Talk:Strike action/Archive 1

Archive 1

Comments

Suggested things to add, if someone gets the time:

1. Differences internationally in law relating to strikes.

-Penta 15:28, 3 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Amen to that. We have an article on United States labor law and Mexican labor law, but we need more.

Reasons for strikes

Article sites grievances as most common reason for strike. At least in Finland, it's illegal to strike on basis of grievances, if there is valid agreement between unions representing employer and employee. One can have legal strike (in Finland) only, when there is no-agreement situation, that is, it has expired, or reason is for example political, but it has to be completely non work-related when striking during treaty period. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.239.138.11 (talk) 08:19, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Scabs

Maybe add some more about scabbing, I remember hearing stories about scabs being attacked during the miner's strikes in the UK.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW MORE ON UNEMPLOYMENT PAY WHEN A SCAB IS HIRED ON YOUR JOB. DON'T THAT BY ALL MEANS QUALIFY YOU FOR UNEMPLOYMENT PAY.

Rules about Unemployment benefits in the US vary from State to State. In California, a striker is ineligible for unemployment benefits unless he or she has been "permanently replaced" or the strike is over. A striker also has to demonstrate that he or she has been actively looking for other work, not just picketting in front of the plant. During the Basic Vegetable strike in King City, California, one striker/volunteer worked almost full time filing Unemployment Appeals for strikers who had been denied benefits. As a result of her work, when the Company announced that it had permanently replaced most of the workforce, over 300 strikers immediately became eligible for unemployment benefits, enabling them to hold out for another year until the strike was settled.

FGC 22:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

re "scab"

Quote: The word comes from the idea that the workers are covering a wound. Is this true? Do we have a reference for it? Tannin 09:12, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think it's really just common knowledge, not to mention common sense. 69.143.245.174 8 July 2005 12:29 (UTC)

What about the term "rat?" I can't find a specific reference but it is sometimes used. Also, inflatable rats are not uncommon at strike sites in the US (particularly New York City) Alec 18:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

The inflatable rat (there's one that is traded around to various unions in NYC) at strike sites represents the employer, not scab labor. The term "rat" for someone who is obnoxious is old in the English language. 70.18.2.196 (talk) 23:51, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Being illegal is counter-revolutionary?

Is there anyone could tell us which laws in china treat Strike as illegal action?I have never seen such laws China.--222.35.88.96 09:53, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

with feeling this time!

hey. i've just begun editing wikipedia, usually for grammar and spelling where i find it. i agree, some more on scabs/scabbing would be beneficial. just to give a better feel for the tense pushing and pulling between labor and management. perhaps a little on 'wildcat' strikes?

Resolution of strike?

So what happens if a strike goes on forever? If the employer hires [temporary] replacement workers, but a new union contract is never finalized, how does it end? Are there signficant examples of when the employer was able to outlast the union so long that the union collapsed, i.e., wasn't even able to acquiesce to the employer's demands? I'd also like to see more references to code--what U.S.C. governs this? (I couldn't find it in a quick perusal of 29 U.S.C. 141 et seq.

This happened with the Liverpool Dockers' Strike I think.--CharlieP 22:58, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

In the United States, as a practical matter, most unions are totally eliminated if the stike goes past one year. If the employer hires "temporary replacements" to scab, the employer can at just about any time designate the scabs as "permanent replacements". If a strike is determined by the NLRB to be for economic reasons only (that is the union is unable to prove that the employer committed unfair labor practices, as defined by the NLRA) after one year the strikers no longer have a vote in NLRB elections. The employer then gets a few of the scabs to collect signatures saying they don't want to be represented by the union, and files for an election with the NLRB. If a majority of the scabs then vote against union representation, then the union no longer represents anyone in that workplace, and all the strikers have lost their jobs. The employer only has to hire former strikers one by one, as "permanent replacement" scabs quit or are fired. Currently (2007) four of the five members of the NLRB are appointees of George W. Bush. They bend over backwards to make decisions favorable to the employers.

This is just one example of how in the United States the whole labor relations system is so bureaucratic, complex, and lawyer orientated, that individual workers or small independent unions have no chance of getting anything done within the system.

