On May 5th, immigration officers detained two men who worked at a restaurant in the centre of Edinburgh. By 9pm they had let them go, what happened?
Edinburgh Anti-Raids Network had previously set up a phonetree, WhatsApp group and social media accounts to alert people to potential immigration raids. At around 17.45 they did a call out, and by 19:30 the crowd surrounding the two immigration vans had grown to around 200. Legal observers advised the protesters not to talk to the cops and to wear masks, while they were also given bust cards and people wrote numbers for protest-specific legal advice on their arms. People also distributed food, water and masks to the crowd. Police were present but claimed “they did not have the power to disperse the crowds”. By 9pm the detainees were de-arrested and the immigration officers fled the scene with police protection, leaving their own vans behind!
This successful use of direct action, while not stifled by bureaucracy, was only possible because of prior organisation. Liverpool has its own Anti-Raids Network which you can contact at: liverpoolantiraids@protonmail.com
On March 17th, P&O Ferries sacked 800 workers without notice over a zoom call. The next day around 300 people gathered outside the Port of Liverpool (in Seaforth, Sefton). This was a huge show of support, given the location is difficult to reach and the short notice. However, the opportunity was wasted, mainly being used to listen to speeches. Despite a sense of camaraderie, with traffic into the port continuing as normal it was hard not to feel like the only thing we were demonstrating was our impotence.
In contrast, on the morning of the 23rd, demonstrators took direct action at the port. A small number of people were allowed into the port to demonstrate at the P&O terminal under close supervision, a distraction which allowed the remaining 40 or so people who had gathered to then block the road into the port. The blockade was maintained for about half an hour, with high morale and support from onlookers, before police moved in to push protestors off the road. This unofficially organised action caused long delays and a tail-back of lorries far down the road.
On the 26th, there was a march, around 250 strong, from the Seafarer’s Centre to the port (followed by yet more speeches). On April 2nd at Pier Head, a joint rally with the People’s Assembly only managed to attract around 50 people. On the 6th, around 60 people marched along Princess Way (a dual carriageway leading to the Port), only to be followed by, you guessed it, speeches! That last march at least led to lorries having to queue to get into the port, despite this the drivers showed their support with beeps and raised fists.
These protests have been organised by the RMT and Nautilus trade unions, and they have mainly been attended by trade unionists and socialists. Fortunately, anger has been directed against employers and not foreign workers. There have been many high profile speakers such as mayors, MPs and national trade union leaders. Despite all this, the Liverpool to Dublin line resumed service from as early as March 19th, and it’s hard not to feel that, locally, the campaign is losing momentum. As far as we see it, there are two, conflicting, strategies to secure victory. In broad terms, the first approach is associated with the trade union leadership, while the latter tends to come from the rank-and-file.
The first relies on seeking support from the Tory government, Labour opposition and the mass media. This support is hoped to equate to economic and legal pressure on P&O to rehire the workers, as well as repealing anti-trade union laws, making fire-and-rehire illegal and even nationalisation. However, it seems likely that P&O knowingly made legally dubious decisions, aware that there might be consequences, and deeming it economically worthwhile (perhaps since, if it had all gone to plan, the workers movement would have been caught off-guard and unable to act). It’s hard to view support from the Tories with anything but cynicism, especially since they knew about the mass dismissals beforehand and did nothing. However, the Labour Party is no better. In Coventry, their local council have shown the true colours of all holders of state-power, hiring scabs and misleading the public to crush a bin strike. Media coverage about P&O has been sympathetic, but how long can weekly demonstrations make for good news articles? And if they seem ineffective how long will people keep attending?
“The State was never and never can be anything other than the political apparatus of force of the propertied classes to ensure the economic exploitation of the broad masses of the working people.”
Milly Witkop
The second strategy is that of a persistent campaign of direct action. Without agency staff informing crews that they were going to be replaced (and then refusing to work), the Hull crew occupying their ship, and road blockades in Dover, it’s possible that this could have all blown over without a fuss (after all, mass dismissals are part and parcel of capitalism). Since the first week following the dismissals, this approach has quietened down, with the exception of sympathetic action from overseas workers. But secondary picketing, road blockades, sit-ins, a concerted consumer boycott, and sympathetic strike action (most of which are illegal) could breathe life into the campaign, and make these protests seem worthwhile.
