Mercedes workers in Alabama vote against joining UAW

Filip Timotija
Fri, 17 May 2024 
THE HILL

Mercedes-Benz workers in Alabama voted against joining the United Auto Workers (UAW) Friday, dealing a blow to the union that hopes to make progress in the south following a successful election in Tennessee last month.

Workers at the Vance, Ala., plant voted 2,642 to 2,045 against joining the union, according to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Around 5,100 auto workers were eligible to participate.

UAW hoped to continue its momentum in the south, following a historic win in April at the Volkswagen plant in Tennessee, where approximately 73 percent of workers voted in favor of joining the union.

UAW has a week to challenge the result of Friday’s vote.

“Our goal throughout this process was to ensure every eligible Team Member had the opportunity to participate in a fair election,” Mercedes-Benz U.S. International (MBUSI) said in a news release following the results’ announcement. “We thank all Team Members who asked questions, engaged in discussions, and ultimately, made their voices heard on this important issue.”

UAW has filed unfair labor practice charges against the German manufacturer, claiming that Mercedes intimated workers in the lead-up to the contest, therefore breaching U.S. labor law.

If found liable, Mercedes could be forced to bargain with the union, under the NLRB standard.

“They tried to paint the union in a bad light, Fain said, later adding “We’re here to help people. That’s what we’re here for. We don’t have to intimidate or threaten nobody. We believe in democracy, we believe in workers having a voice and making their own decision.”

UAW President Shawn Fain was undeterred by the outcome, vowing that UAW will continue its efforts around the country and will ultimately organize auto manufacturing plants, including one in Vance where luxury SUVs are made.

“Sometimes Goliath wins a battle, but ultimately David will win the war,” Fain said in a press conference following the results’ announcement Friday.

“These workers will win their fair share and we’re going to be there every step of the way. We’ve been here before, we know what we’re taking on and this company like most others operates off [of] the same playbook, fear, threats, intimidation.”

Fain said that despite the loss, the union will continue “fighting” and plow ahead in hopes of organizing more in the South, an area of the country historically not as welcoming to the unions.

During the process, UAW faced political opposition from leaders of various states in the south.

Six governors warned workers in mid-April against joining the UAW, saying that it would impact their jobs and the “values we live by.”

Fain’s union spearheaded a walkout last year on the former “Big Three” auto makers. In the end, they were able to strike an agreement with all three automakers —General Motors, Ford and Stellantis — in October after a six-week strike.

“We’ll go back, we’ll, we’ll assess things, see where we are and keep moving, Fain said.

Blow to UAW as Mercedes workers in Alabama vote against unionization

Michael Sainato

THE GUARDIAN
Fri, 17 May 2024

One of the Mercedes plants in Alabama.Photograph: Nora Eckert/Reuters


The United Auto Workers has failed in its effort to unionize workers at two Mercedes-Benz plants in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, in a blow to the union’s plans to build its membership in the southern states.

The loss on Friday comes amid the UAW’s ambitious union-organizing campaign to organize 150,000 non-union auto workers around the US.

In April the UAW won a landslide victory at the Volkswagen plant in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where 73% of workers voted to unionize.


The final vote was 2,642 against union representation and 2,045 for. Fifty-six per cent of workers voted no.

Southern states have for decades successfully fought off unionization drives in an attempt to keep down labor costs – a practice critics have called the “Alabama discount”.

“Mercedes is a better place thanks to this campaign,” said Shawn Fain in a press conference after the results were announced. He cited the end of two-tier wages and a replacement of the chief executive as some of the successes workers won during the organizing campaign.

He said: “The federal government and the German government are currently investigating Mercedes for the intimidation and harassment that they inflicted on their own workers, and we intend to follow that process.”

At Mercedes, the union faced significantly more aggressive opposition to worker organizing efforts than at Volkswagen, including from Republican elected officials and business groups that campaigned against the union vote.

David Johnston, a worker at the Mercedes battery plant since August 2022, said he jumped at the chance to work at Mercedes when he heard they were directly hiring.

But promises and claims that were made to him when he was hired became exposed as false or misleading, he said, such as workers never being forced to work Sundays, or the two-tier wage system, and unilateral changes made by the company.

“They have changed their own handbook many times since I was originally hired, in just two years. They have also changed our schedules. My schedule personally has changed about six times since I was hired on,” said Johnston.

These factors and his previous experience working under a union contract inspired him to support the unionization effort, he said. Johnston said Mercedes-Benz’s attempt to dissuade workers from unionizing had only assisted workers’ organizing efforts.

Mercedes-Benz moved to head off the union drive by eliminating a two-tier wage system at the plants. That decision came after it was announced 30% of workers had signed union authorization cards.

“That quite honestly backfired for the company. It really showed workers that they’ve been listening to us the whole time, but did not care about us,” said Johnston. “It wasn’t until we decided that we wanted to union that the company even would respond to us.

“This isn’t political, regardless of what the governor wants to say. This isn’t something that the UAW came down to us seeking us to join them. This was us going to them asking them to represent us, that we would be allowed to call the shots on how we organized, and this has been 100% worker-driven. The people that are going to unionize are the people that live in the south.”

Now workers will push for a first union contract at Volkswagen as the UAW sets its sights on expanding their union wins in the auto industry. The UAW has so far announced reaching 30% thresholds of workers signing union authorization cards at a Toyota engine plant in Troy, Missouri, in March and at the Hyundai plant in Montgomery, Alabama, in February.

Sharon Block, a law professor at Harvard Law School and former NLRB official, said: “There are legal avenues open to the UAW to challenge the outcome.

“As Mercedes’ anti-union campaign ramped up, the UAW filed a number of unfair labor practice charges with the NLRB, alleging that Mercedes crossed the line from strongarm to unlawful tactics in the plants. In addition, there is an investigation under way into whether Mercedes violated German law by undertaking such an aggressive anti-union campaign in the US.”

A spokesperson for Mercedes-Benz said: “We look forward to continuing to work directly with our team members to ensure MBUSI is not only their employer of choice, but a place they would recommend to friends and family.”


Alabama Mercedes employees overwhelmingly vote against joining union, slowing UAW effort in South

TOM KRISHER and KIM CHANDLER
Updated Fri, 17 May 2024 




UAW Mercedes
David Johnston, right, a worker at Mercedes, thanks UAW President Shawn Fain following a press conference in Tuscaloosa, Alabama on May 17, 2024, after workers at two Alabama Mercedes-Benz factories voted overwhelmingly against joining the United Auto Workers union. 

(AP Photo/Kim Chandler)


TUSCALOOSA, Ala. (AP) — Workers at two Mercedes-Benz factories near Tuscaloosa, Alabama, voted overwhelmingly against joining the United Auto Workers on Friday, a setback in the union’s drive to organize plants in the historically nonunion South.

The workers voted 56% against the union, according to tallies released by the National Labor Relations Board, which ran the election.

The NLRB's final tally showed a vote of 2,642 to 2,045 workers against the union. A total of 5,075 voters were eligible to vote at an auto assembly plant and a battery factory in and near Vance, Alabama, not far from Tuscaloosa, the board said. Nearly 93% of workers eligible to vote cast ballots.

The NLRB said both sides have five business days to file objections to the election. The union must wait a year before seeking another vote.

UAW President Shawn Fain told workers the results were not what the union had hoped for, but he said the UAW eventually will prevail. “These courageous workers reached out to us because they want justice,” he said.

He likened the union organizing effort to the fight between David and Goliath: Sometimes Goliath wins a battle, “but ultimately, David will win the war,” he said. “These workers will win their fair share.”

Fain said whether the union challenges the election results will be up to UAW lawyers. The union already has filed unfair labor practice complaints against the company alleging that management and anti-union consultants tried to intimidate workers. The company has denied the allegations.

“Obviously we’re following through on complaints, both here and in Germany” where Mercedes is headquartered, Fain said.

Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, who has campaigned against the union, wrote in a post on X that auto manufacturing is one of the state’s crown jewel industries, and the state is committed to keeping it that way.

“Alabama is not Michigan, and we are not the Sweet Home to the UAW,” she wrote. “We urge the UAW to respect the results of this secret ballot election.”

