In oakland, the reform caucus had taken over just six months before the strike. Unlike an l a, where the new more militant leadership had had years to build power and develop their membership. Did this difference shape the strikes outcomes? I read an article by daniel roland at commune which called oakland's a ambiguous victory because a contract that fell short of expectations approved by just 58 % of the union membership. Soi i actually think what they did was remarkable given the lack of time they had. And every time i hear some one spouting off, you know, some one ended a strike prematurely,. It's just generally wrong.