Return to: Home | Politics | UK Politics

The postal strike is our strike

John Pilger

Published 22 October 2009

New Labour has done its best to destroy the Post Office as a public institution. Postal workers deserve our solidarity

The postal workers' struggle is as vital for democracy as any national event in recent years. The campaign against them is part of a historic shift from the last vestiges of political democracy in Britain to a corporate world of insecurity and war. If the privateers running the Post Office are allowed to win, the regression that now touches all lives bar the wealthy will quicken its pace. A third of British children now live in low-income or impoverished families. One in five young people is denied hope of a decent job or education.

And now the Brown government is to mount a "fire sale" of public assets and services worth £16bn. Unmatched since Margaret Thatcher's transfer of public wealth to a new gross elite, the sale, or theft, will include the Channel Tunnel rail link, bridges, the student loan bank, school playing fields, libraries and public housing estates. The plunder of the National Health Service and public education is already under way.

The common thread is adherence to the demands of an opulent, sub-criminal minority exposed by the 2008 collapse of Wall Street and of the City of London, now rescued with hundreds of billions in public money and still unregulated with a single stringent condition imposed by the government. Goldman Sachs, which enjoys a personal connection with the Prime Minister, is to give employees record average individual pay and bonus packages of £500,000. The Financial Times now offers a service called How to Spend It.

Best of Britain

None of this is accountable to the public, whose view was expressed at the last election in 2005: New Labour won with the support of barely a fifth of the British adult population. For every five people who voted Labour, eight did not vote at all. This was not apathy, as the media pretend, but a strike by the public - like the postal workers are today on strike. The issues are broadly the same: the bullying and hypocrisy of contagious, undemocratic power.

Since coming to office, New Labour has done its best to destroy the Post Office as a highly productive public institution valued with affection by the British people. Not long ago, you posted a letter anywhere in the country and it reached its destination the following morning. There were two deliveries a day, and collections on Sundays. The best of Britain, which is ordinary life premised on a sense of community, could be found at a local post office, from the Highlands to the Pennines to the inner cities, where pensions, income support, child benefit and incapacity benefit were drawn, and the elderly, the awkward, the inarticulate and the harried were treated humanely.

At my local post office in south London, if an elderly person failed to turn up on pension day, he or she would get a visit from the postmistress, Smita Patel, often with groceries. She did this for almost 20 years until the government closed down this "lifeline of human contact", as the local Labour MP called it, along with more than 150 other local London branches. The Post Office executives who faced the anger of our community at a local church - unknown to us, the decision had already been taken - were not even aware that the Patels made a profit. What mattered was ideology; the branch had to go. Mention of public service brought puzzlement to their faces.

The postal workers, having this year doubled annual profits to £321m, have had to listen to specious lectures from Peter Mandelson, a twice-disgraced figure risen from the murk of New Labour, about "urgent modernisation". The truth is, the Royal Mail offers a quality service at half the price of its privatised rivals Deutsche Post and TNT. In dealing with new technology, postal workers have sought only consultation about their working lives and the right not to be abused - like the postal worker who was spat upon by her manager, then sacked while he was promoted; and the postman with 17 years' service and not a single complaint to his name who was sacked on the spot for failing to wear his cycle helmet. Watch the near frenzy with which your postie now delivers. A middle-aged man has to run much of his route in order to keep to a preordained and unrealistic time. If he fails, he is disciplined and kept in his place by the fear that thousands of jobs are at the whim of managers.

Subversive forces

Communication Workers Union negotiators describe intransigent executives with a hidden agenda - just as the National Coal Board masked Thatcher's strictly political goal of destroying the miners' union. The collaborative journalists' role is unchanged, too. Mark Lawson, who pontificates about middlebrow cultural matters for the BBC and the Guardian and receives many times the remuneration of a postal worker, dispensed a Sun-style diatribe on 10 October. Waffling about the triumph of email and how the postal service was a "bystander" to the internet when, in fact, it has proven itself a commercial beneficiary, Lawson wrote: "The outcome [of the strike] will decide whether Billy Hayes of the CWU will, like [Arthur] Scargill, be remembered as someone who presided over the destruction of the industry he was meant to represent."