Worker Melissa Howell, who opposed joining the union, said she and other employees realized that the UAW was making lofty promises that it couldn't put in writing, including pay of $40 per hour, pensions and better benefits.

“They kept repeating over and over, ‘You’re not going to lose anything. We're going to start with what you have right now,'” Howell said. “That's when we really started letting people know, 'Hey, hold up. It's all negotiable.'"

But Rick Garner, 60, who works in quality control at the Mercedes assembly plant and supported joining the union, said workers were shown an anti-union video every day ahead of the vote, while union opponents targeted employees who they thought could be persuaded to vote no.

“I’m disappointed in the people that flipped and believed the persuaders,” Garner said.

The loss slows the UAW's effort to organize 150,000 workers at more than a dozen nonunion auto factories largely in the South.

The voting at the two Mercedes factories comes a month after the UAW scored a breakthrough victory at Volkswagen’s assembly factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee. In that election, VW workers voted overwhelmingly to join the UAW, drawn by the prospect of substantially higher wages and other benefits.

The UAW had little success before then recruiting at nonunion auto plants in the South, where workers have been much less drawn to organized labor than in the traditional union strongholds of Michigan and other industrial Midwest states.

A victory at the Mercedes plants would have represented a huge plum for the union, which has long struggled to overcome the enticements that Southern states have bestowed on foreign automakers, including tax breaks, lower labor costs and a nonunion workforce.

Ivey and other Southern governors warned that voting for union membership could, over time, cost workers their jobs because of the higher costs that the auto companies would have to bear.

Yet the UAW was campaigning from a stronger position than in the past. Besides its victory in Chattanooga, it achieved generous new contracts last fall after striking against Detroit Big 3 automakers: General Motors, Stellantis and Ford. Workers there gained 33% pay raises in contracts that will expire in 2028.

Top-scale production workers at GM, who now earn about $36 an hour, will make nearly $43 an hour by the end of their contract, plus annual profit-sharing checks. Mercedes has increased top production worker pay to $34 an hour, a move that some workers say was intended to fend off the UAW.

Shortly after workers ratified the Detroit contract, Fain announced a drive to organize about 150,000 workers at more than a dozen nonunion plants, mostly run by foreign-based automakers with plants in Southern states. In addition, Tesla’s U.S. factories, which are nonunion, are in the UAW’s sights.

It turns out that the union had a tougher time in Alabama than in Tennessee, where the UAW narrowly lost two previous votes and was familiar with workers at the factory. The UAW has accused Mercedes of using management and anti-union consultants to try to intimidate workers.

In a statement Friday, Mercedes said it looks forward to “continuing to work directly with our team members so they can build superior vehicles for the world.”

The company said its focus is on providing a safe and supportive work environment.

In an interview before the votes were tallied, Marick Masters, a business professor emeritus at Wayne State University in Detroit, said a loss would be a setback for the union but suggested it would not deal a fatal blow to its membership drive. The union will have to analyze why it couldn’t garner more than 50% of the vote, given its statement that a “supermajority” of workers signed cards authorizing an election, Masters said. The UAW wouldn’t say what percentage or how many workers signed up.

The loss could lead workers at other nonunion plants to wonder why Mercedes employees voted against the union. But Masters said he doesn’t think it will slow down the union.

The union has said it will continue organizing efforts at nonunion plants run by Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, Toyota and Honda.

__

Krisher reported from Detroit.


Mercedes-Benz Exec Implores Workers Ahead Of Union Vote: ‘Give Me A Chance’

Dave Jamieson

HUFFPOST
Updated Fri, 17 May 2024 


The top Mercedes-Benz executive in the U.S. had a not-so-subtle message for workers as they headed to the polls this week to vote in a potentially historic union election.

Federico Kochlowski, the new president and CEO of Mercedes-Benz U.S. International, wrote in a letter to employees at the plant in Vance, Alabama, that the election marked “an important decision about how we work together for years to come.”

“And although I respect everyone’s right to take a position on this matter, I prefer that we work on our future together without anyone else between us,” he wrote, according to a copy obtained by HuffPost.

Kochlowski sounded as though he was pleading with employees near the end of the letter, telling them he was “a person of my word.”

“When I tell you I’m going to do something, you can trust that I will do everything in my power to make it happen,” he wrote. “I hope you’ll give me a chance to do what I came here to do.”

More than 5,000 employees at the plant are voting Monday through Friday this week to determine whether they join the United Auto Workers. The UAW has struggled to unionize manufacturing plants in Alabama, so an election win would mark a major organizing victory.

A Mercedes-Benz spokesperson said the company “can’t comment on individual correspondence.” The letter viewed by HuffPost had been mailed out to an employee last Thursday.

The letter Federico Kochlowski sent to Mercedes-Benz employees in Alabama ahead of the union vote. He asked workers to "give me a chance." Obtained by HuffPost

Rick Webster, an employee at the plant and member of the union’s organizing committee, said workers had been pulled into meetings leading up to the vote to hear talking points against the union.

“It’s been nonstop anti-union. We’ve had to go to meetings every day to watch videos or have them read off a piece of paper,” he said. “They’ve spent all this money on all these commercials and everything else. ... They’re just blowing all kinds of money on this thing, and it just hasn’t fazed us.”

The letter from Kochlowski prompted a rebuke from IndustriALL, the global union federation based in Europe that has come out in support of the UAW. The group says the Vance plant is Mercedes’ only non-union plant in the world.

IndustriALL general secretary Atle Høie sent a letter to Mercedes-Benz CEO Ola Källenius on Tuesday to say he was “appalled” by the company’s “ongoing and massive violations of the principle of neutrality” in the union election.

It’s been nonstop anti-union. We’ve had to go to meetings every day to watch videos or have them read off a piece of paper.Rick Webster, Vance plant employee

Høie wrote that Mercedes was not supposed to take a position on the Vance election under the “Principles of Social Responsibility and Human Rights” agreement the company had signed alongside IndustriALL.

The agreement states: “In the event of organization campaigns, the company and its executives shall remain neutral.”

Høie wrote to Källenius, “I expect you to intervene immediately to ensure that neutrality prevails at least for the remaining four days of the vote.”

The news outlet Labor Notes reported earlier this week that Mercedes had enlisted a local pastor to speak to workers and discourage them from unionizing. “Mercedes-Benz has been an uplift for people like me,” Rev. Matthew Wilson said in a video aired at the plant, according to Labor Notes.

The UAW is coming off a landmark election win last month in Tennessee, where it unionized the Volkswagen plant after two previous failed attempts. The union is hoping a win this week in Alabama could turbocharge more organizing at auto plants in the South, despite continued political pressure from figures like Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey, who’s urged workers to vote against the UAW.

Webster predicted the union would prevail regardless.

“We’re gonna win this thing on Friday,” he said.

What It’s Like Voting Union Inside Alabama Mercedes Plant

By Jane Slaughter

May 16, 2024

Source: Labor Notes





In the election on whether to join the United Auto Workers, being held over five days this week at the Mercedes plant in Vance, Alabama, the union negotiated rules to try to minimize management influence. The vote is taking place inside the plant.

Workers are allowed to vote on company time, at designated intervals. A golf cart carrying a union observer, a company observer, and a National Labor Relations Board agent tours the 5,200-worker plant. The agent announces through a bullhorn, and by holding up a card, that workers in a certain area are now excused to go vote, if they choose to.

Jacob Ryan, a Mercedes worker and an observer for the union, said that management personnel are not supposed to be in the area at the time of the announcement. It is his job to make sure they are not herding workers to the polls.

Ryan said Mercedes had initially wanted its managers to be the ones making the announcement, but the union resisted.

Mercedes has been requiring people to watch anti-union videos at their team meetings at the start of the shift. The time for discussing quality or safety problems from the day before is cut short so people can watch these mandatory videos, according to Rob Lett, who works in the battery plant and has nine years’ seniority.

‘THIS IS OUR TIME’

On day three of the voting, Ryan was guardedly optimistic. He said that in an area he formerly worked in, the body shop, the best he had hoped for was a 50/50 split and that was now his prediction.

