Thank you Jo Ann. 

While we are on the subject of the British boycott, the Forward reports,

Leaders of some of America’s most powerful unions are said to be considering whether to pull support for a top British union official, Keith Sonnet, in his bid to lead a major international service workers union, Public Services International. The American union leaders are responding to last month’s passage of a resolution proposing a sweeping boycott of Israeli goods by Sonnet’s union, Unison, which represents 1.3 million public service workers....

As the number of British labor unions passing Israel boycott resolutions has snowballed in recent months, American trade union officials have raised alarms over the growing phenomenon, which encompasses boycotts of Israeli goods and academic institutions. Last week, nearly every top union leader in America signed on to a statement drafted by the Jewish Labor Committee decrying the raft of boycott proposals as non-constructive.

The boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) movement is more than just labor unions in Britain.

But what do Palestinian workers think of Histadrut?

From Worldwide Activism: Manawel [Abdellal, member of the Executive Committee of Palestinian General Federation of Trade Unions (PGFTU)] described how Histadrut (the Israeli Labor Union) has used its privileged position in the Jewish State to take advantage of Palestinian workers for Histadrut's own ends. "Histadrut has failed to represent any Palestinian workers inside Israel.", he said, "and the PGFTU is forbidden from defending Arab workers in such areas. It is very painful. We can see, witness, and hear of Israeli brutal exploitation of Arab workers, but we cannot do anything...It can only remind us of the Cantons of the Apartheid State of South Africa."

Joanne: Excellent news for Israel's public sector workers and their families, and also for you, since it sounds like you'll now be able to catch your scheduled flight back to the States. Thanks so much for your first-hand posts from Israel and the OTs over the past several weeks. Safe trip home. Also, as a follow-up to Zionista's post on American labor's reaction to the British boycott movement, this article (h/t Zionista) includes the specific resolution adopted by many of America's principal labor leaders.   

Bruce

Zionista:

There is every reason to assume that the 1 percent deduction is for dues. Such mandatory deductions are--with caveats that eat at my liver every day as union counsel-- part and parcel of American labor relations too (drives the right-wingers and the organized business community nuts), and I don't see any indication that Palestinian workers are assessed a fee that Jewish workers are not assessed.

What is compelling to me, if accurate, is the allegation that Histadrut agreed in 1996 to share one half of these fees with PGFTU, but has not yet done so (particularly if we are talking about Palestinian workers who are represented by PGFTU).

It would be nice to know more.

Bruce

A little Gompers reference there, eh? Nice touch!

As in the case of the hospital worker who leaves East Jerusalem and loses his job, I think he is saying PGFTU cannot defend him legally as it is a two-tiered system (Palestinians under Jordanian law and Pal Labor Code and, always, permits). I'm not sure if he is saying that PGFTU cannot represent a Pal worker in Israel at all or in some cases. 

It all looks very complicated but I think a Palestinian working in Israel can be a member of unions from both orgs. The 1% is a union fee going to Histadrut supposedly to benefit the Palestinian worker (as a partial member with limited benefits). About a $100 million was collected before a deal was struck in '95 where half would go back to PGFTU, but the shutdown of PGFTU in '96 by Arafat was used to renege on that (I think some monies were transferred before that). This report (Builders of Zion) on workers from the OPT is dated a bit but is comprehensive.

koshembos "...especially interesting in light of the British butchery in Iraq...."

Given that the British Army's approach to occupation is a considerably lighter touch than the US Army's and they have had, for whatever reason, much lower level's of "collateral damage" attributable to their actions, it would seem that you are exposing your own racism.

I don't see that any of the major counterpoints -- that British union, along with individual and corporate, actions are a protest against the state rather than labor or race; taking advantage of Palestinian workers, etc. -- have been answered.

Clearly there are two sides to every story, but Israel is the occupier and holds the upper hand in every way. It's hard to put all the blame on those in poverty and kept fenced and underfoot, especially as they are, over time, excluded from larger swathes of their own land and economically hogtied.

Captain Video:

Don't flatter yourself. You've written nothing that will get you booted off of this site. You need to try harder dude if that's your goal.

Break a leg!

Bruce