Orrell Mount Park (Silcocks) in Litherland might not be the grandest park, but it is somewhere where local residents can walk the dog, play five-a-side or simply get a bit of fresh air. Unfortunately, the Labour-led Sefton Council have had their eyes on developing it into a full size 3G artificial football pitch for some time now. From reading the Echo, the dispute between the Council and local residents might seem merely like a difference of opinion. The council believe it will help develop Bootle and Litherland, providing a space for fee-paying football teams.
On the other hand, residents are concerned about the fact that if developed the space would exclude most of the community; about noise, light and traffic pollution; and lower house prices.
They also have environmental concerns: grass will be torn up and replaced with plastic, known to have only an 8-10 year lifespan before it needs to be disposed of; and trees and wildlife will be lost (including bees, bats and squirrels). The local community are also concerned about potential health risks, for example some research suggests there is carcinogenic material in the proposed pitch’s rubber crumb.
Interestingly, there may be more going on behind the scenes. Bellway Housing, who are the contractors responsible for the St Wilfrid’s housing project in Litherland, were initially asked by the Council to bring two disused football pitches on that site back into use. However, it seems that, rather than develop and open up pitches within that housing project, Bellway and the Council have attempted to use Orrell Mount Park as the location of the pitches – a process incorrectly referred to in planning documents as an attempt to ‘bring back into use’ the pitches. In reality it was a means of building more houses (which can be sold for higher prices), also generating more council tax – at the expense of local residents. The consultation regarding the development was rushed through and approved back in February 2021. Only about 12 houses were consulted, and those that opposed it were unable to door-knock, inform other residents or protest due to the lockdown, meaning that until construction work began, very few people in Bootle and Litherland knew about the scheme. The only reason the development is now well-known and may even be scrapped, is because local residents took direct action against it.
On November 1st, lorries turned up unannounced to put up fencing. A local resident quickly parked his car on the public driveway to the site. Others soon followed suit, and so they managed to prevent large construction vehicles from gaining access. Surprisingly, the police were friendly and told them they had a right to protest (some protesters even commented on how much they liked their local police afterwards). Residents then started picketing at the entrance from early morning until evening every day. On November 8th, another lorry arrived and around 25 residents amassed again, this time without any vehicles, since the Council had locked all gates to the park a week earlier preventing any public access. However, after a lengthy stand-off, the police told them that by blocking the park’s access to the vehicles they were breaking the law, and that if they continued they’d be arrested. The protestors did move out of the way allowing access, but remained too close to the lorry on the side of the road for the fencing to be taken down safely. Eventually the construction workers, who had previously been frustrated by the protest, packed up and left, many wishing the community good luck in their fight to save their green space, perhaps feeling bad about their involvement in the dispute. In the following days, the park remained closed to the public to ‘protect the protesters’, before Sefton Council reopened it on November 12th, announcing work on the pitch would be postponed pending further consultation.
For now it seems like the campaign to Save Orrell Mount Park has left the domain of direct action, the residents committee are now lobbying councillors and gaining signatures for their petition (1,600+ at the time of writing). An investigation could be a means for the council to save face (claiming to change their minds due to new information rather than disruptive protests), but also an opportunity for residents to build popular support. At the time of writing, residents are still picketing daily, showing that they don’t trust the council not to try the same underhanded tactics again. In the ongoing struggle against the scheme and similar schemes such as Rimrose Valley, it’s worth remembering that it was ordinary local people taking collective action that won the Battle for Orrell Mount Park.
If you’re interested in supporting the ongoing campaign by Friends of Orrell Mount Park you can get in touch at friends@foomp.org.uk
For causing traffic jams Insulate Britain and Extinction Rebellion are regularly attacked in the mass media for inconveniencing ordinary hard working people. This is pretty ironic given who these critics are and the aims of these movements.
We would not deny that the above mentioned groups are generally “middle class”, but often their critics are politicians and police chiefs who make the lives of the poor a living hell. It has been pointed out that by blocking roads, Insulate Britain are preventing people from getting to hospital, which could even result in deaths. While we would not agree with blocking an ambulance, beyond that, traffic jams are already an ordinary part of life. It also pales in comparison to deaths due to the underfunding and mismanagement of the NHS.
The demands of these movements would also benefit the poorest in our society. The effects of climate change will be disproportionately felt by the working class who will lack the money and power to easily adapt. It will be our neighbourhoods that disproportionately flood, just as it is already our streets that have the worst air pollution. On the other hand, money and lives would be saved if every house was insulated.