In the paint shop, Ryan said, “when the announcement came, people were like ‘This is our time! Let’s go! Let’s get it!’” Both union and anti-union stickers are being worn on hardhats and clothing.

Ryan was one of several Alabama auto workers who attended the Labor Notes Conference in Chicago in April. One workshop he attended was “Inoculation,“ about preparing your co-workers for management’s reaction to organizing.

Deb Sandifer, a materials handler, said the voting where she acted as a union challenger (observing the voting process on the union’s behalf and challenging potentially ineligible voters) took place in a curtained-off area that had been used to store empty boxes. She said management personnel were not in the area: “We made sure of that.“

She has seen more anti-union stickers in recent days and is “ready for the real thing”—the vote count on Friday morning, which she will be off work to observe.

‘WE WANT TO BE VISIBLE’

Kay Finklea, a 23-year employee who works in quality, said even at the last minute, union supporters are still answering a lot of questions.

“We are staying present so people can see that we are here,” she said. “We want to be visible in numbers. We are telling each other to have on your union attire, have people see you.“

Workers are required to wear a Mercedes shirt when they are on the clock—but they can unbutton it and have a union shirt underneath. They also have bracelets, caps, and vests.

Ryan said they had been handing out shirts and trying to set up “voting parties.“ That’s where people on a certain team get in early and wear their union shirts and go vote all together.

UAW's push to unionize factories in South faces latest test in vote at 2 Mercedes plants in Alabama

The Canadian Press
Thu, May 16, 2024 



DETROIT (AP) — The United Auto Workers union faces the latest test of its ambitious plan to unionize auto plants in the historically nonunion South when a vote ends Friday at two Mercedes-Benz factories near Tuscaloosa, Alabama.

The voting at the two Mercedes factories — one an assembly plant, the other a battery-making facility — comes a month after the UAW scored a breakthrough victory at Volkswagen's assembly factory in Chattanooga, Tennessee. In that election, VW workers voted overwhelmingly to join the UAW, drawn by the prospect of substantially higher wages and other benefits.

The UAW had little success before then recruiting at nonunion auto plants in the South, where workers have been much less drawn to organized labor than in the traditional union strongholds of Michigan and other industrial Midwest states.

A victory at the Mercedes plants would represent a huge plum for the union, which has long struggled to overcome the enticements that Southern states have bestowed on foreign automakers, including tax breaks, lower labor costs and a nonunion workforce.


Some Southern governors have warned voting for union membership could, over time, cost workers their jobs because of the higher costs that the auto companies would have to bear.

Yet the UAW is operating from a stronger position than in the past. Besides its victory in Chattanooga, it achieved generous new contracts last fall after striking against Detroit Big 3 automakers: General Motors, Stellantis and Ford. Workers there gained 33% pay raises in contracts that will expire in 2028.

Top-scale production workers at GM, who now earn about $36 an hour, will make nearly $43 an hour by the end of their contract, plus annual profit-sharing checks. Mercedes has increased top production worker pay to $34 an hour, a move that some workers say was intended to fend off the UAW.

Shortly after workers ratified the Detroit contract, UAW President Shawn Fain announced a drive to organize about 150,000 workers at more than a dozen nonunion plants, mostly run by foreign-based automakers with plants in Southern states. In addition, Tesla's U.S. factories, which are nonunion, are in the UAW's sights.

About 5,200 workers at the Mercedes plants are eligible to vote on the UAW, the union's first election there. Balloting is being run by the National Labor Relations Board.

The union may have a tougher time in Alabama than it did in Tennessee, where the UAW had narrowly lost two previous votes and was familiar with workers at the factory. The UAW has accused Mercedes of using management and anti-union consultants to try to intimidate workers.

In a statement Thursday, Mercedes denied interfering with or retaliating against workers who are pursuing union representation. The company has said it looks forward to all workers having a chance to cast a secret ballot “as well as having access to the information necessary to make an informed choice” on unionization.

If the union wins, it will be a huge momentum booster for the UAW as it seeks to organize more factories, said Marick Masters, a professor emeritus at Wayne State University's business school who has long studied the union.

“The other companies should be on notice," Masters said, “that the UAW will soon be knocking at their door more loudly than they have even in the recent past.”

If the Mercedes workers reject the union, Masters expects the UAW leadership to explore legal options. This could include arguing to the National Labor Relations Board that Mercedes' actions made it impossible for union representation to receive a fair election.

Though a loss would be a setback for the UAW, Masters suggested it would not deal a fatal blow to its membership drive. The union would have to analyze why it couldn't garner more than 50% of the vote, given its statement that a “supermajority” of workers signed cards authorizing an election, Masters said. The UAW wouldn't say what percentage or how many workers signed up.

A UAW loss, he said, could lead workers at other nonunion plants to wonder why Mercedes employees voted against the union. But Masters said he doesn't think an election loss would slow down the union.

“I would expect them to intensify their efforts, to try to be more thoughtful and see what went wrong,” he said.

If the UAW eventually manages to organize nonunion plants at Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, Toyota and Honda with contracts similar to those it won in Detroit, more automakers would have to bear the same labor costs. That potentially could lead the automakers to raise vehicle prices.

Some workers at Mercedes say the company treated them poorly until the UAW's organizing drive began, then offered pay raises, eliminated a lower tier of pay for new hires and even replaced the plant CEO.

Other Mercedes workers have said they prefer to see how the company treats them without the bureaucracy of a union.

___

Chandler reported from Montgomery, Alabama.

Tom Krisher And Kim Chandler, The Associated Press

#BDS 

UAW 4811

UC officials charge that academic workers strike over pro-Palestinian protests is illegal

Jaweed Kaleem, Paloma Esquivel
Fri, May 17, 2024 

Academic workers at UC Irvine walk the picket line during a strike on Nov. 15, 2022. 

(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Times)

As the 48,000-member UC academic workers union announced a Monday strike at UC Santa Cruz over alleged free speech violations during pro-Palestinian protests, the University of California on Friday filed a labor complaint to stop what they allege is an illegal action, heightening tensions roiling the university system.

The union's decision to strike on the 19,764-student campus — where nearly 2,000 students are in graduate school — could deal a blow to operations at a critical time during the final weeks of the spring quarter.

The targeting of UC Santa Cruz came after 79% of voting members across the state this week authorized the union leadership to call for "rolling" strikes — not over wages and benefits, but for alleged unfair labor practices against union members who supported pro-Palestinian student protests demanding that universities divest from Israel and weapons companies.

The union represents graduate student teaching assistants, researchers and other academic workers at University of California’s 10 campuses.

The Santa Cruz strike would be the first of potentially several work stoppages that the union intends to launch one by one across campuses based on how receptive administrations are to pro-Palestinian activists' demands.

The strike threats prompted UC leaders to file their own state unfair labor practice charge against the union on Friday that called on student workers to "cease and desist" the pending walkout.

"This strike directly violates the [collective bargaining agreement's] no strike clauses, and has no relation to UAW members’ employment with the university. Instead, as the UAW and its members’ communications make clear, UAW strikes to support protest activity surrounding the conflict in the Middle East," UC said in their filing with the state's labor board.

UC officials allege the strike is illegal because of a no-strike clause in the union's contract, ratified in late 2022, that won significant pay increases and benefit improvements for union members. The union argues that the strike is within its legal rights because it's connected to an unfair labor practice charge workers filed in early May with the state's labor board.

"Particularly in today’s climate, if UAW [and other unions] can disregard no-strike clauses, the University — and every other public agency in California — would face constant strikes advancing political and/or social viewpoints," the university's filing said.

The union chose to strike at a smaller UC campus where tensions have been lower and police have not been called in to make arrests or sweeps. But the campus is not a stranger to worker protests. In 2020, the university fired dozens of grad students from their teaching assistant positions after strikes there. At least 17 arrests were made during a related student-led demonstration.

This spring, UCLA, UC Irvine and UC Berkeley have been particularly volatile flashpoints of pro-Palestinian protests. A violent mob attack on a UCLA pro-Palestinian encampment last month has led to multiple investigations into how the university handled the melee and the delayed police response to it.