The record is clear that Scargill and the miners were fighting against the wholesale destruction of an industry that was long planned for ideological reasons. The miners' enemies included the most subversive, brutal and sinister forces of the British state, aided by journalists - as Lawson's Guardian colleague Seumas Milne documents in his landmark work, The Enemy Within. Postal workers deserve the support of all honest, decent people, who are reminded that they may be next on the list if they remain silent.

Post this article to

  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • newsvine
  • Reddit

26 comments from readers

mount
22 October 2009 at 09:28

"..a strike by the public.."

Brilliant but unfortunately reminiscent of the conundrum, what can the majority do? We the people know it's wrong, we know we're being shafted, we know life just gets dearer, we know the bankers are awarding themselves bonuses with our money, we know that Bush, Blair and the rest sent a bunch of those they protect to die when they themsleves would never face any risk to get fat, we know that millions die through wars in our name and we even despite propaganda mostly recognise that, we know that the wealth chasm keeps getting wider, we know we work like slaves and can't afford a pint.. but the feck can we do about it?

We're all just trying to make ends meet, whilst meanwhile we're funelled into a machinator. I for one am becoming ever more aware that there's grass, chairs and cocktails around the edge of that hole.

mount
22 October 2009 at 13:42

by the way who was third?

MickR
22 October 2009 at 16:26

I must congratulate John on the most incisive and insightful piece of journalism on this dispute I have read to date. the instances involving the treatment of the postpersons in this article ring so true, I am aware of an instance of harassment by an individual which upon investigation was upheld, and the week after the decision was made the same individual was an acting manager! The facts are exactly as you portray them, and I have no doubt the CWU are exactly right when they suspect that the triumverate of Higson,Crozier and Mandelson are entirely resposible for the mess we are in. A top piece of journalism, keepmit up!

Keir H
22 October 2009 at 20:35

If the CWU wants public support for continuing strike action it will have to overcome the incessant media Right Wing bias.

Daniele
22 October 2009 at 21:24

Another lucid article by Pilger!

It is obvious that the plan is for the government is to destroy the Post-Office by encouraging its management to make outrageous demands which will force the Union to declare a strike. The post-office 's demise is then squarely blamed on the Union and the workers and then we

terence patrick hewett
22 October 2009 at 21:39

Mr Pilger misunderstands the nature of the effect of

technology upon society. The world is driven by

business, science, engineering and technology. The

development of the transistor by Bardeen/Brattain, at

AT&T Bell Labs in 1947, wrought changes in society

that dwarfed any of those achieved by political

philosophy. The invention the World Wide Web by Tim

Berners-Lee in 1989 has ensured a barely controlled

dialogue between millions and has changed the world

forever. The ignorance of science by the people of the

political village is palpable. They do not even

understand how the simplest of everyday devices

work. Fifty years ago C P Snow wrote on the fact that

Science and the Humanities regarded each other with

mutual incomprehension; and it has got much, much

worse. A re-reading of Snow's "The Two Cultures"

shows that nothing has changed since then. "If the

scientists have the future in their bones," he claimed,

"then the traditional culture responds by wishing the

future did not exist." F R Leavis's poisonous

response, exemplified this attitude and it triumphed;

but I sense things are about to change. The political

elites have realised that we are going to have to work a

great deal harder if we are to survive. The essentially

Luddite attitude of the British union movement creates

the impression that technological advance can be

resisted; it can't, and it is a cruel deception to say that it

can. The false reality of non-job creation will always, in

the end, be engulfed by the Tsunami of technological

change. The National Trades Union Congress

(NTUC) of Singapore acknowledges this reality and

have adopted, in its own words, "a cooperative, rather

than a confrontational policy towards employers."