Only when a union has good attorneys, skilled representatives, and a very united workforce is there any hope of a successful outcome for workers.

At Basic Vegetable Products in King City, California, 800 food processing workers struck in July 1999, because the employer was proposing wage and pension cuts, and the elimination or subcontracting of many of the non-production line jobs. The employer bussed in over 600 scabs, many from other communities over 100 miles away. Strikers received $55 strike pay per week from the union. Because food processing strikes are often long and difficult, the union deliberately encouraged the most skilled employees to take other jobs in the surrounding area, while others continued picketting the plant. After a few months the employer made the scabs "permanent replacements" and notified the majority of strikers that they no longer had jobs.

About nine months into the strike, the union filed for a "certification" election. Because they had been on strike for less than one year, all strikers were still eligible to vote, and an employer dominated "decertification" election with scabs only voting was avoided. In early 2000 the union membership, on the recommendation of the strike leadership, also decided to cease picketing at the work site and allow members to offer to return to work. Over fifty strikers went in to work, by seniority, creating a union presence within the plant. Since the strikers had now offered to return to work, the company could not legally hire more scabs. Any openings had to be filled by returning strikers. Other strikers worked on a boycott of Basic Vegetable products. Initially strikers went to Los Angeles and San Francisco, then eventually to the midwest and even New York. In addition to continuing production and quality problems at the plant, the company now began having difficulties selling their other products as well. Just before the one year anniversary of the strike, the NLRB election was held. Using a network of strike captains, each captain responsible for making sure that 12 to 15 stikers came to vote, the union was able to get a turnout of 700 striker votes, vs 500 scab votes.

Both the union and the company knew the union had won the election, but the union filed charges of company unfair labor practices, thereby preventing a vote count. Had there been an immediate vote count, the company would have been free to file for a scabs-only decertification election one year later. Because the union was able to tie up the vote count indefinately, the company was faced with an open-ended period of labor unrest, a continuing boycott, and continuing litigation. They decided to sell the plant to Conagra Foods, who signed a contract six months later. Most of the strikers returned to work two years after the start of the strike.

In the US, at the beginning of the 2001st century, that was a successful strike. Strikes are rarely won by just standing outside the plant.

FGC 19:45, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Inaccuracy Regarding "Blue Flu"

The article states, "Sometimes the term 'caught the blue flu' is used to refer to individuals who are on strike." This is not correct. A "blue flu" is a labor action by employees who are not legally able to strike, e.g. police officers. Ref: Merriam-Webster definition for "blue flu."David Hoag 17:51, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Japanese strike

What about the passive Japanese strike? You know, they're on strike, but they keep on working, just wear a yellow thing. Kind of like in hospitals...

Limited Geographic Scope

While this article does make references to other countries, it is heavilly focussed on the United States. Perhaps some of the information in this article should instead be located in an article about 'Industrial Relations Laws in the United States', and the article could be cleaned up to talk about striked generally all over the world, rather than making so many references to United States industrial relations laws. -- 136.153.2.2 00:17, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Nottinghamshire Miners

With regard to this exchange [1] - the word "consistently" is significant here. It refers to the fact that Nottinghamshire miners pursued a different path in both the General Strike [1926] and the Miners' Strike of 84-5. In '26 a "non-political" union was formed in Notts. The founder was named Spencer, and "Spencer Union" became a common term for a company union for the following couple of decades, in the UK at least. I am not saying that this section does not need reworking, but there is a historical context here that is worth pointing out. Mattley ^(Chattley) 22:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah. I wasn't aware of the scabbing in '26. What about 72 and 74? I thought that the key difference between 74 and 84 was that Labour had introduced performance related pay which meant that due to the larger seams the Notinghamshire miners were both better paid and less concerned about pit closures. (of course in the end they got shafted like the rest of the miners...). some refs for all of this would be good.--NHSavage 23:01, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Category Strike action?