For two weeks, students at UC Santa Cruz, including unionized graduate students, have maintained a pro-Palestinian encampment on campus in support of divestment from Israel. The strike comes as protesters and the university administration have indicated that they've reached a standstill. Protest leaders said on Thursday that they were "under imminent threat of police sweep" after they said the university gave them formal notice to "cease all camping activities on university property."

No length of time was given for the strike, which the union announced with a promotional video on the social media site X, but a UC Santa Cruz union member said it could last through June 30.

Speaking before the strike decision, Rafael Jaime, United Auto Workers Local 4811 co-president and a doctoral candidate in UCLA’s English department, said a strike would mean "all academic work would cease, including research, teaching and grading."

Read more: 'Maximize chaos.' UC academic workers authorize strike, alleging rights violated during protests

Student workers will receive $500 weekly in strike pay, or about 33% less than the average teaching assistant makes for a 20-hour work week, he said.

Jess Fournier, a union representative at UC Santa Cruz, said that while the alleged unfair labor practices did not take place on their campus, workers there view the university’s response as a threat to workers across the UC system.

"If members of our academic community are being maced and beaten for peacefully protesting, our ability to collectively organize as workers, and our fundamental right to have free speech and protest on any issue is threatened."

Fournier said academic workers at the university would continue their walkouts over the coming months until the university resolves the alleged unfair labor practices.

"If they refuse to do so, more campuses may be called as necessary. Workers on every campus are extremely fired up about this,” they said. "This is a statewide issue. Even though we are the ones leading the charge. It seems very likely other campuses will follow unless and until these unfair labor practices are resolved.”

Experts say the union is taking a novel approach in its strike because it is not focused on contract matters but instead on free speech.

The union complaint focuses on the arrests of pro-Palestinian graduate student protesters at UCLA and suspensions and other discipline at UC San Diego and UC Irvine. It accuses the universities of retaliating against student workers and unlawfully changing workplace policies to suppress pro-Palestinian speech.

In a letter sent to graduate student workers on Wednesday, UC officials warned students against striking.

"Participating in the strike does not change, excuse, or modify, an employee’s normal work duties or expectations. And, unlike a protected strike, you could be subject to corrective action for failing to perform your duties,” the unsigned letter from the UC office of the president said.

Read more: UCLA struggles to recover after 200 arrested, pro-Palestinian camp torn down

The letter also defended universities using riot police to break up protests.

“We have a duty to ensure that all speech can be heard, that our entire community is safe, and that our property and common areas are accessible for all. These duties require the UC to take action when protests endanger the community and violate our shared norms regarding safe behavior and the use of public spaces,” it said.

The strike vote comes as campuses throughout the UC system have experienced tensions and protests over the Israel-Hamas war, including a violent mob attack on a pro-Palestinian encampment at UCLA and the arrest of 47 protesters at UC Irvine on Wednesday.

UC Riverside and UC Berkeley have reached agreements with protesters to end encampments and explore divestment from weapons companies. Leaders at those universities have rejected calls to target Israel specifically or for academic boycotts against exchange programs and partnerships with Israeli universities, as some protesters have demanded.

While some Jewish students have supported pro-Palestinian encampments, national Jewish groups have criticized the divestment movement. They say it is antisemitic because it aims to delegitimize the only predominantly Jewish nation.

In Santa Cruz, emails and calls from The Times to several Jewish student organizations seeking comment on the strike and pro-Palestinian protests were not immediately returned.

"We are aware of the challenges happening on campus and right now are focusing all of our attention on supporting students and working with campus administration," said an auto-reply from Becka Ross, the executive director of the Santa Cruz Hillel.

This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.

Graduate workers in California to strike over treatment of Gaza protesters

Michael Sainato
Fri, 17 May 2024 

UCLA faculty and staff members in Los Angeles on 9 May.Photograph: Jae C Hong/AP

California’s huge university system is facing widespread disruption after workers voted to hold a series of strikes in protest of its treatment of Gaza protesters.

The University of California (UC) has more than 280,000 students and 227,000 faculty and staff on campuses across the state.

Members of the United Auto Workers (UAW), which represents 48,000 graduate workers throughout the system, voted to authorize a strike on Wednesday. On Friday, the union called on graduate workers at UC Santa Cruz to walk off the job on Monday. About 2,000 graduate workers are represented by the union at UC Santa Cruz.

The vote was called in response to charges of unfair labor practices filed against universities over their response to Gaza protests where union members were attacked by counter-protesters and police.

The UAW called for a ceasefire in Gaza in December. Best known for its representation of auto workers, the UAW is planning to engage in a series of “stand up” strikes where the union’s executive board will call on campuses to strike on a rolling basis. The tactic was used in the UAW’s successful strike against the big three US automakers late last year.

“At the heart of this is our right to free speech and peaceful protest,” said Rafael Jaime, a graduate worker in the English department at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) and president of UAW 4811.

“If members of the academic community are maced and beaten down for peacefully demonstrating on this issue, our ability to speak up on all issues is threatened. As days pass with no remedies for UC’s unfair labor practices, academic workers on more and more campuses are preparing to stand up to demand that our rights to free speech, protest and collective action be respected.”

Graduate workers at UCLA, the University of Southern California, the University of California at San Diego, Brown University and Harvard University have filed unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board over how their university administrations unilaterally changed policies and responded to Gaza protests.

According to the union, UC Riverside and UC Berkeley have been negotiating with protesters over their demands for transparency on university investments and divestment from Israel and weapons contractors and manufacturers contributing to the war in Gaza. The union is also demanding amnesty for all academic workers who face disciplinary action and arrest for participating in the protests.

The University of California administration has claimed the strikes are illegal despite the union classifying them as unfair labor practice strikes that are protected activity.

“The University strongly disagrees with the UAW that any exception to this general rule applies and strongly believes that the action is an unlawful strike,” stated the administration in response to the strike vote. “In response to an unlawful strike, the University will take action with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) to assert that the strike is unlawful.”




University of California Workers Authorize Union to Call for Strike Over Protest Crackdowns

Jonathan Wolfe
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Counterprotesters fight with pro-Palestinian demonstrators at the pro-Palestinian protest encampment on the UCLA campus in Los Angeles, on April 30, 2024. (Mark Abramson/The New York Times)


LOS ANGELES — Unions are known for fighting for higher pay and workplace conditions. But academic workers in the University of California system authorized their union Wednesday to call for a strike over something else entirely: free speech.

The union, UAW 4811, represents about 48,000 graduate students and other academic workers at 10 University of California system campuses and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. Its members, incensed over the university system’s handling of campus protests, pushed their union to address grievances extending beyond the bread-and-butter issues of collective bargaining to concerns over protesting and speaking out in their workplace.

The strike authorization vote, which passed with 79% support, comes two weeks after dozens of counterprotesters attacked a pro-Palestinian encampment at UCLA for several hours without police intervention and without arrests. Officers in riot gear tore down the encampment the next day and arrested more than 200 people.

Sign up for The Morning newsletter from the New York Times

The vote does not guarantee a strike but rather gives the executive board of the local union, which is part of the United Auto Workers, the ability to call a strike at any time. Eight of the 10 University of California campuses still have a month of instruction left before breaking for summer.

The union said it had called the vote because the University of California unilaterally and unlawfully changed policies regarding free speech, discriminated against pro-Palestinian speech and created an unsafe work environment by allowing attacks on protesters, among other grievances.

“At the heart of this is our right to free speech and peaceful protest,” Rafael Jaime, the president of UAW 4811, said in a statement after the vote. “If members of the academic community are maced and beaten down for peacefully demonstrating on this issue, our ability to speak up on all issues is threatened.”

A spokesperson for the University of California president’s office said in a statement that a strike would set “a dangerous precedent that would introduce nonlabor issues into labor agreements.”

“To be clear, the UC understands and embraces its role as a forum for free speech, lawful protests and public debate,” said the spokesperson, Heather Hansen. “However, given that role, these nonlabor-related disputes cannot prevent it from fulfilling its academic mission.”

