Behind the Rail ‘Settlement’

[p003] ditorial

Behind the Rail "Settlement'

THERE has been nothing like it since 1926. For almost two weeks the main topic of conversa- tion was the threatened rail strike. The unani- mous decision of the Executive Committee of the National Union of Railwaymen to call their mem- bers out on strike on Monday, February 15, was the first time in 41 years that this union had decided to take such action on its own initiative. This fact alone emphasizes once again the deep rumblings of class conflict, which are now very much in evidence in British political life.

In their usual hypocritical way the Tories pro- tested loudly about the NUR decision. "After all' they say, 'we had decided to give the railwaymen something' True enough. But what the Tories fail to make clear is that they wanted to postpone payment until the Guillebaud repori finally made its appearance, and then only grant as small an increase as possible. The railwaymen, however, decided to put an end to this long-drawn out, indefinite procedure and by a threat of class action they secured an almost immediate response.

What the Tories are really protesting about is this threat of class action. The leaders of the government are painfully aware of their own weaknesses. As a class they cannot rule with- out the support of the right-wing leaders of the Trades Union Congress. The alternative to this is to challenge the working class in a head-on collision. Right now they are unable to make this decision. Such a conflict with the railway- men could well have set in motion forces which would have rapidly exposed the class collabora- tion between the TUC and the Tory government.

The Tories had no illusions about Mr. Sidney Greene, general secretary of the NUR. Count- less articles were written describing how his mild- mannered, gentlemanly appearance personified all that was best about trade unionism. Somehow or other something went wrong with this calcula- tion over the last three months. This something was the dining car strike during November. powerful rank-and-file movement linking London and Manchester came into existence and forced the Executive Council of the NUR to put pro- cedure to one side and negotiate directly with its

leaders. The powerful pressure emanating from the ranks on the question of wages forced the mild Mr. Greene to embark upon a serious struggle. If Mr. Greene had not taken this road it is entirely possible that he would no longer be general secre- tary of the National Union of Railwaymen.

The threat of class action on the railways im- pelled the Tories to make some rapid readjust- ments in relation to other industries whose unions were negotiating for a reduction of hours and in- creases in wages. The most notable of these was, of course, the claim of the Confederation of En- gineering and Shipbuilding Unions. A few days before the NUR decision to strike, Mr. Carron, the president of the Amalgamated Engineering

Caroon of Penanam), walked out obes employers

offices declaring that he would not accept the 42- hour week and that he wanted a substantial in- crease in wages. This same Mr. Carron on Thursday, February 11, one day before the rail settlement, attended a meeting of the unions concerned in York and decided to accept the 42-hour week with no increase in wages. The reason for this change of face is not difficult to see. Behind the scenes the TUC chiefs were in almost constant collusion with the Minister of Labour and government departments. These gentlemen had decided to help the Tories over a difficult period. They deplored the action of the railwaymen, just as much as the Tories. In the House of Commons Mr. Robens, right-wing Labour Shadow Cabinet spokesman, denounced the threatened railway strike as 'catastrophic'

wade the for to that draw as pike ilie pher-

went to work to find a solution that would assist the employers to weather the storm. The formula was contained in the 'about-face' decision of Mr. Carron to sell the engineers for a miserable two hours reduction each week (from 44 hours to 42) and to drop his demand for more wages.

The victory of the railwaymen, therefore, must be considered alongside the betrayal of the en- gineers. In its editorial of February 15 The Times notes that—

[p004] 'An important point in the current round of union claims for higher wages and shorter hours has been passed. This was not the intermediate agreement reached on the railways, but the settlement in the engineering and building industries, the two largest negotiating unions, whose decisions affect more than three million and more than one million workers respectively. Since the engineering unions agreed to accept a reduced working week and the builders settled for a wage increase of just under four per cent., it cannot be said that any pattern emerges.'

In other words, the Tories are well satisfied that the railway wage increase will not set the pattern for a general wage struggle because the important unions who may be involved in such a struggle have now accepted paltry awards.

Thus the Conservative government has been extricated from a difficult position by the right- wing of the TUC at a time when the working class could have won substantial concessions. They have been betrayed by the old-line leaders who are still in the saddle as in 1926.

Powerful working-class pressure has forced the Tories to make certain adjustments. However, since they represent the capitalist class and are conscious of the reasons for these decisions, they are much better able to do this than the working class, who are leaderless in the fight. It would be a mistake, therefore, to talk about the strength of the working class and leave it at that. The crisis of leadership remains the greatest single problem before the British Labour movement. The setting-up of powerful rank-and-file commit- tees would have been on the order of the day

W-February

-March,

had the railway strike broken out. These would have provided the beginnings of an alternative leadership. Under conditions where the Tories rely so much on the right-wing of the TUC this leadership may well have become the most power- ful force in Britain. This is the Achilles heel of Tory policy. Macmillan and company can get away with this type of horse-trading between themselves and their friends on the General Coun- cil of the Trades Union Congress only so long as no other leadership takes the field to oppose the latter.

The moment the trade union rank and file begin to develop this type of leadership then we will have entered a pre-revolutionary situation in Britain. That time is not yet, but it is not a long way off. The holding of local Assemblies of Labour throughout the country will afford trade unionists and all active members of the Labour movement an opportunity to discuss how to prepare a strategy for defeating the Tories, for a renewal of the struggle for the 40-hour week and for improved wages to meet the increased cost of living.

Alongside this must go constant theoretical preparation of the most militant of the working class. At first this cannot be on a spectacular scale, but that fact is not decisive. The main question today is for all those who appreciate the problem of leadership within the working class to resolve to build a powerful Marxist movement for the days that lie ahead. That is the only answer to the betrayal which we have just ex- perienced.