<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lindsey dispute: in defence of wildcat strikes</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 20:49:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark P</title>
		<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/comment-page-1/#comment-20741</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 17:35:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/#comment-20741</guid>
		<description>Socialist Party report on victory at Total. It appears that all strikers have been reinstated, and that the workers who were originally made redundant will be offered jobs.

http://socialistparty.org.uk/latest/7482

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Socialist Party report on victory at Total. It appears that all strikers have been reinstated, and that the workers who were originally made redundant will be offered jobs.</p>
<p><a href="http://socialistparty.org.uk/latest/7482" rel="nofollow">http://socialistparty.org.uk/latest/7482</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Denham</title>
		<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/comment-page-1/#comment-20740</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Denham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 20:58:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/#comment-20740</guid>
		<description>&quot;Heck, it might just be worth putting the real business of beating each other up over theoretical disputes on hold for the duration.&quot;

Hear, hear, Dave!

I was about to write something very similar at &quot;Shiraz&quot; but you beat me to it.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Heck, it might just be worth putting the real business of beating each other up over theoretical disputes on hold for the duration.&#8221;</p>
<p>Hear, hear, Dave!</p>
<p>I was about to write something very similar at &#8220;Shiraz&#8221; but you beat me to it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scratch</title>
		<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/comment-page-1/#comment-20739</link>
		<dc:creator>Scratch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 19:18:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/#comment-20739</guid>
		<description>One notes the near complete lack of coverage of this issue on the rest of the left sites linked to from here.

Fancy that.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One notes the near complete lack of coverage of this issue on the rest of the left sites linked to from here.</p>
<p>Fancy that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff Collier</title>
		<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/comment-page-1/#comment-20738</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff Collier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:29:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/#comment-20738</guid>
		<description>My former MP (Alan Johnson) was on the radio today criticising the strikers for going outside the law. Given that the original purpose of the Labour party was to remove anti-union laws, this is surely some kind of sick joke. I wonder what you can tell us about your attempts to change your party&#039;s policy on this question. Was your motion well received at the ward or constituency meetings?

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My former MP (Alan Johnson) was on the radio today criticising the strikers for going outside the law. Given that the original purpose of the Labour party was to remove anti-union laws, this is surely some kind of sick joke. I wonder what you can tell us about your attempts to change your party&#8217;s policy on this question. Was your motion well received at the ward or constituency meetings?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scratch</title>
		<link>http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/comment-page-1/#comment-20737</link>
		<dc:creator>Scratch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:52:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.davidosler.com/2009/06/lindsey-dispute-in-defence-of-wildcat-strikes/#comment-20737</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Heck, it might just be worth putting the real business of beating each other up over theoretical disputes on hold for the duration.&lt;/i&gt;

Oh, I don&#039;t know...

&lt;i&gt;Total’s nakedly nasty move makes its intention absolutely clear. Shop stewards, troublemakers, lippy bastards and/or anyone with minimal self-respect need not apply. What we are seeing is the return of hardline, back-to-the-eighties, management’s right to manage old skool union busting, pure and simple.&lt;/i&gt;

One difference between now and then was the faux left hadn&#039;t done half the bosses work for them by delegitimising the strikers in advance.

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Heck, it might just be worth putting the real business of beating each other up over theoretical disputes on hold for the duration.</i></p>
<p>Oh, I don&#8217;t know&#8230;</p>
<p><i>Total’s nakedly nasty move makes its intention absolutely clear. Shop stewards, troublemakers, lippy bastards and/or anyone with minimal self-respect need not apply. What we are seeing is the return of hardline, back-to-the-eighties, management’s right to manage old skool union busting, pure and simple.</i></p>
<p>One difference between now and then was the faux left hadn&#8217;t done half the bosses work for them by delegitimising the strikers in advance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

