By JOHN WILLIAMSON

The Daily Telegraph heads

an editorial “Strike-Struck Bri-
tain” and says the country is
“strife-torn” and laments “How
long, oh, how long” can this go
on?
\ In one week the streets of
London have been occupied by
marches of students, postal wor-
kers, teachers and bank clerks—
all indicative of the rising mili-
tancy of new sections of the
working class and students.

Behind this is the seething
discontent among workers in
the factories, docks and rail-
ways. The General Electric Co.
announced a further layoff of
3,500, making a total of 12,000
lost yobs since the merger last
November with English Electric.

This was only one of a rash of
mergers in 1968 which amounted
in value to $944 billion, com-
pared with $21, billion in 1967—
something unprecedented in Bri-
tain. No wonder ,the Financial
Times could write “On the crest
of a fantastic wave of takeovers,
mergers and financial coups, a
select group of City entrepre-
neurs found that almost every-
thing. they touched turned to
gold.” }

But layoffs are not limited to
the results of mergers. So-called
“modernization” of British in-
dustry—sponsored by the La-
bor Government — is also car-
ried through at the expense of
the workers. One of the Rolls-
Royce branch factories near
London, is threatened with clo-
sure and the loss of 585 jobs. In
the much larger Bristol plant of
the same company, 700 men face
redundancy. Last year 950 -were

squeezed out of the Cardiff and

Benthem plants. A _ delegate
meeting in London of the Engin-
eers Union has just decided to
call for a ban on all overtime in
all Rolls-Royce plants.

Dock owners in London an-
nounced suspension for nearly
3,000 dockers who took part in a
half-day strike at the Royal

PPULEDOPONRERPRSNER TF ELEN Per?

UK talks gen

ee

CEE ag ES Say

Group of docks earlier this
week. Its purpose was in support
of a claim for increased wages.
Since this is the group of docks
where the rank and file commit-
tee, led by Jack Dash, is very
strong, the owners face a possi-
bility of a complete tieup if they
proceed with this action.

The 24-hour solidarity strike
of all postal, telegraph and
phone workers in Britain’s 19
largest cities — 100 percent
effective—in support of the 12-
day old overseas telegraphers
strike, on top of a week-long
ban on overtime, soon forced the
Right Wing Labor Government
to retreat. An agreement was
reached which included a 5 per-
cent wage increase backdated to
lst Aug. plus an initial produc-
tivity payment of 2 percent from
lst April, 1969, which may be
adjusted upwards on review. On
only one point did the union fail
to secure its full original de-
mands — backdating also the
the productivity pay.

The chaos in delivering mail
has not yet been overcome and
only last week would the
postoffice accept parcels. Com-
munist Party Secretary Gollan
told a cheering Glasgow rally
“If the Labor Movement used
its organized strength as the
Post Office workers did, it could
kill Barbara Castle’s anti-union
legislation stone-dead.”

The movement for a one-day
protest strike on the 27th Feb.
against the anti-trade union leg-
islation described in my last
dispatch, continues to gain mo-
mentum. Under TUC pressure,
the national unions have not yet
taken action on the proposal, but
District Committees and shop
stewards of large plants are pil-
ing up a “Yes” vote. Adding their
voice to the Scottish Miners Dis-
trict Committee, for a one-day
protest strike, are the 250,000
strong Transport Workers Union
in London and the 120,000-
strong Sheffield District of the
Engineers Union. The latest
large factory to act is the Hawk-

ral strike

er Siddeley aircraft plant in
Stockport.

The Ford workers are also
back in the news. Their shop
stewards Committees in the
large Dagenham plant with
35,000 workers, have decided to
recommend a strike 24th Feb, to
force the company to agree to
their demands.

