we are still
Next meetings

NORTH: Sunday 1 March, 2.30pm, Cafe Nero, Manchester Piccadilly.

LONDON: Our next London steering meeting is on Sunday 15 March, 4-6pm at the Common House Unit 5E (press the buzzer) 5 Pundersons Gardens, Bethnal Green, London E2 9QG. This will be an organizing meeting.

All self-defining women welcome, this includes trans*women and intersex women.
Please contact us if you need childcare. We can either fund it or arrange for you to bring along any small people to the meeting. Also, if you have any other access issues please get in touch. feminist.fightback@gmail.com

Solidarity with Caroline Leneghan from Feminist Fightback

Re posted statement from Caroline Leneghan


Domestic Violence and International Women’s day RMT


Today I would like to show my solidarity with women all over the world on International Women’s day and to raise the issue of domestic violence against women. The RMT have released a model domestic violence policy for the transport industry which I hope gets rolled out to every employer.

I’m Caroline Leneghan, I’m a member of the RMT and assistant Branch Secretary of my RMT branch.
Until recently I was in a relationship with the RMT Assistant General Secretary Steve Hedley. During the relationship I experienced physical and mental domestic violence which made me feel hopeless to challenge. In January I reported a violent assault to the police that took place the previous year. On this occasion he kicked a pot of paint at me, threw me around by my hair and pinned me to the floor repeatedly punching me in the face. The extent of my injuries meant I couldn’t go out for weeks. I had severe bruising and swelling to my face and body and he had pulled out clumps of my hair. I have decided to make a public statement about this because of his public position in the union and because I want to encourage other women to come forward who have faced similar abuse.

Additionally, as I am a member of the RMT I felt that it was important to raise my assault with the RMT. I believe that he will continue to perpetrate abuse and is a threat to female members. I want to continue my activism within the union but I do not feel safe to do so unless this matter is dealt with properly.

When I raised the assault with the union, I was subjected to what is known as as ‘victim blaming’. I was distressed and astonished at the questions I was asked and the investigating officer displayed a total lack of respect and sensitivity, and a lack of understanding of domestic violence. The investigator tried to make a link between my mental health and the assault and deemed it appropriate to inquire about my personal history, but has not deemed it necessary to look into Steve’s, despite the fact that it is his behaviour that is being called into question and not mine. The investigatior attempted to focus his attention on anything about me which could exonerate or mitigate Steve’s behaviour.

I was also shocked that the investigator asked to explain how someone of Steve Hedley’s build and proficient at boxing did not cause me more injuries. The investigator also accused me of causing the injuries myself. It is outrageous that when a woman reports an assault it would be considered feasible that she severely beat up her own face and further to also attempt to make a link with her mental health is collusion with the tactics of manipulation that abusers use to silence their victims. I felt degraded and that I had done something ‘wrong’ in reporting the attack.

These actions contribute to a culture where perpetrators of violence are never punished for their behaviour. It is a well known fact that women do not come forward when they have faced abuse because they fear the treatment they will get. Since receiving help from Victim Support I have learnt that it is common for perpetrators of domestic abuse to deflect blame for their actions onto their victims and attempting to discredit their claims and to shame them into remaining silent.

I think it is important to say that I am a proud member of the RMT because I thought it was committed to fighting for justice and equality for all workers. I had hoped that it would take seriously a claim against a senior elected representative and treat me with respect when I have made such a serious allegation. I am shocked and saddened that instead I have had to undergo a character assassination. No aspect of my life has been spared from scrutiny, using any detail, no matter how sensitive, used in a horrible and insensitive manner to undermine my claim.

I am writing this because I feel it is imperative that all organisations on the left take a look at themselves and question whether they are doing all they can to support their female members and fight sexism and abuse, in all its guises. I believe that we need strong unions and organisations like the RMT to fight all forms of inequality in society. It cannot do this if it allows sexism to go unchallenged and it fails to investigate its elective representatives seriously.

Women do not have equality in the labour movement or the left. This is a struggle and a fight that goes on everyday at work/ in our unions/ at home/ in meetings, etc. To women; we are what militant trade unionists look like. The labour movement continues to heroises a macho, aggressive archetype of what a good trade unionist looks like.
Recently highlighted problems on the left (e.g. the SWP rape case handling) have demonstrated the need for radical change. A support group made up of women from the left and labour movement to support women and challenging abuse and sexism should be set up.

In the past week my case against him was dropped by the police due to falling foul of their timescale for submitting a complaint. Steve has made an official statement to the RMT that the case was dropped and he was found innocent and exonerated. This is completely untrue. The investigating officer said the CPS would not prosecute because the incident had not happened in the past 6 months. Furthermore, I have been told that, had I reported it within 6 months, they would have had enough evidence to charge him with common assault. But due to the lapse in time, they instead had to arrest him on suspicion of ABH. However, the CPS sets a very high bar for chances of conviction (I was informed that they will only bring forward to trial cases that they believe have a 90 per cent chance of conviction).

Please see following link for original post




Justice for Cleaners at Thompsons Reuters!

Mass protest at Thompson Reuters


33 Aldgate High Street London EC3N 1DL, next to Aldgate tube station

Speakers include
STEVE HEDLEY RMT London Regional Organiser,
JOHN MALONEY – PCS DfT Group Secretary

Further protests at Thompson Reuters in Canary Wharf on Friday 30th March

Sex Work, Trafficking and the Olympics: The Case for a Moratorium

By Stop the Arrests Campaign

Stop the Arrests Campaign, a coalition of sex worker rights activists and supporters, is calling for a moratorium on arrests, detention and deportation of sex workers in London with immediate effect until the end of the Olympic Games.

Prior to the Olympics run up anti-trafficking laws and policies were resulting in brothel raids, closures and arbitrary arrests, detention and deportation of people working in the sex industry. For many sex workers these laws have dire consequences. Such policing creates a climate of fear among workers, leaving them less likely to report crimes against them – including violence and exploitation in the industry  and more vulnerable to abuse.1

A series of violent robberies on brothels in Barking & Dagenham by a gang in December 2011 demonstrates the effect that this climate of fear can have on the safety of sex workers. After the robberies, carried out at knifepoint, sex workers were deterred from pursuing the attacks because police threatened them with prosecution. There were many more  subsequent attacks and one woman was raped. But once the police agreed to an amnesty from arrest, sex workers were able to come forward.2

After 2006 a meme emerged suggesting that with every major sporting event comes a huge increase in trafficking of women for sexual slavery. The government, charity organisations and campaign groups have gone along with this. Such claims, often repeated by the media, are usually based on misinformation, poor data and a tendency to sensationalise.

Pressure groups cite the football World Cups in Germany and South Africa as evidence. Yet the claim that 40,000 women were trafficked into Germany in 2006 has been refuted by reports by the International Organisation for Migration, as well as by the Global Alliance Against Trafficking of Women. South African sex workers even noted a slump in demand during the World Cup, stating that they were disappointed that customers were “more concerned about football than in sex.”

Lobbying groups, including charities and non-governmental organisations have sprung up in London – many of which have no prior knowledge of the sex industry or experience of working with sex workers – citing this purported link and demanding measures such as increased law enforcement (policing) of sex work and a ban on advertising sexual services.

Nonetheless, there is no evidence that large sporting events cause an increase in trafficking for prostitution.3 This myth has reverberated throughout the media, activist circles and it now shaping policing policy in London.

We are aware of “clean up efforts” underway in London, particularly east London, in the run up to the Olympics. These include multiple raids and closure of premises. We anticipate that until the end of the Olympic games there will be a continued rise in the numbers of raids, arrests, deportations and level of harassment of sex workers.

Police have intensified raids on sex work premises, which have been ten times higher in the five Olympic boroughs than the rest of the city’s boroughs. This, the claim goes, is unrelated to the Olympics. But there have been 80 brothels shut down in Newham in 18 months and over seventy arrests in Tower Hamlets and Newham since the beginning of 2012. These arrest levels already exceed the total number for 2011.

The closure of brothels and flats leaves sex workers without premises from which to work, often forcing them onto the street, where they are more likely to be heavily policed, attacked or assaulted.

