Trade Unions: A chance to learn from the past

Submitted by Anon on 30 November, 1997 - 11:21

The formation of the Trade Union Lefts Alliance in 1996 provides the best opportunity in a long while for uniting activists across the unions. It was set up by the Socialist Teachers’ Alliance to bring together trade union lefts. Those who attend Committee meetings are mindful of past failures so there appears to be a genuine desire to be non-sectarian.

It is unlikely that trade union activists will remain silent for much longer in the face of Blair’s attacks and the union leaders’ cowardice. TULA can play a crucial role in helping to bring together those in struggle and lay the foundations for a mass rank-and-file cross-union movement.

Broad Left and rank and file organisations already exist in many unions: the Socialist Teachers Alliance, the CWU Broad Left, RMT Campaign for a Democratic Fighting Union, CPSA Left Unity, CPSA Socialist Caucus, UNISON Labour Left, UNISON Broad Left, TGWU Broad Left. Most of these bodies as yet fall far short of anything resembling an effective rank and file group.

Alliance for Workers’ Liberty supporters in these organisations have argued for broad campaigns reaching out to the wider layers of members, for organising strike action if the leaderships refuse to call it, to campaign for union democracy such as the annual election of all full-time officials, for unity in struggle across the unions, and unity across the Broad Lefts and rank and file organisations.
Under the Tories, the union leaders’ excuse for not fighting was that we could expect nothing from the Tories. We were not strong enough to fight. If the miners lost, how could we win? We should wait for a Labour Government. The idea that millions of exploited and angry workers organised in a serious fight are no match for a tiny number of bosses would be laughable were the consequences not so tragic.

Now these same miserable leaders are saying we can expect nothing from Blair, and are refusing to stand up to him. Not content with allowing him to crush the trade union link and smash democracy inside the Labour Party, the union leaders have caved in to Blair over the minimum wage. The TUC have dropped their demand for a minimum wage to of half male median earnings and are now calling for it to be set at £4 per hour — a reduction of 66p on the original demand. Furthermore, the TUC have effectively accepted that there will be no minimum wage legislation until 1999 and that it will not cover the under 25s! Nor has Blair’s announcement that any legislation on trade union recognition will be drawn up in consultation with and agreement of the CBI elicited any revolt by the TUC.

The history of the trade union leaderships is, and continues to be, shameful. At best they talk a good fight, then do as little as possible. At worst they collaborate with the ruling class to betray us. Their fear of the ruling class is greater than their concern for union members. But a strong rank and file can force them to either lead a fight or quit office.

The key task for socialists in the unions is to build mass, fighting, democratic rank-and-file organisations in each union and to unite these rank-and-files into a national movement. Failure to do this will allow our leaders to continue to cave in to the bosses, selling our jobs, pay and conditions in exchange for their own security. Our unions will become prison houses. Power will be further concentrated in the hands of highly paid officials, and discussion, debate and democracy will be stamped out.

Despite the craven cowardice of the union leaders, trade unionists continue to fight back. The Liverpool dockers and the Magnet, Critchley and Hillingdon strikers, for example, show the strength, determination and bravery of rank and file union members. Yet they have had to fight alone, with little or no support from their union leaderships. These disputes could have been won quickly had other groups of workers come out in solidarity.

The most serious and successful organisation to organise on a cross-union rank and file basis was the Minority Movement of the 1920s — formed in a period similar to today, after a series of setbacks for the working class. Then, Communist Party members rallied workers on the basis of programmes related both to the problems of the given industry and the actual structure of the trade union machine. These rank and file organisations gathered together into the National Minority Movement at a conference in 1924, with 200,000 workers represented. At its peak, the Minority Movement had one million workers affiliated.

Despite its decline and eventual collapse (due to policy imposed on it by Moscow), the Minority Movement for a brief time transformed much of the trade union movement into a mass, united fighting force. No attempt to organise the rank and file across the unions since has come close to its achievements.

If a movement on that scale existed today it would be able to carry out activities such as:
• Raise enough money to sustain the striking dockers and other long-term strikers.
• Unite trade unions in a common struggle to break the pay freeze.
• Organise a national trade union campaign on the minimum wage in face of the TUC’s climbdown.
• Organise a national trade union campaign against welfare to work.
• Organise an effective fight to force Blair to repeal the anti-trade union laws and introduce positive rights for workers and unions.
• While campaigns are being run on these issues by bodies such as the Free Trade Unions Campaign and the Welfare State Network, a united rank and file movement across the unions would massively increase our chance of success.

The increasing separation of trade union leaders from the members they are supposed to represent dates back to the middle of the last century and, over the decades, has become the key issue for socialists in the trade unions — particularly in Britain, where the anti-trade union laws have helped concentrate power in the hands of national union officers.

Unelected, highly paid full-time officers, who are supposed to work for the union, become the henchmen and women of whoever is in power at any particular time. And, although the National Executive Committee, General Secretary and some other key positions are subject to national election under the law, the system of individual postal balloting, and the ability of those already in power to “work the system”, keeps the lid on.