The company, with its resi-
dent American managers, took
the initiative with typical Yan-
kee flambuoyancy, to put one
over on the unions. At national
negotiating level, a vicious “car-
rot and whip” proposal was
made. They offered pay increas-
es of 5 percent, fringe improve-
ments in pensions, holidays,
sick pay and payment for tem-
porary layoffs not caused by
labor troubles. The condition
was that there must be a guar-
antee against strikes. If anyone
engages in “unconstitutional”
activity, defined as a_ strike,
overtime ban, or work to rule,
such workers would lose for a
6-month period the proposed
lay-off pay (two-thirds of earn-
ings for the first 10 days of a
layoff by action of the company)
and the proposed sickness bene-
fit (also two-thirds of earnings
but to be inclusive of state sick-
ness benefits).

Meanwhile the shop stewards
have rejected the company offer
and called for a stoppage. The
stewards demands are: (1) a sub-
stantial pay increase to bring
them in line with the rest of the
industry, (2) equal pay for wo-
men, (3) no penalty clause at-
tached to any settlement, (4) lay-
off payments to be calculated on
existing hourly rates, (5) appren-
tices to get the adult rate at 20
years, (6) union membership to
be a condition of employment
and (7) shop stewards to partici-
pate in fixing work standards.

Throughout the area the Com-
munist Party prospective parlia-
mentary candidate, George
Wake, has issued a public pro-
test at a cut of $648,000 in the
Ford Motor Co. local rates bill.

The Sentinel missile system, conceived as a defense against q
Chinese missile threat, would cost more than the original $5.5-bil.
lion estimate. The Spartan left and the Sprint, right are two missiles
which would be used in the Sentinel system. The Spartan is designed
to intercept missiles before they re-enter the atmosphere. The Sprint
would be used as a back-up.

Pentagon puts |
heat on labor

By TIM WHEELER
WASHINGTON

The Pentagon is unleasing a
full fledged pressure campaign
to get organized labor to run
interference for it in cramming
the Anti-Ballistic Missile Sys-
tem down the throats of the
American people.

Labor representatives were
briefed by the Pentagon last
month on the “role labor is ex-
pected to play” in the deploy-
ment of the Sentinel missiles.
Present at the briefing at AFL-
CIO headquarters were M. A.
Hutcheson, Carpenter's Union
general president, C. J. Hagger-
ty, of the AFL-CIO building
trades department and others.

The meeting was reported in
an article in the “Carpenter,”
magazine of the United Brother-
hood of Carpenters and Joiners,
headlined “Labor Given Promi-
nent Role In Building Sentinel
Defense Network.”

The Pentagon declared that the
role of labor leadership was to
keep the rank and file in line,

to prevent any work stoppages
in the interests of “national se-
curity.” ‘

In order to short-circuit rank
and file opposition to construe
tion of the bases, the unidenti-
fied Pentagon briefing officer
emphasized that 900 to 1,875
construction workers will be
employed in construction of each
base. .

He told the labor leaders, “The
army, its contractors and con-
tractor-employee’s unions must
strive to serve their respective
interests in a manner befitting
the status of Sentinel deploy-
ment as one of national priority,
The avoidance of lockouts and
work stoppages is necessary if
this nation is to meet the pro
jected Chinese Communist threat
of the mid-70's.”

The article reports without
comment a statement by the
officer that, “The project . . . re
quires that the work be done by
team effort—that team consist-
ing of labor, management, the
scientific community and the
military.”

alf dewhurst

United action can

stop Ran

Report

According to press reports 450
union activists, stewards and ,lo-
cal union officers turned out to a

meeting in Toronto, called by
the Allied Committee Against
the Implementation of the Rand
Report, to plan action to stop
the Ontario government from
implementing the _ anti-strike
Rand Report.

The program of the Allied
Committee calls for full support
to the educational and publicity
campaign of the Ontario Federa-
tion of Labor. But while agreeing
with the OFL on the need for
such a campaign to acquaint
union members and the general
public with the character of the
Rand Report, the Allied Commit-
tee thinks much more than this
needs to be done.

