Gerry Caughey replies to Victor Feather

LEADER OF THE SACKED PILKINGTON GLASSWORKERS IN LAST SATURDAY'S WORKERS" PRESS TUC GENERAL SECRETARY VICTOR FEATHER ANSWERED QUESTIONS ON WAGES, PRODUCTIVITY, UNEMPLOY.

MENT, ANTI-UNION LAWS AND THE PILKINGTON DISPUTE. TODAY GERRY CAUGHEY, A LEADER OF THE ST HELENS GLASSWORKERS TAKES UP FEATHER'S Members of the glassworkers rank-and-file committee-L R: Dere k Greenough, Gerry Caughey, Brian Woodward CA G PAGE TWO VICTOR FEATHER-in the interview published in Workers Press seven days ago-says he doesn't think there's anything he can do about what's happened at Pilkington's at this stage; he says he's not responsible.

This is just not good enough.

Leaving aside for the moment the inaccuracies in what he told Stephen Johns, there are crucial issues of principle —directly affecting the lives of millions of trade unionists -at stake in the events at St Helens and Pontypool.

These concern the two most basic and fundamental rights of the working class: the right to a job and the right to strike.

In both cases the Tory government is unmistakably on the attack after only three months in office and if the leadership of the trade union REPLY ON THE LAST POINT.

movement can't answer this attack, then every rank-and-file member of every single trade union must wake up to one very simple proposition; he'll have to organize to build a new leadership which can defend these rights.

More than 600 men were sacked by Pilkington's - and between 230 and 250 at St Helens and 27 at Pontypool remain without work. How are trade union leaders going to get the 600,000 unemployed off the dole queues if they can't defend the jobs of 270odd glassworkers?

We in St Helens were sacked for withdrawing our labour in defence of a fellowworker who wanted to be represented in a complaint by someone of his own choosing —not by someone the management, the people he was complaining against, endorsed.

At Pontypool, which had struck in sympathy with St Helens, the men were sacked for refusing to return to work while we. were still out.

In fact what's happened at both towns is that we've been staked out on the barbed wire as an advertisement against going on strike. At first, we thought this was something special to Pilkington's. But recent events have shown it's starting to hâppen all over the country.

Doesn't Feather think this warrants some action? What is he arguing with the government about anti-union legislation for if they're already allowing employers to get away with this kind of attack on the right to strike?

Really, the only thing. I agree with Feather on in his interview in the Workers Press is that he doesn't work at Pilkington's.

In fact everyone at that meeting - Feather, Lord Cooper of the General and Municipal Workers' and myself-initialled the agreement. Feather even initialled a copy of the TUC centenary book for us at the same time!

send to NATIONAL LABOUR LEAGUE, LONDON, SW4. to the meeting which ended the strike — that he would chair the meeting.

He had a role to play, as every chairman has a role to play. Our interpretation was that as chairman-and as general secretary of the Trades Union Congress—he would see that the agreements made at the meeting were upheld.

We put our trust in him. If he was not going to be a party, why did he chair the meeting? Why didn't Harry Pilkington chair it?—-we'd have been as well, as it turned out!

We ended the strike on the understanding that this meeting would take place and see justice done.

We wanted to make sure the voice of the shop floor would be heard on questions affecting their livelihoods; we were elected to ensure this.

The General and Municipal Workers' Union had forgotten what it was formed for. The rank and file had become just pawns in a power game.

I had been working on machine-cutting of car windscreens, a job I'd done for about seven-and-a-half years, with bonus and shift supplement, about £25 for a 50-hour week—you couldn't manage at all without overtime.

It was a campaign to humiliate us on the shop floor. That was victimization-the agreament wasn't worth the paper it was written on; it was broken before the ink was dry.

Pontypool speaks for itself. Those 27 men are still on the stones. Although the Congress House meeting-the first one, that is — wasn't attended by any of the rank-and-filers from there, it was attended by the local G&MWU branch secretary.