Road blockades have a long tradition as part of the workers’ movement. Back in the 1984-1985 Miners’ Strike, motorways were blocked; earlier this year electricians also blocked roads in an unofficial dispute. Around the world, wherever mass struggles take place, you’re likely to find ordinary people blocking roads. Whether it’s health workers fighting for wage increases in Argentina, Gilet Jaunes opposing a fuel tax in France or metalworkers in Spain fighting to protect their working conditions, it is a widely accepted tactic. Most people support transport strikes despite the inconvenience, so why not climate campaigners?
Road blockades are an effective tactic precisely because they are disruptive, crucially hitting profit rates, the primary concern of the government. Anyone can participate in them, and they can be used to bolster other struggles. If we accept this demonisation of the tactic, then we will be limiting how we can respond when we need to fight back. If we cheer on heavy sentences for those activists currently in court, the precedent will stand for all future road blockades.
Liverpool’s council-owned Exhibition Centre will be hosting an arms fair from the 12-13th of October. On September 11th, over 3,000 people protested in opposition. The absence of our mayor, the self-proclaimed “socialist and pacifist” Joanne Anderson, was revealing. Apparently she has sought legal advice, which conveniently stated she was powerless to cancel the event, but any councillors that have seen the evidence have had to sign non-disclosure agreements. Our rulers are happy to stand aside and let the event go ahead, so that they look reliable in the eyes of big business.
Liverpool Against the Arms Fair, who organised the march on the 11th, have led an extensive campaign of awareness raising. Locally there have been die-ins, street theatre, protests outside council meetings, stalls, and on the 2nd of October, a protest inside the Pullman Hotel (which will be accommodating arms dealers). Locally, everybody knows about the arms fair, and while not everyone agrees with the campaign, all signs suggest that the majority do. The campaign has led to Massive Attack, the National Education Union and the National Union of Students boycotting the venue. Disappointingly, Unite have not; many of their members work in the arms trade and Unite typically conflate being pro-worker with being pro-industry. However, there are limits to awareness raising, and despite tireless campaigning, it seems clear that the arms fair will go ahead.
So what is the alternative? Taking direct action to disrupt the proceedings of the council, the exhibition centre (who host regular public events) and the arms fair itself. On the 11th of September, Palestine Action used a fire extinguisher to splatter the windows of the exhibition centre with blood-red paint. Back in June, they targeted a factory in Runcorn involved in the supply chain for the Israeli military: occupying their roof for two days, spraying the walls red, destroying property such as ventilators & cameras, and, crucially, halting production.
In London an eight-day campaign of direct action and education was organised against the DSEI arms fair in September. People blocked entrances to the venue by blockading the roads with protests and lock-ons, as well as climbing on top of military vehicles being transported to the event. Inside, several socialist workers disrupted the fair by setting off red flares in front of the Lockheed Martin stand, while speaking out against British imperialism.
Even if these tactics don’t stop the arms fair, they will disrupt the industry and might stop them returning. Hopefully, wherever the fair goes, protests will follow. However, if we want to stop the profiteering from mass murder worldwide, then we will need to start talking about international revolution.
In April we wrote about electricians (sparks) on the Wirral holding weekly protests against plans by Balfour Beatty and EDF to undercut wages by de-skilling. It looks like their campaign has been completely successful! This was primarily due to direct action taken down south, such as trespassing to disrupt or shutdown offices and worksites. On one occasion sparks gathered from across the country, including Merseyside, and shut down a nuclear weapons facility in Berkshire using flying pickets, despite resistance from the police.
In Gateshead, Tyneside, unskilled workers were being hired for electrical work at an Amazon warehouse. Without hesitation the local rank-and-file group setup a picket line on Wednesday the 16th of June and 60 sparks refused to cross. There were around 100 workers present, most from outside that workplace, some even from offshore platforms. The next day the contractor agreed to hire proper electricians. However, on the Friday around 35 sparks were sacked, and told that “threatening behaviour, sabotage or any trouble whatsoever” would result in losing that week’s pay. There are basically no legal protections for wildcat (unofficial) strikes and no reason was given for the dismissals. So electricians picketed the site again on Monday, and on Tuesday they actually blocked the entrance. The police took this opportunity to tell them to move, but they simply walked continuously back and forth! One scab almost ran over the workers and threatened to stab them all at a later date. Despite this, and an increased police presence, they returned on Wednesday the 23rd and succeeded in getting all of the workers reinstated!
