skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Twenty-five
years ago, Hugh Simmonds, my closest friend, my law partner, my
political mentor, a rising star in the British Conservative Party, and
Margaret Thatcher's favorite speechwriter, turned up dead in a woodland
glade, seven miles from our hometown of Beaconsfield, in England, in
mysterious circumstances.
I made a promise to investigate
those mysterious circumstances. The mothers of Hugh's children became a
tad concerned about where my investigations were leading (ok, they
thought I was loopy). I don't blame them. So, in 2002, I handed to the children's grandfather, Hugh's father, who did
believe in me, folders to be given to the children on the occasion of
his death, Which occurred in 2005. Those folders set out a somewhat different scenario to the official version.
I don't know what those children think of all of this. I still
care for them deeply. I believe one of them may even have surreptitiously Friended
me on Facebook. What I do know is that I did what I could. Which is not
as much as I would have liked. But sometimes, we can not always do all
that we would wish. As my very favorite President discovered, when he
decided to let the US health insurance industry design his healthcare
reform package.
And those few spare words about Hugh's children camouflage an eternity of continuing personal anguish.
As for me. Well, twenty-five years ago, I was a deeply ambitious young man. Office
manager of Hugh's law firm (although not in charge of the bank
accounts!). About to earn six figures a year as Executive Assistant to
the Chairman of a newly-formed company, which was purchasing 100 tenanted
pubs from Whitbread. Senior staff member for a politician, who likely
would have been a senior Cabinet member. Perhaps not a star, but maybe a
rising starlet, in my own right, in the British Conservative Party.
Wing-tips, braces and Filofax in my hand.
Today, I am older. Not much wiser. Violet in my hair. A confusion to my father, as I
seemingly live my life backwards. Earning low five figures in my local
co-op. Where I advocate, to the consternation of my management, and
sometimes to the delight of my fellow workers. I don't wear a watch, nor
carry a smartphone, nor own a personal organizer. If there is something
which does not neatly fit into my immediately-accessible memory, then
it is something which is a step back into a life of stress and anxiety,
which life I left behind when I chose to become a recovering alcoholic
(nineteen years, two months ago).
My current preoccupation is
with exploring my creative side. And that finds its most immediate
musical expression in my alter ego, Pop Vox / Geoff Gilson.
I have a wealth of good friends. Many new. Some from my past, who
re-discovered me earlier this year, and who have a far more generous
memory of me from twenty-five and some years ago than I have. Thank you.
It has been an interesting twenty-five years. Begun with tragedy.
Finding destinations that never figured in my early planning. But still
welcome. There is much left to accomplish. I am fifty-seven years young.
The powers that be may yet act with the good faith I have sought for
Hugh's family these past twenty-five years. In the meantime, I never
forget. Not Hugh. Nor his children.
As promised earlier this week, when I discovered this was 'Respect for Shopworkers Week' in the UK, I have now written to the General Manager of our co-op (Weaver Street Market/Panzanella), asking him to consider putting hourly workers on the same footing as management, i.e. we all get paid for holidays:
"Hey Ruffin,
I've tried before. I'll try again. The hourly-paid workers of WSM and Panzanella are currently moving heaven and earth to create the large profits WSM is experiencing. We are allowed two 'official' holidays each year - Thanksgiving and Christmas.
The problem is this: although managers are paid for those two days 'off,' hourly-paid workers are not. You make much hay with your thanks each year to hourly-paid workers. Why not thank them this year by actually giving us the day 'off.' It's only 'off' if it isn't requiring that we use one of our own vacation days to pay for it. What do you think?
All the best,
Geoff"
We'll see. Next up. Trying to get him to allow those who work on New Year's Eve to leave in time to get to a party. Yes. We stay open on New Year's Eve until 10.00pm (which is 11.00pm, if you're clearing up the Hot Bar, and the Salad Bar, and counting cash, and vacuuming the Bulk Section). And then, time and a half for those of us who work on federal holidays ...