This is militarised spatial and social cleansing in the shadow of the Olympic stadium. Yet it is women’s safety and the desire to eliminate trafficking that is the narrative through which this aggressive agenda is being played out!

It is in this context that the Stop the Arrests Campaign is calling for a moratorium on arrests, detention and deportation of sex workers in London with immediate effect until the end of the Olympic Games. What this means is that we want the Mayor of London and London Metropolitan police, in co-operation with the UK Border Agency to,

1. Suspend offences that refer directly to sex workers: soliciting and prosecution for working collectively under brothel keeping laws
2. Suspend arrests of sex workers, administrative detainment and / or deportation, during the enforcement of offences relating to third parties, namely causing, inciting or controlling for gain.
3. Suspend the closure of premises through the use of closure orders and notices.

Go to http://www.moratorium2012.org to learn more about the campaign, read the open letter that will shortly be sent to the Mayor and sign the petition.

Notes: 1. x:talk (2010), Human rights, Sex Work and the Challenge of Trafficking
2. Owen Bowcott, “Call for change in law to protect prostitutes from violent crime”, Guardian  6/01/12, http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jan/16/change-law-prostitutes-crime-violent
3. Global Alliance Against Traffic in Women (GAATW), (2011) What’s the Cost of a Rumour? A Guide to Sorting Out the Myths and Facts about Sporting Events and Trafficking. http://www.gaatw.org/publications/What’s_the_Cost_of_a_Rumour-GAATW2011.pd



Organise This! – a day of workshops on workplace organising as part of the struggle against austerity

Pamphlet February 11, 2012Saturday 11th February, 10.30am-4pm 11th February 2012 at Oxford House, Derbyshire Street, London E2. 5 minutes walk from Bethnal Green tube station.

Many of us work in the public sector and took strike action on June and November 30th, or played a role in supporting this action in our communities. This experience threw up many of the above questions, as well as practical issues about the nuts and bolts of workplace organising. We have started to discuss these questions in our collective, and now are keen to work with others who have found themselves facing similar challenges – to share skills, ideas and experiences.

Organise This

What is the impact of withdrawing your labour as an educator, health worker, refuse collector, librarian or childcare worker; when the people most immediately affected are service users?

What strategies can we develop to make a strike powerful in sectors where our workloads are increasingly privatised and/ or we are employed on a short term or freelance basis?

How does taking industrial action fit into a broader struggle against austerity? How do we talk to our colleagues and service users about why our seemingly individual demands are collective concerns?

How do we develop forms of sustainable workplace organising that extend beyond the current climate of reactive and top-down one-day strikes?

All genders welcome.

The venue is accessible and a volunteer-run creche will be provided. Suggested donation of £4 low/ unwaged, £8 waged, includes lunch. Please register in advance so we know how much lunch to make!

For workshop booklet click here.

Please contact us if you want to come so we have an idea of numbers, and if you have any requirements that we can help with or if you can do a slot in the creche, at feminist.fightback@gmail.com.

‘Human Rights, Sex Work and the Challenge of Trafficking: Human rights impact assessment of anti-trafficking policy in the UK’.

Fightback has welcomed the report launched this month by the x:talk project ‘Human Rights, Sex Work and the Challenge of Trafficking: Human rights impact assessment of anti-trafficking policy in the UK’. Download a copy of the report.

The report finds that the UK’s anti-trafficking policy is undermining the rights of sex workers, leaving them vulnerable to arrest and conviction or, in the case of migrant workers, detainment and deportation. The UK is also failing to meet its human rights obligations to trafficked persons, particularly men, transgender people and people trafficked into non-sexual labour.John McDonnell MP said:

“This welcome report confirms what we suspected. Far from protecting vulnerable people the anti-trafficking laws are increasing the vulnerability of sex workers to abuse and exploitation. Lawmakers need to address seriously the recommendations of the report, including the question of decriminalisation.”

Ava Caradonna, sex worker and spokeswoman for x:talk, said:

“We have always suspected that attempts to address human trafficking have been co-opted by people with another agenda—the eradication of the sex industry. What the x:talk report has highlighted is that, rather than assisting and supporting trafficked people, anti-trafficking policies have been most effective at putting the safety, health and even the lives of sex workers at risk. They have also helped to make sex workers a soft target for the Border Agency.”

Thierry Schaffausser, president of the GMB Sex Workers’ branch said:

“The GMB has passed motions to support labour rights for sex workers as the best way to combat human trafficking and migrant workers’ exploitation. Prohibition actually worsens workers’ exploitation and creates the kind of conditions that generate trafficking. Last July, the LGBT TUC Conference also voted a motion calling for labour rights approaches to fight trafficking in the sex industry in the same way we do for all industries.”

The Original Sexist – Justice for Zara

On Saturday 23 April between 10am and 1pm supporters of Zara Senkan leafleted customers of , boarding at Victoria Bus Station. They highlighted a serious issue of sex discrimination and victimisation at the company.

Zara worked for the company for five years until the end of 2010 when she was sacked. During that time she was on the receiving end of bullying, sexism and unfair treatment by managers and co-workers. Zara was sacked shortly after she submitted a grievance to the company about some of these issues.

Zara started working for The Original Tour as a driver. In 2006, when she also began working as a controller, her problems began.

Over a four year period she was subjected to systematic sexist bullying by her co-workers and manger

She was told her job was “not for women” and was subject to many other sexist remarks.

She received unreasonable and personal criticism of her work on a daily basis.

She was blamed for things that went wrong on the job that had nothing to do with her.

She was systematically isolated in the workplace especially by the managers who wanted to “divide and rule” — they fabricated stories about Zara, her work and her behaviour.

Zara’s grievances were summarily dismissed by managers.

She was discriminated against over work allocation and over her right to be represented by a union.

Zara’s personal sickness record and her need to be both breadwinner and carer for sick relatives was used against her.

Supported by her union, the RMT, Zara is pursuing a case for sex discrimination through an employment tribunal.

All Zara wants is to set the record straight and prove that Original Tour was guilty of condoning and worse, perpetrating, clear sexist and unfair treatment that should have no place in any company. It is especially shocking that these bullying working practices took place at such long-standing, large company that claims to be “family friendly”.

Zara sums it up:

“They wanted me to have a nervous breakdown and leave the job, but they couldn’t break me so they sacked me”.

Andrew Lansley, greedy Andrew Lansley

Pre-election promises made by the Tories to protect the NHS from the devastating cuts being made to public services, have recently been exposed as farcical. The coalition government’s proposed reform threatens to completely remove the NHS from its founding principles of free comprehensive care based on the population’s needs, and is set to open the door even wider to private profit-making companies. Meanwhile, the imposed ‘productivity targets’ and ‘efficiency savings’ (£20 billion to be squeezed out over 4 years) are beginning to bite.

Cuts to frontline staff, ward closures and diminished services are now a serious concern across the whole spectrum of health care services. Barts and the London  hospital made the headlines last week with their plans to reduce nursing staff on the wards, cutting 10% of nurses. 630 jobs are estimated to be lost overall. London Ambulance service has also just announced their plans to cut 890 jobs, including 560 frontline workers.

The pressure on frontline staff is, as always, keenly felt in maternity care where the shortage of midwives is a chronic problem. And nowhere have the Tories more unashamedly reneged on their promises. Their pre-election promise to increase the number of midwives by 3000 was swiftly dumped by the coalition government. UK maternity wards are now at crisis point, and fears over the stillbirth and maternal death rates continue to make headlines. Despite this midwifery services are being pared back and training budgets disappearing. On top of this CEMACE, a body that investigates and reports on all deaths related to childbirth to improve the quality of maternity care, has just been scrapped.

This government’s agenda of cuts is set to cause irreparable damage to our NHS and must be resisted. The Royal College of Nurses voted 99% in favour of a vote of no confidence in health secretary Andrew Landsley, and the coalition have since announced a ‘pause’ in the program of reform.  This is a purely cynical attempt to soften the blow, and plans are going full steam ahead as the NHS chief of staff has himself admitted. Health workers and users of the NHS have been joining forces to fight for the NHS in their local areas and various groups will be attending a demonstration on the 17th May.

Click here for more details

Also, check out the Andrew Lansley Rap!

