Sunday, February 07, 2010

"Trotskyism is not compatible with human dignity.. It conflicts with fundamental rights..repugnant.. and not worthy of respect in a democratic society". OFFICIAL

Last week’s published judgement by an Employment Tribunal (ET) which threw out a nasty and bogus complaint by certain members of the Socialist Party (SPEW) against UNISON - completely vindicated the union.

The four London based SPEW member's barmy claim was that internal discipline action taken against them by the union was only taken because they were Trotsky revolutionaries. They also claimed they were entitled to protection due to their Trotsky views and philosophy under the anti- religious discrimination regulations.

I won’t comment on the internal discipline procedure since this is still on-going. The SPEW web site reports that their internal union appeals have failed and they face a “mitigation” hearing on 24 February 2010.

However, I can comment on the completely vile lies and slanders that have been put about by supporters of these four SPEW members with regard to this ET.  Leaving aside the important issue that we have union members publically attacking their own union and encouraging outsiders to do the same.

You can purchase a copy of the ET judgement for yourself and see that the tribunal found that not only was there was no case to answer since the allegation was outside the regulations (and not capable of being discriminative), it was also “out of time” and even if it was within the regulations and in time it found that no discrimination had taken place.

Incredibly, SPEW has now published here that the employment tribunal decision was part of some wider class conspiracy against them and... British Airways workers (BA)? What daft and ignorant comments. ET’s have played no part in current legal dispute between Unite and BA. These BA workers are facing a real legal attack on them and for SPEW to try and compare themselves to genuine workers at risk of dismissal is just bloody shameful. Who outside the public sector union movement, who have to deal with such extremists, really gives a damn or has even heard of them?

What a load of cultist conspiracy rubbish. No-one forced them to take part in this legal process. Most of them had taken part in tribunals beforehand and knew the score. If they had won would they still be saying the same? No. Of course not.

Let’s see what the tribunal decided after a full hearing with witnesses giving evidence and being questioned, during several days of evidence as well as the submission of thousands of pages of statements and documents.

Without forgetting the important decision that the tribunal found that there has been no discrimination let’s see what they found about Trotskyism.

They found that the SPEW Trotskyism was “not compatible with human dignity” section 131; they found that SPEW members held “Extreme and repugnant views” section 133; Trotskyism is “not a belief that qualifies for protection from discrimination" section 134; “The claimant views conflict with the fundamental rights of others, and the dignity of others, and are not worthy of respect... in a democratic society". Section 135

That’s good enough for me. I only wish that this judgement was made available to all UNISON members. It was a pity that there was no mention that SPEW and other Trotskyite parties such as the SWP believe in “democratic centralism” which means that all their members must accept being told what to do by their Party and what the Party thinks is in the interest of the “revolution” (whatever that is) rather than in the best interests of union members. Why don't they disclose this on election addresses?


Anonymous said...

Presumably the judgment will have to be reported to the NEC and ALL our NEC members will ensure that the decision (including specifically the parts you refer to) are reported back to their constituencies.

boilermaker said...

Do you generally take as gospel what ET judges say?

I presume next time they find against a union member we can remind you of how you fully agree with them and their 'impartial' position?

Anonymous said...

Excelent news for local democracy and the rule of the membership! There is enough evidence being kept in reserve in branches like Greenwich, Bromley and in Lambeth by those who are in support of democracy to expose the militant beureucrats (because that is what they really are) to disciplinary investigations and stop them from being parasites because that is what they are. The national union should deal with them now!! Start the ball rolling!

Anonymous said...

"It was a pity that there was no mention that SPEW and other Trotskyite parties such as the SWP believe in “democratic centralism” which means that all their members must accept being told what to do by their Party and what the Party thinks is in the interest of the “revolution” (whatever that is) rather than in the best interests of union members."

Unlike the Labour Party, whereby it doesn't matter what policy you pass at your annual conference, it'll just be ignored if it's not to the leadership's taste --

Anonymous said...

Why do we have to 'buy' the judgment? Can't it simply be put up on google docs or something so we can all see it? I only ask this as it seems some of the lunatic fringe are trying to suggest the judgment wasn't quite as howlingly bad as you are suggesting.

Anonymous said...

Made themselves look stupid

a revoluntinary

yes revoluntionary organisation
seeking legal status

Lenin didnt say hang on a minute lets check if the Czar will legalise us

they must be surely one of worst revoluntary socialist groups ever

they can keep the the "League" bit
in RSL because thats all they stand for now

Anonymous said...

Jon Rogers criticism would be valid and somewhat relevant, or perhaps real, if the militants in his own pit, who have now become 'militant bureaucrats' stopped posting comments anonymously of course, attacking others and more significantly (and this is the funny part of the whole thing) each other. Lambeth militant bereaucrat syndrome? Explain please? On second thoughts perhaps not..

Mary Scott

John Gray said...

Hi boilermaker
I think you “don’t get it”. I am always very wary of the ET route and prefer whenever possible collective action or negotiation.

The SPEW 4 and their advisors freely decided to go ahead with this bonkers ET knowing the score yet now they have lost, they cry wolf.

This is pretty hypocritical and even pitiable by any count. If they thought the state would always go against them why did they go ahead with the action and waste thousands and thousands of pounds of union subs? Sour grape losers or what?

andy newman said...

I think these four should have seen a lawyer first, as I recall that the then BNP Advisory Council member, Rbert Baggs, had already taken Union to an Employment Tribunal some years ago on almost exactly the same basis, and lost on the same point of law.

John Gray said...

Hi Andy
That is part of the problem that they (or to be fair - one of them) appear to see themselves as employment lawyers not trade unionists.

After all who on earth with any experience of the legal process would really trust ET’s over such issues? This is all just bonkers.

The only people who would have benefited if they had won on the point of legal definition would have been the fascists.