This week, in the UK, is 'Respect for Shopworkers Week.' Just for one moment, I have completely lost my train of thought, so bowled over am I by the thought that anyone actually cares. I thought we shopworkers were acknowledged fodder for every crazy, foulmouth, redneck, tosser and general all-round neanderthal God ever created.I think I will celebrate by:
1) Writing to the General Manager of my co-op (again, I have to stop and lean against the wall in hysterical laughter for a few minutes, as I use the term 'co-op' in reference to the capitalist, profit-driven paradise where I work). Where was I? Oh yes ...
I will write to him to ask if it is possible that, this year, we might actually get paid for the only two official holidays we are granted (Thanksgiving and Christmas). I mean. The two lone holidays are fine. And all. But they're pretty useless if we have to use up our own vacation days to pay for them.
After all, respect for shopworkers (and Food House workers and admin workers) should be forthcoming from management as much as customers. We are, after all, the ones directly producing for and selling to the customers. We are the ones making the money, which management then divvies up as it sees fit.
2) Trying my hardest, for one week at least, to encourage my customers to end their requests with 'please.'
Meanwhile, the photo with this rant is of Jessica Simpson, in the movie "Employee of the Month." Because Jessica is hot. And to remind me that respect for shopworkers is due not only from customers, but from other shopworkers, too ... guys and gals ...
Ok. No photo yet. But my evolution as the #POPVOX continues. I now have tasteful streaks of magenta and violet in my hair.
No, this is not just a ploy to get you to come to the next Pop Vox / Geoff Gilson gig ... which, um, is on Saturday, November 30. Although, there is loads that is new.
Beginning with wonderful indy-pop-reggae band, #Broadleaf. Who kick off the evening of hi-energy beach music at 2nd Wind at 8.30pm. And are composed of Greg Sronce (who works with me in the SV Kitchen), Douglas Stoll, Ian Watkins and Carly Yusiewicz.
After which, the hi-energy will continue with my shamelessly
interactive set of beach pop. Including three new songs. About which I
am terribly excited. A stadium rocker; one of those boppy numbers you
simply can't get out of your head; and a whole new dance-a-long
extravaganza.
And. Finally. My hair. You won't want to miss any of it ...
Ah. Halloween. An excellent opportunity to mull upon political correctness. First, costumes and scarecrows. Then, customer service.
Dressing as a Boston marathon bombing victim isn't politically incorrect. It is obnoxious, tasteless, uncaring and insensitive. The woman concerned deserves all the opprobrium she received. We don't need to invent a new expression to deal with blatant incivility and lack of tact.
Then again. At the Southern Village Weaver Street Market, we were apparently forced to take down our scarecrow. Because a customer complained that it was 'politically incorrect.' Namely, the Bobblehead Zombie had too much tomato ketchup on the brain (cauliflower) it was holding in its hand.
Look, people. It's a called a bloody scarecrow. Not a tickle-crow. Not a princess-crow. Not make-me-laugh-like-frigging-Elmo-crow. Not a please-don't-make-Tiffany-cry-crow. No. A bloody scarecrow. Get over it.
And those in charge? There are times we don't give in to every customer's tiniest complaint about political incorrectness. In fact, it is also politically correct to stand by your employees (many of whom have children), who voted democratically (well done!) for this particular scarecrow, and then invested time and creativity giving expression to the collegial concept.
Again. It is called 'customer service.' Not 'roll-me-over-and-kick-me-wherever-it-is-vulnerable service.' On the subject of political correctness. In a co-op. Where all are equal. Customers and workers alike. Can I stop ranting now, please ... ??
[Oh. Do I need to add that these are my personal views? Really ... ??]
Oh dear. An article in this past Sunday's [London] Independent on Sunday quite neatly
encapsulates (for me) the difference between progressivism and
socialism. How I support the former; not the latter. And, on a slightly
side issue, why it is that I get ever so gently annoyed that socialists in my locale pretend to be progressives, when, in fact, they are avid socialists.
I lived through the disastrous experiments in neo-socialism in which
British Labour Party Governments engaged in the Sixties and then in the
Seventies. We had combined tax rates for some individuals of 102%, and
employers (good and bad) could barely move for all the impositions
placed upon them.
From several decades of experience, my current view is as set out in a previous and rather long Note on my Facebook Page.