There are still several active encampments at University of California campuses, including UC Merced, UC Santa Cruz and UC Davis. Protesters at UC Berkeley began dismantling their encampment Tuesday after reaching an agreement with university officials.

In a letter to the protesters Tuesday, Berkeley’s chancellor, Carol Christ, said that the university would begin discussions around divestment from certain companies and that she planned to publicly support “efforts to secure an immediate and permanent cease-fire” by the end of the month. But she said that divestment from companies that do business with, or in, Israel was not within her authority.

After packing up their tents, some of the Berkeley protesters traveled on Wednesday to UC Merced to attend a meeting held by the University of California governing board. More than 100 people signed up to give public comment, and nearly all of those who spoke about the protests criticized the handling of them by university administrations.

The strike authorization vote enables what is known as a “stand-up” strike, a tactic that was first employed by the United Auto Workers last year during its contract negotiations with General Motors, Ford Motor and Stellantis. Rather than calling on all members to strike at once, the move allows the local union’s executive board to focus strikes on certain campuses or among certain groups of workers, to gain leverage.

Jaime said before the vote that the union would use the tactic to “reward campuses that make progress” and possibly call strikes at those that don’t. He added that the union would announce the strikes “only at the last minute, in order to maximize chaos and confusion for the employer.”

The union said Wednesday that its executive board would announce later this week if it was calling for strikes.

Tobias Higbie, a professor of history and labor studies at UCLA, said that while striking for free speech was unusual, it wasn’t unheard of. The academic workers’ union is also largely made up of young people, who have been far more receptive to organized labor than young people in even the recent past, he said.

“It points to how generational change is not only impacting workplaces, but it’s going to impact unions,” Higbie said. “Young members are going to make more and more demands like this on their unions as we go forward over the next couple of years, and so I think it’s probably a harbinger of things to come.”

c.2024 The New York Times Company

#BDS

Police Scotland conduct 'astonishing and shocking' at Glasgow protest

Gabriel McKay
Thu, 16 May 2024 

Pro-Palestine protestors and police clash outside Thales in Govan, Glasgow (Image: Andrew Milligan/PA Wire)

The conduct of Police Scotland at a protest in Glasgow has been described as "astonishing and shocking" after a journalist was threatened with arrest.

Pro-Palestinian protestors blocked the entrance to the Thales factory in Govan in protest over arms sales to Israel, before the picket was broken up by police.

Xander Elliards of our sister title The National was threatened with arrest after being told he was being "obstructive to the police" while covering the events.

The journalist was standing on a public street around 100m from the protest and said "I was threatened with arrest and manhandled for doing my job, as far as I can tell".

In response NUJ Scotland called the altercation an: "Astonishing and shocking confrontation. Journalists need to be free to go about their work without interference from Police Scotland.

"We will be following up on this to ask why police officers apparently are unaware of the law."

A Police Scotland spokesperson said: “During the protest an officer engaged with a journalist and asked him to move away from an area where officers were taking part in an operational briefing. Officers provided advice and guidance and no further action was taken."

It follows criticism of the way the force handled the protest, with demonstrators accusing them of heavy-handed tactics in breaking up the picket.

---

Read More:

• Police Scotland caused 'fear and panic' as protestors speak out on Glasgow demo

• Pro-Palestine protestors shut down Glasgow factory involved in making Israeli drones

• Students’ hunger strike is ‘last resort’ to get Scots university to listen on Gaza

---

As previously reported by The Herald, Police Scotland were accused of creating "fear and panic" as they made several arrests.

One of the protestors told The Herald: "The picket started at 5am and finished around lunchtime when police violently intervened and arrested some of the protestors.

"With no provocation, police violently broke up one of the pickets and made arrests. The police should be there to maintain public order but what they did was incite fear and panic, and physically hurt people without provocation.

"What we went through today, while upsetting and unnecessary, was nothing compared to what people in Gaza have been facing every day for over 7 months, and the unquantifiable suffering of Palestinians under occupation for 75 years. Stop the chain of killing: Free Palestine."

Police said that three men aged 18, 28 and 29, and a 21-year-old woman were arrested and charged during the demonstration.

The force said six officers were injured, including one who sustained a bite to the arm.

Two officers were said to have attended the Queen Elizabeth University Hospital in Glasgow, one of whom was discharged after treatment while the other remains there for further assessment, police said.

Chief Inspector Derrick Johnston said: "When policing any protest our priorities are to ensure the safety of protestors, the public and police officers involved as well as preventing criminal behaviour or disorder and deescalating tensions.

"We are committed to protecting the rights of people who wish to protest, however when this is not done peacefully, officers are required to maintain public order and will exercise their powers of arrest if necessary".

Nuclear waste to be buried 650ft under the English countryside

Jonathan Leake
Thu, 16 May 2024 

New pit will ease pressure on the 17 nuclear waste disposal plants, the largest of which is the Sellafield site in Cumbria - Stuart Nicol

Swathes of nuclear waste are set to be buried in the English countryside after ministers agreed to dig a 650ft pit starting this decade.

The facility, which has yet to be allocated a site, will hold some of the 5m tonnes of waste that was generated by nuclear power stations over the past seven decades.

This will ease pressure on the 17 nuclear waste disposal plants currently in operation around the country, which consist of giant sheds and cooling ponds.

The largest facility is the Sellafield site in Cumbria.

Plans for the 650ft pit will see it house so-called intermediate-level waste, possibly in a mine on a pre-existing nuclear site to minimise planning objections.


The facility will be separate from the much deeper geological disposal site that will hold the UK’s most dangerous waste, such as plutonium, which is unlikely to be built until after 2050.

The proposals come amid fears Britain’s stockpile of nuclear waste will grow in the coming decades with nowhere to put it.

Concerns are particularly acute as the Government is currently planning to build at least three new nuclear power stations.

This will put the country at odds with the 1976 review of nuclear waste policy by the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution, which warned the UK was accumulating nuclear waste so fast that it should stop building reactors until it had a solution.

Ministers want to brand nuclear energy as a “green” and “sustainable” fuel.

However, experts on the Government’s own advisory body, the Committee on Radioactive Waste Management, have said such terms are misleading if there is no safe place to store radioactive waste.

Plans for a nuclear waste pit were recently published by the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (Desnz), headed by Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho.

A government spokesman said: “In addition to long-term plans to dispose of the most hazardous radioactive waste in a geological disposal facility hundreds of metres underground, the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority will explore a facility closer to the surface for less hazardous radioactive waste.

“While a geological disposal facility is not expected to be ready until the 2050s, a shallower disposal facility – which is up to 200m below ground – could be available within 10 years.”

Nuclear waste can remain dangerous for tens of thousands of years, with fears of disposing of it underground stemming from the fact water can flow through waste, carrying radioactivity back to the surface.

However, once buried and sealed with cement, such waste will be practically impossible to reach should there be such a problem.

Nuclear accidents are rare but when they do happen the consequences can be deadly and extremely expensive.

This was evidenced by the disastrous fire at the Sellafield site in 1957, which released radioactivity across the UK and Europe.

Other accidents at Chernobyl, Ukraine, in 1986 and Fukushima, Japan, in 2011 were even more devastating.

The Government’s proposals come after policymakers recently announced the biggest expansion of nuclear power for 70 years.

Hinkley Point C is already under construction in Somerset at an estimated cost of £46bn, while Sizewell C in Suffolk is also about to start with a similar price tag.

A third giant nuclear station is also being planned alongside a fleet of so-called small modular reactors.

Andrew Bowie, the minister for nuclear energy, said: “We’re taking sensible steps to manage our radioactive waste, while reducing the burden on the environment and taxpayer.”

David Peattie, chief executive officer at the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority, added: “We will maintain the highest standards of safety and environmental protection to deliver our nationally important decommissioning mission.”

As for the much larger geological disposal facility, which will hold the UK’s deadliest waste, this will soon become Britain’s biggest and most expensive infrastructure project ever.

Two sites are under consideration for the facility, which is expected to be 3,500ft deep.

One lies off the coast of Lincolnshire and the other is off the coast of Cumbria around Copeland.