It may be a good idea to create a Category:Strike actions (Category:Strikes is taken for phycical combat moves), to list famous strikes (like Homestead Strike). Comments?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 16:30, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you are probably looking for Category:Labor_disputes. --NHSavage 17:08, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

It looks like the correct category for labor disputes, but strike actions could be it's specific subcategory.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 00:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Restrictions

I know that in Iowa public school employees are not permitted to strike. I was wondering how many states aside from Iowa do not allow teachers to strike?
JesseG 01:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

Edit of the introduction for clarity and neutrality 6th september 2006

The following sentence was confusing in the context of an introductory paragraph on strike action and misleading in that it suggests that violence is a fundamental part of strike action

"If an agreement could not be reached, workers could strike, or refuse to work and use violence against those who do, until certain demands were met."

I've also altered the wording of some other parts of the introductory paragraph to enable it to better conform to wikipedia's policy on neutrality.

Seferin

Missing: Pros and cons, eligibility, consequences and outcome of strikes

Some discussion regarding pros and cons, when strikes are right and useful and how it can help or harm would be good. Petr Matas 21:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Work/Hunger/Sex/Culture strike

The word strike has multiple meanings: in general it concerns deliberately refraining from a particular human need to achieve a certain goal (scratch definition). I propose to write a more general article on strike. Any ideas?Brz7 02:13, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Add a disambiguation link to the top and create more specific pages. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.184.150.249 (talk) 18:41, 12 March 2007 (UTC).

Hi, these already exist, see Strike (disambiguation). Probably the first article visitors expect to find under strike is a Work strike or strike action (also an action, which is a disambiguation page), which is currently the main article. Under the article name strike action references to other types of strikes - which are not work related were added (at the bottom) under the subsection "Categories of strikes". Is this because there strikes are "actions" as well? Does anyone know why it's called "strike action"? (what's the origin of the expression?). Best regards, Brz7 01:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Firefighter Strikes

From personal experience, firefighters in Montreal, Quebec, in 2003, had their fire engines painted green to indicate a strike status. Perhaps ways that people who are prohibited from striking can nonetheless "go on strike" should be discussed.

When firefighters go on strike in the UK, the army takes over their role and uses green military fire engines known as Green Goddesses. Is this the same thing?--Moonlight Mile 08:52, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

strikeout wiki code

I think a disambig link to the <s>(strikeout)</s> wiki markup might be in order. If there's a link for the wikicode function somewhere (a template for example), I haven't been able to find it. Typing "strike" in the search box leads here. --Sasoriza 02:32, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, taken care of. Thanks, Nethac DIU! --Sasoriza 02:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

No-strike clause

I have added text relating to the no-strike clause found in many labor contracts. The Wikipedia page Harlan County, USA doesn't address this (yet,) but that is what the documentary (which i just finished viewing) states, and i have confirmed what i viewed with a sanity check from this web page: [[2]]

"The strike drags on, month after month, with no end in sight. The main stumbling block to a settlement is the no-strike clause demanded by management."

Now, one of my questions becomes: Why is the previously existing link to the "Harlan County, USA" documentary on the Strike Action page listed under fiction? user:Richard Myers

Info modified with strike-thru to reflect changes Richard Myers 01:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Unrelated info removed

Removed the following—there is a disambiguation page for this type of information. Richard Myers 16:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Striking picket" can mean a vertical component of an elevator cage's door, which hits a contact and thus tells the elevator mechanism whether it is safe to let the cage move.

A strike is also a term in baseball. When the baseball passes over the plate at the appropriate height depending upon the batter's stance, the umpire calls a strike. A strike is also charged against the batter when he hits the baseball into foul territory. The batter is deamed out when he has 3 strikes however the third strike cannot be called on a foul ball.

fiction about strikes

I think the section on fiction should include Norma Rae —Preceding unsigned comment added by Captainspirou (talk • contribs) 00:54, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

There is a scene in the movie American President where the US President has to cancel a date because of the airline baggage handlers at a major going on strike/

---

History suggestions

A broad overview of the history of strikes would be educational; I was inspired by listening to Strikes Were Once a Powerful Tool for Labor. It was also interesting to learn that U.S. Workers Strike Less Often Than in Past. I'm sure there are many more details and a global history to be found in more conventional sources. -- Beland 15:12, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

In the UK

The section on the UK really isn't helpful. It mentions lots of different laws without explaining what they're for and without respect for their chronology. Is anyone in a position to improve this? --Lo2u ^{(T • C)} 21:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

History needs expansion?