Bringing together a community in solidarity

Almost every school in the borough  closed either partially or entirely on 30 March due to joint action by local Unison and the NUT.  After picket lines were held, several hundred people assembled at Weavers Fields for a march to a rally at the London Muslim Centre.   I’d walked some of the way with my school through our neighbourhood.   Kids were on our megaphone all the way, other kids leaned out of windows to cheer us, cars beeped, and we got escorted off the premises of Canary Wharf to one of my kids leading a chant of “you’ve got loads of money”.

We were en route to support workers at another school where the head had been leading a campaign of intimidation against strikers. We met the workers of a Sure Start children’s centre holding a formidable picket line — this was one of many highlights, as we all cheered in riotous solidarity.  Before we knew it, about 2,000 people had taken to the streets, the majority of them women, many of whom had never struck or demonstrated before.  The demonstration, full of school bands and workers with their kids marching as service users as well as providers, felt massive, was incredibly loud and lively, and got loads of public support. Another of my kids appeared out of nowhere, clutched my hand and said in an awestruck whisper “I’ve never seen anything like it.”

The rally consisted of a top-table speaker panel made up of male union big-wigs.  There was lots of fighting talk from the bureaucracy.  Hundreds of people made it to the rally. There was lots of chanting demanding a general strike, a big vote in favour of combined public sector union action over pensions, and, I hope, a sense that we need to hold our tub-thumping “leaders” to account and demand action.

Obviously a one-day strike by itself is going to win nothing, but this was a necessary experience for us.  It gave us practice at organising, arguing, mobilising and demonstrating. It was a massive confidence boost to lots of us who are feeling our way for the first time with this stuff.  Perhaps most important, it allowed us to have solidarity with workers of different unions, in different schools, with parents and children — in short, our community.

Opportunities to build this solidarity are in themselves vital if we are going to be able to go on to fight a battle with a chance of winning. One opportunity may be soon as the NUT plans to ballot over national strike action on cuts in pensions.

By a Tower Hamlets teacher and member of Feminist Fightback Collective

Sexist Pigs Cut our Pensions!

In March 2011 University lecturers went on strike against significant cuts to their pension scheme which included forcing employees to pay more while their employers pay less, and ending the final salary scheme for anyone new to the workforce.

Picket lines went up in every college and university across Britain totalling five strike days. Pensions are now political. Many students were also clear that these seemingly bureaucratic changes were part of a broader attack on higher education which affected them too. This is an attack that seeks to create divisions between baby boomers and those of us under 35, erasing the memory and sense of entitlement to something as basic as the right to retire without fear of poverty. Many students supported the strike, and at Goldsmiths College, University of London they took over management’s offices for 4 days – an interesting tactic whereby an occupation was used to enforce a picket line and prevent bosses from coming to work.

But the sexist nature of these attacks on pensions needs to be more strongly highlighted. For the proposed changes discriminate especially against any employee whose wishes to take a career break or to return to work part-time. They are therefore most likely to affect women with children – further limiting any choice we might have about how to combine work with family life. They will reinforce conservative and nuclear family arrangements, deterring fathers or non-biological family members from taking an equal part in childcare.

Less than one hundred years ago women were still fighting to study at universities on an equal basis with men. Until the Second World War, female lecturers at most universities were required to resign their posts on marriage. It is ironic (if it were not so predictable) that, just at the moment in which women have begun to enter a relatively prestigious profession in equal numbers to men, that profession becomes devalued and degraded. Academia today is still a comparatively welcoming space for feminists: but right now our feminism needs to extend beyond the words we write in books to struggling in our own workplaces against retrograde practices which divide and exploit in highly gendered ways.

By a member of Feminist Fightback

Why are cuts are a feminist issue?

Report back from workshop at ‘Women At the Cutting Edge’ regarding how public sector cuts relate to feminism.
Overview of the cuts

Women (along with disabled people and migrants) will be hit disproportionately by the cuts to services.

Ideological attacks on none nuclear families, while the reality is that more than ever “families” need two adults just to survive.

Legal Aid cuts compound difficulties that people face with the benefits system. Home repossession will be a big feature of the next period.

Employers will use whatever leverage they can against low paid and public sector workers (=women workers). They will attack wages (including pensions) but also be bullies. Use of sickness records. Disciplining workers and giving them the boot just before retirement. Voluntary redundancy process will be used to bully people.

Moreover, there seems to be a lot of bullying going on in many areas. E.g. at the when people are “signing on”. Vulnerable people are going to feel most under attack (disabled, long-term sick, people with caring responsibilities). There may be a return to the assumption that a man is the “head of household” is the breadwinner. The bullying is compounded by the contradiction that it is going to be increasingly difficult to “go back to work”. It is difficult to see how the government/state is going to manage this contradiction. There are big implications for how we struggle against public sector cuts.

For more information:

‘Cuts Are a Feminist Issue’ FF Article Soundings 2011

FF Workshop Cuts

‘Women and the Cuts Fact Sheet’ Women’s Resource Centre

TUC Women and the Cuts Tool Kit

Women Against Cuts

Women and Capitalism

The ‘double’ exploitation of women under capitalism – as low paid waged workers and as unwaged carers / domestic workers.

The intersectional exploitation of people – race, gender, class, sexuality, disability, nationality etc…

The role of the family unit in reproducing capitalism.

Cuts will mean that women will not only loose their jobs (given they make up the majority of as precarious workers & public sectors workers) but that a reduction in reproductive and welfare services will place greater burdens on women in terms of their unpaid work.

How does the law help us? Equality legislation only obliges Local Authority to do an assessment on the gender impact – we not have to do anything beyond that…

We are stronger than we think. We genuinely are, all in it together. They are packaging cuts, we can do “packaging” too.

Privatisation/restructuring is complex. Really compels us to bring together service users and workers.

Changes are structural. They are creating new divisions or revamping old ones e.g. between the deserving and undeserving poor. They are now talking about benefits as a privelege, not a means to help out vulnerable in society.

Cuts and privatisation are piecemeal. We need to get a grip on the areas and points at which we can mount a challenge.

What type of campaign do we want?
Not a campaign, a struggle

Would be useful to have headline figures and alternative arguments

Communities from below – neighbours resisting together, building communities.

Anti-cuts can’t just be about public sector workers

Equipping people to resist, build alliances from the position you are in, rather than start a campaign.

Demo’s around particular issues do build confidence

New situation – we should expect the unexpected

Argue against idea of sacrifice.

Ahouldn’t just be defending what we had e.g. keep fees at 3,000. How do you argue this in a way that doesn’t scare people?

What society do we envision?

Pressure on TU leaders

Need to go beyond existing public services.

Need to make invisible cuts visible e.g. the effect on work at home and therefore the need to recognise that work at home is work.

Need to deefend and also fight for more. Services are inadequate but if we don’t save them the government/state will get stronger.

Privatisation is also about cutting, rolling back services. It is sometimes not clear and not as emotive but nonetheless that is what it is.

We need to do a lot of simplifying – breaking things down to help us understand what is happening.

The Tories build on bad experiences of services. There is always a need to “balance issues” and work out priorities e.g. what do we say about cuts in police services.


In, Against (and Beyond?) the State

Report back from workshop at ‘Women At the Cutting Edge’ and suggestions for how to further pursue the questions it raised.

Aims of the workshop

To test several hypothesis:
Has David Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ rhetoric tapped into a genuine dissatisfaction/ desire for more control over our state services?

How do people experience the contradictory nature of the state – as an instrument of social control and as the provider of essential services?

That a simple ‘defend public services position’ is inadequate to inspiring working-people to fight and responding to their real needs.

And to ask what this tells us about how to fight against cuts:
In particular, what we think about initial moves being made to run services ourselves – case studies of library being taken over by the anti-cuts campaign, and of free ESOL classes in a migrant resource centre filling in for ESOL courses cut at the local FE college. What problems/ possibilities might arise from such a strategy?

What the workshop came up with…;

Many people did not have time to use public services because they had to work full time – a teacher said she hadn’t been to the dentist for years, a civil servant never got to her local library, a charity worker couldn’t take time off to visit her GP.

They were all public sector workers and public service users, but these two different roles were completely separated. People also suggested that their own stresses and work pressures as public service workers made them more demanding about the service provision they received from other public sector workers.

