic occupational health & safety laws (1985 Act)
2) Have equal pay for equal work
3) Provide pay slips and a clear breakdown of casual loading
4) Have no ‘free trial work’
5) Don’t victimise workers wanting to join a union
6) Adhere to anti-discrimination laws

Those bosses who do the right thing will get a sticker to display on their business. Let’s see what bosses refuse to meet the most basic legal requirements for their workers. If you have information on a dodgy boss - don’t let him/her get away with it! Let us know (anonymously if you wish). But we urge everyone to get involved with UNITE in the struggle against dodgy bosses!
To dob in a boss, to get more information on your rights or to help fight the problem by participating in our campaign, contact UNITE by sending us a letter to PO Box 1015 Collingwood 3066, by emailing us at
unitemelbourne@hotmail.com or:
Phone THE UNITE hotline on (03) 9639 9111
OTHER USEFUL CONTACTS:
JOBWATCH, an employment rights legal center, Level 10, 21 Victoria Street, Melbourne. Help line: (03) 9662 1933 or 1800 331 617
FOR YOUR CORRECT PAY-RATE: Ph:1300 363 264 or go to: http://www.wagenet.gov.au

I think the approach of this campaign is completely wrong since what is needed is for workers on Brunswick st and other casualized labour markets to organize for themselves , not have their boses rewarded with a sticker so that yuppies can feel 'ethical' about eating at a particular cafe. This campaign is then consumerist, in that it is about applying consumer pressure to 'bad bosses'. Further should the left really be going round proclaiming who are the good and bad bosses , i wonder if any of the workers in the places that have a sticker think that they have a 'good' boss, or that the crappy award wages and horrible work that they have to do is any better because of the unite sticker campaign.
What is needed is a serious attempt at self organization of workers on Brunswick st that isnt about rewarding bosses but attacking them. Last point, i Heard that the unite campaign was also calling for an end to cash in hand work, if this is so then not only does the campaign have the wrong appraoch but further this campaign would be the enemy of a great number of workers in this industry , who are either on the dole, or dont have working visa's.

Not only is the approach of this campaign completely wrong but also I think you could go as far as to say that it is fundamentally flawed, dangerous and should be stopped.

The distinction between the good boss and the bad boss is a false and ultimately misleading one. This might be a useful distinction to make if you want to run a mainstream media focused, sloganeering campaign that relies on consumers to punish those ‘bad bosses’ but it is pretty much useless to anyone who is serious about the self organisation and collective action of casual workers on Brunswick St. Surely groups like the Socialist Party [the group running the UNITE campaign] have a better analysis of wage slavery and capitalism than that. However it appears not and that they want us to believe that good bosses are the ones that exploit us ‘nicely’ and do so under the ‘protection’ of the law. And that supposedly exploitative work practices will be stopped if we could just get the boss to follow the law. This completely misses the point of the last decade of industrial reforms that have now meant that under the ‘law’ causal workers have basically no rights. The ability for casual workers to attempt to assert some control over their working lives certainly will not come from appealing to industrial laws – instead it will have to be the process of serious, strategic self organisation of workers committed to acting collectively and creatively in actual efiance of the law.

And I don’t know about anyone else but the idea of ‘rewarding bosses who do the right things’ makes my stomach churn. Exactly whose side are the UNITE campaign on? As the self appointed spokespeople for casual workers they might want to take a step back and take some time to actually think about the ramification of what they are actually saying and doing.

It is really clear to me that there are very few actual casual workers from Brunswick St involved in the campaign. From my experience of organising, people usually try at least to take action that is strategic and in someway connected with trying to change their material conditions. What exactly do the UNITE campaign think these fucking stickers that declare that all is good inside will actually do? Other than mean that the boss has one more fucking weapon to use against staff complaints and demands – not much at all. And why would you ask the boss if they are ‘doing the right thing’. Has it occurred to the UNTIE campaign that a more reliable source for information about conditions at work is usual those that actually do the work.

Apart from which Melbourne doesn't actually start and end at Brunswick St. (True!!!)

This campaign is farcical. I know several people who have worked as dish-washers in a couple of the cafes given 'ethical' stickers by this campaign, and certainly the view I got from them was that these places were far than 'ethical' when it came to how they treated their staff.... what a waste of time. We should be organising amongst ourselves and rejecting the current casual labour trap that we are forced into, rather than rubber-stamping current labour trends which see most people denied sick pay, holiday pay, long-term work and a safe and healthy working environment.

