Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We are the 99 percent

OWS in Solidarity with TWU

Posted 12 years ago on Dec. 14, 2011, 11:29 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

<img style="margin-right:0.7em" src=//i.imgur.com/k9kW7.png" alt="Walmart" align="left" />

Transport Workers Union (TWU) Local 100 was the first labor union to come out in support of Occupy Wall Street. Now, Occupy Wall Street Labor Outreach Committee is mobilizing #OWS to stand in solidarity with TWU as they begin their campaign to demand a fair contract. On December 15th at 4pm, TWU will rally outside MTA headquarters at 2 Broadway, then march to Liberty Plaza for a rank-and-file General Assembly. Checkout the facebook page for more details.



Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by llf (144) 12 years ago

Workers, organized labor and OWS are in this together and when we all show solidarity with each other our cause is strengthened and everyone benefits. Thanks for all of the great work that you are doing to keep the flow of information and provide opportunities to engage...

[-] 1 points by struggleforfreedom80 (6584) 12 years ago

Hear, hear! Wonderfully said.



[-] 6 points by ZenDogTroll (13032) from South Burlington, VT 12 years ago

cool man.

solidarity with the working man / and woman of course.

only way to go

and when we're finished

we'll change how business is done in this country

[-] 1 points by qanunderdog (1) 12 years ago

I support you from downunder. The greed at the top of Australian corporates is out of control. Since the advent of the Occupy Wall St movement garden variety Australians have woken up to the huge pay rises CEOs been awarded this year. Our national airline Qantas has become a victim of greed from the top management. Past this link in your browser, song inspired by the OWS movement. thanks guys and girls! The Australian TWU supports you all. http://youtu.be/sc2h_kA7mfU

[-] 1 points by GypsyKing (8708) 12 years ago

This is the kind of inter-cooperation that is necessary to build this movement! Cheers!

[-] 1 points by FHampton (309) 12 years ago

This is exactly what is needed. Rank-and-file-led unions like the TWU need to be supported. They should be distinguished from other unions, like the SEIU, which are closer to the Democratic Party establishment. The distinction needs to be emphasized, and solidarity extended to the militant rank and file.

[-] 1 points by OccupyCentre (263) 12 years ago

About time too. Some of the unions have leaders too carried away with their own egos. The Occupy Movement can help the Union Movement a lot. The unions should capture some of the ethos of bygone days and fight for the working man and woman, not just think about their paychecks.

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 12 years ago

Good! dont let union get strainght by laws made by the 1 %

[-] 1 points by Argentina (178) from Puerto Madryn, Chubut 12 years ago

Good! dont let union get strainght by laws made by the 1 %

[-] 1 points by Zashyr (1) from Fairless Hills, PA 12 years ago

Im loving the revolution that we're having because of #OWS but better contracts? We need to get rid of money entirely.

[-] 1 points by Binh (83) 12 years ago

And until we get rid of money entirely I suppose we should accept progressively shittier contracts until the revolution triumphs?

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

" We need to get rid of money entirely."

I wish we could.

[-] 1 points by Zashyr (1) from Fairless Hills, PA 12 years ago

Has any here looked into the Venus Project? With a resource based economy we should be able to get past this money issue smoothly.

[-] 0 points by NewEnglandPatriot (916) from Dartmouth, MA 12 years ago

They plan to , paper cash that is. We will have an id card or chip. It will be sold to us as a way to prevent identity theft. They are sneaking it in for medical, pet tracking and elderly. Even IBM is promoting it now.


Money is trade, however if you want a pie and I want an axe, how do we trade if I don't make pies?You make knives not axes? I make pizzas not pies, they are close but not the same. Therefore no trade. Money was invented to solve the problem. The money represents value of pie or pizza or axe or anything you want it to be. Then it is based on an assigned value. BANKS have to go, not money. Market commodities and trade in that sense has to go, or at least be rebuilt.

[-] 0 points by iamows13 (10) 12 years ago

Maybe you should just move to a country that has no money. Does that make sense? No. Neither does getting rid of money entirely. If you want to make changes at least try to aim for something that could actually be possible.

[-] 1 points by SwissMiss (2435) from Ann Arbor Charter Township, MI 12 years ago

"Neither does getting rid of money entirely."

So, you can't envision a society without money? That is very, very sad to me that people are so dependent upon materialistic objects that have no true value.

[-] 0 points by iamows13 (10) 12 years ago

Give all of yours away. Would be pretty hard for you to own land without it. You are a stupid woman. Love dio1313

[-] 1 points by theEvilTux (1) from Portsmouth, VA 12 years ago

We Do Not Forget.



[-] -1 points by GreenRevolution (15) 12 years ago

Hi, I am from Russia, and I support you. I warn you: Russian protests - not Occupy, but - Corporate:

...Not only are the protests and their US-funded leadership illegtimate, but by shamelessly twisting public perception to see them as anything but foreign-funded sedition, the corporate media has once again failed the public in pursuit of carrying out Wall Street and London's corporate-financier driven agenda.

Image: A screenshot from US National Endowment for Democracy's (NED) website indicating its funding for "independent" poll monitor Golos. USAID also funds Golos. Golos' shrieking accusations of electoral fraud have been cited as the rhetorical justification for NED's troupe of foreign-funded opposition groups to flood into Russia's streets. (click to enlarge)

Beware of these revisionists and the increasingly unsubstantiated, even flat-out ridiculous claims being made by the media. Name names, follow the affiliations, research the organizations, click on "About Us," follow the money, and discover the truth the corporate media is willfully hiding from the public. Expose both this duplicitous agenda being pursued in Russia, as well as the disingenuous liars throughout the Western media's press peddling it. And above all, boycott and replace the corporate interests driving this agenda to begin with.


