Socialist Organiser

The weekly of the fused Workers Socialist League, July 1981 to April 1984

Betrayed, Still Fighi

Socialist Organiser no. 51, 3 September 1981 · scan p. 8 · about 864 words

Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 8 →

Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.

Scan page 8

liar UREN Despite being evicted on August 18, the LSE workers still fight on Back thee picket lanes-Send money ostage froi n Socialist Lane, Lon Jon N8.

PHOTO: JOHN SMITH, IFL What do you think about the role the Executive has played in the dispute?

Duggie Daniels: In a word, disgraceful. I placed Bob Broughton's letter before my District Committee last night, and they voted unanimously to endorse its sentiments and to forward it to the Executive.

As for Boyd's reply -'The factory was to close quite definitely" - well, Snipe swore blind that if the dispute was not settled his whole operation would go into liquidation by July 24. It's still operating.

John Tocher: Yes. The basic question is one of union democracy.

The Éxecutive decided matters were so urgent that their representative Ken Cure should meet with the employers and negotiate an agreement.

Refused When they came to an agreement Duggie did his job and put it to a stewards' meeting. When they refused to endorse it, 1 put it to the mass meeting, leaving it open to them. They voted to reject it.

OK, the Executive wanted a second bite at the cherry. They sent down Ken RELISTE Cure, and the agreement again voted down.

The correct course for the EC was then to ac rept the members' verdict, re Turn to the employers, and negotiate it.

What do you think about agreement itself?

Daniels: If it had been left to the local officials we would not have left the room without a 'no redundancy' clause. Moreover, the clause referring to the return of their redundancy money turned out to be an embarrassment to everybody. 1 don't think it could have been implemented.

Collective bargaining for the full-time official has to be the art of the possible. Our leadership has a limited idea of what is possible.

There were differing estimates as to the success of the picketing of Mining Supplies in Doncaster. And there were problems.

United For example, URTU [United Road Transport Union] were on to us saying that because they refused to cross the picket line Snipe had withdrawn their contract and 12 men had been laid off. You need a whole united organisation behind you if you are to deal with this type of situation.

You can see the problems in our union. But the picketing certainly opened up a whole new game.

Another factor in making Snipe negotiate was supposed to be Joe Gormley pressurising Coal Board boss| Ezra - who pressurised Snipe.

Robinson

The problem with Boyd and Duffy, as illustrated by the Robinson affair, is that they accept that the employers mean what they say all the time. They've no idea of bluff and testing them out.

When Snipe threatened to close all six factories then, by a certain kind of logic, if you accept the closure of one, you're saving the other five.

Denigration

John Boyd claims in his latest circular that, 'What is motivating certain people is denigration of the Executive rather than the most important objective, nameltin sat of saving the plants districts"

Where we differ from Boyd is in believing that the members involved should be the final arbiters of their own fate.

However, there's a more cynical view of the employers' threats. After all, Snipe had £3 million of orders inside the Manchester plant, and the main aim of the agreement was to get them out.

Overall, his enterprise was booming - why close down, then? Snipe's in Majorca now - but his workers in the other plants are still pumping out the profits, even though Manchester is shut.

What are you doing now?

Tocher: First of all, we've been taking legal advice about taking the Executive's interpretation of the Rules to the AUEW| Final Appeal Court.

Daniels: The deadline for Final Appeal Court has gone, but there is a discretionary period, and given its present make-up the Court might be favourable to us. But it all takes time.

Right now I'm trying to get as many branches and shop stewards' committees as possible to send critical resolutions about the Executive. I've had letters from District Committees in Bradford, Leeds and Nottingham - by no means all left wine - critical of the Executivis behaviour. Les Howard, the AUEW convenor from Kelloggs, told us that he'd raised Bob Broughton's letter to Boyd at the Manchester South District Committee the other night, and Wally Mather (the 'moderate' District Secretary) refused to allow it lo be debated...

Tocher: The Manchester South DC is supposedly leftwing but they ended up actually endorsing the Executive's stand on the matter.

What about the rule used over the Derek Robinson affair by which 10 per cent of branches can request a ballot to remove the Executive?

Daniels: Yes. You need a two-thirds majority [in the ballot]. I just don't think that's on.

But wouldn't it publicise the issue - provide an opportunity for propaganda and debate?

Daniels: I think that in terms of winning at Laurence Scotts, the problem is a deep one. if the National Committer. tor example, was recallcd now. it would probably support the desceutive's line. his aucht-ing body.

← Contents of Socialist Organiser no. 51

Something wrong on this page? Tell us →