Some of the Sparks are members of Unite, but the union’s bureaucracy has done little to practically support them, even denouncing some of their actions in the first campaign. Regardless of whether they stick with Unite, form or join another union (ideally without a bureaucracy to repeat the same issues), or decide to do something entirely different, one thing is clear: direct action gets the goods.
“We are free, truly free, when we don’t need to rent our arms to anybody in order to be able to lift a piece of bread to our mouths.”
From the 24th March to the 7th April, up to thirty electricians (sparks) have gathered weekly outside Balfour Beatty’s in Bromborough, Wirral. Passing cars have beeped their horns in support. Beatty’s is working with EDF on the Somerset nuclear power plant, Hinkley Point C. They have been planning to train up electrical labourers in just 7 weeks to do 75% of the work of qualified electricians, both undercutting wages and leading to serious health and safety risks. The trend towards deskilling is deadly serious, whether it’s taking place at an NHS hospital or a block of flats. These protests aren’t the only recent labour struggle in Merseyside, with ongoing strikes at British Gas and lorry drivers winning a 6% pay rise in February due to strike action. What makes them unique is an emphasis on direct action and rank-and-filism.
The socially distanced demos, among many across the country, were a show of strength intended to put pressure on the companies, signalling that if their demands aren’t met, with the lockdown easing, disruptive action will be taken. In London the bosses have already had a taster of this, with the occupation of construction sites and offices. Just after their HQ was occupied, EDF released a statement announcing they had paused their plans, but the campaign is set to continue until they are fully scrapped. On the 31st, the first action also took place at Hinkley itself, with sparks continuously crossing the road to stop traffic, before being stopped by the police, undoubtedly emboldened by their new powers.
Sparks already have a history of direct action, with the BESNA dispute in the early 2010s, over an attempted 35% industry-wide pay cut. With their union leaders in Unite delaying strike ballots (due to fear of legal consequences) the sparks had to rely on weekly protests and creative action, such as disrupting an official dinner of industry executives. This culminated in wildcat, or unofficial, strikes and a victory for the workers.
While primarily members of Unite or non-unionised, these recent protesters have been organising through a rank-and-file group. This certainly suggests frustration with the constraints of an official framework and complacent leadership. On the 30th Unite actually denounced the planned protest outside of Hinkley C. Beyond this, opinion on Unite seems divided with some thinking problems could be solved through greater participation and calls for reform in the union, or even forming a separate union just for Sparks, while others seem disinterested entirely. While we would sympathise with calls for a new union, afterall Unite seem more interested in selling their members life insurance than on the idea of taking strike action, a narrower purview won’t necessarily lead to a militant or democratic union. For example on the railways, the RMT’s broad membership are more militant than the specific-drivers union, ASLEF. Issues around union democracy are deeper than this and in our view can only be solved by forming unions that are not legalistic representative bodies, which necessitate a bureaucracy who form their own separate interests, but that are simply associations of workers relying on direct action, what might be called “syndicalism”. However, groups of workers with strong opinions on this debate are best off leading by example and cooperating with other groups with differing views, rather than descending into infighting.
Nonetheless the focus of the movement is clear: stopping deskilling. If you are an electrician, or supporter, and want to get involved you can on facebook at: https://www.facebook.com/groups/230217498810296. The important thing is that the sparks are thinking and acting for themselves, and we wish them the best of luck with their struggle.
Protest against fencing, which was quickly torn down. Sign reads: HMP UoM
Recently around 200 students withheld their rent at the University of Manchester. They were locked inside their blocks, after being lured into living at the university with the promise of safe in-person teaching. A revolt followed, with students tearing down fences that were erected around their blocks! Nine students also occupied a disused 19-story accommodation block. Why that many rooms, which they described as an “upgrade”, are empty while so many sleep rough is a mystery only capitalism can explain. While the occupation was largely symbolic, it did a great deal to raise awareness, and thus harm the reputation of the university.