Camille, as the co-ordinator of the Young Unionist network you seem to be a little "protective", maybe the real issue is that unite is incringing on your supposed turf?

One campaign targeting bosses who can't even do the "right" thing within their law, isn't go to create a workers paradise and nor does it intend to. But surely if the conditions of even a few workers are improved as the result of bosses looking over their shoulder then Unite has done its job.

Workers recieving cash in hand are in no way the target of the Unite's work however Unite is serious about targeting bosses who hire people on a "trial" basis, pay them no wage and move onto the next person.

Instead of thinly veiled personal attacks dressed up to be the old ‘your nothing but a bureaucrat’ maybe it might be more useful to engage with the numerous criticisms that people have raised the UNITE campaign.

On the question of the UNITE campaign targeting cash in hand work – why is it that in media articles Steve Jolly has been quoted talking about how [shock horror] people get paid in drugs and cash on Brunswick St. These statements are nothing but moralistic and invoke the views of the conservative right and open the door for government agencies like Centrelink and Dept of Immigration to look a little more closely at who is working on Brunswick St. On several UNITE posters the slogans used have talked about ‘stamping out under the counter dodgy practices” – what exactly does this hope to invoke if not the images of shady drug deals and cash in hand work?

No one is expecting the UNITE campaign will create a workers paradise – what people are concerned about is the fact that campaigns like UNITE that purport to speak on behalf of sections of the community and assert certain ‘demands’ for “disadvantaged groups” can actually do more harm than good. Again I would ask people to explain what it is that they think the UNITE stickers are going to achieve, other than giving the boss another weapon against staff complaints and demands. Would it have been better to invest time and energy into meeting up with, getting to know and organising with workers on Brunswick St and seen what they thought of the idea of “rewarding” bosses who follow the law. Instead of charging in and telling everyone what their problems are and enforcing solutions that do very little to actually change the material conditions of those you are now speaking on behalf of. What about the concept of stickers on the doors of shops that the staff put up that stay “100% unionised and organised”. Do people see the difference in the two?

And no I don’t think that…

‘if the conditions of even a few workers are improved as the result of bosses looking over their shoulder then Unite has done its job’

In fact it is this kind of reasoning that lets people get away with crappy campaigns and dodgy politics all the time. Has it even cross your mind that instead of being able to rely on the old feel good of helping a few people that you have actually made it harder for people on Brunswick St to organise and create campaigns based in collective action. And made it really fucking bad for those on Brunswick St who work cash in hand for a variety of reasons such as they are expected to live in extreme poverty called Centrelink payments or people who do not have work visa’s or are illegal.

oh and I don’t feel at all like the UNITE campaign is infringing on my turf – whatever that means. Surely you don’t expect me to have some notion that I represent all the young workers around the place. My part-time job, as the Young Unionists Network co-ordinator is project based and really does not have the scope to lay claim to solving the massive exploitation and abuse of young workers. The self organisation of young workers both inside and outside of their workplaces probably have the best bet in winning that game.

rissole workers unite good one

The UNITE campaign has established itself as a fighting organisation on the streets, doing the hard preparatory groundwork needed to tackle the ever growing trend of casualisation. Not surprisingly, the campaign has won great support from casual workers along Brunswick St., and also huge support and sympathy from ex-workers in the area and the community at large. Through the efforts of all those helping in the campaign UNITE has received major media attention with the goal of politicising the issue – the first step in the struggle against casualisation.

Unfortunately, it seems some find it easier to criticise the efforts of others from behind their computer monitors, then it is to actually struggle for the rights of casual workers.

UNITE agrees entirely that the fight not only against the exploitation of casuals, but against casualisation as a whole, can only be won through workers’ unity and workplace organisation. However, due to the very nature of casualisation, and exacerbated by ‘cash in hand’ work, unionisation of casual workers (particularly in small businesses) will be a long and tough fight. UNITE has proven through its efforts so far that it is a campaigning organisation for casual workers, not one of armchair activism, and in the years ahead it will be the role of UNITE and the trade union movement in organising casuals to win this struggle.

The ‘Name and Shame’ campaign initiated by UNITE is merely the beginning. There are indeed no ‘good’ bosses. But there are particularly bad ones, namely those that are not even meeting the minimum legal requirements. Unlike comments to the contrary, legal rights won through past struggle must always be defended and form the cornerstone of future struggle.