Israel urges caution on Gaza death toll after UN cuts figures
Jotam Confino

TELEGRAPH
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Palestinians attend a funeral in Gaza City - Khalil Hamra/AP


Israel has urged the West to treat death figures from Hamas more cautiously, after the UN began citing dramatically lower totals for the numbers of women and children killed.

Until May 8, the UN cited data from the Hamas-run Gaza Government Media Office with the last death toll before then at 35,000, including 9,500 women and 14,500 children.

But on that day, the UN shifted to providing information from the Gaza Health Ministry – also run by Hamas – which has fully identified 25,000 dead, including 4,959 women and 7,797 children.


The new figure is around half of the previous total of women and children who were reported dead.

The Health Ministry said it has the corpses of a further 10,000 people, but has not been able to secure information to meet its standard for identification, which includes full names and official ID numbers.

A UN official said that the international body believes the overall number of dead still stands at roughly 35,000, but is awaiting further information on 10,000 people.

Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister, has said that 30,000 people have been killed in Gaza in the war since Oct 7, with 14,000 of that number terrorists and 16,000 civilians.

Tal Heinrich, the spokeswoman for the office of Mr Netanyahu, told The Telegraph: “Hamas has a clear incentive to increase casualties and inflate the numbers in an attempt to encourage international pressure on Israel.

“It is proven beyond any doubt that the data of the Hamas Ministry of Health in Gaza is part of the Hamas fake propaganda apparatus.

“Only recently, the UN has significantly revised the number of women and children killed in Gaza and cut them by half.

Media outlets and organisations should take any numbers provided by Hamas with a grain of salt.”

On Friday, Martin Griffiths, the UN’s humanitarian aid chief, defended the organisation’s death toll figures, saying it was hard to find accurate information in a war zone.

He told the BBC: “I’d like to remind anybody listening to this that Gaza is a war zone and the collection of data and statistics, while admirable and necessary, is first of all secondary to actually delivering some aid, and secondly very difficult in cases of insecurity and violence.

“So, that’s my first point – be realistic, please, about what’s possible in the middle of what we’re seeing in Gaza.”

A Palestinian woman with bodies of people killed by Israeli shelling in Gaza - Said Khatib/AFP

Mr Griffiths added that he believes the UN is “very cautious with these figures and I think it’s not right to blame the messenger who is trying to get the truth out of what is a very complicated situation”.

The reduced totals of dead women and children cited by the UN provoked a storm of criticism within Israel.

The foreign ministry said: “Interestingly, the [UN] did not release any press releases or statements, almost as if this reduction was a secret.

“They recently had trouble explaining why there was such a disparity in the numbers in the first place.”

Israel Katz, the country’s foreign minister, called on António Guterres, the UN secretary general, to step down.

On Tuesday, Christian Lindmeier, a spokesman for the WHO, insisted that casualty figures from Hamas could still be relied on, despite the discrepancy revealed by the UN.

He said: “Nothing wrong with the data, the overall data [more than 35,000] are still the same. The fact we now have 25,000 identified people is a step forward.”
Death toll expected to rise

The UN has said it expects the death toll of women and children to rise as more identifying information is found.

Death figures provided by the Gaza Ministry of Health have proved accurate in previous rounds of fighting. However, they do not distinguish between civilians and Hamas members.

Meirav Eilon Shahar, ambassador and permanent representative of Israel to the UN and international organisations in Geneva, said on Twitter: “Seriously WHO? There is ‘nothing wrong with the data’ provided by the Hamas-run Health Ministry?

“What about the issue: Hamas does not differentiate between civilians and terrorists! Let alone relying on the figures of a terrorist organisation.

“For months, the WHO and the UN have continuously shared unverified information – one might say misinformation.”

Despite the UN changing its estimate in the latest report, the Palestinian Red Crescent issued a statement on Thursday claiming over 15,000 children had been killed in Gaza.

What We Know About the Death Toll in Gaza

Brian Bennett
Fri, 17 May 2024 


Boys watch smoke billowing during Israeli strikes east of Rafah in the southern Gaza Strip on May 13, 2024 

The question of how many people have died in Gaza since Israel began a bombing and ground campaign in response to Hamas’s deadly Oct. 7 attack has taken on renewed urgency as President Biden tries to forestall a full assault by Israel against Hamas’ leadership and remaining battalions into the densely-populated city of Rafah. A recent decision by the United Nations to change how it reported Gaza's death toll has further created confusion, prompting some to incorrectly claim that the U.N. had dramatically lowered its estimate of those killed in the conflict.

While Biden has kept his commitment to sell $1 billion in arms and ammunition to Israel, he announced on May 8 that he would pause a shipment of 2,000-pound bombs over concerns about their potential use inside Rafah. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said this week it “would be a mistake to launch a major military operation into the heart of Rafah that would put huge numbers of civilians at risk without a clear strategic gain." The Biden Administration has shared intelligence and tactics with Israel in an effort to prevent a large-scale bombardment in the city. All of those actions reflect growing concern within the U.S. government over the number of civilians who have been killed in the conflict.

Here’s what we know about Gaza’s death toll and where those estimates come from.

How many people have been killed in Gaza since Oct. 7?

There is no independent source for the death toll in Gaza. The U.S. says it doesn’t keep its own count of fatalities in Gaza. Neither does the World Health Organization or the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, both United Nations agencies that track fatalities in war zones.

The United Nations has published and credited third-party estimates of the number of those killed and injured in the war. Those include estimates that more than 34,900 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza and more than 1,200 people in Israel.

The number of dead in Gaza is based on information released by three Hamas-controlled entities: the Gaza Ministry of Health, Gaza’s government media office and the Gaza chapter of the Palestinian Civil Defense, which provides emergency response there. Critics question the U.N.’s use of estimates based on data coming from Hamas, an organization that has controlled Gaza since 2007 and is committed to the elimination of Israel. The figures don’t distinguish between civilians and fighters killed.

The U.N. agencies have provided several reasons for crediting the figures coming out of Gaza.

The agencies cite more than a decade of “generally accurate” numbers from the Gaza Ministry of Health through multiple mass-casualty conflicts there. U.N. officials say that the list of the dead compiled by the authorities in Gaza are used to issue death certificates that are in turn used for settling estates and land ownership. This creates an incentive for the ministry to accurately confirm the identities of those who have died, the U.N. says.

“Unfortunately, we have the sad experience of coordinating with the Ministry of Health on casualty figures every few years for large mass-casualty incidents in Gaza; and in past times, their figures have proven to be generally accurate,” Farhan Haq, deputy spokesman for U.N. Secretary General António Guterres, said on May 13 during a press briefing with reporters.

The U.N.’s World Health Organization also credits the data provided by Gaza’s health ministry, WHO spokesman Christian Lindmeier told reporters in Geneva on May 14. Lindmeier said that the WHO has been told by the Gaza Ministry of Health that about 24,000 dead people had been formally identified and about 10,000 remained missing and had yet to be identified. The WHO believes thousands of those missing could still be buried under the rubble in active combat zones, Lindmeier said.

Both Israeli and U.S. officials have said that Hamas' tactics, including its use of civilian facilities like hospitals and schools for military purposes, have contributed to the war’s civilian death toll.

Why did the U.N. lower its death toll of women and children in Gaza?

The U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) caused confusion in early May when it changed how it reported the number of women and children killed in Gaza.

For months, the agency had been regularly updating an estimated total death toll in Gaza and breaking that total down by gender and age. Those figures were based on information provided to the U.N. by three Hamas-controlled entities: the Gaza Ministry of Health, Hamas’s government media office, and the Gaza chapter of the Palestinian Civil Defense, which provides emergency response in Gaza.

On May 6, the U.N. agency published the Gaza government media office’s latest estimate that 14,500 children and 9,500 women had been killed. Two days later, OCHA reported a much lower number of Palestinian women and children killed in the conflict based on those who the Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health claimed had been specifically identified by name. The new figures were 7,797 children and 4,959 women killed and subsequently identified.

OCHA did not change its overall estimate that more than 34,900 Palestinians have died. That larger total includes both those whose identities have been confirmed, and an estimate that 10,000 additional dead are missing and have not been accounted for. OCHA opted to change how it broke down the deaths after it began receiving more detailed information on verified, identified victims from the Gaza Ministry of Health, an OCHA official said.

