Find it at Blessed Herbs.com!

« links for 2007-03-31 | Main | links for 2007-04-01 »

To Strike or Hunger Strike?

hunger%2Bstrike.jpg

Whether you've seen or participated in one or not, whether you live in a country that allows them or not, everyone knows what it means for workers to strike. Wikipedia defines it thusly:

Strike action, often simply called a strike, is a work stoppage caused by the mass refusal by employees to perform work. A strike usually takes place in response to grievances that employees feel management are ignoring. Strikes first became important during the industrial revolution, when mass labour became important in factories and mines. In most countries, they were quickly made illegal, as factory owners had far more political power than workers. Most western countries partially legalized striking in the late 19th or early 20th centuries. Strikes are sometimes used to put pressure on governments to change policies. Occasionally, strikes destabilise the rule of a particular political party. The strike tactic has a very long history. Towards the end of the 20th dynasty, under Pharaoh Ramses III in ancient Egypt in the 12th century BCE, the workers of the royal necropolis organized the first known strike or workers' uprising in history.

Similarly, anyone who follows politics and history knows that another kind of strike is often used to "put pressure on governments to change policies"- the hunger strike. Like strike actions, it also has a long history: Again from Wikipedia:

A hunger strike is a method of non-violent resistance in which participants fast as an act of political protest, or to provoke feelings of guilt or to achieve a goal such as a policy change. Fasting was used as a method of protest and receiving justice in pre-Christian Ireland, where it was known as Troscad or Cealachan. It was detailed in the contemporary civic codes, and had specific rules by which it had to be used. The fast was often carried out on the doorstep of the home of the offender; scholars speculate this was due to the high importance the culture placed on hospitality. Allowing a person to die at your home, for a wrong you were accused of, was considered a great dishonor. The fast's uses were primarily to recover debts or get justice for a perceived wrong. There are legends of St. Patrick, the patron saint of Ireland, using the hunger strike as well.

While there is no reason why hunger strikes could not be used by workers, until today I never heard of it happening:

Brazil crippled by Airstrike

Airports are getting back to normal in Brazil after air traffic controllers suspended a strike in protest at their working conditions. Government negotiators and trade unions reached an agreement to end the strike, which briefly halted all flights out of all of the country's 49 airports.
Action had spread across Brazil after air traffic controllers began a hunger strike in the capital, Brasilia. Thousands of passengers were left stranded by the protest. The striking controllers had said they had lost all confidence in their commanders and the equipment at their disposal. Air traffic controllers in Brazil have staged similar protests since last September, when 154 people were killed in the country's worst air disaster.

Commentary

At first glance this hunger strike appears to have worked. An agreement has been reached and hopefully the result will be improved airline safety and at a cost that doesn't make flying unprofitable. The profit question is especially important in light of the fact that Varig, once Brazil's largest airline, was just acquired by Gol. Varig just emerged from bankruptcy last July. Gol's CEO announced that he plans to continue "the same low-cost philosophy with Varig." Hopefully, cost doesn't mean low quality or worse, skimping on safety or security.

On second thought, these hungry strikers have created a precedent. They chose, this time, to eschew the standard strike action in favor of the hunger strike, something far more bold, sympathy-garnering, and it seems, highly effective. But that choice of means has consequences for next time. Labor negotiations are repeated games.

These parties will see one another again and again in the future. By choosing a tactic that gets them want they want now, the air traffic controllers may have raised the bar higher than they like. They may have created a condition whereby that whether or not they hunger strike, instead of just strike, is the yardstick by which their commitment is measured. They may have created an expectation that their strength is shown by laying down on the job, laying down as if dying. This may work well in a political context, but it is hardly the image that any employee would want to project to his or her employer, let alone labor for whom strength (in numbers) is their supposed strength.

Tags: | | | | | |

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://thebusinessofamericaisbusiness.biz/MT/mt-tb.cgi/536

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

About Me

Blog Roll

Powered by
Movable Type 3.31