Which worker would dismiss his/her legal entitlements opting instead to act “collectively and creatively in actual [d]efiance of the law”? (camille, 18/12/03). Firstly and foremostly, all workers want their minimum entitlements. Imagine a trade union that said to its members: “don’t worry about your entitlements, they’re only a sham of the evil capitalist system”. It is no wonder then that Camille finds the grass roots organising of casual workers so baffling.

By giving positive stickers to those bosses that prove they are acknowledging their minimum requirements, it lets workers get a foot in the door to begin organising. It gives an extra right to workers in those workplaces with a sticker to organise, lest much attention be drawn to the fact that the boss is losing the sticker for breaking those requirements. In an area or industry where unionism is near non-existent, it allows unionism to grow at its strongest points, and then later to be able to lend support to those places where it is weak.

Boycotting businesses will not defeat casualisation, but it can be used as a lever for further struggle. UNITE has raised the awareness of the issue in both the workplaces and the community. Such a large amount of positive media coverage has not been seen in the workers’ movement for a very long time. It is indicative of the first steps in a fight back against the horrors of casualisation.

This awareness has led to huge community support to let casual workers know that there is social discontent about the conditions they are facing, and most importantly, that they are not alone in their situation. This support will give casual workers the much-needed courage to take the first steps in fighting casualisation: that of organising with other casuals to demand their minimum legal entitlements. From that victory will come the impetus to keep fighting, to maintain their rights, and to fight for more.

The often short-term, unskilled nature of casual work leads to constant job and industry changes. Combined with the near comatose state of some unions, and the fear of taking on casual members in others, this has left gaps in between the industry-specific trade unions through which casual workers are slipping.

It is here that organisations such as UNITE and the Young Unionist Network (YUN) will play key roles. We must organise ourselves, as well as encourage active union participation in the relevant unions (such as our advice to all hospitality workers on Brunswick St. to become active inside the LHMU). But this will not come overnight, and like other strong fighting unions, it will be built only on long hard work. It is all of our hopes to see strong unionism organise casual workers, crush the exploitation of casuals, and fight the very existence of casual conditions.

One of the most cancerous aspects of casualised work is that of ‘cash in hand’ work. In those areas where workers are unionised and organised, this cancer is stomped out as a first priority (take for example the construction division of the CFMEU). No working conditions or entitlements can be won, maintained or even properly implemented without the open acknowledgment that someone is even employed at a particular workplace! No rights can proudly be declared won, while quietly being implemented under the counter or in black books.

No union organiser of even one day’s experience would dare insinuate that cash in hand work is anything but detrimental to workers. The very fact that bosses illegally implement it should be enough of a signal to realise that it is done in their interests, not in the juxtaposed interests of their workers.

Unfortunately, the conditions of casual workers in the current period is so bad that many are stuck in bosses’ traps – traps such as cash in hand. Most casual workers probably have, at some time, worked cash in hand. Many students are forced to accept cash in hand, so that they can survive while doing their studies. Students accept this not because it is in their interests, but because of the inability of social securities, of Youth Allowance etc., to provide a livable income.

It is for this reason that UNITE is not campaigning against cash in hand at this time, as we recognise that this would not be immediately beneficial to many casuals, but in fact would be detrimental.

UNITE has never claimed to be campaigning on that issue, and anyone who claims otherwise is very mistaken. Those making slanderous allegations against progressive community campaigns should learn about the campaign before making publicly abusive statements.

Along Brunswick St. we have made it clear to bosses that we are not campaigning on cash in hand pay, even though we unequivocally stand against it. Those bosses paying cash in hand, however, are still required to comply with our six minimum legal requirements, in order to avoid being named and shamed, and to be eligible for a UNITE door sticker. UNITE unequivocally supports all those casuals working cash in hand positions.

UNITE is opposed to cash in hand as a matter of basic trade union principle, but due to the low level of casual organisation, class consciousness, the negative balance of class forces and so forth, we have made a tactical retreat.

It is a job for the trade union movement as a whole to struggle for the improvement of social securities and for the payment of living wages for casual workers so that it need not be ‘under the table’. But it is a misinformed myth that casual workers are predominantly students in such a situation. Today, over a quarter of Australia’s workforce is casualised, making it the second highest ratio of casualisation in the world. Many are now ‘full-time casuals’ - working parents who are forced into ever growing casualised positions.

