WATCH OUT IT'S THE INDUSTRIAL SOCIETY SHOW!

1 regular feature of every ent's life is the Industrial Society, or rather the lavish festivities thrown by this nebulous body for union leaders, bie boses, Cabinet ministers even the Royal Family.

At these sought-after beanfeasts the journalist will meet John Garnett, the care-warn CBE who heads the outfit. Mr Garnett is a very pleasant man exuding the easy charm of Rugby, Trinity College and the Royal Navy. He is solicitous, paying equal attention to newsmen of all political persuasions. In fact a perfect democrat.

At Mr Garnett's lunches, which usually separate a day of discussion on industrial topics, men like Amalgamated ers' resident Hugh and Confederation of British Industry chief W. O. Campbell Adamson speak.

The journalist returns to his office full of good cheer (and good wine), but the more inquiring do feel a slight sense of unease.

Exactly what is the Industrial Society up to? they ask Direct inquiries often unsatisfactory. The host of pukka young ladies and smart young men employed by the proachable. But it's like dear- Society are friendly and ing with a sponge. They bend and weave and agree. Eventually you get the impression that your own 'incisive' views are being absorbed and added to some conglomerate of 'fine' morality Society workers seem to carry in their heads.

But whatever its motive, the Industrial Society is going places... and fast.

Its annual report, published today, reveals an astonishing portfolio of activities that stretch from the denizens of British industry to the corners of the ex-Empire-in September four Society advisers went to Zambia and 'installed' briefing groups and advisory committees throughout the entire Zambian copper industry, covering 50,000 people.

On Tuesday it had a starstudded forum the Industrial Relations Act and a week Palace, where its patron, the Duke of Edinburgh, summoned captains of industry and union leaders to a secret pow-wow on the crisis in British industry (secret save for the Workers Press who broke the story the day after -an act that spurred the Society into an untypical burst of anger!).

Over the years vast 10u he Society's income from it company - training re-fold. projects have increased Income over the 12 months to June reached to near flm—a record. No less than 27,000 staff at all levels in 532 companies went through the training schemes The net is cast wide and involves some of Britain's giants. Beaverbrook Newspapers, Esso, Fisons, Hawker Siddeley, Society s Vo an temene the managementunion relations schemes. The new idea is the 'briefing group'. The annual report explains: •This communication system by the Society means getting employees at every level in small groups together with their boss on a regular basis to explain to them what is happening and why [we understand an explanation of profit and where it comes from is not on the curricula]. More than 30 companies now operate this system and a separate department is being formed to pioneer this work.' The Society also gets them young.

*This year 53 conferences were held in schools. They were attended by 8,270 sixthformers and involved 820 group leaders from industry and commerce. The object of these conferences; which largely consist of discussions in small groups, is to get people still in school to understand the challenge that faces them in industry and commerce and in playing a part in improving industry and commerce in the future as managers, supervisors or through trade unions.

But perhaps the most amazing aspect of the Society's work is the depth to which it has penetrated into fields usually considered the preserve of the labour movement.

It proudly announces that 1,300 shop stewards were 'trained' by the Society last year. Sometimes this involved courses along with managers where the two sides engage in mock battles across the negotiating table.

What exactly is the object remains vague. The Society calls it 'constructive negotiation' technique. It seems to involve recognizing unnecessary conflict (they do admit some conflict is necessary), isolating the problem and eliminating it.

Anyway it seems to be doing very well and claims to be the biggest single body dealing with stewards.

One of the Society's greatest coups over the last 12 months was John Garnett's appointment to Wilberforce inquiry into the miners' strike. It gave them a semi-official aura. Garnett is an upper-class type who went to Rugby. He was 15 years with ICI, a firm noted for its paternalistic approach to its workers. lives in Putney, south-west London and clubs at the Athenaeum and the Leander (Henley).

Last year the Society 'trained' stewards for Coalite Chemical Products, Courtauld's, GKN, Scottish Stamp. ings and the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company. And many unions send their members along for the same purpose.