The Committee proposes that
unions should organize systema-
tic and intensive lobbying of all

- members of the Ontario Legisla-
ture against the Report and for
labor legislation giving full re-
cognition to labor’s rights. They
want a mass demonstration at
Queen’s Park the day the Report
is tabled in the Legislature; and,
if it becomes necessary, they
want the unions to organize
province-wide ‘work stoppages,

civil disobedience, and a general
strike. ‘

This is a program which pro-
jects the idea of militant strug-
gle to block the viciously anti-
labor Rand Report from being
imbedded in the laws of Ontario.
And, on the basis of this pro-
gram and without benefit of OFL
or Toronto Labor Council leader-
ship, these union activists turn-
ed out on a sunny Sunday after-
noon to demonstrate their
willingness to battle the Rand
proposals to the end.

Perhaps, it was the very mili-
tancy of the Allied Committee’s
program which decided the offi-
cers and executives of the OFL
and TLC not to participate in
the meeting. For, it couldn’t have
been the sponsorship of the
gathering because the creden-
tials of the sponsoring Commit-
tee are quite sound.

While the meeting was criti-
cal of the non-participation of
the officers of these top labor
bodies it did not turn its back
on them. Rather, those present
extended the hand of coopera-
tion. The meeting endorsed the
positions adopted by the OFL
and the Provincial Building
Trades Council on the Rand Re-
port and instructed the officers

PACIFIC TRIBUNE—FEBRUARY 21, 1969—Page 4

\

of the Allied Committee to seek
a meeting with the officers of the
Federation and Council to dis-
cuss united labor action to stop
implementation of the Report.

It is to the credit of these
union activists that they under-
lined the fact that the Rand
proposals will only be blocked
by united action around a com-
mon program of struggle. And
every union leader worthy of his
salt should lend his high office
to achieve this sensible objec-
tive.

Trade unionists rightly expect
their leaders to take up the chal-
lenge of preserving and extend-
ing the democratic right of the
workers to be able to confront
the employers of labor with their
bargaining strength free of all
legal chains which would place
them at the mercy of the bosses.
And, to do so without any hedg-
ing whatsoever.

For, there is hedging going on.
And it takes a variety of forms.
One form is the “theory” going
the rounds which holds that the
big employers don’t want the

Rand Report anymore than do ,

the workers. This is pure, un-
adulterated poppycock. For labor
legislation which prohibits or
impedes strikes means more pro-

fits in the pockets of the employ-
ers and less money in the wage
packet. It is as simple as that.

Another “theory” is that anti-
strike laws being contemplated
will only be directed against
workers employed in public ser-
vices. And that these workers
being deprived of the right to
strike will be given wage in-
creases and working conditions
through arbitration which cor-
respond to what are won in in-
dustry. Such reasoning is fan-
tastically naive and unworthy of
those union men who subscribe
to it.

There are union officers who
deplore militant furms of strug-
gle as serving to impel the big
monied interests and government
to impose harsh labor laws on
workers, It can be expected that
amongst those who “deplore”
militancy are governments, var-
ious employer associations and
the daily press. But for labor
leaders to be among them is non-
sensical. Without struggle work-
ers would be ground down to a
poverty level of existence.

There are many valid reasons
why union leaders should wel-
come and encourage militant
struggle. Chief among them be-
ing the need of building the pow-

er of the working class. In Eu
ope responsible union leaders
sanction and lead general
strikes. They do so, because
they know, that the general
strike is a particularly high form
of the united bargaining power
of the workers most feared
respected by employers and gov
ernments alike.

Responsible union leaders are
understandably concerned that
the unions they represent sh
not be dragged into leftist 4

_adventurist actions which wou

do harm instead of good to
cause of the workers. But cal
tion should not be used as a
excuse to do nothing or alm
nothing. To substitute cautiom
ary words for militant action—
when such action is called for~
only plays into the hands of
employers and breeds adventul
ism. |

The vast majority of workers
are looking for responsible, 4
ciplined and united action '
protect and extend their barga!™
ing positions. It is logical they
should look to the OFL to pr
vide politically sound leaders
to stop the Rand Report.
want this fight to be prep
now. And they want to be ™
cluded in,