To struggle for the rights of such workers, cash in hand practices must be the first thing targeted. The rights of casuals must be strengthened before a true struggle of organised workers can take on casualisation. To suggest to these workers that cash in hand is ‘okay’ is the grossest of insults, and contradicts the virtue of organising.

As for such unjustified comments that UNITE has “made it really fucking bad” (camille, 18/12/03) for those who work cash in hand, don’t have work visas or are illegal – how exactly is that? By fighting for decent working conditions and decent pay? If your argument is that by forcing bosses to pay minimum wages some people will lose their jobs – this is the exact same argument we hear from bosses everyday. Or are you insinuating that we are working with DIMIA? Exactly whose side are you on?

It should be made clear that both UNITE and the YUN have their offices in Trades Hall. If Camille had a serious concern or question as to the tactics of the UNITE campaign, she could have easily talked to us. In fact, we have tried to contact her in the past as a representative of the YUN, but she will not even respond to our calls. Not only is she not even doing her job for which she was elected, but I hope that all Young Unionist Network members are content with Camille making all executive decisions on their behalf.

The issue of dealing with casualisation is indeed complex, and it requires much more debate in the workers’ movement. Camille would be better serving YUN members (which includes UNITE members) and the paid position she has been appointed to by contributing her thoughts in a more comradely way. Her unprofessional language only encourages the lunatics on the fringes of the movement, the armchair critics, the internet warriors, and possibly, agent provocateurs.

Ginny wrote on the 13/12/03 about workers on Brunswick St. she knows who say that UNITE has given stickers to dodgy employers. We have heard no word from these casuals, and we find it surprising to hear that they felt these places were horrible, yet did not bother to contact us. I know if I was being ripped off or being treated poorly, and a campaign came along that would clean the place up – or at least shame him publicly as a dodgy boss - I would not hesitate to do so.

That you suggest that these people you know should organise their workplace, while at the same time don’t have the motivation to call a number to dob in their boss is farcical. If these people that you know have information regarding dodgy bosses on Brunswick St., they should let the campaign know. Complaining to their friends that their workplace is horrible and that nobody is doing anything about it is the waste of time.

As for comments such as UNITE are fascists – clearly this person has little idea about either. I would be curious to know what survivors of fascist regimes would think of the belittlement of their repression; comparing the struggle for workers’ rights with death camps, torture and genocide.

Despite the few slanderous and unfounded attacks as posted on this site, the progressive elements of the community have applauded UNITE for its work. Most importantly, we have cast the first stone in the fight back against casualisation. Through its boosts in membership and with help from the massive community support, UNITE looks to strengthening the campaign along Brunswick St. in the new year, as well as spreading the campaign to other key shopping districts.

To get involved with UNITE, or to dob in a dodgy boss, email us at unitemelbourne@hotmail.com or give us a call on (03) 9639 9111

I'm sorry Greg, but you're not seriously suggesting you thought you'd get a round of applause from everybody on this issue.

I agree, the ruthless exploitation of the workforce is something that is intolerable, but you will not get unanimous support on this proposal.

The reason that I consider it to be fascistic is because it relies upon intimidation in order to achieve its ends. This is something that most workers are not comfortable with - PARTICULARLY OLDER WORKERS, intimidation is a characteristic of the very people you are hoping to expose: namely unscrupulous bosses.

At best it sounds like something a current affairs show would indulge in; at worst it smacks of Nazi Germany and the division of small business between Aryan and Jews (this is a good Aryan shop; this is a bed Jewish shop, etc.) only the race element is missing.

Furthermore, it is confontational with the potential for violence: all elements of fascist activity.

So unless something more POSITIVE in its outlook is proposed, I'm sorry but I will not support this action.

Furthermore I will NOT be led to believe that this is the only solution to the exploitation of a casualised workforce.

An attempt to create genuine solidarity based on common experience between all casual workers would be a better option.

Go the rissole over the sausage anyday!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By your logic, isn't every political action-
ie. Strikes, protests, blockades, political meetings etc-
fascism without the race element?

They involve an element of intimidation and divide sections of society.

Hardly.

Industrial action, even by the biggest stretch of the imagination, is hardly fascism.

No, this is a case of becoming what we hate, and putting into practice what we oppose.