Initially they were offered a measly 5% rent reduction in return for an end to the strike. The Student Union fell over themselves to accept this offer, but since UoM Rent Strike and 9K 4 WHAT? actually organised the strike the union was ignored. In the end their persistence won an impressive 30% reduction for the first term! Roughly £600-900 for every student, not just those that participated. This is being proclaimed as the biggest victory to ever come out of a student rent strike. The strike is set to carry on into January unless a similar concession is gained for the whole year. They were following in the footsteps of 1,400 Bristol students, and it looks like it’s spreading across the country with strikes breaking out from Newcastle to Brighton. Hopefully it continues to spread, and outside of the more expensive “elite” universities. An education in direct action is worth far more than any university degree.
In contrast, at the University of Liverpool, as of December 6th, the pathetic Student Union are merely petitioning management to “Refund the Rent”. While one demand has been won (the right to cancel contracts) this is undoubtedly an attempt from management to avoid the outbreak of a strike. If students want a rent strike they will have to do it themselves.
Obviously the vast majority of us aren’t students, so why should we care? Perhaps most importantly helping them is the right thing to do. Solidarity goes both ways – for example students helped the Abercromby rent strikers in 1969 – we shouldn’t expect support if we aren’t willing to give it. Furthermore, student accommodation often ends up forcing local working class people to move out due to increased rent costs (gentrification); if students can get rent cuts this process might be slowed down or even reversed.
Crucially, we should be trying to learn from their example. Direct action can help us keep our livelihood and liberty. The basics of rent strikes are quite simple: convincing people to start and continue withholding their rent, resisting evictions and using other forms of direct action such as occupations in support. Obviously they are easier to organise for students living in halls, but this should also apply for some blocks of flats or council estates. There is also no need for “paid professionals”, looking to fund their salaries, to organise on our behalf. No one is saying it’s easy or we are guaranteed a victory, but if freshers can manage to organise a rent strike, then why can’t we?
In 1972 the national Housing Finance Act (HFA) raised the rents of council houses. There was national opposition, particularly strong in Liverpool, where in September twenty tenants’ associations agreed to withhold rents. The strike spread through existing tenants’ associations, “Fair Rents” Action Committees and mass meetings. They were supported by a new alternative media including the Scottie Press, Liverpool Free News and, in particular, Big Flame. Tenants also burnt rent bills, organised protests and disrupted council meetings. By October rent strikes had broken out in Birkenhead, Bootle, Cantril Farm, Huyton, Everton-Scotland Road, St. Helens and Warrington. These strikes were partial rather than total, just withholding the increase in rent.
The response was different in Kirkby, where a number of tenants had been involved in the 1969 Abercromby Rent Strike. In Tower Hills a mass meeting of 450 tenants agreed to a total rent strike, forming a group called THURAG with representatives for each street and block. In October, 1,475 Kirkby tenants withheld their rent completely. The “Over the Bridge” group, one of eight associations in Scotland Road, was alone in joining Kirkby, with almost complete support from their 570 residents. The total rent strikers proved far more resilient than their counterparts, and by March 1973 were effectively alone.
From the get-go housewives and the unemployed formed flying pickets in Kirkby to “follow” rent collectors. Both Tower Hills and “Over the Bridge” quickly became no-go areas for bailiffs. On November 10th over 900 tenants resisted an eviction in Tower Hills. 50 tenants surrounded their home, while the rest sealed off the estate to all traffic. When THURAG’s spokesperson was threatened with an eviction, 400 tenants travelled from “Over the Bridge” to defend him. Preparations were made with a telephone tree setup to sound WW2 sirens, an assembly point and volunteer patrols. Community spirit flourished with a tenants community centre, weekly newsletter and an estate-wide party on the night of the strike’s anniversary.
By June 1973, despite its small size, Kirkby council had the third highest rent arrears in the country. By October, Tower Hills managed to spread the strike to the Northwood estate and Croxteth, despite the fact that at this point rent strike was clearly in remission. They ignored court summons and decided to continue fighting their “own way.” On December 6th, two strikers were arrested in their homes for contempt of court and taken to Walton Jail, where they received a warm welcome from the inmates. Within a few hours roadblocks were set up around the town and four industrial strikes broke out. That evening tenants from across Merseyside picketed the jail, while the frightened authorities stockpiled anti-riot gear. On the 21st, with five more arrested, Tower Hills agreed to end the strike by majority vote in exchange for “no more legal action.” On the same day the strike ended in Oldham, followed by the remnants of the strike in Liverpool, Merseyside and Sheffield within a month.