The unions also pay formal recognition. All the big ones are affiliated to the Industrial Society. ( The latest to join are the printing union NATSOPA, the National Association of Schoolmasters and Jack Peel's Union of Dyers and Bleachers. Only the miners remain untouched by the new spirit, general secretary, was Daly elected though Lawrence their to the Society's council recently.

There he joins Jack Jones of the transport union and Alf Allen (shopworkers), James Conway and Len Stubbs (engineers), Lord Cooper and Derek Gladwin (municipal workers), Jack Peel (dyers and bleachers) and Mark Young (electricians and plumbers).

These union worthies rub shoulders with some of the toughest monopolists in the country. The employers' representatives on the council include:

A. J. Nicol (Lucas-just closing their Fazakerley factory), H. Morley (British Steel —18,000 redundancies in Scotland on the way), Sir "Don' dustria rodie'y;

says the report, 'was largely due to our ability to react quickly and appropriately to the massive demand for information about the Industrial it , Relations Act and the Code of Practice' " JS.

The Society's good fortune is incles.

reilected in its new premises.

Carlton House, London. Over £120,000 has been raised to pay for modernizations. It will be called Peter Runge House after a protégé of the Society's founder, Robert Hyde.

Society opposition to the Act is at least curious. The Code of Practice is based, he boasts, on the Society's teaching and the report adds: 'Some 14,000 managers, supervisors and shop stewards received a day's training in ways in which the legislation could be of practical help in improving industrial relations' The emphasis is on the word help-not exactly in line with even the TUC's very feeble total opposition to the Act.

The Act and the Court, it seems, have become a fact of life and the Society is busily absorbing it into its practice.

But what motivates these keen boy scouts of industry?

Society chiefs earnestly explain that they want to make things better for people in industry.

Their spokesman told me: 'We are neither pro nor anti private enterprise. We simply recognize that it is a fact. It is not our job to change things. Our aim is to get people treated better. If people get treated better, it's good for the firm and good for the employees.' Basically these ideas are very old hat. The Industrial Society is corporatist and wants to erect a structure in industry to (a) resolve unnecessary conflict, (b) channel necessary conflict into constructive avenues.

In plainer language it aims to persuade workers not to be automatically hostile to bosses and get bosses to be nice to workers. The aim is to merge management, shop stewards and unions and smother them in some swamp of procedure —a process called 'constructive negotiation' or 'action centred leadership'.

One wily old trade union official passed a blunter verdict of the Industrial Society's objectives: "Take a right-wing union leader and a so-called "progressive" employer. Both men basically agree with the system. The Society comes along 45,1650 and wheels them out at a conference. In this way they try to paint a smile on the face of capitalism, fudge over its evils. That is their role. We go to listen, but we don't give them any money.' His remark shoud be qualified. . Some of the keenest supporters of the Society are not right-wingers but union leaders who boast a left-wing reputation. Both Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon featured as speakers at Society conferences over the last year.

One of the latest innovations is the Society's 'conciliation service' It's a modest affair, not comparable, they say with the grander CBI-TUC scheme. It began in September and John Garnett has already been involved as trouble-shooter for one small firm.

The philosophy of the Industrial Society is one thing, its growth and influence another.

One reason is to be found in the industrial training legislation passed in the early 1960s. Firms must pay training levies to their industry's board. They can claim the money back by sending their managers and tame shop stewards to courses, seminars and lunches organized by the Society. In this way the legislation has been a boon to many groups in consultancy and industrial relations.

But this perk cannot entirely explain the Society's phenomenal growth, achieved at a time when all enterprises are trying to cut out extras.

Neither does it explain its extraordinary pull.

It's not easy to call Victor Feather, Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon to meet Campbell Adamson (CBI), Lord Melchett (British Steel) and Lord Stokes (British-Leyland) together, especially in the midst of the crisis talks over inflaAdd to that that the meeting was at Buckingham Palace with the Duke in the chair, that it was secret and that the event they were discussing was not supposed to take place until 1974, then you have a first-class mystery. It begins with the question-'Where does the Industrial Society get its influence from?' Clearly the powerful backers who are very interested in its corporatist ideas.

Workers will undoubtedly see more of Mr. Garnett and his band of industrial cavaliers.