Hidden clauses of King's new anti-union Bill

Scan page 9

completed the isolation of POEU.

In the present conflict the TUC has acted to firm up this position. It has not only assumed throughout that organising Bolidarity action is simply not on the agenda. It has even sunk to the level of having its craven communiques vetted by lawyers.

The Employment and Organisation Committee and the General Council itself have met no less than five times over the NGA situation. They have helped the dispute not on hair's The decision of the NGA to call off the mass picket for seven days, whilst understandable, is a heavy blow to the dispute. It will be very difficult indeed to recapture the dynamic that had built up. The cooling off period also provides the opportunity for the TUC to work on the 'uncivilised" and relatively unintegrated NGA.

It is clear from Len Murray's statements that the present dispute will have no influence at all on the talks with the government.

The TUC is now absolutely determined to accept the Anto in unturum the most limited of concessions 11. - 1'-_ "1-3 - e • - -- . over the political levy and the new trade union Bill. That the TUC wants to use this dispute to strengthen their links with the Tories, not allow it to disrupt them.

The mass picketing constituted a powerful focus which could have provided the dynamic to take the dispute forward. But in the face of a sophisticated and powerful police force, the mass picketing was incapable of stopping Shah.

And of course we not only have to stop Shah, we have to stop the judges and Thatcher.

The key to success is spreading the dispute through rank and file solidarity action.

We must argue for this in the context of reimposing the mass picketing.

Defeat for the NGA would not be terminal for the struggle ANDREW WIARD (Report) against the Tory law. But it would make that fight a thousand times harder. It would spread and increase the demoralisation at all levels of the unions which even now is holding back a fight against the Tories and against betrayals of our leaders which help the Tories and strengthen them against the labour movement.

For these reasons as well as for reasons fo elementary trade union soldarity, militants must move heaven and earth to ensure the NGA is not defeated.

But we can expect little from the labour movement's official loadoro The rolativaly Inw num- TT MNT STARTOT ATTT •CTANDAT haun af mislento lant Mladunndaz ders or pickets last reunesuay, 30 November, shows what we are up against.

Nonetheless, militants in both the unions and the Labour Party should look for ways to come together to organise resistance to these laws.

Broadly-based 'Defend Our Unions Committees' are required. We urge militants in all areas to come together to form such committees capable of fighting for independent action as well as pressurising the leadership on the central demands.

*Break off all talks with the Tories. Don't talk, organise.

*Immediate solidarity action with all those threatened by the *No payment of fines.

*No collaboration with courts.

*Make the TUC fight! HARRY SLOAN reviews the new Labour Research pamphlet 'Unions Attacked'. BY NOW, in the shadow of Warrington, many trade unionists are waking up to the danger of the anti-union laws already placed on the statute books by the Tories with minimal TUC opposition.

Some will be aware of the main lines of the additional package of measures being in a Bill which could be law within seven months.

But the new Labour Research Department pamphlet, 'Unions Attacked' , provides a much-needed detailed breakdown of the implications of the Bill -some of which may have escaped your notice in the laundered Tory press coverage.

For instance, did you realise that one clause of the Bill anne Clause 2(10) - appears to be deliberately opening the door to witch-hunting of Communist Party members or supporters of left wing organisations?

Under a general statement that no member should be "unreasonably" excluded from standing as a candidate, the Bill makes the specific exception of members who 'belong to a class of members all of whom are excluded."

According to URD, the use ot the word "class' is intended by the Tories to sanction the proscription of members of certain political parties.

Did you know that the King Bill's move to impose ballots will leave unions in a Catch-22 situation on spontaneous If they refuse to lend official support to such strikes without a ballot having been held before the walk-out, they risk the prospect of losing their immunity from claims for damages — with the real danger of being driven into bankruptcy: but if they refuse to give support, they leave their membership to their own devices and run into conflict with the rank and file.

Tom King with Sir Geoffrey Howe mean a work-to-rule, an overtime ban or a refusal to cover vacancies. If a ballot had not been held, and an employer sought damages, unions could again face hefty bills.

Another potential Catch-22 arises over the scope of the ballot. King's Bill states that "all those whom it is reasonable to believe will be called upon to act in breach of, or interfere with their contracts, must be balloted, and no others."

Picketing

This may at first sound fair enough: why should workers not affected by industrial action have a vote? But if a strike gains in strength - pickets successfully - or becomes drawn out, other sections may be forced into action. Yet the fact is that the unions could lose their immunity from damages claims if they cast their net too narrowly, or too widely!

The pamphlet effectively exposes the naked political motive of the Tories in their moves to destroy trade union political funds.

It points out clearly that a central element in the Bill is the imposition of regular ballots to confirm the existence of a political fund: this is quite separate from the additional proposition (about which King has said he will 'negotiate" with the TUC) changing the "contracting-out" rule for the politica levy to 'contracting-in"

tion of ballots abolies impy tithose unions which currently have a political fund, and not to the "non-politicals" like NALGO, NUJ and NUT. And it underlines the fact that under the King Bill nearly every union with a political fund would be required to hold a ballot on whether to retain it or not within 14 months of the law reaching the statute book. This would provide ideal conditions for the Tory press to stick its knives into the finances of the Labour Party.

Tory Party Meanwhile, of course, companies are tree to donate vast sums to the Tory Party without anything resembling a ballot or consultation with workers or shareholders. The Tories get more than twice as much from biz business as Labour receives from the unions.

Even non-affiliated unions like NALGO could be hit by the Bill's new definition of 'political objects", which could outlaw the spending of union general funds on virtually any campaign against government policies whether or not the campaign was in furtherance of union objectives.

The pamphlet has a clearly defined purpose: it is produced to educate trade unionists on the main contents of the Bill. It makes no effort to criticise the present level of democracy in the unions (though a suggestion on page 3 that union meetings in working time would be a benefit for democracy could be read as an implicit critique of the status quo).

Valuable

It stands aloof from the right wing critique of the Bill - but it does not draw out the cynical way in which the Tories have singled out union executive committees (already chieflycomposed of lay members) rather than full-time officials and general secretaries for regular reelection.

Nor does it offer any hint as to how this new, potentially explosive, legislation ought to be fought by the trade union and labour movement.

But the pamphlet is valuable: it should convince every class conscious worker of the reasons why the Bill has to be stopped.

ACKED 'UNIONS ATTACKED' - 45p plus postage from LRD Publications Ltd. 78, Blackfriars Rd, London SE1 8HF.

----- pull-quotes -----

steered through Parliament by Tebbit's successor, Tom King,