People spoke positively about their experiences of the NHS – a life saving service. They also commented on the long waiting lists, and sometimes grumpy and over-worked staff that came with this, though this did not stop them from strongly endorsing the service. One participant felt strongly as a result that our first and foremost position had to be to defend these services, not to critique them.

This connected to a point about there being great potential in all our public service institutions which was often stifled because workers were prevented from doing the job properly. One positive arising from this was that the fury and frustration that it provoked might be effectively channelled into fighting management.

Going on strike might be seen (and argued for) as the ultimate experience of workers taking control of these services.

Guilt of state workers providing essential services such as education or public transport when they either had to limit their work in order to protect their own health or withdraw their labour during strikes. In this context it was useful to point out to service users that management, who force workers into these positions, are NOT running the service for the benefit of the public.

This was a clear example of the paradoxical/ dual nature of these services – in whose interests they are run and how they are run depends on who runs them?

Higher education provided another useful example of the multiple ways in which the state operated in this context. On the one hand higher education could be a liberating and transformative experience for working class people. Yet the higher education establishment is currently structured to operate as a border, benefitting a chosen few and deliberately excluding the majority, and it is upon this exclusion that it derives its prestige. So now higher education, or lack of it, is also a way of ensuring that people who don’t have a degree will be trapped in minimum wage jobs. One participant felt strongly that as a result is was not possible to simply defend higher education (despite his positive experience of it), we need to imagine a different system altogether[?].

Important to ask who is empowered to access state services and who is not.

State services and the housing system were even more explicit examples of ‘gate-keeping’ public resources – dividing working class people and making them see each other as the enemy.

Case Study: Taking over the local library

What would happen if we took over a local library earmarked for closure? Would we just be providing this service for free?

Lets the state off the hook – providing a vital service for free.

Where would the money come from? Voluntary service provision unsustainable. Would it encourage further privatisation, insist that it be run for a profit?

Who would the volunteers be? Middle-class retired people or unemployed people on workfare – both scenarios highly problematic.

Would undermine librarians both in terms of arguing that this is important work that should be waged but also that they are highly skilled workers.

Important that we don’t romanticise current public service provision. Libraries for example use a lot of volunteer labour, untrained workers, and also are supposed to be ‘self-funding’ (eg fund themselves through fines and DVD rentals.

Would depend greatly on how it was run, but possibility of running it in an antagonistic way which was less about service provision and more an educative experience in what these services are/ who controls them and why we need them?

Could you use the library also as space for political meetings, could people’s involvement in helping to run it be a politicising experience, could its inevitable ‘failure’ be used to highlight the impossibility of Cameron’s voluntary vision?

Case Study: ESOL Classes

Free ESOL classes provided by volunteers in a migrant resource centre are being used to fill in the gap in provision created by under-funded FE college and closure of ESOL courses there.

Sets precedent that it is ok to provide services on the cheap. How is quality guaranteed in a voluntary service?

How do you support yourself if working unpaid?

Tensions created between FE teachers and volunteer activists.

How do the students needs and desires fit into this?

Will funding for migrant resource centre impose restrictions and regulations?

Important to question whether ESOL really is just a service – also a means of disciplining migrants and forcing them to conform to a standard of ‘integration’ which supports a racist logic. When are ESOL classes empowering and when are they not?.

ESOL teachers and volunteers need to join forces, communicate, understand each other’s position.

Potential to build a stronger campaign hat defends existing services (for documented migrants) and demands better ones (for undocumented migrants).

ESOL teachers could refuse to ask for proof of documentation, to resist division between legal and illegal migrants that created the need for the voluntary lessons in the first place.

Questions/ Issues to Pursue Further…

Do we need to go back to basics? To ask why these services exist in the first place? What is their function? What are people’s needs? Why do people need them?

How can we challenge fragmentation between workers and services users as well as breaking up of these services themselves?

Women at the Cutting Edge…Saturday 30th October 2010

11am – 5pm, Saturday 30 October 2010

The Arbout, 100 Shandy Street, E1 4ST

(nearest tube Stepney Green)

On 20 October the ConDem government’s “Spending Review” will detail enormous cuts in public services. We are already feeling the impact of earlier cuts many effected by Labour; nurseries and libraries are closing, jobs are being lost. As the government “austerity drive” steps up, the reality is that cuts will hit the lives of all but the wealthiest. In many cases women will be hit the hardest with recent reports estimating  that women will suffer 72% of the tax and benefit cuts.

Whether you’re a feminist, an activist, a trade unionist, someone affected by the cuts, or involved in fighting the cuts in your college, community or workplace, or just interested in how the landscape of the welfare state is changing, Feminist Figtback invites you to join a day of discussions and networking. We want  to put these cuts in a political context, link up, and share ideas and skills as we plan to fight them together.

Free creche available. Open to people of all genders

For more information or to book a stall at the event or a place in the creche please email feminist.fightback@gmail.com or call Laura on 07971 842027.

Participatory workshops on:

What’s going on?
 Mapping cuts and campaigns

Who do the cuts affect? Why are cuts a feminist issue?

….Because the way cuts will impact on working-class women. For instance, job cuts will disproportionately affect women as we make up 65% of the public sector workforce (often in the lowest paid grades).

….Because financial support and services for children will be seen as “extras”. Billions of pounds are being cut from child benefit, tax credits, maternity support, Sure Start and other Children’s Services.

…And for many other reasons.

This workshop will start with an overview of government plans.

This workshop will ask particpants to think about and discuss the myriad ways in which cuts affect women. We are affected as “frontline workers”. But also because we are patients, refugees and survivors of domestic abuse. What will “redundancy” mean for women? Part-time jobs at ever lower rates of pay? What happens to our lives when bosses scrap rights such as “flexible working”?

Women from the RMT union who are fighting job cuts on London Underground will discuss with us what is at stake in their industrial dispute. They want to stop job cuts which could also worsen the inequalities they face in their working lives.

All politicians like to talk hypocritically about making the cuts “fair”; they might even identify cuts that impact disproportionately on women as being unfair. But that does not mean, as is implied, that there should be more cuts for men, or different kinds of cuts! How do we criticise those arguments? What are our alternatives and how can we promote that alternative in the wider movement against the cuts?

Demystifying the “economics of the crisis...

This workshop to discuss economic explanations and analysis of the economic crisis and why these cuts are taking place.

Many people feel alienated by the way the economy is discussed and feel ‘unqualified’ to participate in debates. We understand that the ‘economy’, ‘economic jargon’ and the ‘economic academia / debate’ are not neutral. That the fact a capitalist economy is not run in the interests of the working class relates to the over complicated jargon that is used in discussions and the elitism and mystery of ‘economics’ because the latter is not meant to be understood by the majority of people. The study of mainstream ‘economics’ as a science often over-complicates ‘the economy’ as something distinct and separate to people – machinery governed by objective rules. We often talk about ‘the’ economy not ‘our’ economy.

This workshop will also attempt to demystify economic jargon and provide an inclusive space – not one that divides in to the ‘experts’ teaching the ‘non experts’. We want bring the discussion of economic theory with the present and our personal experience. Therefore, we would like the workshop to also go right back to the basics and ask the question what is an economy?

‘In, Against (and Beyond?) the State’: What are our Strategies for Fighting Cuts?

How can we make sure the fight against cuts isn’t just about defending existing and often unsatisfactory public services, but becomes a struggle for a better way to organise our society and our lives? This workshop doesn’t pretend to have the answer to a question which we nevertheless believe is central to building an anti-cuts movement that will win. Instead we aim to provide a space in which together we can begin to find solutions and strategies. This workshop is for those of you think that the call to ‘defend public services’ isn’t enough, but are also repulsed by the perverted version of community autonomy advocated by Cameron’s Big Society, then we need you at this workshop. It is a workshop for public sector workers frustrated by lack of control or resources, and for service users sick of being short-changed and disempowered. It is for people who want to create alternative ways of educating, living together and supporting each other, but who want those alternatives to be available to everyone rather than just a middle-class elite. It is for anyone who wants to listen to and learn from each other to find political practices that will enable us to fight both within and against the system and in, against and beyond the state.