I have worked on this street for 4 years in many different types of jobs in the industry, both as casual and full time. I know at least 100 workers or owners etc. along brunswick st. it appears to me that you have lost touch with the rank and file concerned on this topic. You seem to be forgetting that as casual workers the bosses can simply write you off the roster with out notice or reason and replace you with a more uninformed and submissive worker when it comes to rights and entitlements. firstly in approaching the bosses and workers on these issues it raises the awareness of the workers that they may be entitled to more than what they are receiving. if the boss has a sticker and is not adhering to the basic rights of the employees then the WORKERS have a weapon in that they can hold the boss to his word and raise the issue with confidance and are less likley to be fed a bunch of crap and lies. at the same time it raises awareness to all the workers at the same time and is a first step towards unity without it being obvious to the boss that the workers are collectively becoming involved on this issue. on the subject of intimidation it is the bosses that use it on the workers EVERY day. The naming and shaming is not intimidation but a way of telling not just the boss concerned but all the bosses, that they cant just get away with this theft and exploititive criminal practices any more. it also lets the workers know that they are no longer an their own. are you jealous? unite seems to have done more and achieved more on this topic, with no funds and limited resources than you or your organisation have. What have you done? remember that UNITE is still in its infancy and if you think thay can just walk into a business unionise and organise the whole place just like that then you really are delusional and caught up in the ideals and not looking at how they can be implemented and achieved in the REAL world. As a worker on brunswick st i pledge 100% support behind UNITE and not your bureaucratic organisation despite what funding you might have( many others i know along this street also hold this same opinion, i speak to my fellow workers ). Your attacks on UNITE really are offensive and do little for raising the spirits of these hard working casuals. WELL DONE UNITE!!! THANKS FOR SUPPORTING ME AND THE REST OF US IN THE CASUAL WORKFORCE.!!!!!! A.A.A.

Didn't the National Socialist German Workers' Party claim that Jews exploited German Workers? This was their solution...

[ED - graphic removed - photo of shop window with star of David and the word 'Jude' painted on the window. Note: please keep discussion within editorial guidelines ]ÿØÿà

so a debate that had some fairly interesting begginings has now dissolved into socialist party members swearing their gratitude with a degree of kitch that even the worst advertisers couldn't achieve (thanks A.A.A).
The rest is left to artifex who thinks the campaign reeks of nazi germany. yr off yr rocker. all relations currently in society are based on violence. the fact that your boss can fire you in an instant is a relation of violence. so your path seems to be to go and talk nicely to them and hope some common ground can be established. what world are you living in? go back to your cushy job.
as for the official UNITE reply well there wasn't much interesting there either.
infact the whole tone of the unite campaign can be found in the 1st sentence of the original article " UNITE is the new campaign fighting for the rights of casual workers". yes unite fights FOR you. that is UNITE is not a group of self-organised casual workers actually involved in the industry, it is a socialist front group looking for it's latest recruits. it will fight on yr behalf, all you need do is follow.

My god, the same broken record over and over again and the same amazing demonstration of how out of touch such parties are with people's everyday lives. at least on this occassion the socialist groups are trying to go beyond Jo dockworker and Jimmy builders labourer in their account of the lives of working people.

But we get the same thing. a construction of the idea of casual work as being a one sided phenomenum that the bosses have imposed. now i am not suggesting that casualisation is not used as a weapon by capital to dismantle the ability of workers to organise, that's one of it's cheifs aims. limiting that organising allows greater exploitation and thus greater profits.

The move to casualisation can also be seen though as a reaction by capital to everyday resistance to work. sickies, slacking, working slow are all options when you are on solid wage. casualisation removes much of that ability but is is also a reaction to the fact that people don' t want a solid job for 20 years as UNITE might believe. in fact in many ways casualisation and cash in hand are desired by young people becuase it means they can collect the dole, not pay tax and quit whenever they want. it's not a one sided thing.

As my own personal example i worked casually for a year in a job where I was offered a secure contract. why? cause out of the money i was getting some would get taken out for sick days, some for super annuation i might never see, more in tax, my overtime would not be paid and the fact that i had to give 6 weeks notice to quit. what if something happened and i wanted to quit straight away? so basically it didn't make much difference. stop viewing everything from the bosses perspective, you might realise there are alot of choices people are making everyday to make their lives better.

