A Socialist Policy for the Miners

‘BRITAIN’S miners are threatened with a return to the unemployment and poverty of the thirties. What are the miners’ leaders doing to stop this? At the Scarborough Conference in July a resolution was carried, instructing the Executive to oppose further pit closures, but this resolution was not even mentioned when the leaders met the National Coal Board on August 20, when the future sacking of 85, 000 miners was announced.

‘Strangely enough no one on the Executive mentioned the resolution passed at the Scarborough Conference, calling on the leadership to oppose any further closureof pits for economic reasons.’ (Manchester Guardian, August 21)

The man who could have raised this on the Executive, Abe Moffat, the Scottish miners’ ‘communist’ leader, was the mover of this same resolution at Scarborough. Did he lose his tongue in front of the employers? _ That. other ‘communist militant’ Will Paynter, general secretary of the union, has a similar record. On December 17, shortly after the announcement that the NCB would close 36 pits, Paynter moved a resolution which read, ‘We demand full employment or full wages and will fight against any man going down the road, a victim of government policy.’

Leaders co-operate Today it is no longer a case of ‘any’ man going down the road but of 85,000, and Paynter is obediently co-operating with the Right-wing and the NCB in closing pits and sacking The Communist Party fears that a rank-and-file movement might get out of hand, as they showed clearly in the strike at Devon pit.

Towards the end of June, 60 miners employed at the Devon ’ pit in Scotland staged a ‘stay-down’ strike in protest against the closure of their pit’ Immediately 20,000 miners working in 43 pits came out in sympathy. The statement issued by the Coalfield Campaign Committee read: ‘We call on workers everywhere, whatever their trade, to express their solidarity with us and support us not only because we have a just case, but also as part of the fight of all workers to defend their jobs from attack .... We are prepared’, said the strikers, ‘to stay down until the whole coalfield is out.’

But Moffat intervened. On his advice the strike was called off, and Moffat led a deputation 1 to the NCB. The result— Devon Pit is still to be closed .

The same bosses The NCB represents the same employing class that defeated the miners in 1926. Their strategy is the same, and the Official leaders of the Labour movement are helping them.

Miners need a strong organization of rank-and-file committees throughout the coalfields to go into action on the only policy that can defeat the Tories.

1. No sackings!

2. 7-hour day for underground workers and a 40-hour week for surface men.

3. Three weeks’ holiday with pay.

4. No wage-cuts.

The miners cannot win this fight alone. The only way is for them to forge links with the rank and file in other industries where unemployment, shorter hours and wages are also the big questions. All miners should support the National Assembly of Labour, and take the first step to a united socialist rank-and-file movement to fight the capitalist class and its government.

Part I: A New Period For some months now the capitalist Press has directed a steady stream of propaganda against unofficial strikes.

The aim of this propaganda is to smash the unofficial ‘Strikes that are on; secure a retutn to work; and create a climate of opinion that will later assist in getting through Parliament legislation providing for the gaoling of unofficial strikers.

This fits in with the next stage of the employers’ offensive.

They know that in the coming struggle to reduce wages and worsen conditions, they will meet with tro organized resistance from the leaders of the trade unions. But recent disputes have ‘shown that the rank and file, even with the burden of the Right-wing trade union leaders on their backs, are a formidable force.

It is obvious to the employers that they need additional ‘weapons to hit back at the rank and file if they are to crush resistance.

Anti-strike legislation It became clear in the bus and print disputes that the longer the workers were out on strike the more determined they became to secure their full demands. Even the patched-up compromise in the print dispute was ratified only by a bare Majority of printing workers.

So for the next round of the struggle the employers need to take on the trade unions saddled not only with a treacherous leadership, but also with anti-strike legislation.

Every Tory rag is now calling for a clean-up in the unions. The last issue of Crossbow, organ of the Bow group of Tories, openly calls for legislation to deal with the closed shop, demarcation disputes, etc.

This cry is now taken up by those who assist the Tories in the Labour movement. MHutchinson, a so-called Labour writer, in the Daily Herald of September 3, called upon the © trade unions to take advantage of this year’s Trades Union Congress to clear some blots from their copy book. Woodcock of the TUC is quoted as saying that the blots are: “Unofficial disputes, demarcation disputes, closed shop rows and noisy demonstrations of trade unionists on strike.’

‘None of these,’ declared Woodcock, ‘are part of the policy of responsible trade unionists.’

A response to employers From all this it can be seen that the announcement by the TUC that they are considering an inquiry into the activities of shop stewards is, in fact, a direct response to the needs of the employers.

The truth is that the Right-wing trade union leaders abhor any strike, official or unofficial. Sir Tom Williamson once. told an AUBTW conference that the engineers’ strike of 1957 was a ‘needless operation’ and that the men had gained nothing that they couldn’t have had as a result of stopping at work and negotiating. This, in spite of the fact that the ‘dispute was an official one backed by his own union and only called after the employers had refused four times during negotiations to grant a halfpenny.

The aim of the reformists is to prevent any strike, good or bad, to hold back the working class and to allow the employer to do as he pleases. In pursuit of this aim they have constructed, together with the employers, the most elaborate procedure imaginable to prevent disputes and hoodwink the tank and file.

The Socialist Labour League, in common with many trade unionists, starts from the standpoint that a worker’s only real weapon is the withdrawal of his or her labour and that everything possible must be done to organize matters in the trade SBPTEMBER 26, 1959 unions so that when such a withdrawal takes place it gets the fullest possible support. We have not the slightest faith in the so-called disputes machinery.

The York Memorandum in engineering and the Green Book procedure in building were both imposed by the employers at a time of defeat for the working class. A. condition of both agreements is that there shall be no stoppage of work while the matters in dispute are referred to the machinery.

In practice this leaves the initiative with the employers and is no protection to the men. The case of Frank Horsman, the victimized shop steward at Morris Motors, is still going through procedure—while he has been transferred from the factory.

At Jaguars in Coventry another shop steward was sacked. His ‘crime’ was the same as Horsman’s; telling men not to work overtime on a disputed operation. The management at Coventry say that they are quite happy to allow the thing to go through procedure.

The disputes machinery is a screen behind which the Rightwing can hide from the class struggle and sell it out.

It is essentially based upon class collaboration. Whatever crumbs may have been gained in the past owing to the boom, these are now going to be few and far between as the struggle sharpens.

We are entering a new period in industrial struggle; a period characterized by the famous declaration of the engineering employers. ‘We were prepared twice in the last four years to fight it out with the unions.’ (To be continued)

LAUNCHED