Suggest Reading (Pre-Workshop):

London-Edinburgh Weekend Return Group, In and Against the State (1980), available electronically at http://libcom.org/library/against-state-1979

Lynn Segal, ‘A Local Experience’ in S. Rowbotham, H. Wainwright and L. Segal, Beyond the Fragments: Feminism and the Making of Socialism (1979)

Join Friends of Hackney Nurseries to hand in our petition

Friends of Hackney Nurseries will be meeting outside the Town Hall, Mare St, E8, Wednesday 21st July 2010 at 6pm, to hand in our petition to the council.

We have invited Rita Krishna, member of Cabinet with responsibility for Children and Young People (and member of the board of the Learning Trust), to receive the petition from us before the Full Council meeting, which starts at 7 p.m.
Thanks to vigorous campaigning by Friends of Hackney Nurseries, some of the 13 nurseries who had their commissioning grants arbitrarily removed in April have had most of their money restored. However, several have not, and have had to cut wages, number of childcare places, and are still in danger of closure.

There are still many unanswered questions about the future of our nurseries, especially in the light of proposed cuts to all public services.  And the Learning Trust is still not making itself transparent and accountable to the people of Hackney.

Everyone who cares about nurseries, and indeed all the children of our borough, is welcome to join us – come and show the council and the Learning Trust that we will not be fobbed off.

Protest: Bring Tube Cleaning Inhouse!

Join cleaners and their Trade Union, RMT, in protesting at the offices of LU Metronet, Templar House, 81-87 High Holborn.  Bring placards, banners and friends!

Wednesday 18th November 12-2pm

With GMB’s contract being transferred to Initial, who are to further sub-contract it to ICS, Tube cleaners are angry that they are being treated like parcels to be passed around.  Multiple subcontracting means sackings, and the driving down of wages.  The only solution is to kick out the contractors and bring Tube cleaning back into an integrated, publicly-owned London Underground.


Tube cleaners challenge Boris Johnson

RMT Cleaners Grade Secretary leads chants of 'Boris - keep your promise!'

RMT Cleaners Grade Secretary leads chants of

On Wednesday, tube cleaners and supporters, including Feminist Fightback, Campaign Against Immigration Controls and John McDonnell MP and Jeremy Corbyn MP demonstrated outside City Hall to demand that Boris keeps his promise of a living wage for all tube cleaners.

Boris has been in the press this week with the publishing of the study he commissioned into an amnesty. Yet his real approach to migrant labour can be found in how he has dealt with the tube cleaners’ campaign: promise a living wage, fail to deliver and preside over cleaning contractors who targeted union reps with immigration checks to break the RMT’s organisation. His idea of an amnesty would deny even those who met its hurdles access to the public services their taxes pay for, and would further delegitimise the thousands who wouldn’t meet its strict criteria.

Feminist Fightback is proud to stand by tube cleaners as they demand a living wage for all. It’s time Boris coughs up, brings the cleaners in house and starts talking about regularisation for all migrant workers.

Fighting ESOL cuts in Tower Hamlets

Friday 12 June saw hundreds of English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) students, staff and supporters march in East London in protest at major cuts to ESOL announced at Tower Hamlets College.

The march followed a week of action since the cuts were announced on 5 June, including an unofficial walkout on 8 June, a lobby of the principal on 9 June (with staff joined by 50 students who pushed past security after being denied entry for having the wrong pass), protests at the college’s awards ceremony and joint UCU and Unison meetings on 12 June proposing a vote of no confidence in newly-appointed Principal Michael Farley. After the meetings, ESOL learners marched with their teachers, other college staff and supporters from the college’s adult education site at Arbour Square to a rally outside the 14-19 site at Poplar. Students and staff are angry and worried about the future, but there was a sense of hope as this anger was channelled into action to protect jobs and courses, and a real feeling of solidarity as students, staff and representatives of other unions addressed those assembled at Poplar.

The document Michael Farley circulated to college staff on Friday 5 June laid outproposed cuts of £2 million, which will see 50% of all ESOL courses offered by Tower Hamlets College cut from September. The document, ironically titled ‘Securing the Future’ detailed the loss of over 1,500 ESOL places alongside 60 job losses. There is now a one month ‘consultation period’ on the document, with staff being told on 6th July if they are at risk of ‘dismissal’ (the language used in the document). Those who are going to be dismissed will be told on 10th July, just before the end of the college term. Teaching staff, support staff and learning centre staff will all be affected. Staff have been consoled with the fact that new posts are being created, but unsurprisingly these are not teaching posts and the majority are business positions.

The ESOL classes most affected by the cuts will be at entry levels, those in the college’s community outreach centres, those not expressly for work. They therefore affect the most vulnerable and historically excluded students, and will affect the wider community as well as current and potential learners. The attack is gendered as well as racist– the vast majority of those attending courses are women. Some are recently arrived in the country, others have been here many years but never had the opportunity to attend a course before. Reasons for this include the incredible lack of ESOL provision in the decades prior to this one, time constraints because of their long hours of labour (particularly unpaid labour in the home), needing to travel outside their local area, and the fear of entering a classroom after negative experience or no prior experience of formal learning. Community-based provision is essential in helping to break down some of these barriers.

The 12 June demonstration itself was a testament to the role that ESOL has played in the lives of the (overwhelmingly female) student protesters. There were women leading chants on megaphones, women carrying placards with their own powerful slogans, and women speaking eloquently and emphatically to the national press about what ESOL means to them. Key messages were the need for English to allow them to support their children’s learning, so they can be a part of their communities and (contrary to the views many hold of these learners) so they can work.

These women have developed not only language skills, but increased confidence, self-esteem and above all a critical engagement with the world around them. And it is this which underlies this fight. The fight is for jobs, for student places, but also for the principle of education itself.

For more information on the struggle, go to  http://defendjobsandeducation.posterous.com or see http://www.uculeft.devisland.net/tower-hamlets-college-dispute.html

National call for action – defend SOAS cleaners

Students and allies at the University of London’s School of School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) have occupied the university to protest against managers’ attacks on migrant workers, when nine cleaners from the university were taken into detention after a dawn raid by immigration police on Friday. Five have already been deported and the two remaining are in Yarl’s Wood detention centre.

We see this raid as indicative of a current political climate, which sees not only corporatisation of universities but the extension of surveillance and border processing to its institutions, affecting both staff and students. We need to form a national strategy uniting workers, staff, students and the wider community against racist immigration controls and erosion of workers rights.

***SUs contact your UNISON branch and speak to your cleaners. Find out which company they are contracted to, and identify individuals at risk. Contact us to receive translated booklets to help your cleaners prepare, and give them emergency contacts.
***As a long term more sustainable measure, campaign to unionise workers and bring them in house for equal protection of university staff.
***Take action against ISS (the company our cleaners are contracted to) and the Home Office.
***Follow us on http://freesoascleaners.blogspot.com. Join our occupation, send messages of support, sign our online petition and keep watch for upcoming demonstrations.


The cleaners won the London Living Wage and trade union representation after a successful “Justice for Cleaners” campaign. Activists believe the raid is managers’ “revenge” for the campaign.

John McDonnell MP said: “As living wage campaigns are building in strength, we are increasingly seeing the use of immigration statuses to attack workers fighting against poverty wages and break trade union

Immigration officers were called in by cleaning contractor ISS, even though it has employed many of the cleaners for years. Cleaning staff were told to attend an ‘emergency staff meeting’ at 6.30am on Friday (June 12); a false pretext to lure the cleaners into a closed space from which the immigration officers in full riot gear were hiding to interrogate and arrest them, before escorting them to the detention
centre. They were allowed no legal or trade union representation, or even a translator (many are native Spanish speakers).

Five of the SOAS cleaners have already been deported, and the others could face deportation within days. One has had a suspected heart attack and was denied access to medical assistance and even water. One was over 6 months pregnant. Many have families who have no idea of their whereabouts.

The management of SOAS, a university that prides itself on its global outlooks and left wing politics were complicit in the immigration raid by enabling the officers to hide in the meeting room beforehand and giving no warning to them. Cleaning contractor ISS used the same tactics against tube cleaners that went on strike with the result that key activists were deported.

Ken Loach says “Recent action by Unison to secure better wages and conditions at SOAS was good news. Now we wonder if the SOAS cleaners are being targeted because they dared to organise as trade unionists.”

