Industrial Newsletter

Seots labour fights unemployment Unions must campaign for ban on overtime HE Scottish trade union movement faces this winter its toughest fight since the 1930s: to defeat the threat of unemployment. The economic policies of the Tory government condemns thousands of families to live on unemployment relief, in continuous struggle to keep up with mounting rents, rates, transport and food costs.

On September 10, the number of unemployed was 82,780, 20,742 more than a year ago and 3.8 per cent of the total labour force in Scotland. The rate of increase, now higher than in 1961, threatens to bring peak unemployment during the slack winter months to a figure exceeding 1959, when over 100,000 were out of work.

In Glasgow, there is to be an immediate run-down of 1,100 men at Cowlairs and St. Rollox railway workshops.

Pits are to close in all of Scotland's coalfields and 5,000 miners will be redundant this winter. There is very little prospect of other employment being provided for miners in some areas: workers and their families face real destitution.

Many engineering factories on the Clyde also have lists of redundancies and workers such as those at Rolls-Royce are being advised to seek employment elsewhere.

The fight against unemployment is not one to 'save the Scottish economy, as stated by the Executive of the Scottish TUC, but a battle to unite the unemployed workers with those in work to defeat the Tory plans.

"INDUCEMENT'

Instead of starting with the necessary unity of all workers, the STUC talks of its objective being 'to arrest the industrial decline and to provide for expansion' . An appeal is made for 'special consideration for Scotland's exceptional problem by 'extraordinary measures of inducement'.

The only inducement which the monopolies are likely to take note of is the prospect of making massive profits. The exceptional position which Scotland occupies is the unenviable one of having very low rates of pay and an army of unemployed.

All talk of offering inducement to employers to come to Scotland and appeals for government 'direction' turn out to be the most reactionary and dangerous propaganda for the employers. Not only will such appeals fail to solve the unemployment problem, but their effect is to divert attention from the main fight. This is to unite the unemployed workers with those at present in jobs, who are themselves fighting against super-exploitation and sweat-shop conditions.

In many engineering factories on the Clyde and elsewhere overtime is being worked whilst union members are walking the streets looking for jobs. In some factories men are on short-time working, alongside those working full week.

Some employ temporary labour, laid off each time there is redundancy, so that a certain number of workers spend a few months of each year on the dole.

The district committee of each union should review the number of their members unemployed each week. All overtime should be automatically banned until all are found work.

The strong Trades Councils in Glasgow, Clydebank, Dundee, Aberdeen and other towns should immediately give a lead in asking all affiliated unions to start such a campaign in the main industrial areas. Trades Councils should themselves go to the factory gates and explain the need for unity of those in work with the unemployed.

There are now five unemployed young workers for every available job. l Many are forced to take Glasgow stewards meet the quarterly meeting of AEU shop stewards in Glasgow last Sunday, a resolution demanding the immediate and complete banning of overtime as a first step to compel the employers to absorb some of the unemployed workers, was passed unanimously. AEU shop stewards from all the main engineering and shipbuilding establishments in Glasgow and Clydebank were in attendance.

The resolution was moved by Communist Party Councillor, Arnold Henderson. Whilst the Right wing 'accepted' the resolution, it was obvious to many stewards that they intend to let it rest at that, and not put it into effect if they can possibly get away with it.

They were annoyed with the terms of the resolution, which sceks to make the union really use its power to challenge the employers and force them to reemploy unemployed workers.

Moves are now afoot by some of the stewards to exert pressure on the Glasgow AEU District Committee to implement the resolution.

Another resolution unanimously endorsed was proposed on behalf Saturday October 6, 1962 Correspondent dead-end labouring jobs whilst others return to school. The unemployed youth should be asked to sign a declaration that once employed they would join a union. Those who sign such a pledge should be given the same opportunities for employment as unemployed trade unionists.

The engineering confederation is on record for the 40-hour week. The miners and many other unions have also said that they would like the introduction of the shorter working week.

Now is the time to campaign and to fight for this demand. The employers should be forced to concede the shorter working week without loss of pay to absorb the unemployed.

