UNIONS
AND THE ECONOMIC CRISIS
BRITAIN Below is the concluding portion of an analysis of the relationship between the economic crisis and trade-union activity and the class struggle in Britain. The first part wos published in the last issue of INPRECOR No. 65, January 13, 1977.
* * * The three economic elements we have analyzed - unemployment, incomes policy, and inflation - are, of course, only part of the explanation for the decline in trade-union struggles during the past two years. What is decisive is the combination of the economic cycle and the blocking of political perspectives created by the betrayals of the Labour government. Disillusionment with Labour is spreading rapidly, but this is not reflected primarily in a shift to the left, and this fact, combined with the present unemployment, much higher than ever before during the postwar period, and the present dec line in struggle, much sharper than in any other period, makes it dangerous to try to predict the exact development of the trade-union struggle in the coming period. Nevertheless, a number of signs indicate that what has occurred is a temporarysetback and defeat for the working class, that no qualitative defeat has taken place which would bring the situation back to its pre-1968 conditions, and that an uptum in struggle, even if a slow one at the outset, should be expected. In particular, we may note four factors. 1. The bourgeoisie's estimate of the relationship of forces While this is not a decisive index, it is nonetheless significant that despite all the gains of the past year, and despite the serious defeats of the Labour party in by-elections, the bourgeoisie is still not confident that it can defeat any major struggle by a well-organized group of workers. This has been shown time and again. When the seamen threatened to strike during the summer of 1976, no significant section of the rul16 by ALAN JONES ing class expressed any desire for a serious fight to defeat the seamen, in sharp contrast to the bourgeoisie's reaction to threatened struggles by almost any group of workers during the period before the first miners strike of 1972. Without exception, bourgeois leaders urged reliance on the trade-union bureaucracy and insisted on avoiding provocations. Although the threatened strike was eventually called off, it did gain certain small concessions for the workers involved -gains which represented the first ochievements on the wages front in one year and which therefore had a smal! stimulating effect on other sections of workers. Even clearer has been the bourgeois response to the action threatened by the miners over the lowering of the retirement age. Although on the surface the issue here did not involve wages, it still represented a much sharper threat to the incomes policy than did the action of the seamen. Not surprisingly, after the experiences of 1972 and 1974, the bourgeoisie is convinced that it cannot defeat a miners struggle, and the degree to which the exchange value of the pound followed the state of the negotiations with the miners was almost laughable: When union president Joe Gormley said that the majority of miners did not want a confrontation with the government, the pound rose; when left-wing leader Hugh Scargill called for a ballot on industrial action, the pound fell; when the Coal Board's latest offer was rejected by the miners union and a ballot was called, the pound immediately fell further. (The Times, November 24, 1976.) This ballot produced a massive vote of 78% to 22% to reject the offer of the Coal Board and in favor of industrial action. There is every like lihood that the miners will extract concessions from the government which will further undermine the incomes policy, something which will in turn affect other groups of workers. Finally, and most significant politically, the bourgeoisie continues to be uncertain and fearful of the possible effects of the return of a Tory government, which the ruling class could probably secure at any time. The major fear is that such a government would meet a major struggle by the working class that would
render it incapable of governing even more rapidly than was the case with the Heath government. This fear is undoubtedly one of the major factors now keeping Labour in office, which is why the government's action in urging dockers not to strike over the defeat of the Labour-sponsored dock bill was not merely class treachery, but even suicidal from the standpoint of the bureaucracy itself. Despite the gains it has made in the past period, including the lack of any action against the defeat of the dock bill, the ruling class is still not confident it would not face a repeat of the struggles that first defeated and then brought down Heath. 