Watch this space for news of demonstrations and other actions!

Take Action with Tubecleaners on Wed 17 June

At the end of May, the London Mayor increased the London Living Wage to £7.60 an hour. Tubecleaners know they won’t see this increase without a fight. Despite the Mayor’s commitments to a living wage for cleaners on the underground last summer, it took months for the increase to kick in, and some contractors are still refusing to pay even this.

The Tubecleaners’ struggle highlights the way that gender and class intersect to heighten oppression – cleaning is undervalued because it is seen as women’s work; the majority of cleaners are migrant workers. We need to stand with the cleaners to demand an end to sexist, racist and capitalist exploitation.

Join the RMT picket of City Hall to call for this living wage for all tube cleaners, as well as for free travel to work / sick pay / decent pensions / 28 days’ annual leave / an end to third party sackings.

Wednesday 19 June 9.30am outside City Hall to coincide with Mayor’s Question Time (on the south of the river between Tower Bridge and London Bridge) – http://www.london.gov.uk/gla/locationmap.jsp

Bring banners, placards and noisemakers!

The demo has been postponed from 1 June but if you still have time on Monday 1 June, show solidarity with the people of Niger Delta. Many tubecleaners are from Nigeria, where multinational interests in natural resources have devastating consequences for communities….


The people of the Niger Delta under the umbrella of the Niger Delta Solidarity campaign will be holding a public demonstration in London to protest against the invasion and bombing of several Niger Delta
communities by the Nigerian Military. These atrocious acts of brutality  have led to an estimated death toll of over 1000 people and more than 20,0000 displaced people. Several towns and villages have been
completely razed and many others are under occupation by the military. These military attacks are still continuing today.

Come and join us and raise your voice against these massacres that are being committed against the oppressed people of the Niger Delta.
Date: Monday 1st June 200

Venue: 10 Downing Street / Nigerian High commission

Time: 12 Noon – 2pm (10 Downing Street)
2 – 3 pm (Nigerian High Commission, 9 Northumberland  Avenue, London. WC2N 5BX.)

We will be handing over a petition to the British Prime Minister, Mr. Gordon Brown.

What the Other Feminists Look Like…

What: An evening of making trouble, sharing ideas and planning ways for women to fight back against the crisis, hosted by Feminist Fightback.

When: Tuesday 30th June, 5pm, and 6.30pm

Where: Paying a visit to Harriet Harman, Southwark Townhall (5pm), followed by film showing (6.30pm) at Studio 96, The Galleria, Pennack Road, SE16 6PW

All genders welcome!

This is a fundraiser for Lambeth Women’s Project www.lambethwomen.wordpress.com

Harriet Harman, Minister for Women, thinks that a ‘feminist’ response to the recession would be to place more women in top city jobs, putting them ‘in charge of the banks’. Meanwhile Harman supports the Welfare Reform Bill, which proposes to introduce US-style ‘workfare’ practices, forcing mothers of young children into minimum wage jobs or risk losing their benefits.

Harriet Harman likes to talk up her feminist credentials, but what kind of feminist only looks out for the interests of rich women during times of economic crisis? In fact, Harman has a long track record of selling out the majority of women she claims to represent – most recently playing a key role in blocking a Bill to legalise abortion in Northern Ireland. If this is how the Minister for Women is going to act on our behalf, then we can do without her!

Fortunately, Harriet Harman’s feminism isn’t the only kind on offer. Many women in London are organising to resist the iniquities of capitalism – from the parents occupying Lewisham Bridge Primary School to protest against its privatisation; to hostel residents demanding decent housing in Hackney; to the Visteon workers who occupied their factory and finally won their redundancy.

Feminist Fightback has also been organising grass roots resistance to some of Harman’s biggest sell-outs during her time as Minister for Women – occupying the Department for Work and Pensions in protest against the Welfare Reform Bill, and taking direct action in solidarity with Northern Irish women who continue to be denied the right to control their own bodies.

Feminist Fightback invites you to join us outside Southwark Town Hall to show Harriet Harman that women have been fighting back in ways very different to those she proposes. We’ll be ‘decorating’ the Town Hall, sending messages to Ms Harman in a variety of ‘creative’ ways, and inviting our Minister for Women to come out and take a look!

This will be followed by a film showing introducing a number of women-led struggles taking place at the moment. We want this to be an opportunity to find out what’s going on in London; to make links with other women’s groups; and to find inspiration for how we can act collectively to take control of our workplaces, our communities and our lives.

Sex workers stopped the traffick!

On Tuesday 31 April, sex workers and our allies held a successful SPEAK OUT at the Eros Fountain, Piccadilly Circus against criminalisation and for labour rights for everyone who works in the sex industry. At 2.30pm, we took over one of the streets, bringing traffic to a standstill at Piccadilly Circus and unveiled a banner which read ‘SEX WORKERS ARE STOPPING THE TRAFFICK’.

Sex workers took direct action to highlight our opposition to the Policing and Crime Bill.

Speakers at the SPEAK OUT included representatives from the x:talk project, English Collective of Prostitutes, Sex Worker Open University, academics and sex worker rights activists from across Europe.

The issue of human trafficking in the sex industry has been used by the Government and those intent on abolishing the sex industry to justify the further criminalisation of the sex industry. The existing criminalisation of sex work effectively excludes workers in the sex industry from the full protection of the law. Increased criminalisation will further exacerbate this exclusion. All trafficked workers, regardless of the industry in which they work, face gross violations of their rights. Women in the sex industry should not be defined by the area in which they work.

“The Policing and Crime Bill will make it less, not more, safe for us to work, whether as strippers, escorts, working girls, maids or models. It is crucial that sex workers speak out about the current climate in the sex industry of fear, raids, deportation and arrests“ said Ava Caradonna from x:talk.

Ava Caradonna continued, “We also want to highlight the hypocrisy of the Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith.  Purchases from our industry can find their way into her expense claims, while at the same time she has been leading the Government’s attack on the sex industry.”

The Policing and Crime Bill has passed through the committee stage following two readings in the House of Commons.  If passed, this Bill will further criminalise people in the sex industry in the UK, whether they work by CHOICE, CIRCUMSTANCE or COERCION. It criminalises clients, increases penalties for soliciting and imposes measures for forced rehabilitation. It is based on a lack of evidence about the sex industry and has been drafted without taking the views of sex workers and their organisations into account.

This event was been called by x:talk in partnership with the Sex Worker Open University and supported by Feminist Fightback.

photo’s from the action are available on flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/xtalk_project.

More info: xtalk.classes@gmail.com

Subway sacks migrant workers

Join a picket of Subway in London on 4 April in solidarity with Natalia Szymanska, a 19 year old Polish migrant worker employed by a Subway in Belfast, who was sacked in her fifth month of pregnancy on a dubious charge of being in breach of the company’s health and safety policy. She was sacked one month after telling her employers she was pregnant.

Meet 9.30 at 358 Oxford St for a rolling picket of three Subways

Feminist Fightback are also supporting a No Sweat picket of Primark on the same day. Meet at 11.30 near Primark on Oxford Street. More details www.nosweat.org.uk

Both actions open to all genders.


Do something different this Valentine’s Day- make a date with feminists!

Saturday 14 February 10.30am-6.30 pm, School of African and Oriental Studies, Thornhaugh St, Russell Square, London, WC1
Fully accessible venue. This event is free!
for more info see www.anticapitalistfeminists.co.uk
to register email anticapitalistfeminists@gmail.com

Discussing and organising our fight for women’s liberation – open to all those who want to learn, think and plan for grassroots feminist activism… Join us for workshops which identify the interconnections between oppressions and our struggles against them. Work together with other feminists to find ways to actually change the material conditions of women’s lives.

Workshops include: learning from feminist history/ sex workers’ rights/ challenging domestic violence/ international solidarity/ a woman’s place is in her union?/ reproductive freedoms/ rape and asylum/ community organising/ queer and trans politics/ prison abolition/ self-defence workshop/ feminists and the capitalist crisis/ films, stalls and campaign planning

Organised by a coalition of groups and individuals. Groups involved so far include: Anarcha-Fem Kollective, All African Women’s Group, Black Women’s Rape Action Project, English Collective of Prostitutes, Education Not for Sale Women, Feminist Activist Forum, Feminist Fightback, Left Women’s Network, London Coalition Against Poverty, Permanent Revolution, RMT Women’s Committee, Women Asylum Seekers Together, Women Against Rape, Workers’ Liberty.