Unlike the successes of the 1968 and 1969 rent strikes, the 1972 strike ended after its last bastion fell with no material gains. While it’s not worth overstating its failure, after all they only had to repay the rent and prisoners were released, it is worth reflecting on why the strike failed.
Promises from local Labour councils to refuse to implement the HFA came to nothing, meanwhile they urged non-payment and issued eviction notices. Due to faith in the Labour Party many tenants’ associations, including the only real national association, were surprised when these promises didn’t materialise and so were slow to respond. The overwhelming majority of associations also opted for partial strikes, which are less disruptive, yet appear more legitimate and “fair” to their masters. In contrast, THURAG and “Over the Bridge” underwent a process of radicalisation and rejected Labour and the legitimacy of the state. It took 14 months until Tower Hills strikers were arrested – just imagine the state’s reluctance if militant resistance had spread beyond Merseyside. Since the HFA was a national policy the tenants required a strong national response, but this never really got off the ground and where it did it pulled its punches.
On the other hand, there was not enough industrial resistance to the HFA. Unlike tenants, workers have the capacity to swiftly shut down the economy. Nationally there was no real opposition from the unions. Locally there was industrial support for the rent strike at the beginning from Ford’s and Bird’s Eye workers, but both suffered layoffs due to their actions. Luckily all those workers were re-hired, with mothers from THURAG joining their picket lines for reinstatement. The arrests that broke Tower Hills happened a few days before the last payday prior to Christmas, in an attempt to undermine any industrial response. Despite strong support from the rank-and-file, the union hierarchy were also reluctant, failing to call meetings or refusing to support Tower Hills at the end due to technicalities.
It is possible to win national gains as tenants. The Poll Tax rebellion built a successful national movement for non-payment, while the 1915 Glasgow Rent Strike saw strong industrial support for tenants and won a national rent freeze.
Liverpool and Manchester SF picket, 6th September 2020.
The Covid-19 pandemic has made abundantly clear that our bosses and rulers are only concerned with our well-being insofar as is necessary to maintain a productive workforce.
A member of the Liverpool Solidarity Federation came up against this reality in his job at Formby Hall Golf & Spa Resort. In August he was summarily dismissed for raising concerns about inadequate health and safety measures leaving both workers and customers vulnerable to the virus.
This type of treatment is standard fare in the service sector, where zero-hours contracts and high staff-turnover enable businesses to ignore basic workers’ rights, maximising exploitation and preventing unionisation. In this case, however, the sacked worker decided to stand up for himself and, alongside the Solidarity Federation, demanded just under £400 in compensation for unfair dismissal (equivalent to two weeks notice pay). As an anarcho-syndicalist union, the Solidarity Federation does not challenge bosses through tribunals, appealing to laws written by and for the capitalist class. Instead, demands are backed up by direct action.
Over the following weeks, Formby Hall was picketed several times. Despite the isolated location, legal threats, and police interference, dedicated supporters returned each time more resolute. The group leafleted Formby town centre, gaining public support and drumming up bad publicity for the resort. Creative tactics were used to disrupt business as usual, putting further pressure on the management. These actions were organised among equals, without any directing authority or bureaucracy, drawing support from the Federation across the country.
“Nearly all laws which were originally framed with the intention of benefiting workers, have either turned into weapons in their enemies’ hands, or become dead letters unless the workers through their organisations have directly enforced their observance. So that in the end, it is direct action that has to be relied on anyway.”
Voltairine de Cleyre
The dispute is ongoing at the time of writing; regardless of the outcome, however, it has been an important experience for those involved. The person sacked from their job had a chance to defend their dignity and demonstrate to co-workers that resistance is possible. The conflict made evident the dividing line between workers and bosses, whose interests are diametrically opposed. It also demonstrated the excessive approach the police will take to protect private property, so long as it’s in the hands of the rich and powerful. The people taking action gained vital experience, skills, and confidence that will be put to use in future campaigns. Formby Hall will think twice before sacking someone again under the flimsy pretence of having an “attitude problem”.
The struggle was limited by the fact that only one worker was willing to take action; if the workforce had come together then there would have been greater leverage and potential for future workplace resistance. For example, workers have collectively walked off the job over Covid elsewhere, such as council workers in Glasgow and retail staff in Bristol. However, through self-organisation between workers of all sectors in the local area, the Solidarity Federation demonstrated the potential to take action even when workplace organisation is lacking.
Liverpool Anarchist 