Throughout the Thatcher and Major years, trade union leaders caved in time and again to attacks on the workforce. Mass unemployment, the dismantling of the Welfare State, the anti-union laws, privatisation, contracting out, “flexible” working practices and the end of national bargaining were brought in by the Tories in an attempt to break the unions. The response of the union leaders was pathetic. They were often reluctant to lead fights for their own unions let alone unite workers across unions in a concerted fightback.

The miners, dockers, printers and other groups of workers fought brave and hard battles but were let down either by their own leaders or the failure of leaders in other unions to organise solidarity action in their support.

The miners’ strike of 1984-5 was a key dispute, and their defeat was a huge defeat for the whole labour movement. Had other unions come out on strike in their support, it is very likely the miners would have won and the whole of the British political scene would look very different today. We would not have had 18 years of Tory rule — and we would not now have Blair! But the cowardice of the union leaders and that miserable failure of a Labour Party leader — Neil Kinnock — meant the miners were left to fight alone, so ensuring a victory for the ruling class from which the labour movement is still feeling the effects.

The union leaders could get away with such behaviour partly because of the failures or shortcomings of previous attempts to build rank and file movements. The SWP (then called International Socialists) initiated several rank-and-file groups, and then a National Rank and File Movement, in the early 1970s. They seemed to have come at an ideal time. Dockers, engineers, health service workers and the miners took militant industrial action. Between 1972 and 1974, over 200 occupations of factories, offices, shops and shipyards took place. In February 1974 the miners forced Heath to call a General Election.

What these struggles taught many militants was that the trade union leadership are at best inadequate and at worst treacherous. The main left wing trade union grouping of the time, the Liaison Committee for the Defence of Trade Unions — dominated by the Communist Party — was almost entirely preoccupied with winning official positions and acting as a cheerleader for left-wing bureaucrats. Against this background, the stated aim of the National Rank and File Movement was to link up militants across the industries and organise independently of the officials where necessary.

However, in the end the NRFM was too much of a “front” for the IS/SWP. The cumulative end-effect of the SWP rank and file groups’ work was to discredit the very notion of “rank and filism” amongst many militants. The term is now tainted with organisational sectarianism, narrow economism and a tendency to avoid the question of leadership. Eventually, in the early 1980s, the SWP shut down the rank-and-file groups to focus on narrower “party-building”.

In 1981 the Broad Lefts Organising Committee (BLOC) was set up by Militant. The first two conferences were large and lively, but the heavy domination by Militant was a taste of things to come. BLOC became nothing more than a signboard for Militant rallies. It ran no campaigning activity.

In 1983 thousands of activists mobilised to support the NGA print union picket lines against Eddie Shah in Warrington. It was a crucial test for the anti-trade union laws. BLOC took no initiative at all around the dispute.

The 1984 BLOC Conference coincided with the start of the miners’ strike. All the Conference did was to pass a bland resolution in support of the miners. For the whole year of the strike, BLOC did nothing beyond issuing one leaflet and calling one lobby of the TUC. It was Socialist Organiser (forerunner of the AWL) and Briefing who took the initiative to organise the Mineworkers Defence Committee, attracting 1000 delegates. BLOC played no role at all.
BLOC had completely disappeared by the late 1980s — another wasted opportunity.

In 1988 another attempt was made to set up a national cross-union left current. The Socialist Movement Trade Union Committee (SMTUC) was initiated by people grouped around the Socialist Movement, some of whom were members of left groups and some not. Its first conference in 1989 was lively and open and attracted quite a reasonable turnout given the generally poor morale of the left by then. But soon certain individuals came to regard the SMTUC as their personal fiefdom. When one of the elite was involved in the RMT’s capitulation to London Underground management’s Company Plan in 1992, it was made very clear that no criticism of his role would be tolerated within the SMTUC. The SMTUC threw away a lot of campaigning opportunities.

• The ambulance dispute I989-90. A proposal to organise an ambulance workers’ solidarity conference which had the support of the Camden and Liverpool strikers — groups that were occupying their stations — was rejected. Nothing else was done.
• The poll tax. A proposal for a special SMTUC trade union conference on the issue was blocked.
• Gulf War 1990-91: nothing from the SMTUC despite the pretentious internationalism of some of its officers. The initiative for Trade Unionists Against the War which organised a successful lobby of the TUC came from non-aligned NUT left-wingers and the AWL.
• The battle over Labour’s union links in 1992-3 was met by sectarian indifference from key SMTUC officers.
When the elite could no longer hope to maintain their grip one the SMTUC they simply gave up. The secretary, Carolyn Sikorski, and chair, Phil Griffin, walked out and took with them the “Unshackle the Unions” campaign, an initiative that had been built up by everyone in the SMTUC.

The failures have left their mark. But they were avoidable; and now in the Trade Union Lefts Alliance, there seems to be a real will to avoid the mistakes of the past.

Trudy Saunders

This website uses cookies, you can find out more and set your preferences here.
By continuing to use this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms & Conditions.