Basically, the economy is a natural force. Let it flow. The minute you
try to interfere, you screw it up. What we should do, as caring
progressives, is leave the economy alone; maximize the opportunity for
all to benefit; and provide dignified support directly to those unable
to make ends meet.
But no. Ed Miliband (current Leader of the British Labour Party) dives straight back into the
Seventies. Plans to dump all sorts of interference on businesses up and
down Great Britain. His artifice, the Make Work Pay contract, will be
massively rejected by businesses as unworkable. Just as similar measures
were in the Seventies. And the low-paid will be even worse off.
What's worse is that Ed is dishonest about how the scheme will be funded.
Instead of coming straight out and saying folks will be paying more
tax. He uses the old and continually discredited chimera about increased
tax revenues.
I would be much more impressed if his Labour
Party would come up with proposals making it easier to establish
co-operatives and/or encouraging public companies/large private
companies to elect employee and community Board Directors (as I
suggested in another recent Facebook post). In that way, it would be up to the companies themselves to determine,
within the context of more progressive structures, what they could
reasonably afford in terms of better living wages.
But no.
Bless him. Ed is a socialist. Not a progressive. He still lives in a
fantasy land, where some amorphous and omnipotent entity, known as the
state, knows better than people what is good for the rest of us. Sigh.
We learn nothing ...
So. A group of students at the University of
Manchester in the UK want to reform their economics curriculum to
address new post-crash realities. And 'The [London] Guardian/Observer' is jumping
on the bandwagon. Good for them. Almost.
A quick look at the economic scene in both the UK and the US tells us
that absolutely nothing has changed since before the crash. We have
recovery. But for shareholders representing capital only. Not for labor.
Not for communities. Not for the environment. And it's all based on new
unsustainable bubbles in the housing and stock markets.
We
have learned nothing. And we were all so ready to. Took part in Occupy.
Wondered about how to create local economies that are independent of
Wall Street and the City of London. Where the creation of 'wealth' and
its enjoyment are controlled by the people who are immediately affected
by it.
But. It's the same old story. Today's crisis became yesterday's news because there's a new show about dragons on the telly.
So, I welcome the desire to address a new economic model. And then I
read the small print. Capitalism has failed! Markets are rubbish! Hand
it all over to the state!
No. You bastards. Don't hand over my life to anyone else. Hand it back to me. You f**king clowns.
Why, oh why, can't at least one genius, in charge of someone's policy
unit somewhere, come up with the simple notion that we don't have to
reinvent the economic universe; we just need to tweak it, in favor of
people, their communities and the environment?
I have no
problem with shareholder capitalism, per se, be it institution-based,
co-operative based, even state-based (although I still think 'the state'
makes a lousy businessman or woman).
But why not make this
small change? Insist that shareholder companies be accountable not only
to capital (private, individual, institution or state), but also to
employees, communities and the environment, by legislating that all
public companies (plus private companies over a certain size?) allow
employees/communities to elect a set number of Board Directors?
Of
course, that would require that employees and communities given such an
opportunity actually took advantage of it. As they are so religiously
failing to do with my own co-op, Weaver Street Market. But horse and water. Horse and water ...
In the meantime. Why does everyone have to make it so complicated? Or, am I just being too simple ... ??
Well. One of the regular contributors on
OrangePolitics, the self-styled 'progressive' multi-author blog/forum of
Orange County, NC, is complaining long and hard about the announcement
this week that Panzanella, Weaver Street Market Co-op's local food restaurant, will be closing at the end of the year.
Now. Don't get me wrong. I agree with almost everything that the
gentlemen in question (who prefers to remain semi-anonymous, as 'Patrick
M.') says. It's just that I've had dealings with 'Patrick M.' before.
On the same blog.
He whines at length about how he is just so
let down because he can not fathom why a supposedly progressive
institution, in such a strongly progressive region, could possibly have
the sort of Soviet-style decision-making process (um, my words), where a
small self-appointed clique act as if they know best who and what we
want.
Um.
This would be the same 'Patrick M.' who took me to task when I complained that just such a Soviet-style of
'democracy' exists in practically every primary democratic institution
in Carrboro, NC. From the community radio station, to the Carrboro Board
of Aldermen. And including WSM.