The changed numbers drew attention to the continuing reliance by the U.N. and the U.S. government on Hamas-controlled entities for information about the conflict in Gaza.

“These numbers are having a profound influence on U.S. policy,” says David Adesnik, senior fellow and director of research at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Adesnik is skeptical of the Gaza health ministry’s methods that rely on media reports to estimate how many are dead beyond those whose remains have been identified and says that Hamas-controlled entities “have shown they are willing to distort the truth.” The death toll has already shaped American foreign policy, says Adesnik. “There is strong evidence that the Biden Administration’s faith in numbers from the Gaza health ministry is one of the main reasons it has begun to put so much pressure on Israel,” Adesnik says.

How does the U.S. government describe the death toll?

The U.S. government has cited the same figures that Hamas-controlled entities have provided to the U.N. During his March 7 State of the Union speech, President Biden said that “more than 30,000 Palestinians have been killed — most of whom are not Hamas.” Biden did not provide a source for that number, but the White House later confirmed that it was based on the Gaza Ministry of Health numbers.

The U.S. government again relied on the same tally in early May in a public State Department memo about whether U.S. weapons are being used to violate international laws of war. “The Hamas-controlled Gaza Ministry of Health is the primary source for these numbers, which international organizations generally deem credible, but do not differentiate between Hamas fighters and civilians,” read the report.

How many of those killed in Gaza were Hamas fighters?

The U.S. hasn’t been able to independently verify how many Hamas fighters have been killed in Gaza. The Israeli government has said that about half of those killed there have been fighters. Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu repeated this claim on May 12. During the “Call Me Back” podcast hosted by the former U.S. government advisor Dan Senor, Netanyahu said that about 30,000 people had been killed in Gaza since Oct. 7, of those he said 14,000 were “combatants” and “around 16,000 civilians have been killed.” There has not yet been any independent confirmation of Israel's estimates. News outlets have previously cited Hamas officials estimating between 6,000 and 8,000 of their fighters have been killed.

In war zones, the percentage of civilians killed can vary widely. Studies have shown that more civilians die during fighting in urban areas. In a U.N. Security Council report titled, "Protection of civilians in armed conflict”, the U.N. examined the rate of civilian casualties in populated areas during conflicts in the year 2021. It found that 89 percent of deaths in urban areas were civilians. In non-urban areas that year, the civilian death rate fell to 10 percent.

#BDS

Cambridge graduation ceremonies forced elsewhere by pro-Palestine camp

Ewan Somerville
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Negotiations are set to begin with the Cambridge pro-Palestine protesters next week - Getty/Martin Pope


Students at the University of Cambridge have been forced to graduate in a less traditional venue because of pro-Palestine disruption.

Activists pitched tents outside Senate House, the grand venue where Cambridge graduations have been held since the 18th century, earlier this week in an attempt to force bosses to meet their demands on the Israel-Gaza war.

It led to Friday and Saturday’s ceremonies being moved by university chiefs to Downing College – which was announced to all students due to graduate but not publicly – with security patrols stepped up.


By Friday morning the protesters had ended their occupation of the lawn at Senate House, claiming that bosses had now agreed to start negotiations with them next week, but the graduations were not moved back in time.

In a statement, the camp organisers Cambridge for Palestine said: “The university has agreed to negotiate and met a number of our preconditions.

“Our goal from the Senate House yard occupation has been accomplished, in a step towards distancing our university from genocide.

“This small victory paves the way for our demands to be met in future negotiations.”
Camp remains standing

The Telegraph understands the university has agreed that students taking part in talks will not be disciplined and that faculty members will be used as observers and mediators rather than third parties.

Cambridge’s main pro-Palestine camp, outside King’s College, remains standing along with others at dozens of universities across Britain, as activists try to copy the occupations that swept US universities last month.

The demands of the main Cambridge camp, which still numbers at least 30 tents on King’s Parade, are similar to those on campuses nationwide.

They are for bosses to disclose financial investments, divest from companies with links to the war in Gaza, reinvest in Palestinian academia and become a “university of sanctuary” for “all forced migrants”.

The university did not answer questions about whether it would cave into the demands, but denied it was a negotiation.

Prof Bhaskar Vira, pro-vice-chancellor for education, said: “We were glad to meet our students as we have been willing to do from the first day of the protest. While we understand some will see it as a negotiation, we see it as a constructive dialogue with our students.”

On Friday, pictures showed lines of students in gowns processing from their individual colleges to the new venue. They were allowed to take photographs of each other in their robes outside Senate House afterwards with security officers patrolling the gates.
‘Alternative arrangements’

In an earlier statement on Tuesday, the university said: “We regret that due to the ongoing presence of protesters on Senate House lawn, we have taken the very difficult decision to make alternative arrangements for the degree congregations this weekend.

“All students who want to graduate this weekend will still be able to attend their degree congregation at an alternative location that is fitting of the occasion.

“We are confident that ceremonies will be a memorable and enjoyable experience for students and their guests.”

Former home secretary Suella Braverman paid a visit to the Cambridge King’s College camp on Thursday, where she was met with a wall of silence when she asked the protesters questions about Israel and the hostages seized by Hamas.

“I’m very concerned about this anti-Semitism on campus. We have a lot of Jewish students feeling very intimidated and harassed on campus,” the MP told the student newspaper Varsity.

Meanwhile, at the University of Oxford, where another pro-Palestinian camp has been erected, a letter from staff and students this week claimed that when when some had raised concerns about anti-Semitism to their heads of programmes, they were “simply advised to leave Oxford”.

Oxford said it was “unequivocal in its position that there is no place for anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, or unlawful discrimination of any kind”.

Demonstrators at the London School of Economics became the latest to occupy part of a campus this week, joining peers in Manchester, Newcastle, Sheffield, Leeds, Warwick and Bristol.

Protestors camp outside University of York in show of support for Palestine

Alice Kavanagh
Fri, 17 May 2024

Pro Palestine protestors camp out at the University of York (Image: Newsquest)


A PRO-PALESTINIAN encampment at the University of York has been set up with no end date in sight.

As The Press reported earlier this week, York Palestine Solidarity Encampment has been set up outside Heslington Hall at the University of York where students and staff plan to remain until they feel the university has done enough to stand in solidarity with Palestine.

With the first day of their camp scheduled for the 76th anniversary of Nakba, the group told reporters that they were there as they felt their list of demands had not yet been met.

READ MORE:

‘We have got to keep hope in our hearts’: York protesters call for ceasefire in Gaza


'Free Palestine' protesters march through York

Whilst the university announced last month that they will no longer invest in companies that primarily make or sell weapons and defence-related products or services, those in the encampment believed they were still offering indirect support through research partnerships, sponsors, and some administrative facilities.

According to protestors, one such example of this is £11 million given to The UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) AI Centres for Doctoral Training, who reportedly partner with BAE Systems.

One member of the camp said: “This sets a precedent of the University not investing personally but still accepting it.”

Another demand on their list was cut ties to Israeli universities and offer scholarships to Palestinian students. Linked to this is support for Fadi Hania – a Gazan student who had to flee the country with his family, something that pro-Palestinian groups helped him raise funds for – reportedly without the support of the University itself.

When The Press arrived on the site, around 4pm on the first afternoon of their encampment (May 15), the mood was relatively positive with ten to fifteen people dotted across the camp – studying, eating, and chatting.

Few were keen to speak openly, fearing negative repercussions (as have reportedly occurred at other universities), and others wore face coverings.

York Press: 
Signs at the encampment protest (Image: Newsquest)

According to the protestors, the reaction from university staff so far had been positive with campus security staff coming onto the site to chat with protestors about access arrangements and the Vice Chancellor paying a visit on the first morning on the encampment.

That being said, not all of those at the site were impressed with this – one person saying of the Vice Chancellor’s visit: “We’re waiting to see action on our demands, not just words.”

As of the first day, there is no end date planned for the encampment – whilst students will come and go as exam season progresses, there will be a presence on the campsite ‘indefinitely’ with designated study spaces set up and food donations given.