[-] 0 points by alouis (1511) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Thank you. I have suspected that the protests were alot about US efforts to destabilize Russia and bring back the bad old days of Yeltsinite kleptocracy.

[-] -2 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 12 years ago

So this whole thing about getting money out of politics is just a sham, right? Unions are masters at using money to influence the political process. Dang, they're so good at it that they've figured out a legal way to use money from people who don't even agree with the political causes they are being forced to support. Gotta admire their system.

But you can't run around claiming that you are opposed to money in politics while you cozy up to unions who specialize in the purchase of politicians. Credibility goes out the window, people. You appear to be just fine with money in politics when it is flowing to your side of the aisle. Please do not assume that we are too stupid to see that.

[-] 2 points by bpmangan (123) from New York, NY 12 years ago

If a union works properly, its working for the beliefs of the whole union. They don't always work properly and I can't speak for TWU because I have no experience with them. I disagree that money used to empower the 99% is inherently good, and money to empower the 1% is inherently bad. The problem is that a person can't donate nearly as much money as a corporation, so relatively their voice/money will always end up silenced/insignificant. Unions do something to combat that in the here and know. While I would agree that ultimately it would be best for somethin like Buddy Roehmers suggestions of accepting no more than 100 dollar donations, when you're being attacked by a Mecha-Godzilla, a regular Godzilla fighting for you isn't so bad. I would agree that ultimately killing them both off and letting everyone make their own decisions is the best

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 12 years ago

Overall, I think you are being consistent. Sadly, as you can see in shule's post below, you don't speak for the whole movement. And as long as obvious hypocrisy like this dominates the rhetoric, OWS will be a fringe movement largely ignored by the average person. Credibility is the coin of the realm, and OWS is losing valuable coin by saying one thing to it's enemies, an something entirely different to it's friends.

[-] 1 points by bpmangan (123) from New York, NY 12 years ago

I agree and its very dissapointing

[-] 1 points by iamows13 (10) 12 years ago

Sorry, but common sense will not be tolerated here.

[-] 2 points by Shule (2638) 12 years ago

Money is just a tool. It depends how money is being used. If it is being used to power the 1% that is obviously bad, but if money is being used to empower the 99% that is good. It only makes sense. You must be a troll.

[-] 1 points by bpmangan (123) from New York, NY 12 years ago

Large amounts of money that is ostensibly being used to empower the 99% will almost always be used to co-opt the movement and force it in a different direction. If we want to make something happen, we have to do it by ourselves. Letting someone elses money into our politics, even if it seems to support the people, will give them undue control over us and ruin everything this movement is about.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2638) 12 years ago

Absolutely true! Whenever one borrows or uses somebody else's money there are obvious strings attached to that money. A loaner always has power over a borrower. I think that is a basic root of the problem that has got our country in the situation we are in; all that indebtedness. However, if we took our own money, pooled it, and used it to achieve some civic purpose, then there are no strings, and thus no problem. First thing though, it would be wise for all of us as individuals to adjust our lifestyles in manners that will keep us out of debt, or get out of debt if we are already in it.

[-] 1 points by iamows13 (10) 12 years ago

Anyone who disagrees is a troll? Anyone who points out your flaws is a troll? You guys are trying to perform a hostile takeover of this country and you will not succeed, because way too many people disagree with you.

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 12 years ago

Fine, just so people are clear about what they really oppose. "Money on our side is OK, money on their side is not.". If that is the position, and you state it pretty clearly, then enough with the high and mighty "get money out of politics" line that we see and hear so much about. Troll or not, I know hypocrisy when I see it, and someone who says money doesn't belong in politics, and then posts what you just did, is speaking out of both sides of their mouth.

[-] 1 points by Shule (2638) 12 years ago

Don't see the hypocrisy. Of course I think we all would be better off not having money in politics, but if one side is going to play the dirty game, using money to bribe and corrupt to get legislation favorable to a few, then it should not be unexpected for the other side to counter with money the best they can to get legislation favorable to the many. The request is clear; get money out of politics, but if the corps, banksters, etc. continue to use their money to do their thing, don't expect the unions, environmental, and other civic minded organizations to not use money to do their thing. It all come down to who are you for.

So, you admit you're a troll?

[-] 1 points by Confusedoldguy (260) 12 years ago

Give me a break. You know very well that corporations could use the exact same argument, in which case every stays just the way it is. OWS is trying to "purify" politics from the corrupting influence of money, as long as only the other side gets purified. Amid all the calls for the end of political donations by corporations, not a word about unions. I realize you don't see the hypocrisy, even though you spelled it out so clearly your post above - neither does the rest of the movement. But much of the country does, which explains the free fall of OWS in the polls.

As for my trollhood, I've never heard the word until these last few weeks, so I don't know if I'm qualified for the label or not. It looks like it's often used to smear people who disagree with you, or bring up issues you can't refute. If so, then it looks like OWS is all about free expression in public parks, but not in public forums on the Internet. Again, a nasty little double standard. But I guess I'm getting used to that on these pages.

[-] 1 points by gnomunny (6819) from St Louis, MO 12 years ago

Not all unions donate to political parties although the largest ones obviously do. I belonged to a construction union back in the eighties that wasn't a political donor.