About 50 of us work on the afternoon shift, which runs 2:30 p.m. to 11:30 p.m. Tuesday to Friday and from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m on Saturday. We are members of the United Food and Commercial Workers union.

During the weekend of May 26–27 we learned that the company was going to change the Saturday hours to 11:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. We would be working both Friday and Saturday night. The announcement was to be made at a meeting in the cafeteria the following Wednesday.

When the plant manager came to the cafeteria on Wednesday, backed by all his supervisors, he found that almost every one of us was wearing sunglasses. We were showing our united opposition to the new hours.

The boss asked for "our support" for his move to extend the work week and get out "more kilos" of meat. Workers would be brought in to work before 11:00 a.m. thus extending Saturday work to at least 12 hours.

After his announcement workers didn't hesitate to speak out. We pointed out that this was one more step to a seven-day operation, which previously existed in the plant: that we should be working Monday to Friday with voluntary overtime on weekends; that the wages were too low. Since the announcement the company has put more pressure on the union by using butchers and packers from a temporary agency on weekends.

While we have not yet forced the company to change its plans we showed that we can stick together.

Al Cappe
Montreal, Quebec
 
 
Nazi-era compensation pay
A recent newspaper article reported that compensation payments are soon to begin for some of those forced to work as slaves in capitalist factories during the Nazi regime. Allegedly, they are initially to receive a payment of $4,400 for what was in some cases years of slave labor. These former workers expressed some rancor at the settlement. This is not surprising, since these former slaves are not the real intended beneficiaries of this suit.

The primary beneficiary of this theater was the U.S. government, which manipulated it to fraudulently present itself as a defender of human rights and to use it as a public relations club against its capitalist competitors in Germany. That the U.S. government--the worst violator of human rights in the 20th and early 21st century--should be allowed to pose as a defender of human rights is truly grotesque!

The secondary beneficiaries of this lawsuit were the 51 lawyers who organized it and will rake in an average of more than 1 million dollars each for the public relations work they did for the U.S. government. The former slaves will be tossed a few pennies for the use of their names.

Robert Dees
Palo Alto, California
 
 
Protectionist policies
In the July 2 Militant, Brian Williams reported the support by leading officials of the International Association of Machinists for the U.S. government's plans to develop and deploy an antiballistic missile system which could give Washington a first-strike nuclear capacity for the first time in decades.

Reporting on a recent IAM aerospace conference in St. Louis, the IAM journal argued that one of the union's objectives must be "reducing or eliminating so-called offset levels in aerospace sales agreements."

"Offset levels occur, for example, when a country orders a fleet of 777s from Boeing--or a few regional jets from Canadair--and requires that a major part of the work be performed by workers in the purchasing country. This, of course, results in a reduction in the amount of work performed by union members in North American shops. It also means that aerospace technology is sold to the offshore customer who thus becomes an industry competitor."

It was from this protectionist perspective of counterposing the interests of its members to those of workers in other countries, that the IAM in Quebec mobilized its members to join recent protests at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. It then completely abstained from participating in the annual Montreal May Day march that featured workers on strike or in struggle.

Jim Upton
Montreal, Quebec
 
 
Questions on U.S. bases
In reading the June 18 issue, I noticed the small note about increased U.S. troops in Ecuador. It raised a question in my mind. How many other countries have U.S. military bases in them? How many military bases does the U.S. have in other countries?

Marty Anderson
Staten Island, New York

The letters column is an open forum for all viewpoints on subjects of interest to working people.

Please keep your letters brief. Where necessary they will be abridged. Please indicate if you prefer that your initials be used rather than your full name.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home