A GoFundMe, set up on the first morning, had raised around £600 in 5 hours at the time of our visit – this will go towards sustaining those on the campsite with any excess donated directly to groups that support those in Palestine.

A spokesperson for the University said in response to the encampment: “Our campus is a place where difficult issues can be discussed openly and through lawful protest and free speech. We need to make sure we listen and learn from each other, whilst together rejecting all forms of violence, intimidation and harassment.”

Australia's richest woman Gina Rinehart 'demands' portrait removed from exhibition

Jacob Phillips
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Gina Rinehart and her painting on display at the National Gallery of Australia (ES Composite)


Australia’s richest woman has reportedly demanded that her portrait be removed from an exhibition after being painted in what some may describe as an unflattering light.

The painting of Gina Rinehart is currently on display at the National Gallery of Australia as part of a collection of works by artist Vincent Namatjira, and features a prominent double chin.

Mr Namatjira, whose satirical paintings are known for their dry wit, told reporters in Australia that he “paints the world as he sees it”.


He said in a statement: "People don't have to like my paintings, but I hope they take the time to look and think, 'why has this Aboriginal bloke painted these powerful people? What is he trying to say?'

"I paint people who are wealthy, powerful, or significant - people who have had an influence on this country, and on me personally, whether directly or indirectly, whether for good or for bad.

"Some people might not like it, other people might find it funny, but I hope people look beneath the surface and see the serious side too.”

Vincent Namatjira in front of the exhibition at the National Gallery of Australia (Vincent Namatjira (Western Aranda people) with Vincent Namatjira: Australia in colour at the National Gallery of Australia)

Ms Rinehart has not commented publicly on the painting, Australian media reports.

The exhibition includes portraits of King Charles and Queen Elizabeth II as well as a self-portrait of the artist.

Mr Namatjira won the Ramsay Art Prize in 2019 and was the first indigenous artist to win the Archibald Prize in 2020.

He also received the Medal of the Order of Australia for his contribution to indigenous visual arts the same year, Sky News reports.

Lisa Slade, assistant director of artistic programmes at the Art Gallery of South Australia - where the work was on display until early this year - told ABC Radio Adelaide that Ms Rinehart did not complain when the item was first revealed.

Gina Rinehart is the richest woman in Australia (REUTERS)

She told the broadcaster that she suspects that Ms Rinehart has not personally seen the show.

Ms Slade said: "I think if you have seen the show you’ll have a different reading of the show but you will have a context for the way in which Gina is depicted and for the kind of storytelling inherent in the show.

“Ms Rinehart has not been subject to an aesthetic treatment, let’s say, that is any different to the way he has treated the other 20 Australians that are depicted in the series.”

She added: "Portraiture is not a photographic art, it is an art of expression, an art of creating a sense of identity, a sense of an individual."

A spokesperson for the National Gallery told Australia’s ABC News it “welcomes the public having a dialogue on our collection and displays".


Gina Rinehart’s Unflattering Portrait—and Reputation With Indigenous Australians

Koh Ewe

TIME
Thu, 16 May 2024 



Left: A close-up of a portrait of mining magnate Gina Rinehart from an exhibition by indigenous artist Vincent Namatjira. Right: Rinehart at a mining conference in Melbourne in 2015. Credit - Courtesy of the National Gallery of Australia | Carla Gottgens—Bloomberg/Getty Images

Gina Rinehart, Australia’s wealthiest person, is less than thrilled about a recent painting of her being exhibited at one of Australia’s largest art museums. But her reported attempts to get the unflattering portrait taken down is backfiring: the piece, part of a collection of portraits by an acclaimed indigenous artist, has been defended by the museum, the arts industry, and—perhaps worst for her—social media users, who have given it more attention than ever.

The portrait features Rinehart, who is 70 years old, with a misshapen head, downturned lips, and a double chin. It is part of an exhibition titled “Vincent Namatjira: Australia in colour,” which opened at the National Gallery of Australia (NGA) in Canberra in March and is set to run until July 21.

The exhibition of portraits by Namatjira, a 40-year-old Aboriginal Australian who has won the prestigious Archibald Prize for portraiture, also contains depictions of other famous people—including Queen Elizabeth II, former Australian soccer player Adam Goodes, and former Prime Ministers Julia Gillard and Scott Morrison—all in Namatjira’s signature style that often employs humor and exaggerated features to interrogate the rich and powerful.

Portraits from “Vincent Namatjira: Australia in colour.”Courtesy of the National Gallery of Australia

“I paint the world as I see it,” Namatjira said, in response to Reinhart’s reported attempts to have her portrait taken down, in a statement shared with TIME by the NGA on Thursday. “People don’t have to like my paintings, but I hope they take the time to look and think, ‘why has this Aboriginal bloke painted these powerful people? What is he trying to say?’”

“I paint people who are wealthy, powerful, or significant—people who have had an influence on this country, and on me personally, whether directly or indirectly, whether for good or for bad,” he said.

According to Namatjira, who explained his intention behind the exhibition at a panel discussion organized by the NGA in March, the portraits are meant to convey that “we are all equal in Australia, no matter where you’re from, no matter what you do or what background you’re from, or what heritage you’re from, we’re all Australian.” He added that the choice of wall colors—red, black, and yellow—represents the Aboriginal flag.


Namatjira, left, looks at the installation of his exhibition at the NGA.Courtesy of the National Gallery of Australia

This is not the first time Rinehart has featured in Namatjira’s paintings. In his 2017 paintings Gina Rinehart and Me and Gina Rinehart and Me II, she’s portrayed standing beside the artist himself; she was also painted as a standalone portrait in his 2017 series “The Richest.”

Rinehart, who took over mineral extraction company Hancock Prospecting from her father and whose net worth is estimated at over $30 billion, is known for her financial support of the country’s sporting scene. She’s also listed on the NGA’s website as a “friend” of the gallery for donating between A$4,999 (over $3,000) and A$9,999 (under $7,000) in the most recent fiscal quarter.

Rinehart directly contacted NGA council director Nick Mitzevich and chair Ryan Stokes to ask for the removal of her portrait, and associates of her company have lodged more than a dozen complaints to the gallery, the Sydney Morning Herald reported on Wednesday. A group of 20 Australian swimmers—a sport for which she’s known to provide vital funding—have also campaigned against her portrait on display, calling it “offensive to a great Australian.”

Rinehart, contacted through Hancock Prospecting, did not immediately respond to TIME’s request for comment.

The gallery is not backing down, saying in a statement on Wednesday that it “welcomes the public having a dialogue on our collection and displays.”

“Since 1973, when the National Gallery acquired Jackson Pollack’s Blue Poles, there has been a dynamic discussion on the artistic merits of works in the national collection, and/or on display at the gallery,” the NGA said. “We present works of art to the Australian public to inspire people to explore, experience and learn about art.”

The National Association for the Visual Arts also published a statement backing the right for artists to “create art about any subject and by any means.”

“While Rinehart has the right to express her opinions about the work,” the association’s executive director Penelope Benton said on Thursday, “she does not have the authority to pressure the gallery into withdrawing the painting simply because she dislikes it.”

Read More: An Australian Art Museum Is Installing a Toilet to Keep Its ‘Ladies Lounge’ Off Limits to Men

Rinehart has courted controversy before with Indigenous Australians. In 2022, Hancock Prospecting withdrew A$15 million (about $10 million) in sponsorship funding from Netball Australia after the national team voiced its support for Donnell Wallam, an Indigenous netballer who had refused to wear a uniform with the mining company’s logo. Wallam cited concerns about racist comments Rinehart’s late father had made against Aboriginal Australians, including that those who hadn’t “assimilated” should be sterilized—which Rinehart has long remained silent over, even as she faced growing public calls to apologize.

Now, instead of shielding the unflattering depiction of herself from public view, Rinehart finds herself the victim of the so-called Streisand effect—the phenomenon whereby attempts to quash attention to something ironically only cause it to get amplified—as news of her dissatisfaction with the art exhibition has inspired international coverage, which has resurfaced her family’s unsavory history, as well as widespread memes and mockery on social media.

Contact us at letters@time.com.