UNITE might find it hard to believe because it doesn't fit into their 1920s style idea of what a workers movement looks like but this is how much resistance to work is made up these days. ofcourse this resistance needs to become collectivised but creating a spectacle is not how you do it. creating some organisation and then going to the workers and getting them to join it is not how you do it.
sitting down with the people affected, developing methods of self-organisation is.

UNITE will most likely flop in year but the problem is still there. new forms of organising need to be found that go beyond the obviously limits of hierachical trotskyist organisations. so far other organisational forms are yet to really rear their head, but they must becuase if not we will be on this trotskyite tredmill for a long time to come.

Hmmm. I'm not sure oj. I think that all relations currently in society are based on how much bullshit a wanker like you can fit into box.

And, ED... what is this, Catch 22? On another thread we have people compiling their very own name and shame list.... does the irony completely elude you?

sorry artifex, didn't mean to speak over your head with all my big words and stuff yeah.
but then for someone who states

"it smacks of Nazi Germany and the division of small business between Aryan and Jews (this is a good Aryan shop; this is a bed Jewish shop, etc.) only the race element is missing".

I'm not surprised you didn't understand. what is kristallnacht without the race element? the whole division was based on race. the division being made here is based on class and exploitation (even if i think it's a failed campaign).

can we move on to something a little more sophisticated now?

http://www.makeworlds.org/?q=node/view/61

Submitted by fls on Fri, 12/26/2003 - 15:24.
Precarias a la deriva (Precarious women workers adrift) is a collective project of investigation and action. The concerns of the participants in this open project converged the 20th of June 2002, the day of the general strike called by the major unions in Spain. Some of us had already initiated a trajectory of reflection and intervention in questions of the transformations of labor (in groups such as ‘ZeroWork’ and Sex, Lies and Precariousness, or individually), others wished to begin to think through these themes.

In the days before the strike we came together to brainstorm an intervention which would reflect our times, aware that the labor strike, as the culminating expression of a process of struggle, was unsatisfactory for us for three reasons: (1) for not taking up –and this is no novelty- the experience and the unjust division of domestic work and care, almost entirely done by women in the ‘non-productive’ sphere, (2) for the marginalization to which both the forms of action and the proposals of the strike condemn those in types of work –
ever more common- which are generally lumped together as ‘precarious’[1] and (3) for not taking into consideration precarious, flexible, invisible or undervalued work, specifically that of women and/or migrants (sexual, domestic, assistance, etc.). As a friend recently pointed out in the context of the more recent ‘political’ strike against the war (April 10, 2003), “How do we invent new forms of striking when production fragments and dislocates itself, when it
is organized in such a way that to stop working for a few hours (or even 24) does not necessarily effect the production process, and when our contract situation is so fragile that striking today means risking the possibility of working tomorrow?”

We saw that many of these jobs in the margins: the invisible, unregulated, unmoored jobs were in no way interrupted or altered by a strike of this type, and that the precarization of the labor market had extended to such an extent that the majority of working people were not even effected by the new reforms against which the strike was directed. Therefore we tried to think of new forms of living this day of struggle by approaching and confronting these new realities. We decided to transform the classic shut-down picket into a survey-
picket. Frankly, we didn’t feel up to upbraiding a precarious worker
contracted by the hour in a supermarket or to closing down the little
convenience store run by an immigrant because, in the end, despite the many reasons to shut down and protest, who had called this strike? Who were they thinking of? Was there even a minimal interest on the part of the unions for the situation of precarious workers, immigrants, housewives? Did the shut-down stop the productive process of domestic workers, translators, designers,
programmers, all those autonomous workers for whom stopping this day would do nothing but duplicate their work the next day? It seemed more interesting to us, considering the gap between the experience of work and the practice of struggle, to open a space of exchange between some of the women who were working or consuming during that day and with those who were moving in the
streets. This small, discreet sketch of an investigation was the starting
point for what became the project of the ‘drifts’.

The exchange of that June 20th was fruitful. Not so much for what people told us here and there, or for what we made visible for ourselves and for others, as for the opening we glimpsed, the possibilities for unpredetermined encounters, the pleasure of an unclassifiable dialog, mediated by no apparatus besides the tape-recorder, camera and notepad.

continued here
http://www.makeworlds.org/?q=node/view/61

A good idea! The wife and I will be able to select from a list of those doing the "right thing".

souvlaki king is also a food shop on brunswick street that does not respect workers rights.