They know better than us that if we are to survive we

need to embrace the future, not bury our heads in the

past; in the sad, sad world of a Tolpuddle Martyrs

theme park.

mitchy
23 October 2009 at 15:11

Good article John.

Go posties! Down with the UK Oligarchy!

Lovecat
23 October 2009 at 21:55

Hi Keir - According to the CWU website a poll indicated 50% support for the postal workers with 25% support for the managers. I presume the other 25% were rabbiting on twitter about whether the left or right wing were more historically violent. :-) Seriously, I think the way that postmen have daily relationships with their customers goes a long way to counteracting media bias and John and I aren't the only people who feel sympathy when we see sweat dripping from our postmen's foreheads as they practically run the rounds now.

John - thanks for another good article. You write in such a calm, clear, non-hysterical way that puts information before entertainment. In light of the media circus that's going on just now, this was a relief.

Lovecat
23 October 2009 at 21:56

I meant to add that the CWU claim that poll was a Newsnight poll.

A Jeffery
24 October 2009 at 02:30

I cannot understand why so many people in the same insecure, pressured situation in their jobs as the postal workers are incapable of empathy with them?

A colleague, a van driver for the company I work for, told me today that he didn't support the strikes because the postal workers are lazy and should get on with the job, then continued to complain about how much he has to lift and that all of his fellow drivers are worried about redundancies.

So many people are being squeezed by the recession, (and recovery that costs the workers and not their bosses), shouldn't there naturally be more solidarity despite the un-informing and manipulated soundbite media output?

maryb
24 October 2009 at 12:53

@ mount 22 October

Unbelievably it was Bob Geldorf. Surprised they didn't have Bono as well.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200605220016

Brilliant article as ever by John Pilger. CWU - do not give in to the NuLabour slimeballs.

zhuxai
25 October 2009 at 16:11

Agreed, mostly. A postal worker who wrote a piece in The Guardian yesterday pointed out some of the bizarre decisions made by his managers. My point is that "managers" in many industries actually make decisions that stop people doing their job. Amazing but true. It happens in my profession and obviously in the Royal Mail and this article supports that premise.

Peter Arrand
26 October 2009 at 06:12

"Not long ago, you posted a letter anywhere in the country and it reached its destination the following morning"??????

When was this - I don't remember it - and I'm over 50!

William
26 October 2009 at 13:21

Difference between John Smith, Robin Cook & Gordon Brown apart fom the blatant obvious. 2 believed in safe guarding the dichotomy of the socialist working person, the 3rd well selling out to the EU Oligarchs springs to mind.

Pierre
26 October 2009 at 13:43

The issue is the willingness of the politicians to deal with the unions. They are overpaid and under worked.

The salaries should be based on comparable similar private sector workers salary.

Their wage increases/decreases/benefits should be the average of the private sector increases/decreases benefits for similar work.

There should be no guaranteed lifetime employment as in the private sector.

No strikes, no slowdowns and more firings.

redkook
27 October 2009 at 10:56

Come on, get real. The PO has many problems caused by many factors but to reduce this down to somesimplistic and blindly romantic guff about downtrodden posties insults everyone.

This is just ridiculous -- worthy of Private Eye in fact: "Watch the near frenzy with which your postie now

delivers. A middle-aged man has to run much of his route in order to keep to a preordained and unrealistic time. If he fails, he is disciplined and kept in his place by the fear that thousands of jobs are at the whim of managers."

writeon
27 October 2009 at 12:39

The attack on the postal workers is only the first stage of an attempt by management and the state to fundamentally weaken the ability of working people to organize and defend themselves against the threat of a return to a new form of economic and social fuedalism, where wages and conditions, and a lot more, are not negotiated, but dictated from above.

Due to the gross and criminal mismanagement of the British economy, illustrated by the collapse of the financial system, the balance of payments crisis... it is of paramount importance to launch a form of pre-emptive strike on what's left of organized labour, which is mostly in the public sector, so that any resistance becomes momentously more difficult.

Working people are going to be made to carry the full burden and price, for a crisis they did not create. The price will be a massive and asocial reduction in living standards not seen for a generation, whilst the lifestyles of the ruling elite are enhanced and paid for by crushing and squeezing the standard of living of the majority of the population.

Destroying the ability of the majority to defend and mount any sort of resistance, just like the attack on the mineworkers, during the Thatcher regime, is the real purpose and background to the current postal conflict.

mohammedmassoudmorsi
27 October 2009 at 13:15

Dear Terence,

"The world is driven by business, science, engineering and technology."

I do not know which school you attended. I grew up in Egypt and neither of those ever applied! I see a world driven by numbers and weapons, all firmly backed by a political philosophy that promotes class and social difference as well as a modern imperial bullying of anyone who speaks differently.

Public institutions are being privatised and people are ever more confused of how to argue with a reasons of numbers, aka a positive bottomline.

In reality, the postal strike is synonym all over most of the western world. People just assume they live in a free country, but in reality it's hard to subject that concept to any real or practical scrutiny. In Egypt, who is considered a "democratic country" by the west, scrutinising the government would lead to arrest, imprisonment and so forth. In the west, scrutiny is only applied by words, in effect making any real scrutiny only to be - to take to the streets and protest. Here police officers will remove and beat you in what will be described as 'controlling' the masses or maintaining law and order, whereas in Egypt it would be described as the 'brutal hand of the secular regime" - up until the next time Britain or any other Western country needs the countr's voice or canal.

Encroachments on freedoms are taking place in the western world, some very far reaching. The postal strike is an example of this. This has got nothing to do with transistors, but everything to do with political philosophy, cause people's thoughts have been trapped in hollow rhetoric. People (We) have lost all intelligence and will.

What to do?

To stand up and yes SUPPORT, not just by words but by action. To hold our governments accountable for what they DO, not what they say or intend to do.

The postal strike is also an example of the how far the laws have gone. They have to do with intensification of government power and removal of democratic aspirations.

gondwanaland
31 October 2009 at 09:08

As much as i admire John Pilger, i'm always struck by

how black and white his world view is.

The postal service will be downsized in the years to

come, and privatized shortly after the tories come to

power next year. As usual the unions are hastening

the demise of their workers, and are cheered on by

John Pilger who, unlike the workers, will not be

unemployed.

Terence Patrick Hewett

Good post.

DanBrown
31 October 2009 at 10:26

An intelligent and thoughtful article.

When the veneer relating to this topic- as sadly

presented by much of the mainstream press- is

disturbed we see the bullyboy tactics employed by

essentially unaccountable corporations to increase

their profits and control their workforce.

To debate the "real world" relevance of, or take some

moral position relating to, strike action is in many ways

missing the point; what matters is that the action is

heard and understood. Or should these individuals

too submit to a Ballardian world, consigned to

boredom and resignation by the humdrum managerial

marketing machine.

papigosh
31 October 2009 at 11:53

PRIVATISATION HAS FAILED IN EVERY SECTOR

Do not be fooled.

'Modernisation' simply means privatisation of public services generating massive profits and bonuses for canny individuals with massive job losses for the vast majority of the British people.

No public service or institution is exempt. NHS, RAIL SERVICES, POSTAL SERVICES, SCHOOLS AND UNIVERSITIES etc are already in the throes of strangulation in the guise of modernisation.

Curiously, the Financial sector, already 'modernised' had to be rescued by us the taxpayers.

Our only saving grace is to CLEAN OUT BOTH NEW LABOUR AND MODERN CONSERVATIVES in the next election. IT IS TIME WE MAKE A PACT WITH THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.

SUPPORT THE POSTIES OR YOU WILL BE NEXT!

