The real lessons of May14 Day of Action

Scan page 10

DTORWARDANKHE 80s1 m 1980: a year of big talk and little action by the TUC. Above: March 9 CHANGE COURSE TUC HOW action against the Tories' new proposals to put trade unions in a legal straitjacket, then we need to learn the lessons of the campaign-or lack of itagainst the first instalment, the 1980 Employment Act.

Looking back it is clear that right from the start the TUC had no intention of mounting any campaign that could stop the Bill becoming law or provide a foundation for its immobilisatin if it did reach the statute book.

Any coordinated campaign of industrial action and boycott, the only realistie strategy, would have required a conference of Executives. The TUC had no intention of calling one.

Torn between fear of risking their organisations in unfavourable circumstances of depression and mass unemployment and their terminal allergy to the independent working class action that a real lead could unleash, the General Council decided to live with the legislation, wait out the recession, hope for a Labour government.

Murray himself put it very well, 'We are not talking about a revolution or a general strike in the sense of bringing the government down. We are talking about protest - loud protest.

The legislation was, of course, skilfully drafted to encourage the view that the union leaders 30s Murray:

exist with it. Whereas the 1972 Act had provided a monolithic extended onslaught on the functions of leaders and rank and file, the 1980 Act was more skilful and more limited.

It involved pecking away at unfair dismissal and maternity rights, hedging around the closed shop with restrictions rather than outlawing it, making funds for secret ballots available rather than imposing such ballots, hitting workers who picketed but not the union organisation and funds.

O'Fishall

Prior had no intention of going too far all at once and repeating past mistakes. As he pointed out to his right wing, "To do so would unite the whole of the trade union movement against the Conservative government. The unions are in a state ot flux. They are divided about their future. While the division is going on there is the possibility of change and that is what we want (Like the TUC, Prior tends to overestimate his opponents!)

Stage Il of course, was •fere call. There was no instruction to come out, action was optional.

Generally this strategy was based upon the perspective that the Bill would become law. Specifically it was a recipe for a shambles.

As leaders such as Duffy, Chapple and Jackson campaigned against strike action, Murray and company retreated from earlier claims that May 14 would be 'like Christmas Day' and spoke of lunchtime meetings as sufficient.

In the face of a vicious press campaign centred on the Sun, Express and Mirror, the TUC refused to organise. They had no intentions of even attempting to bring down the Tories. 'I would never be a party to attempts to smash up a democratically elected government. If we did that we wouldn't know what to do with the power we had got" said Len on BBCTV.

Congratulate

The lefts on the General Council did not differentiate themselves. Bill Keyes claimed 'We could have found ourselves outmanoeuvred on the General Council if we had put a large turnout in Scotland, a large turnout generally where stewards planned, worked, leafletted, argued to build support. Those who simply called mass meetings without preparation were often knocked back, and so many stewards refused to call meetings for fear of rejection.

In the face of the lack of leadership the response was amazing. It showed a sizeable minority prepared to fight even in the face of adverse circumstances and confusion from above.

Of particular importance was the fact that, despite an injunction obtained by Victor Matthews against Express workers on the grounds that the dispute was a political one, Fleet Street was halted and the Express did not appear on May 14 or 15. (The leaderships of the NGA and SOGAT, but not NATSOPA accepted the court order).

Len Murray said that May 14 had achieved everything he wanted. He was probably right. It signalled the end, not the beginning of TUC activism against the Act. It strengthened the bureaucracy in relation to the militants amongst the rank and file.

Given the limited response, the Chapples were