Anyways. Leaving all that on one side. He asked some questions. And
challenged the Board of WSM. I took the time to answer his questions.
And to wish him good luck in getting any response to his challenge.
Bottom line? Community-owned only works when it also means
community-controlled. Progressive democracy means the people decide, not
just a select few. And? The white collars only complain when they find
they are not one of the select few ...
[Oh. The usual. My views. Not those of the Central Committee ... ]
Taken (cross my heart) from this week's Independent commentary on candidates for the Hillsborough Board of Commissioners:
"To the town's credit, outsiders see a quaint, beautiful downtown, but there are other sides of Hillsborough where, yes, there are poor people who are not shopping at Weaver Street Market."
Ouch! This is how the region's premier progressive newspaper views the Weaver Street Market Co-operative?
Co-op's originated in Great Britain as an antidote to corporate general stores, where ordinary working folk were gouged by the prices.
Have we (I work at the Southern Village Weave), have we become the very company stores we are supposed to be replacing?
I remember asking at my original WSM Orientation (er, I didn't wait long to start causing trouble ... ) why price did not figure as an item in the WSM Mission Statement.
I was told (loudly) by the then WSM Operations Manager that he had never heard anyone complaining about the prices.
Of course he hadn't. The customers at that time (and probably now, as well) were too busy worrying about whether they'd missed the 30,000 mile maintenance check on the Land Rover.
Look. It's all very well engaging in social experiments to try to provide local, organic, natural, hemp-based, hippy-grown, fair trade, whatever.
But not if we are in contravention of our most important mission: inclusive - accessible to the community.
And clearly, The Independent thinks we aren't making ourselves accessible enough to our disadvantaged friends and neighbors. Shame on us.
[As always, I am bound by the new WSM Employee Policy to let you know that these views are not necessarily those of the WSM corporate office management team. Although, quite how you would mistake them for such is beyond me. Now. When I'm not writing this blog, I perform hi-energy, interactive Beach Pop, as Pop Vox / Geoff Gilson. My next gig is on Saturday, November 30, @ 2nd Wind, beginning at 10.00pm. Preceded @ 8.30pm by the wonderful reggae band, Broadleaf, which includes work-mate, Greg Sronce. Wow. This is one heck of a footnote ... ]
So. I read in this week's Weaver Street Market
Co-operative employee Market Messenger that the sole candidate in the
annual Worker-Owner Board Director election [Curt Brinkmeyer] was ...
elected.
As I have stated elsewhere, this is no sign of a healthy democracy, or an indication of all workers being whoop-di-whoop with Curt's tenure.
Rather it is clear evidence of the fact that the WSM corporate office
management team are succeeding in suppressing democracy among workers
within a co-op which they boast is half-owned by its workers.
But. Let's leave all that on one side. It ain't why I'm penning this
little ditty today. The Market Messenger goes on to claim that Curt
was instrumental in making it easier for workers to become
worker-owners.
Ouch. That's sort of like saying that Jesse
Helms was 'instrumental' in getting the US Senate to approve a federal
holiday for Martin Luther King Jr. (even though Jesse tried to
filibuster against it), just because he happened to be in the Senate at
the time.
The truth about the path to easier worker-ownership is more along the lines to be found in this blog post.
In short. I campaigned vigorously for easier worker-ownership for five
years. Put it forward as a proposal while serving on the WSM Elections
Task Force. Ran for the Board (for my third of four attempts) in 2009 on
the single issue platform of giving the vote to ALL workers, not just
worker-owners (we shouldn't have to pay to vote).
At which
point the WSM corporate office management team ran Curt against me, on a
wishy-washy pledge to do something about worker-ownership. Which pledge was only then eventually acted upon because I badgered the Board (and Curt) for a further three years on
the subject.
Now. I'm not concerned about not being offered
credit. I'm not even worried that Curt makes claims for himself. Every
election candidate presents themselves in the best possible light.
But I do mind that WSM, as an institution, engages in a recreation of history. So. I post to get the story right ...
Posts
