By Workers Power
THE ‘OFFICIAL’ unemployment figures are moving closer and closer to the 1.5 million mark. One in every twenty workers in Britain is now without work. And the Labour government intends that this situation will get worse. Harold Wilson promises a bleak and hard winter. The figure of 2 million unemployed is being openly predicted in government and official circles. The jobs of many more workers are threatened if this government is to have its way.
Just what are our trade union leaders doing about it? What are they doing to save our jobs and livelihoods?
During the summer they endorsed the £6 wage limit on all wage claims while arguing that unemployment was the main enemy of the Labour movement. Since then wages have have fallen further behind the cost of living and unemployment figures have continued to rise. Now they have abandoned the unemployment struggle. Even worse, they try to obstruct any rank and file initiative on this issue.
The trade union leaders have put their trust in politely pressuring the Labour government to keep unemployment levels down. This policy has obviously not worked. In fact it never could. The Labour government is committed to restoring and streamlining British capitalism. As our jobs disappear, as the welfare state crumbles, as inflation eats away at our living standards, the stock exchange is at its highest point for two years. The Labour government accepts that workers will have to pay the price for a crisis which is not of their making. The trade union leaders have no alternative to this. They accept cuts and unemployment, hoping only to persuade the Labour government to soften the blows.
The government and bosses hope that the threat of unemployment will make workers prepared to accept cuts in living standards. In many factories it is being used blatantly to undermine militant trade union organisation.
The cudgel of unemployment has been used to great effect at Tower Brand, a Tube Investment subsidiary in Wolverhampton. Shop stewards supported the sacking of two militant TGWU members at the factory. The full time official tried to argue with the stewards but got nowhere. When the sacked militants picketed the factory, their brother workers refused to speak to them for fear of losing their jobs. With unemployment running at 7% in Wolverhampton, there is little hope of finding a new job.
Unemployment hits hardest at groups of workers least able and experienced in defending themselves. It has opened up divisions between workers struggling to maintain their jobs. Women, black workers and young people are particularly vulnerable to the divide and rule tactics being used by the bosses.
But short time working and unemployment also threatens traditionally well organised groups of workers. Borth are a threat to the working class as a whole. That is why class-wide action will be necessary to defeat the unemployment programme of the Labour government.
The TUC bureaucrats have deliberately set out to prevent the mobilisation taking place everywhere against unemployment. They have tried to sabotage the North West Region TUC lobby on 26 November. They claim that such action would upset their policy of whispering sweet nothings in the ear of the government. With such leaders, who needs enemies?
But the bureaucrats have not succeeded in having it all their own way in the labour movement. They have failed to prevent the mobilisation for 26 November. Strike action has been called for on that day by London building sites and Islington NALGO. Shop stewards’ committees and Trades Councils have made it clear that they will be going to London. Crawley Trades Council, for example, wrote to the General Council saying they would do all in their power to mobilise for the 26th and condemning the General Council for their class collaboration. Demonstrations are also being called by Liverpool and Leicester Trades Councils in that week. The TUC has got a resounding vote of no confidence in their pussy-footing tactics from rank and file trade unionists everywhere.
But one week of good demonstrations will not destroy the government’s unemployment plans. The bosses’ attack will only be repelled if much greater force is used. A clear strategy to fight unemployment must be hammered out.
The battles of the last four years have shown clearly that jobs cannot be saved without militant action. The government is not a charity organisation. It wants to close down whole sections of British industry. It wants workers to pay for the bosses’ crisis. The government has only been diverted from this course when workers’ action has forced them to. Even then, it has attempted to make workers pay for keeping their jobs by commissioning ‘feasibility studies’ and then implementing ‘rationalisation’. The bosses say that the workforce must accept wage cuts, speed-up, voluntary redundancy and productivity strings. Short-time and further redundancy plans at British Leyland show that the Labour government will give cash to the bosses and expect workers to pay.
The bosses want our labour only when there are profits be made. When the crisis makes it less profitable to employ us or when the British bosses’ competitive ability receives a blow from their rivals, they want to dump us in the dole queues until business picks up again.
If we accept this argument it will condemn large sections of workers to unemployment or short-time working while other sections are doing enormous amounts of overtime. Since the latter are also working themselves out of a job, it is to the direct benefit of all workers to ensure that hours are reduced to maintain work for all, while full pay is maintained. However, work-sharing (the reduction of hours to maintain all the workforce) must be under strict shop stewards’ control.
Only occupation tactics—holding the bosses’ property in exchange for jobs—can force the hand of employers and the government. In Leicester this summer an occupation by Peggs’ workers saved 40 jobs. The plans for occupation at Chrysler and the current occupations at Personna in Glasgow and Balfour Darwin in Sheffield (both involving large numbers of women workers) point the way forward.
But these tactics will not win in isolation. That is why we must fight to build in every area trade union committees against unemployment. These committees must not just be platforms for flowery orators. They must have a clear programme and perspective for action. The crucial test for these bodies will be whether they can marshal in the locality real support for groups of workers fighting redundancy. They must take responsibility for picketing, strike fund collecting, blacking and factory gate meetings in support of workers in struggle.
They must also initiate a clear campaign against the threat of redundancy in the entire labour movement. Most importantly, they must fight for trade union registration of the unemployed, for immediate bans on all overtime, and for the 35 hour working week with no loss of earnings. These policies can win immediate support in the trade union movement. Only local trade union committees against unemployment can make sure that these policies are actually fought for in the factories and workplaces.
Occupations by threatened sections of workers can win if supported by the trade union movement through rank and file unemployment committees. But these struggles immediately pose the question—what are we fighting for?
Already we have seen 1 ¼ million workers lose their jobs. They are our responsibility. We must ensure that the trade unions and anti-unemployment committees organise and fight for workers already unemployed. When our schools are disintegrating, our hospitals hopelessly inadequate, and pathetic housing programmes being abandoned, the entire labour movement must campaign for a programme of public works under the control of the trade union movement. We cannot accept a system where hundreds of thousands of building workers are unemployed while housing, school and hospital programmes are being cut.
We must demand that the Labour government immediately nationalise all firms that cannot guarantee full employment. But we are not interested in nationalisation that leads, as in the Coal Board, or British Steel, to massive redundancies and to workers paying the price through deteriorating pay and conditions. We must say that the bosses must pay the price for the crisis they have created. That is why we must demand nationalisation with no compensation to the owners who have created the crisis. The workers must not pay the price. We have not caused the crisis. We shall not pay for it.
We must organise ourselves to save our jobs, but our struggle does not end there. If we can develop our power and organisation, we need never return again to the present relationship with management. Of course, we should never sacrifice our trade union rights and independence. We should not accept responsibility and joint ‘participation’. But we must continue to organise to protect the interests of workers more than ever before. We must insist that all books and committees are open to workers’ inspection whenever we see fit. We must build our strength to veto any management decision we do not agree with—those which affect us adversely. We must develop the power to say yes or no to all management proposals for production, planning and conditions.
The struggle for our jobs raises the question of who should be in control. In the fight to save jobs and guarantee full pay, we must insist that we will decide what we produce and how we do it. That is what we mean by workers’ control.
The Labour movement must demand not only nationalisation without compensation but also that the Labour government recognise the right of the workforce to veto all decisions of management. Occupation committees must ensure that this demand is part and parcel of their fight against unemployment. The plight of workers on the Scottish Daily News and at Triumph Meriden shows just how important this demand is.
The trade union leadership cannot save our jobs. Their cringing tactics prove this. We will have to organise for ourselves. But that organisation must have a clear strategy and programme if it is to win.
We are for:
We shall not pay for the crisis:
