💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › adam-weaver-fast-food-workers-strike.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 07:48:16. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-07-09)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Fast Food Workers Strike
Author: Adam Weaver
Date: August 29, 2013
Language: en
Topics: strike
Source: Retrieved on 10th December 2021 from https://machete408.wordpress.com/2013/08/29/fast-food-workers-strike-what-is-and-what-isnt-the-fight-for-fifteen-campaign/
Notes: This is a short prequel to a longer soon to be released analysis piece on the Fight for Fifteen campaign.

Adam Weaver

Fast Food Workers Strike

A called for nation-wide strike of fast food workers by the Fight for

Fifteen campaign (FFF) is set to go down today. Surely a historic

moment, this is the first large scale and national strike involving fast

food workers who are at the core of the low-wage service industry.

Beginning with a series of strikes among fast food workers in New York

City late last year, the campaign and the called for strike is organized

by the SEIU (Service Employees International Union), though in many

cities this is being organized in conjunction with allied institutional

non-profit organizations.

This is significant in that this is helping to popularize the use of

strikes as a tactic, even for workers who are not formally part of a

union, and the idea of the tactic and the experience gained can be built

upon. But at the same time an on the ground analysis is needed by folks

on that left that doesn’t mistake this for what this is not—SEIU isn’t

building a movement to organize workers and fight bosses.

Instead of a ‘march on the boss’ directed towards the corporations

robbing workers daily, rather this is a ‘march on the media’ where the

strikes serve as the visuals in a narrative of worker protest crafted by

professional media consultants. Actions are scripted and run by the

staff (themselves young, overworked, underpaid and working to meet

difficult mobilization quotas) and the ultimate shots are called by

officials in Washington, DC, not spontaneously by workers from below

like the picture painted would lead you to believe.

Speaking to workers involved in the campaign in several cities on the

condition of anonymity I was told stories of how when important shifts

in the public direction of the campaign were made they were instructed

to state publicly “the workers made this decision.” A national

conference was held in Detroit August 15–16 by the campaign with 7–800

attendees from the core cities of the campaign, a large number being

campaign staff as well. Here workers were guided through a rapid fire

pep rally, where they were handed a pre-written agenda and presented

with the pre-packaged plan of the August 29 strike as the only decision

of the meeting. No further discussion of the direction of the campaign

was had. As one worker who was involved the past strikes and who

attended the conference as a member of the staff selected steering

committee said, that this is when they realized “maybe this isn’t our

movement, but this is really their [SEIU’s] movement.”

As to where the campaign is headed the rumors leaked so far are that

SEIU is still up in the air about which direction to take this effort.

One possible route is a focus on major chains aimed towards a neutrality

or industry standards agreement and would likely include SEIU agreeing

to lobby for some sort of pro-restaurant industry tax breaks similar to

what SEIU did in the California nursing home industry in promising to

lobby the heavily Democratic state government for pro-industry

legislation in exchange for industry wide union recognition which

included agreements barring workers from striking or speaking out on

their working conditions. I think this route is unlikely and not very

realistic.

The second and I believe more likely route would be a move towards a

range of legislative efforts including state ballot initiatives allowing

cities and counties to set their own minimum wage. A third potential

direction might be a combination of both employer agreements and

legislation such as previous efforts of unions such as HERE to raise

wages through legislation but which exempted workers covered by union

agreements. Another factor is that Obama recently announced plans to

introduce a bill to increase the federal minimum wage. I think it’s hard

to believe it coincidental that SEIU, one of the largest contributors to

Obama’s 2012 reelection, unfolded the campaign just in time to deliver

the legislative effort a ready-made support base.

Some have called FFF a form of “venture syndicalism”, a tactic whereby

unions fund riskier and more confrontational start-up efforts. In terms

of tactics this makes sense but I think only at the surface level, as I

think it is questionable, unlikely even, that SEIU is committed to

building anything beyond a campaign for legislation or national level

agreements that are made over the heads of workers. Others have cast the

effort in the light of “militant reformism”, whereby reform oriented and

institutional actors temporarily adopt militant tactics associated with

more radical movements but only with the goal restoring their seat at

the table. I think this is basically correct when looking at the use of

one day strikes by mainstream unions such as SEIU- this is a change in

tactics but the model of top down unionism tied to the Democratic Party

remains firm. The best framing in my mind though is “militant lobbying,”

where seemingly militant tactics are used not with the goals of

empowerment and building a militant movement but creating a new base,

guided from above, to push for legislation.

So how should we relate to the campaign and called for August 29 strike?

Undeniably the campaign has lit a spark and is bringing together in

meetings, rallies and strikes workers who would normally not be in the

same room together. I would say support the strike action, go on strike

and organize your co-workers if you work in fast food and most

importantly make contact with striking workers. We should not do this

though without any illusions of where this is headed and our focus

should be the need to build an inside/outside yet independent effort of

fast food workers. Workers are brought into the campaign with little

training on organizing, shop floor issues remain unaddressed and these

are places where radicals can step in to play a practical role.

Instead of lobbying the same entrenched political system, appealing to

change from above, and attempting to retool the existing system of

profit, inequality and exploitation, it’s time for the left to build its

own organizing efforts and worker organizations that are committed to a

long term vision of building a new world where our lives are not

controlled by and dependent on bosses, corporations and politicians. The

Fight for Fifteen campaign presents the potential to take an important

step in that direction.