2. Combativity of the masses Turning from the political judgments of the bourgeoisie to the objective features of the development of the workers movement, we find equally good reason to reject any idea that there has been a qualitative defeat resulting in a complete reversal of the relationship of class forces established since 1968. The combativity of the masses continues to be shown in the very broad response received by any call from the leadership of the working class. In spite of the downturn in strike struggles, it is clear that demoralization and apathy do not reign, as is demonstrated by the response to any call to action issued by the bureaucrats. In addition to mobilizations on more specifically political issues (the large turnout, some 20,000, at the Labour party demonstration against racism on November 21 is an example), the most important development pointing to the temper of significant layers of the masses was the November 17 demonstration against cuts in public spending. This came on the heels of more limited but nonetheless important actions, notably the 20,000 who marched on the November 30, 1975, demonstration against unemployment and the one-day general strike against cuts in Dundee. The November 17 demonstration surpassed even the most optimistic predictions, mobilizing 60,000 in the largest demonstration of the labor movement since the 1971 action against the Industrial Relations Bill, It is clear that very broad layers of workers in the public sector were drawn into this action, despite regional unevenness. In particular, there was massive participation by women workers, black workers, and a number of sectors (school cafeteria workers, cleaning departments, direct works departments) which had no previous record of struggle. Given the present situation in the public sector, where the union leaderships not only must deal with pressure From the ranks but also stand fo suffer real losses in membership if the cuts go through, the openings created by the small left turn mode by the leadership are meeting a real response from militants. In Scotland in particular, two or three strikes or lobbies a week take place over the issue of cuts. The Civil and Public Services Association (CPSA), with 220, 000 memben, has imposed an overtime ban in areas where additional work would disguise the need to fill a staff vacancy, has banned certain types of statistical work, and is opposing moves to pay unemployment compensation on a fortnightly instead of weekly basis. The executive of the National Association of Local Government Officers (NALGO) is to ask its members for an overtime ban and to refuse to perform duties that would have been carried out by employees who have been laid off. In London about twenty-five schools are refusing to cover For teachers absent for more than three days. There are, of course, severe limits to this situation. At best, the leaderships of the unions in the public sector are pursuing the classic left bureaucratic tactic of not mobilizing forces in a centralized way, but leaving it to individual militant sectors to fight it out alone. For example, NALGO has left it to the individual branches to ban overtime, the National Union of Public Employees position on the cuts is to fight on a hospital by hospital basis, and the National Union of Teachers has done nothing to implement its formal position against cuts; even the massive turnout on November 17 was secured essentially by vigorous campaigns of rank-and-file militants taking advantage of the leeway given by the bureaucracy. Furthermore, in a number of cases the bureaucracy still resorts to methods of direct repression. NALGO, for example, sent out a "scabs charter" stating that no action could be taken against any member for not participating in the November 17 action, and the NUT has attempted to vicitimize the teachers involved in the most isolated "no cover" struggle at Little Ilford school in London. The role of the bureaucracy in these actions highlights the necessity of demands that overcome the fragmentafion being imposed on struggles, but the very big response with which even the smallest calls from the leadership are greeted reveals the continuing underlying combativity of the workers and indicates that there has been no qualitative defeat. 3. Local Leaderships created before 1971 remain intact Given that the furthest the bureaucracy has gone in the current period is to leave the door open to action led by militants on the local level, it is especially important that the local leaderships created in the pre-1974 period remain essentially infact, with certain exceptions, such as the Midlands factories of Chrysler, construction, and, to a certain extent, the docks. Furthermore, in a number of areas, notably the public sector and to a limited extent among women workers in Industry, there has been a new development of shop steward and local organization. This has a dual significance. First, as already noted, it means that whenever some room for action is created by the union leadership, a large enough number of militants are organized to take advantage of it. This was shown above all on November 17, but it has also been seen in the 3,000 delegates who attended the National Assembly on Unemployment called by the Communist party and in the forces attracted by the "Right to Work" initiatives of the Interational Socialists.