Jack Cooper told him to get these men either reinstated or re-employed. But it was really! all cut and dried. He just asked for re-employment and then accepted the company's statement that there were no vacancies.

A couple of weeks after this, when we could see the victimization taking place and nothing being done about it by the union, despite the agreement, we asked for another meeting. Feather agreed to chair a second meeting and invited Cooper-who agreed to attend on the understanding that we would stop attacking the union.

We in fact ceased any such attacks for about a fortnight before the meeting.

We travelled 200 miles, at a cost of about £70, to attend— but Cooper never showed up. A quarter of an hour after we got there—it must have been 6.45 p.m. — Feather came in. Cooper had telephoned that he would not be coming because the people they wanted elected 'as branch secretary and works convenors wouldn't get in.

our attacks on the union had continued.

This was just not true. Cooper was using the tact that people were coming to us with votes of no confidence in their shop stewards - they wanted new shop stewards and new Joint Industrial Council members elected.

The answer from the officials was that we couldn't have new elections until the inquiry into the St Helens No 91 branch — set up in an attempt to counter criticisms which had arisen during the strike--was completed.

What they were worried about was that we would occupy all the posts and that Available from 186A Clapham High Si... SW.s. TROTSKYIST ANALYSIS

In other words we were denied proper representation. How can you work within the machinery of the union, as Feather asks us to do, when this happens?

attacked Feather for accepting Cooper's reason for not attending without proof. He had given John Potter and myself advice - but only to make the union collect dues on the shop floor, instead of having the check-off system.

No doubt he'll deny this now. But when we told him we couldn't get the representation people wanted, he was simply unable to answer. I challenge him and Cooper to argue all this out-anytime, anywhere.

He says he's not criticizing anyone. But he was the chairman, it is his job to criticize. Some of the Pontypool men went along for a face-to-face confrontation with Cooper, and there were about 12 of the St Helens committee.

But we couldn't get paid by IN

Saturday, October the union for the day's pay we lost. And half the train fare was paid by the TUC-still leaving us about £30 down. Some of us ended up having to sleep down in the park until we could get a train back the next morning.

Feather is just adopting the traditional attitude of the trade union establishment. When the rank and file are attempting to break through he takes the side of the official set-up every time.

But if he was really concerned about the shop-floor workers of this country-who are being let down every day by their official leaders — he would take responsibility.

JOHN POTTER

If 250 men can be victimized without a squeak of opposition from the G&MWU then it's time their affairs were investigated-and, as general secretary of the TUC, that's Feather's job.

He should be using his influence on the TUC General Council to bring pressure to bear from other unions to change this situation.

But he hides behind procedure because he can't afford to antagonize the established leadership of a union like the What we're fighting for is reinstatement of all those men who have been sacked by Pilkington's-and remember, all the Pontypool lads are still members of the G&MWU. There are members of the G&MWU at St Helens who've been re-employed by the company but have lost all their rights under the pension scheme, the Redundancy Payments Act and the Contracts of Employment Act. What are Cooper and. Feather doing about this?

We came out for a basic trade union principle-after exhausting every possible channel of procedure. Feather is supposed to be leader of the entire trade union movement. If he can't take responsibility for that, just what is he there for?

We were still inside the G&MWU at the time of the second Congress House meeting. We hadn't yet formed the Glass and General Workers' Union. In fact we hadn't even given Pilkington's our contracting-out forms until then.

I think it was that second Congress House meeting that decided us. Of course it was a provocation.

If Feather says there's nothing he can do—he doesn't think there's anything that can be done-then he's accepting that workers can be sacked for withdrawing their labour.

He told Stephen Johns that Tory Employment and Productivity Minister Robert Carr has two hats. If he doesn't change his tune, there are a lot of people in St Helens who'll go on saying he's got two JUST OUT NEW PARK PUBLICATIONS