Congress expels electrician's union
BRITAIN
INAM
SOLIDARI
TY
JOB
DELEGATES to this September's annual meeting of the Trade Union Congress (TUC) sat in stony silence to hear the leader of the electrician's union, Eric
Hammond, explain why his union should not be kicked out of the federation. The delegates, representing nearly nine million workers, voted overwhelmingly for expelling the Electrical, Electronic and
Telecommunications and Plumbing Union (EETPU).
But the vote, welcome though it was, did not signal the commencement of a battle by union leaders against single-union, no-strike deals with the bosses.
So just what are the implications of this split in
Europe's largest unified trade-union federation?
HILARY ELEANOR
HE EETPU represents a current in
T
British trade unionism that stands even further to the right than the majority leadership of the TUC, itself firmly committed to a philosophy of
"new realism". The electrician's union has made a name for itself as the number one scab union in Britain. Three years ago
EETPU officials organized the recruitment of scab workers for press baron Rupert
Murdoch after he had sacked journalists and printers and set up a non-union operation to produce his newspapers. The TUC turned a blind eye to the EETPU's activities
(finally, only a motion of censure was passed), and did little to support the year- long strike of the 5,000 sacked print workers (see /V 113).
Since then, the EETPU has been at the forefront of negotiating single-union, no- strike deals with employers. But this fact in itself did not unduly upset the trade-union bureaucracy. It was only when Eric Hammond's union refused to be bound by TUC rulings over these "sweetheart" deals that the trouble began.
These rulings relate to the Bridlington agreement, dating back to 1939, which sets out guidelines and arbitration procedures aimed at preventing unions from poaching each others' membership. The EETPU was expelled from the TUC for refusing to abide by two rulings made by the federation's Disputes Committee, instructing the union to withdraw from single-union, no- strike deals at two companies where other unions already existed. This year's TUC adopted a code of practice for future "sweetheart" deals, showing that it is certainly not opposed to them in principle -just as long as it regulates them itself!
The impact of the expulsion is difficult to judge so early after the event, but three questions are now raised. What will be the consequences of the expulsion for the EETPU itself, in particular in its relations with TUC unions? Will the electrician's union seek other alliances? And what will become of the minority left current inside the union?
All-out recruitment war
The answer to the first question is unclear. Many TUC-affiliated union activists have said that they will refuse to recognize the expelled union at local level. This would mean that in many workplaces with joint union negotiating committees there will be a blanket refusal to work with EETPU members. This could cause big headaches for the bosses, who will have to walk a tricky tightrope of parallel negotiations and the possibility of subsequent local disputes created by inter-union hostility.
Now that the EETPU is no longer even theoretically bound by the Bridlington agreement, commentators have predicted an all-out recruitment war, with TUC unions stopping at nothing to break up the EETPU's branches and vice-versa. Many of the trade unions in Britain were histori-
TUC
GENERAL COUNCIL cally built up as craft-based cartels with membership dependent on rigorous and lengthy apprenticeships. The impact of unemployment and the attacks on trade unionism by the Thatcher government have speeded up an existing dynamic of amalgamations. There are now fewer than 90 unions for the first time since 1872, when total trade-union membership was only 255,000. Unions are turning outwards in their fight to keep membership figures up, and increasingly recruiting workers outside their traditional trades.
In its own interests, the 350,000-strong EETPU will undoubtedly be looking for new alliances among the other right-wing "yellow" unions that exist. These include the Union of Democratic Mineworkers (UDM), which broke away from the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) during the 1984-85 miners' strike, and organizations like the Professional Association of Teachers and the Royal College of Nursing. But even if it comes off, the total strength of such a scab rival federation would be miniscule in comparison to the TUC.
Is there a future for the left in the EETPU? Socialists in the union campaigned hard against the Hammond and the executive, but many have decided that remaining in the union after its expulsion is untenable and have launched a breakaway, the Electrical and Plumbing Industries Union (EPIU). Many socialists have argued that this is a mistake, with some saying that the left must remain and fight in the EETPU in spite of all the problems. The future for the EPIU will indeed be difficult. While the bosses, for obvious reasons, are happy to have dealings with right-wing union break-
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
Trade Union
----- photo credits and running heads -----
3
International Viewpoint #149 • October 17, 1988
BRITAIN aways like the UDM, they will be reluctant to recognize a new, evidently militant
Meanwhile, large numbers of left or proTUC militants have opted to leave the EETPU to join relevant sections of TUCrecognized alternative unions, mainly in the two massive general workers' unions, the TGWU and GMBATU. Given the problems of remaining in the EETPU or the difficulties that will face the left breakaway EPIU, this is probably the most sensible
The one clear victory for the left at the TUC was the decision to shut down all nuclear reactors, a motion moved by Arthur Scargill of the NUM. But in other respects, as Scargill said, "I think that the TUC Congress of 1988 will be judged as one that fitted in neatly with the politics of fear. It was filled with the new realism that's sweeping the movement at the present time."
If the pestilence of new realism and class collaboration is spreading within the bureaucracy, socialists can take heart from the continued willingness to fight expressed in the various struggles that we have witnessed this year, and those that will undoubtedly break out in the near future. Thatcher may have succeeded in neutralizing the bureaucracy, but, in spite of everything, her government is still a long way from having subdued the working class. * short-term solution. The success or failure Postal workers: "Sold of Eric Hammond's project to take his union outside the TUC federation will be judged on how many members he manages short, but undefeated" to keep in the EETPU's ranks.
One further and not unimportant repercussion of the expulsion is the EETPU's continuing affiliation to, and participation in, the Labour Party. This week's LP conference voted not to expel the union in spite of strong arguments from the left that individuals in the union could remain members, but that it was scandalous that the EETPU's anti-working class leadership should continue to have a say in party poli-
The pestilence of "new realism"
Outside of the drama of the EETPU affair, the TUC was "business as usual". It was not this year's struggles - albeit mainly defensive ones — by healthworkers, car workers at Ford, seafarers and the postal workers that dominated the agenda. A major discussion was held on the Tories' new Employment Training (ET) scheme for the long-term unemployed. Congress voted to withdraw from participation in the scheme, but only "conditionally".
ET replaces 37 previous training schemes for the adult unemployed, and is intended to provide an average of six months training for 600,000 people. It has two functions for the Tories. First, it will reduce official jobless figures, already manipulated so often by the government that no-one knows any longer how many people are actually unemployed. Second, it will provide a pool of cheap labour for industry: ET trainees will receive only welfare benefits plus around £10 a week.
Another major event at the Congress was the ovation given to Jacques Delors, president of the European Commission, who inevitably spoke of the impact of 1992 on the unions. Why the ovation? Opposition to Britain's EEC membership has been a long-standing policy in the labour movement, but is now beginning to be accepted as an inevitable fact of life. Delors' clever speech implied that Europe could be a safety net for defending and extending basic social rights — a tempting thought not lost on British trade union leaders who have suffered the loss of three million members 4 What Thatcher's gasement will do nexu over the last 10 years and are worried about