17
BRITAIN Workers at British Chrysler vote to preserve jobs. Second, it means that wherever there is an upturn in industrial production and thus more favorable objective conditions for struggle, local militants are able to take advantage of the situation to relaunch struggles in defense of their interests. Especially significant here has been the motor industry, one of the strongholds of shop steward organization, which was severely hit by the recession, massive layoffs, and undoubted defeats in some sectors. With the turn in the economic situation of this sector, a new wave of struggles is unfolding. The weekending November 20 alone saw no less than six strike struggles in this industry. Generally, they were relatively small, but they were nonetheless significant - not only in comparison to the apathy that had prevailed for the previous six to nine months, but also in that three of them were waged against official instructions by the union leadership to return to work, a clear instance of shop stewards and local leaderships again taking up the struggle and gaining some new confidence. In addition, these small struggles have recently been joined by more widespread actions with greater potential - most notably the factory occupations at Jaguar Coventry to defeat a threatened lockout and the important struggle at Ford Dagenham, where nightshiff workers seized control of the body plant, built barricades, and turned fire hoses on the police. It would be wrong to exaggerate this trend, for these struggles are almost all defensive, but it is a clear tum in the situation compared to that which has prevailed for the past year and after such major defeats as the one suffered at Chrysler, The important thing is that the workers are beginning to fight back against the attacks. 4. Spread of struggle and some victories Particularly significant in light of the generalized attacks on the working class, and itself a sign of the beginning of more important resistance and struggle, new layers of workers are now moving into action. This is particularly noticeable in the public sector. Groups of workers with no historical record of struggle 18 have been involved in fights in health, education, and other sectors, as was shown on November 17 when layers such as cleaners and dinner servers mobilized and when women and black workers made up a very large section of the demonstration. The mobilization of women workers has also extended to other sectors. A series of equal pay strikes, culminating in the Trico* struggle, took place throughout the summer as it was increasingly revealed that the Equal Pay Act and the Sex Discrimination Act of 1975 cannot grant even the limited economic gains that were promised. (Despite government promises and legislation, the equal pay situation has continued to deteriorate. By April 1976 the gap in hourly wage averages between male and female workers stood at 40 pence, compared with 32.2p in October 1972.) Even more important, some of these struggles are now bringing of least limited partial victories. Most are still defensive, waged on limited fields, such as the blacking of the use of scab labor at Ford Dagenham, the factory occupations that defeated an attempted lockout at Jaguar Coventry (management was forced to pay wages for most of the period of the sit-in), the successful struggle for unionization of Greenings in Warrington. Nevertheless, after a period in which virtually every struggle ended in defeat, the winning of a number of victories, even if small ones, is important in stimulating the combativity of the working class. It is also clear that a slight turn has occurred in the struggle over wages during the immediate post period. The small gains made by the seamen were the first sign. The second was the twenty-one-week strike for equal pay at Trico. This victory - won against police harassment, the decision of a state tribunal, and lukewarm support from the official trode unions - was the First major vindication in quite some fime of the proposition that struggle can actually bring results. Finally, the fact that the miners are in position to extract at least some concessions going beyond the limits of the incomes policy will represent another stimulus to struggle. Taking all these indices together - the bourgeoisie's estimate of the relationship of forces, the significant response by the working class to any call for action by the leadership, the continued existence of the local leaderships created prior to 1974, and the extension of struggle into new sectors, combined with the winning of some partial victories - we may confidently reject the view that there has been a qualitative defeat of the working class taking us back to the pre-1968 situation. The continued increase in union membership reflects a still undefeated underlying combativity. Further, the November 17 action, the small gains won by the sea*This was a successful strike by 300 women which lasted 21 weeks. It was the largest and longest running equal pay dispute in Britain, and one of the most significant because the women boycotted the state run Tribunals created under the EPA&SDA legislation, which ruled against their claim for equal pay.
-GUAL WORK AT HOME
THE BOSSES GO BERSERK
ECKAL PAY AT WORK
WHEN WOMEN & MEN UNITE
TRICO women demand
FAUEW OFFICIAL STRIKE men, the rise of struggles in the motor industry, the victory at Trico, and the current moves of the miners constitute the beginning of a slow but definite tum in the situation.
In view of the setbacks of the past year and the many major political obstacles confronting the rise in combativity of the working class, even on the purely trade- union level, it would be lightminded and unrealistic to expect a new upturn in struggle to be rapid. Furthermore, these political elements mean that economic determinants are less crucial than they were previously. Nevertheless,
British revolutionaries, while not anticipating spectacular developments at the outset, have a perspective of a new rise of workers struggle. The next steps to be taken if this turn is to be consolidated are to step up the fight against cuts, begin serious struggle against layoffs in Courtaulds and other sectors, and relaunch at least partial struggles against the incomes policy:
Many social and political problems remain to be over-
QUAL PAY come. The bourgeoisie still holds many cards, from racism to a campaign for a "national coalition government, " to increased pressure on the Labour government. But there are no underlying economic reasons to justify the conclusion that the combativity the working class has evidenced during the past eight years has been basically broken. A new upswing in trade-union struggles will in turn help to create improved conditions for revolutionary intervention aimed at resolving the political crisis confronting the working class. An extension of the struggle into heavy industry would mark a qualitative fum here. Today, after a period of undoubted setbacks, British revolutionaries have more reason than for some time to feel guarded confidence in the prospects for the unfolding of the class struggle in Britain. To prepare for a new upturn in trade-union struggles, to extend their demands and methods of organization, and to overcome the political obstacles that will confront them is a crucial part of the activity of revolutionaries today.
10