workers press

The Socialist Labour League's press: The Newsletter, Workers Press, Labour Review and Fourth International, 1952–1973. A searchable archive of the scans

Cardiff yarn

By Martin Zarrop

Workers Press no. 181, 8 June 1970 · scan pages 2, 5

Read the scan at ETOL (PDF) →

Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: headlines and words can be misread, and a caption or advert can run into the text. For anything you quote, read the scan.

Following an almost word-for-word repetition of the speech delivered in Stourbridge, Dudley, Smethwick, Oldbury and Halesowen last week Powell reiterated his ultra-right economic theories and then launched into a tirade against nationalization and state intervention of any kind in industry.

"The Industrial Re-organization Corporation is nationalizing another tround stre back door,' he told an astonished audience.

'Rolls-Royce! . . . Cammell Laird!! ••. British-Leyland!!! • •• have been nationalized in order to ensure that they make or buy what the government wants them to buy ... For a mere £10 million a government director can be put on the board.' BACK-DOOR Convinced that the fiendish Wilson had almost instituted communism by means of the capitalist statethrough the back door, of course - the audience were willing accept anything • that their saviour suggested.

A student from Lancashire rose to his feet and denied Powell's assertion that the fight new shifts WORKERS at the strikebound Brocklehurst Yarn factory at Cardiff claim they have been threatened with dismissal by the management unless they sign contracts.

Employers are using contracts in the offensive against trade unions and workers to prevent them from disrupting production and therefore threatening profits through legitimate attempts to improve pay and conditions.

Strike leader Mr Khan Bahadur told me:

"The men have voted unanimously not to sign these contracts.

'We expect to be dismissed, but even if we are we shall be here picketing every day because these are our jobs and we will get them back.' The men walked out a week ago after the firm had told them that they must accept a new shift system.

New shifts Mr Bahadur said:

"They want us to do more in eight hours than I we are doing now in 12:

The management wants to introduce a new shift system of seven eight-hour shifts a week in place of the present five 12-hour shifts.

One of the men told me:

'What they have realized is that when a man works 12 hours they're not getting the maximum out of him.' The machines used to process yarn which the men operate have all been speeded up, they claim.

Two years ago the production cycle used to take 11 hours-now it takes six and in three years the work load has been increased by 200 per cent, but with no extra money.

Work load

Mr Bahadur said:

'They increase the work load by asking us to look after extra machines. First it was one, then two and now it is to be three.

This means an increase of 50 per cent in the work load.' No new men are being taken on at the factory except for the purpose of replacement. The men claim that poor working conditions have led to a very high staff turnover.

The strikers are picketing outside the factory every day with banners.

Majority of the workers are immigrants and Mr Bahadur said:

•Everybody here has been exploited for years, but particularly the immigrants because they thought we were afraid to raise our voices in case we lose our jobs.' The men are asking for £23 basic (per week) before they accept the new system.

Offer

The firm has offered £2 which the men say includes 17s their union had negotiated anyway and which would bring the wage up to only £21.

The company have also offered time-and-a-half for working a rest day and a production bonus of £8 which the men say it would be impossi• withe tailure on a campiet The open support of

Nixon. to collaborate in a campaign of industrial action against the Vietnam war and-most foul;

The silence of the 'Star' on the frame-up of Dubcek by the French Stalinist leaders. ( None of these things moved Mr Matthews. Now, however, he devotes, half the editorial column to attack the SLL. The question is In our opinion the reason is quite obvious. not only because the SLL and its paper are growing constantly, but because the political campaigns as we saw on the Wilson visit, in Liverpool on May 1 and now in the general election, are beginning to have an impact on the CP membership which seriously taxing the credibility of its leaders.

Booklep by the old stalinist die-hard Betty Reid prove that the SLL was 'sectarian' 'ultra-left' square this 'theory' with and mans develop Trotskyism in Britain.

contrast to this surging movement, the Stalinist rty and press is in gre ficulties which stem fro The sin go more land more tion declines and its financial difficulties information, to its own increase. Similar problems afflict the Party and the Young Communist Done en as a mini The SEL, as states, is a 'sect Indeed! Is it not even admitted by hardened Stalinists - that all the public mentinos and sti monstrations and YS have dwarfed he CP's public Day, ties in 1970? May enin centenar meeting nd the public lecture on Lenin have shown unmistakably the superiority of the Trotskyist programme and policy and leadership over Stalinism.

How does Matthews explain which aradox of 'sect' publishes a daily paper financed by its sales

← the whole issue

Something wrong on this page? Report an error