No to job losses. No to worse conditions.

>
> > No to job losses,
> >
> > no to worse conditions
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Air New Zealand and media spin
> >
> > According to Air New Zealand, engineers have voted to
> > reject a proposal which would save 300 jobs. This has
> > been faithfully reported in the media.
> >
> > In fact, what has happened is that a section of workers
> > have voted to reject a proposal which would have led to
> > several hundred permanent job losses. Along with the 110
> > job cuts announced in December, a further 207 jobs would
> > have been lost if engineers and AMEA members had've
> > accepted the proposed deal.
> >
> >
> >
> > Profit maximisation versus workers' jobs and livelihoods
> >
> > Air New Zealand's claims that it simply must outsource
> > these jobs is an idea that just doesn't fly. The savings
> > through outsourcing are supposedly $48 million over five
> > years. Yet Air NZ profits in the year to June 2005 were
> > $235 million. And, in late November 2005, just as they
> > were preparing to swing the axe on engineers' jobs, Air NZ
> > reported that its profits for the 2005-06 year were
> > expected to be 40% higher than they had previously
> > forecast and they should make $140 million for the year to
> > June 2006.
> >
> > In other words the annual "savings" from the job cuts
> > would be about $9.6 million per year, while their profits
> > currently range between $140 million and around $240
> > million a year.
> >
> > What is involved here is the ruthless pursuit of profit -
> > and, indeed, not merely of profit, but of absolute profit
> > maximisation.
> >
> > They are prepared to throw hundreds of engineers out of
> > work in order to make $140 million profit instead of $130
> > million profit.
> >
> > Moreover, the stakes for workers are especially high.
> > There is very little chance of engineers getting similar
> > jobs in New Zealand. Plus those jobs are lost for good;
> > no future generation will be able to walk into them. A
> > job is not just what you do 40 hours a week; it is the
> > source of an entire livelihood, standard of living and
> > identity; it can be also the result of years of training
> > and up-skilling. These kinds of job losses affect
> > families and future generations as well.
> >
> >
> >
> > Labour: helping the investors and screwing the engineers
> >
> > A major role in this whole affair is being played by the
> > government, in particular by the pro-big business Labour
> > Party. Labour was prepared to bail out the private
> > investors in Air NZ to the tune of hundreds of millions of
> > dollars when the privatisers make a mess of running the
> > company. In return, the state became the single biggest
> > shareholder. However, Labour is not prepared to even use
> > its position as the government and largest shareholder to
> > keep these jobs. They have hundreds of millions to throw
> > into helping private investors, and they can't even step
> > in to stop these job losses. Labour has shown, once again
> > , that it works for big business and against the workers.
> >
> >
> >
> > EPMU leaders: helping abolish jobs
> >
> > Air NZ and the government have not been the only problem
> > faced by the engineers. The EPMU leadership has failed to
> > provide any sort of strategy to keep the jobs. Rather
> > than fighting for their members' jobs - the jobs of the
> > union members whose subs pay the union bureaucrats' wages
> > - EPMU leaders entered a bidding game with the employer
> > and the government, based around acceptance of massive job
> > losses.
> >
> > This is one of the fruits of the EPMU leadership's
> > attachment to the Labour Party and to "partnership" with
> > the bosses. It always results in workers getting screwed.
> >
> > Moreover, in lay-off situations any attempt to work with
> > the boss is especially suicidal.
> >
> > It is a doomed argument about how sharp the axe should be,
> > not an attempt to wrest the axe from the bosses' hands.
> > The only sensible attitude unions can take is a totally
> > committed defence of their members' interests.
> >
> > In the case of the AMEA, concessions were offered up to
> > the employer - for what?
> >
> >
> >
> > The movement workers need
> >
> > The reality is that the bosses and their organisations
> > always put the bosses' interests first. Too many union
> > leaderships, however, fail to put the workers' interests
> > first. The result is a one-sided class struggle in which
> > the bosses fight and the unions in effect surrender, often
> > without a fight.
> >
> > Workers desperately need unions that put our interests
> > ahead of those of the bosses and their profits. We need
> > unions that don't collaborate with the bosses in
> > organising for our jobs to be lost and our livelihoods
> > wrecked. We need unions that organise workers to fight
> > against job losses rather than act as a barrier to
> > organising. We need unions that are politically
> > independent, rather than attached to the Labour Party and
> > who don't want to rock the boat because of those Labour
> > affiliations and because the union leaders are looking to
> > make careers as Labour MPs in the future.
> >
> >
> >
> > A strategy to win, rather than surrender
> >
> > The announcement by Air New Zealand management of huge job
> > losses in order to maximise profits needed to be met right
> > from the start with determined opposition. Industrial
> > action, pickets and other protests -directed at both Air
> > New Zealand and the government - and reaching out to other
> > workers was essential from the start. In Argentina and
> > elsewhere, workers faced with factory closures over the
> > past few years have often occupied their workplaces -
> > workers in New Zealand can take this option. Occupations,
> > mobilising support from other workers and demanding the
> > full nationalisation of Air New Zealand by the government
> > with the day-to-day running being under workers' control,
> > would mean no job losses, no worsening of conditions, no
> > pay cuts.
> >
> >
> >
> > Who produced this leaflet?
> >
> > This leaflet was produced by the Workers Party. We are a
> > new political party for and of workers. Unlike the
> > so-called "Labour" Party, we put workers' interests first,
> > because we are part of the working class and are committed
> > to fighting for a new society in which the decisions are
> > made by the workers, not by a tiny minority of rich
> > employers and politicians who serve those employers'
> > interests.
> >
> > We can be contacted through our website at:
> > www.workersparty.org.nz
> >
> > In Christchurch, you can also write to P.O. Box 513,
> > Christchurch or phone Byron, 021-154-0612.
> >