RMT Cleaners Secretary avoids the sack. Fight for Mary’s reinstatement continues

This week ISS, one of the largest cleaning contractors on the Underground, attempted to break the strength of the cleaners on the Underground by picking off two reps. Clara Osagiede, the RMT Cleaners Grade Secretary for the underground was called into a disciplinary on trumped up charges of “gross misconduct”. Mary, another cleaners’ rep fought for reinstatement after bosses got rid of her. Both of these women have been courageous in their efforts to organise some of the most poorly paid, overworked, and exploited workers in this city, a group that even some in the RMT considered ‘too difficult to organise.’

On Thursday 8 January, 40 solidarity and RMT activists including members of Feminist Fightback picketed the ISS offices while the hearings took place. Chants were kept up for the two and a half hours that the women were in their hearings. Shouts of “Reinstate Mary! Don’t sack Clara!” brought some life to the cold January morning in one of the smartest areas in Greenwich.

Reply to Cath Elliot’s The Great IUSW Con

Having been mentioned several times in Cath Elliot’s “The Great IUSW Con”, Feminist Fightback would like to reply to the accusations levelled at both the IUSW and Fightback’s support for sex workers’ rights. We have been saddened to read yet another abolitionist article which, rather than engage in thoughtful and honest debate, seeks to obscure the issues through factual inaccuracies and faulty logic.

Feminist Fightback supports the right of sex workers to organise amongst themselves to fight exploitation in the sex industry and transform the conditions under which they work. The International Union of Sex Workers is the only such organisation in the UK, as a result Fightback has supported this union and worked alongside it, just as it has a number of other trade unions on various different issues. Some of us have attended London IUSW meetings that are open to allies, while a few other Fightback members are themselves sex workers and members of the IUSW. Cath Elliot’s supposed ‘exposé’ hardly strikes us, then, as a piece of biting investigative journalism. We have no need of her advice to be careful of who we make alliances with for we are perfectly capable of investigating, analysing and making judgements about the political issues on which Feminist Fightback campaigns.

It is no secret that Douglas Fox, a male escort who also runs an agency, is a member of the IUSW. But Cath Elliot seems to think that by ‘uncovering’ this single fact she has discredited not only the entire union but also all arguments in favour of sex workers’ self organisation and decriminalisation. Through an absurd leap in logic Elliot moves from a discussion of Fox to conclude that the IUSW is ‘populated with pimps, agency owners and punters’. Unfortunately no other evidence for this is offered. Nor does Elliot offer any further arguments against sex workers’ right to unionise. In the absence of more sophisticated debate, we’d like to address Elliot’s accusations one by one.

It bears re-stating that because one member of the union runs an escort agency this does not mean that all members are ‘pimps’ and punters. In working with the IUSW we have met members in a variety of jobs in the sex industry including strippers, maids and men and women selling sex in brothels and working independently. Unlike other trade unions the IUSW finds itself in the position of seeking to organise workers who are effectively illegal, denied the right to work by laws which criminalise the conditions under which sex is sold. Decrimalisation is deemed a pre-condition to transforming working conditions and challenging the exploitation which takes place within the sex industry. For this reason union membership is open to others working for decriminalisation, including academics and researchers in this field.

Moreover, the GMB membership ensures confidentiality, for how else could a union seek to recruit illegal workers? It also seeks to challenge the fetishisation of ‘prostitution’ by actively recruiting from a variety of jobs within the sex industry, including, for example, security staff in strip clubs or receptionists in brothels. This is a common trade union approach – to organise all workers in a particular industry collectively rather than pick out a particular trade or role in isolation. (A comparison is the RMT union whose members include drivers, platform staff and cleaners on the London Underground.) We ask Cath Eliott what she would like the union to do? Demand that each individual out themselves? Specify exactly how much cock they suck, whether the do or do not do penetration in order to confirm for her whether they can truly be considered ‘authentic’ sex workers?

This concern for so-called authenticity is worrying. By implication it equates suffering with legitimacy. Does a woman who sells sex have to be addicted to drugs, working on the street and regularly beaten and raped in order to qualify to speak on behalf of sex workers? Can we not accept that a variety of experience exists in the sex industry? Can we not recognise that trade unionism is often about better off workers working alongside those experiencing the worst conditions, in order to improve the lives of all? In fact, we suggest that for Cath Elliot and other opponents of sex workers’ rights, the only ‘authentic’ sex worker is the sex worker who agrees with them.

Since Cath Elliot raised the issue of who, as feminists, we make alliances with, we would like to question the company she keeps by supporting the proposed government legislation to further criminalise sex work. The Policing and Crime Bill proposes to convict clients buying sex from anyone who is ‘controlled for gain’, strengthens police and local government powers to close down brothels, and further criminalises women working on the streets. (See the Safety First Coalition website for why this will make conditions more dangerous for sex workers). This legislation has been vocally supported by Cabinet ministers Harriet Harman and Jacqui Smith, politicians who Feminist Fightback would likewise urge Cath Elliot to think twice about allying herself with. Among the numerous attacks on working-class women that these supposed champions of women’s rights have voted through include Harman’s drastic cuts to single parent benefit in 1997 and Jacqui Smith’s support for a draconian immigration system which regularly deports women who have been the victims of sexual violence back to the very countries from which they have fled. If Cath Elliot wants to purge the feminist movement of women’s real enemies then she might do well to start with Smith and Harman.

Finally, we would like to raise the wider question of why so many wish to block open debate on the subject of sex work – be this through refusing to speak on platforms where the voices of those they disagree with will be heard, through misinformed smear campaigns against sex workers’ organisations, or through mythologising and false claims regarding trafficking (for the government’s almost total lack of actual information on sex trafficking see here). Why does such a fundamentalist attitude persist around feminist responses to sex work? Why can we not think through the complex issues? Why can we not try to deal with the messy reality of the situation rather than resort to myth-making and scare mongering?

Those who want to decide whether they support the IUSW can find out what this union is and stands for for themselves – by reading IUSW materials and website, talking to the GMB or listening to IUSW representatives when they speak at events. We in Feminist Fightback continue to discuss and debate with each other what we think about the multifaceted issue of sex work, We do not claim to agree with every individual member of the IUSW, any more than we agree with all the policies of the other trade unions whose members we work with. We do, however, believe that anyone who is serious about fighting violence and exploitation in the sex industry needs to side with the workers organising within it, rather than seeking to criminalise or deny such workers a voice.

Government clampdown threatens safety and rights of sex workers

In September Jacqui Smith announced at the Labour Party Conference that from October the government will be taking steps to clamp down on the sex industry in the UK. The new measures will give police new powers to prosecute those paying for sex, to shut down ‘brothels’ and force sex workers into compulsory rehabiliation.

She announced that the government would ‘start work to outlaw paying for sex with someone forced into prostitution at another’s will, or controlled for another’s gain’.

Of course, Feminist Fightback and Sex Workers’ Rights Activists also object to coerced labour and coerced sex, whether in the sex industry or otherwise. But Feminist Fightback views these proposals as an attack on the rights and safety of sex workers. Criminalising the clients of sex workers is dangerous for sex workers themselves. It means that male, female and trans-sex workers are forced underground and into clandestine work. This results in more reliance on third parties in order to arrange work, giving such third parties greater power, control and ability to exploit workers, reducing their safety and independence.

For street sex workers, already the most vulnerable group of sex workers, it can have even more serious consequences. Women are forced to take more risks. They have less time to decide whether or not to get into cars, are forced to work alone rather than in pairs or small groups and pushed into darker more isolated areas. Just two years ago in Ipswich we all witnessed the tragic consequences of zero tolerance policies on sex work.

Clients are an important source of information about exploitation and trafficking. The Poppy Project – a Home Office organisation working with victims of trafficking – estimate that 2% of their referrals come from clients. By criminalising clients further, this important source of ensuring safety for victims of trafficking comes under attack.