It is claimed that the history section needs expansion.

Given that the only way of categorizing the history of strikes that I can think of is a list of all strikes, and the link provided leads to an [b]absolutely enormous[/b] list of strikes, what more needs to be written?

Should a little introductory sentence be placed there instead of just "LIST OF STRIKES?" At any rate, I have done so, but I recommend that either whoever suggested that the section needs expansion give some proper criteria, or just remove the thing altogether. Michael.A.Anthony (talk) 06:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

What's this crap?

Quote: "Since the Seattle General Strike, the de-facto policy of the United States is that anyone involved in massive strike action is arrested and tried for crimes against the state."

This is simply not true. In the United States strikes are legal and regulated, as are labor unions. And there is no such thing as a "crime against the state." That's Soviet-era terminology.

Somebody needs to change this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.33.158.121 (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Potential bias re military action

Does this wording seem a little slanted to anyone else? Also, Haymarket Massacre was police, not military, correct?

Generally, though, Carnegie and J.P. Morgan, as well as other Capitalists, have used the US Military to gun down and kill strikers, such as in the Seattle General Strike, the Haymarket Massacre, the Minneapolis Teamsters Strike of 1934, during the Oaxacan unrest of 2006, the Toledo Autolite Strike, the 1934 West Coast waterfront strike, among dozens and dozens of other strikes.

I completely agree. Could someone edit this?

Irishevan (talk) 00:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)irishevan

I also agree. A quick check of the Wikipedia entries for Seattle General Strike, Haymarket Affair, Minneapolis Teamsters Strike of 1934, and Auto-Lite Strike simply do not support the contention provided in the quotation: either troops were never deployed, or were deployed by elected officials with no specific link to specific "Capitalists" (although some, such as Seattle Mayor Ole Hansen, may have acted based on their own strong anti-organized-labor beliefs). Because of these factual issues, and the non-NPOV, I'm deleting the item.

Wilsonchas (talk) 23:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Other kinds of strikes?

Another kind of semi-strike would be what was used in Finland somewhere between 2005-2008 (i don't remember the year exactly) among the nurses, they didn't strike, but threatened with mass quitting their jobs, it went so far that the government made a temporary law to force nurses into work for a certain amount of time after they quit

Here ya go - it wasn't a strike, it was a negotiation between a public-sector trade union and a government. TEHY-Nurses, a Public-sector trade union. Its a good example of how public-sector unions are incompatible with government and public service, taxation without representation, etc etc. This is why collective bargaining and striking of Federal Workers is prohibited in the United States. Patriot1010 (talk) 21:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Films

I cur this from the (fiction) films section:

• Atlas Shrugged, written by author and philosopher Ayn Rand, published October 10, 1957; was originally titled The Strike but the title was changed at the last minute for dramatic purposes. The "strike" in this case is by the industrialists.

because it is a book. There was no Books section to move it to, and I didn't think it really made sense to change the Films header to something else, since every other item is a film. Also, I'm not really sure it belongs in this article at all, since it's not just a fictional "strike", it's a fictional kind of strike. Huw Powell (talk) 22:14, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Bible.

Neither of the biblical 'strikes' seem like strikes to me. The tower of babel one was about people stopping work because they were unable to continue, as they now had different languages. The moses one looks like it's been cited in labour relations histories, so it should probably stay, but the emphasis seems wrong, the lack of straw was a kind of punishment by the pharaoh for unrest rather than an action by the workers, it was the basic attempt to leave that was like a strike. And that's leaving aside the issue of whether they actually were written before the strikes under Ramesses 3 occured (1170 or whatever)130.216.68.111 (talk) 04:48, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Concur about the one with Babel, and removed it not to long ago.174.3.125.23 (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Agree about the Pharaoh example as well. Nothing in this section (or in the Bible) describes an action by workers; rather, the Pharaoh is punishing workers by increasing their labors. From the paragraph, it looks like the citation is only to establish the date of the event, not to support its characterization as a strike. I'll remove this, too. OTOH, we can add in a brief description of the Roman secessio plebis (which we can swipe from the General strike page)--we have a source for that describing it clearly as a kind of proto labor-strike. -- Narsil (talk) 04:01, 23 October 2014 (UTC)