By such a struggle the working class will strengthen the labour and trade union movement in a fight to bring down the Tory government. The way can be cleared for the operation of socialist policies of nationalisation and planning as an alternative to the aims of the monopolies. ncy of the Olivetti Shop Stewards' Committee by its convenor, Peter Murray. This called on the General Council of the Scottish TUC to initiate a 24-hour token stoppage around the slogan of bringing down the Tory government and forcing a General Election.

The resolutions demanding action against the menace of unemployment reflect the growing anxiety of the working class at the situation. The main obstacle in the path of the workers who want to see their union being used to defend their conditions, is that section of the officials who see in the unions only an instrument for negotiation with the employers, and who are afraid to mobilise the workers for a struggle. Those are the elements that have to be fought and removed from their positions at all levels in the unions.

The quarterly meeting of the Paisley and District AEU shop stewards also endorsed a resolution calling for a ban on overtime. When the resolution, was moved on behall of the Pressed Steel shop committee, the mover said that the ban should remain operative until all unemployed in the district obtained employment. Docks plans are portworkers REG THE smashing of the Dock Labour Scheme a strengthenWing of employers' authority and direct control over - labour; a contract system of employment with a mobile disciplined labour force, subject to every whim and fancy of the employer; and an increase in mechanisation. These are the plans of the National Port Employers made clear last week with the publication of their "decasualisation' scheme and supported by the report of the Rochdale Committee of Enquiry into the major ports of Britain.

Like the Beeching plan for the railways and the economy plans of the London Transport Executive for the buses, the aim of the port employers is to provide an efficient, competitive and profitable transport system for the British employers. In these considerations the portworker is nothing more than a debit or credit figure on the annual balance sheet.

DISTRUST

Already, the implications of these proposals are being discussed in the branches of the Transport and General Workers' Union and the National Amalgamated Stevedores and Dockers Union. They must be treated with the greatest scepticism and distrust by all portworkers.

The main proposals Rochdale Report are:

1. To restrict the Dock Labour scheme to recruiting and keeping the register of dockworkers.

2. The establishment of a National Ports Authority to coordinate the plans of the port employers and the big industrial monopolies.

3. For portworkers to be directly employed by private employers on a permanent basis and under a signed contract.

4. For shift-work and more mechanisation.

5. For a reduction in the number of employers, and for increased powers for the remaining large employers.

According to a leaflet being circulated by the NASD, the proposals for decasualisation are even more blatantly aimed at destroying existing conditions in the docks. 'Men will be offered a form of contract and agree to honour the requirements of the scheme and all negotiated industrial agreements. Men in breach of their contract will be subject to the disciplinary action of the employer.

The terms of the contract demanded by the employers are harsh. There must be a greater mobility of gangs and the employers reserve the right to threat to increase or decrease the strength of the gangs 'depending on the type of gear to be used'. The document makes it clear that by mobility they mean that workers must be at the continual beck and call of the boss. Manning scales will be determined by the employers and there must, says the document, be improved timekeeping.

Under these conditions the clause in the contract that covers strikes is vicious. 'Any man taking part in a strike will forfeit all rights to any further benefit under his contract for so long as he withholds his labour. His contract may be cancelled, depending upon the circumstances of each incident.' In the case of sectional strikes, the contracts of other categories of labour prevented from working may be temporarily suspended.

MONOPOLIES

Dockworkers should be perfectly clear about these plans. The so-called decasualisation plan is intended to institute the direct employers 'hiring and firing' system which operates in industry generally, with the added sting that workers will be tied to a contract which takes away all the safeguards and checks including the right to strike against the attacks of the port employers.

The proposals of the Rochdale Committee for a reduction of the number of employers is a move to encourage the growth of monopolies. In this way it is hoped to squeeze out the inefficient smaller firms who are often less willing to take the firm stand against the unions and dockworkers which the employers are demanding for the future.

These plans must be resisted and the case for nationalisation of the port transport industry, implicity proved in the report but not acknowledged, must be fought for. Only then can the inadequacies of the Dock Labour Scheme be ironed out and decasualisation carried through to the benefit of all portworkers.

Registered at the G.P.O. as a newspaper Published by The Newsletter,