The Home Secretary further stated that, as part of the new policy, labour would ‘give councils and the police new powers to close down brothels and clamp down on exploitation’. There is extensive academic research that indicates that indoor sex work is much safer than selling sex outdoors. Current legislation states that more than one woman working in a property constitutes a brothel. Clamping down on ‘brothels’ will often attack women working independently in a safer environment where they are in control of their work and working safely.

There are many reasons that women choose to work in the sex industry. Often because women’s work is underpaid and undervalued, sometimes because it is the best possible alternative in a limited scope of choices or because it allows freedom and independence relative to other jobs available. Frequently it is a combination of these. Pushing sex work underground endangers all sex workers and obscures from view the very women these policies profess to help.

These measures are not about protecting women. They are likely to have the opposite effect. They are however wholly in line with a history of attempts to regulate sex workers’ bodies and women’s sexuality more generally. They avoid difficult questions about why, in a world of huge global disparities of wealth, women may come to the UK to work in sex work and how current immigration and border controls surrender some sex workers, and workers in many other industries, to exploitative and dangerous working practices.

Activists disrupt Mayor’s Question Time to express anger at Boris’ betrayal of tube cleaners

Mayor’s Question Time had to be adjourned twice on Wednesday 16 October as activists protested Boris Johnson’s failure to follow up on his promise of a Living Wage for tube cleaners. The cleaners’ demands were shouted from the public gallery while more than thirty people demonstrated outside City Hall for the demands to be met.

Feminist Fightback leads solidarity actions with cleaners on the underground!

Cleaners on the underground see the worst side of factors affecting workers across Britain at the moment – poverty wages made possible by privatisation and subcontracting; victimisation due to racist immigration laws; sexual harassment due to insecure immigration status; and the undervaluing of their work partly because it has traditionally been seen as women’s (and therefore less important) work.

The cleaners’ struggle

This is why their dispute is crucial not only for cleaners on the underground, but for workers everywhere. It is also why Feminist Fightback were inspired to offer their solidarity to RMT cleaners on the underground to demand some of their basic rights at work:

A London Living Wage

Decent Pensions

Sick pay

28 days’ annual leave

An end to third party sackings

Free travel to work

At our steering meeting in June, Feminist Fightback heard from Clara Osagiede, RMT Cleaners’ Grade Secretary. She highlighted how the exploitation of cleaners on the underground has very gendered elements: women without secure immigration status are often sexually assaulted by their managers. If they take a stand, they are subjected to disciplinaries and sacked.

RMT Cleaners took the courageous decision to take three days of strike in July, with massive support of 99% in the ballot for strike action.

Our actions
Feminist Fightback’s solidarity actions aimed to add to the disruption caused by the tube cleaners’ action – and to use direct action as a way of achieving our goals.

On the first day of strike action, we invaded London Underground HQ and started ‘cleaning’ the lobby, chanting the strikers’ demands. When challenged by the Head of HR, we continued chanting but started cleaning his shoes instead! [link to press release and photos]

During the next strike action, we co-ordinated milkshake spillages at key stations, shutting down at least one of the escalators at Tottenham Court Road at rush hour. We then made our way to London Underground HQ, to bring the rubbish to their doorstep. The action received a lot of support from commuters at St James’ station and added to the press coverage the strike action received that day .

Press Coverage:

‘Feminism and the Tube’ The New Statements 4th July 2008

TfL’s cleaners left in a fine mess’ The GUardian 3rd July 2008

‘Striking cleaners ‘intimidated’ BBC News 3rd July 2008

‘Striking Tube cleaners subjected to ‘appalling intimidation’ 24 Dash.com 3rd July 2008

‘Interview: Clara Osagiede’ The New Statesments 2nd August 2008

In a rally called by the Labour Representation Committee, we proposed a demonstration at City Hall during Mayor’s Question time when we knew a question about the strike had been tabled. The demo had a strong RMT presence and received great support. Its impact was increased by Feminist Fightback activists who entered the assembly and disrupted Mayor’s Questions. They unfurled a banner ‘suspending the Mayor from work’ just as several union activists had been, and chanted the demands of the strike before they were removed from the hall. This put the question right at the top of the agenda and brought forward the Mayor’s announcement that a living wage would be granted to Metronet cleaners.

Inspiring wider solidarity

This model of solidarity direct actions spread further as the dispute continued. A solidarity meeting of Brent Trades Council led to 40 people entering the depot to ensure that a rep facing a disciplinary was able to have his union rep with him.

On the day of the suspended strike action in August, groups including Campaign Against Immigration Controls, London Coalition Against Poverty and Feminist Fightback got together to picket cleaning contractors GBM and ISS. Over 30 people chanted “GBM hear us say! No deporting from today!” Activists entered ISS offices and challenged managers about their victimisation of union activists before they were thrown out. Later that day, with impressive solidarity from RMT members in the area, activists temporarily stopped the Bakerloo line to demand the reinstatement of the rep at Stonebridge.

Looking ahead

Although the strike action in August was suspended, Tubelines who control three of the London Underground lines have yet to concede to the cleaners’ demands for a living wage, and the union has not ruled out further strike action.

The use of racist immigration laws to attack union activists continues. The rep at Stonebridge depot is still suspended and other activists have been deported.

Feminist Fightback will continue to offer its solidarity to cleaners on the underground.

The Mayor, TfL, Metronet, Tubelines, ISS and GBM are all responsible

The Mayor is chair of the board of TfL. Metronet and Tubelines run the tube lines that TfL is responsible for. ISS, GBM and other companies are contracted to provide cleaning services. With this many bosses involved, they’re getting used to passing the buck.

To stop this we need to keep up the pressure at all levels. If we can get the Mayor and TfL to take responsibility for the cleaners doing their dirty work, then we are one step closer to the long-term goal of bringing the cleaners back in house.

In the meantime, we can’t let Tubelines shirk its responsibility for granting its cleaners the living wage, nor let ISS and GBM get away with victimising cleaners with insecure immigration status.

Milkshakes the tube!

Hundreds of commuter’s journeys were disrupted this morning as activists from Feminist Fightback added to the pressure of the strike by 800 RMT cleaners on the underground by ‘milkshaking’ escalators at key stations on the network.

Cleaners have been on strike since Tuesday evening after Transport for London failed to grant any concessions during the cleaners’ one day strike last week.  London Underground cleaners – the majority of whom are women and people from ethnic minorities – have to struggle with low wages, no pension schemes or proper sick pay, contracts which offer as little as 12 days annual leave and the indignities of on-the-spot third party sackings.

Activists from Feminist Fightback planned the action to cause chaos in order to highlight the crucial role that London Underground cleaners – the majority of whom are women and migrant workers – play in keeping the underground running.

Clara Osagiede, RMT Cleaner’s Grade Secretary explains the situations cleaners have to deal with:

‘We have a member whose normal shift is 11pm-5am, he was thirsty on his shift, and so went to the kitchens to get some water. A representative of his contracting firms accosted him, asked what he was doing there, demanded his pass and then put it in his pocket and ordered him to get out. With no further explanation, the man was fired the next day.’

‘Sexual harassment of female cleaners by their managers is rife. Because their immigration status is uncertain they are unable to complain or they will face being sacked. Many of these women get very depressed.’

Laura Schwartz, member of NUS women’s committee and Feminist Fightback activist, states:

‘Keeping the underground clean is an essential task. As feminists we want to highlight the extent to which what is traditionally seen as ‘women’s work’ is so undervalued and are willing to take direct action to do so. Cleaning is vital work and women workers deserve fair pay and decent conditions.’

Last Friday the group invaded London Underground Headquarters. Armed with feather dusters, brooms and mops, they set about helping Transport for London ‘clean up their act’ until they were forcibly removed. Activists are targeting Transport for London to ensure that they do not pass the buck and instead take responsibility for the working conditions of the underground cleaners.

Feminist Fightback Conferences 2006 – 2007

Feminist Fightback Conference 2006, 21 October, School of Oriental and African Studies

Founding statement
Conference report

Feminist Fightback 2007, 20 October, University of East London


FF Graphic Footer FF

Feminist Fightback is an anti-capitalist feminist collective for self-defining women.


Design: Tank | Powered by Wordpress | Created using Blueprint CSS | Webmonkey