Daniele
02 November 2009 at 18:23

In France at this very moment, there is an epidemic of suicides caused by depression and despair following measures of "modernisation" in various private industries, France Telecom in particular. It is a national scandal.

Pierre, you should know this if you are French and shame on you if you think that is a price worth paying.

Writeon says it all. It is only the beginning. The State is now working with the big companies to break all resistance from the workers, to unable the bosses and the rich to make even more and more money and to destroy the very notions of public services and workers' rights."Modernisation" is a euphemism for privatisation and the sacrifice of the workers to the god Money.

This is the sad truth, and to the people who welcome these developments, I only hope no one in your family is driven to such despair that they lose the will to live.

I don't want to live in this kind of society. Does anyone?

Frederick Roots
06 November 2009 at 13:38

The premiss of the article is completely mistaken. This

is not a fight between some noble band of beaten

down working men and an intransigent beastly coal

owner or steel baron in the nineteenth century. I speak

to my postman on an almost daily basis and although

he complains that he has more post to deliver than in

the past (a side effect of Royal Mail contracting to

deliver junk mail as the traditional letter post declines)

he says the main issue is that London postmen only

deliver for an hour and a half a day, and want it to stay

that way. My Geordie postman and most postmen in

the country deliver for three and a half hours a day and

are consequently far more productive than their

London brethren. That is what this strike is about. I

have it from the postman's mouth. 'They don't know

they are born,' he said, 'those London postmen. They

should have my job.'

Well - I agree. They should have his job. Three and a

half hours a day is not an unreasonable length for a

postman's delivery round, but in this union benighted

world of old seventies confrontation and union

radicalism, a fair day's work is not acceptable. The

other thing he told me it was about is the rather quaint

perk that a postman may go home as soon as he

finishes his delivery rather than when his contracted

hours are up. What an outrage! My guy looked at his

watch that lunchtime when we were chatting about this

and said to me, 'Well mate - I haven't got time to chat

any more to you. As soon as I finish this bag, I'm off to

the pub.'

So Pilger old chap - as usual you have it wrong. Too

tied up with your class war, peacnic agenda - as usual.

Comical thing is, twenty years ago I believed every

word you wrote, until I began to see that you are about

the most political agenda driven hack there is.

Camus
10 November 2009 at 14:31

@ Frederick Roots: never heard of irony have you? Your chatty postperson is obviously a pastmaster in

the art of sly rhetoric. Read the diary entry in the last issue of the London Review of Books for a more

authentic (i.e. irnoy-free) account of what it means to be a postman. I'd give you the link but I think you

should make the effort - you obviously have plenty of time on your hands if you can chat at lunchtime!

Fergwoo
10 November 2009 at 18:54

To the people who dissent from this article's basic message for whatever reasons that they can find - 321 million in profit should not precipitate the loss of anyone's job within an organisation that can generate it. The goverment can even make a profit from keeping it going, rather than privatising it and subsequently dumping it in the valley of the rich, where as beneficiaries of private investment, the legislators as private individuals will retire.

mount
11 November 2009 at 09:08

Don't understand. Why privatise something making profit?? Don't you need a lot of tax revenue to make an equivalent gain? Doesn't 'modernisation' / trimming off waste / streamlining etc mean less people in work, whilst more money for fewer people, and inevitably a higher burden on the state from a purely economic viewpoint?

Post your comment

Please note: you will need to login or register before you can comment on the website

About the writer

John Pilger

John Pilger, renowned investigative journalist and documentary film-maker, is one of only two to have twice won British journalism's top award; his documentaries have won academy awards in both the UK and the US. In a New Statesman survey of the 50 heroes of our time, Pilger came fourth behind Aung San Suu Kyi and Nelson Mandela. "John Pilger," wrote Harold Pinter, "unearths, with steely attention facts, the filthy truth. I salute him."

Read More

Vote!

Will Baroness Ashton be an effective EU foreign minister?

Suggest a question

View comments

© New Statesman 1913 – 2009

Tracker