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

Sheflield pay action

By Stephen Johns

Workers Press no. 727, 30 March 1972 · scan page 13

Topics: Engineering

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.

LEADERS of engineering abandoned any attempt to in support of their claim f holidays.

The Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers district committee meeting on Tuesday, which was to discuss the possibility. of joint action against firms, decided instead to allow shop stewards in city plants to fight for their own increases.

This marks a final collapse in the Sheffield district to the national policy, first mooted by AUEW president Hugh Scanion, ef abandoning the national claim in favour of plant-by-plant battles.

At one stage Sheffield seemed likely to be the first area to launch district action around a demand for £6 a week, shorter hours and longer holidays.

The first retreat came when the claim was diluted to one for a 'substantial' increase and better holidays.

Then a proposal to call a mass meeting of city workers to decide joint action was abandoned. A further suggestion that workers in 13 firms should begin a coordinated work-to-rule also came to nothing.

Finally the district committee met and rejected a move to begin a work-to-rule throughout the district in conjunction with engineering workers in greater Manchester.

The casting vote against this suggestion came from Herbert Howarth, one of the several Communist Party members who dominate the committee.

At Tuesday's meeting, a policy of joint action against Sheffield employers who have refused to negotiate turned down? the claim was turned down.

Instead the committee recommended that shop stewards in individual plants write to their full-time union officials and ask for meetings. If the nanagement did not quickly agree to this, action should be taken at plant level.

Even MARCH FUN TWO MORE DAYS TO RAISE £96.27 ALMOST THERE. Our Fund stands at {1,153.73. Your great last-minute effort has nearly reached our target of £1,250. Keep It up and If possible help us go well over the top.

We had no doubt that you, our readers, would make an all-oul fight for our Appeal Fund. daily paper not only to speak out for the working class each day, but takes up the struggle Inside the labour movement for soclalist principles. On the basis of these principles, the revolutlonary party will be built.

Many, many thanks to you all for your very warm support. Keep up this magnificent effort-we are not there yet! Rush all your last minute donations Immediately to:

• March Appeal Fund, 186a Claphamn High st, London, SWA 7UG. aunch d r more Possession order in Sheffiel I have listrict-wide action money and longer deadline for replies rejected without a vote.

An advance in Sheffield would have been crucial at this time. Less than 30 miles away engineers in greater Manchester area are in the midst of their own battle and workers have occupied nine tactories.

I understand that the AUEW national leadership have indicated that district-wide action in Sheffield would not meet with their approval. Only one firm in Shefield, Davy United, is working-to'ule in support of the claim.

ICI jobs face cuts IC! warned yesterday• that they will be pursuing a rigorous costreduction programme which will 'inevitably' mean sackings.

Company chairman Callard told workers: 'Your board is convinced it will have to reduce manpower. We are only too well aware of the distress caused by redundancies, but we have to be competitive and one of the cost savings is manpower.' Last year ICI cut its UK labour force by 8,000. • ICI SALES DROP p. 3. against Preston occupation THE OWNERS of a Preston engineering company have won a court order for possession of their factory where 22 workers are staging a sit-in.

The order was granted at the Preston Chancery Court by the vice chancellor, Sir Thomas Burges.

Within an hour of the court's decision, other engineering WEATHER MOST of England, Wales and N Ireland will be cloudy with rain at times. Some sunny intervals are expected in SE England.

Scotland and extreme N England will have sunny periods and occasional showers which will be of snow in the north. Temperatures near normal in the S but rather cold in the N.

Outlook for Friday and Saturday: Sunny intervals and occasional showers, chiefly in the N, but more continuous rain in the S and E at first and extreme W later. Temperatures mostly near normal but rather cold in the N at first.

DESK 01-720 2000 CIRCULATION 01-622 7029 Registered as a newspaper at the Post Office. Published by Workers Press. 186a Clapham High Street, London.

SW4 7UG.

Printed by Plough Press Ltd. (TU). 180b Clapham High Street, London.

SW4 TUG. workers the Manchester area in went to factory, Sharston engineering works, at Cheadle Hulme, and offered assistance.

Mrs Isabella Dubost, managing director of the factory, said outside the court: 'I don't know what will happen. I hope the police are not called, for the men's sake. I think they have been misled.' Making the application, Mr Peter Ferns said the proceedings were brought under a new order of the supreme court designed to provide a speedy method of obtaining possession of unlawfully occupied property.

Mr Leonard Porter, for the defendants, said it was not a case of people going in and squatting. It was a dispute between employer and employee. He claimed there was no evidence or urgency.

Vice-Chancellor Burges said the men had been sacked 'and that does not entitle employees to remain on premises.' In an affidavit, Mrs Dubost said the company had a work force of about 30, all members of the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers.

The directors had decided on March 17 to lay-off four men because of a falling off in orders.

After meeting the men for one hour, John Tocher, Manchester AUEW organizer, said that the place to settle industrial disputes was not in court.

'We have 12 establishments in this area involved in industrial disputes. A court of law is not the place to settle it. The place to settle it is across the table talking to us.' He said the union were looking at the question of an appeal.

← the whole issue

Something wrong on this page? Report an error