Which way for EETPU
Readers Write militants? THE possibility of the EETPU being expelled from the TUC provoked a debate among activists about our attitude towards the Union if happened. This debate has now been rendered academic by the weakness of the TUC, but it did reveal fundamental differences in priorities towards the EETPU.
It also revealed a basic political mistake made by the majority of "left" Trade Unionists, a refual to learn
Tand a possible the chronic weakness of British Trade Unions today.
Many activists supported staying in the EETPU in the belief that it was important to change that individual Union, or that it was important to keep together the activists who had worked together in the Union. first was the usual idea of getting a "left" General Secretary elected and
officials and expecting the membership to tag along behind.
The fact that this was exactly the sort of policy that put the Union in the control of a group of Stalinists before (and the fact that Eric Hammond himself was originally elected to the Executive on a
Supporters of this idea also refuse to look in a critical manner at Unions where this approach has led to "left" executive; they prefer the rhetoric to the reality. They applaud Ron Todd's fighting speeches at the TUC conference, and forget it was TGWU members who broke Miners' picket lines, and are now doing the same to the print workers. They even refuse to criticise the Press branch of the EETPU for crossing News International picket lines Bouverie St and Grays Inn Road because the Press branch leadership have "left" credentials.
The time when reformist tactics could work in the Trade Union movement was probably over long before 1926. People who persist in devoting time and energy to these tactics are ignoring the whole history of capitulation and sell outs by Trade Union bureaucracies.
The British working class has lost all faith in its trade unions' ability to deliver even their immediate demands, let alone secure a better
TUC sold out miners. future. This is demonstrated in attitudes all too familiar to stewards; attitudes that say at best "Unions aren't much good but they are better than nothing and at worst "I won't
have never done anything for me". bureaucracies is now so rooted in the
Cof the class that it is insurmountable. The futility of taking positions in the bureaucracy, anything other than propaganda
was clearly demonstrated during the Miners' strike.
Scargill and his few real allies were forced into fatal concessions early
such as the ending of mass that destroyed hope of victory. To make absolutely leadership in the NUM were smashed as an effective force, the rest of the union bureaucracies combined with the state to defeat them, or in the case of a few "left" unions stood by and did nothing.
The purpose of working in Trade Unions is not to take over and adapt the existing structures but to smash them and free workers from their
Every activist should be working to create an independent rank and file organisations, organisation capable of expressing their demands and showing it prepared to fight with them to
Which Union individuals in that organisations nominally should, in most cases, be immaterial.
The trade based nature of British Trade Unions demands an organisation that can function independently, across trade and restrict an organisation to one Union Socialist Viewpoint No. 12 May 1986p27
or Craft, except where there is only one Union in an industry, a very rare thing in this country, effectively ties
organisation to that Union's bureaucracy. capable of functioning independently of any Union Bureaucracy, or is not being built for that purpose, is already hopelessly reformist and virtually useless.
The attitude of the SWP to this supported staying in the EETPU on the grounds that there were a lot of "good socialists" in the Union and they should not be abandoned. It didn't matter to them that those in favour of staying in were taking a encouraged to stay in and work with
"save the EETPU" seems to me a very stange perspective that writes off the whole abour Parly as reformist and bevond redemption, supports reformist elements the most reactionary trade union. It's a bit like dumping the Labour Party as useless and joining the SDP. EETPU member South London
• Socialist Viewpoint does not share this reader's approach to the fight for leadership inside the existing trade union movement. While we favour the regroupment and organisation of rank and file shop floor militants on a class struggle basis in opposition to the bureaucratic leaderships, it is vital that this fight is also taken into the branches and other official structures of the unions.
If this is not done, then the whole official machinery remains at the unchallenged disposal of the right wing and their hangers-on for the crushing of militant struggles. while rank and file workers fail to learn ways of fighting the various layers of bureaucracy, and cut themselves off from the fight to mobilise the broader membership.
Our proposal is for the EETPU to be expelled from the TUC and stripped of the protection of the Bridlington agreements. while other unions be urged to mount poaching exercises in each
We welcome further debate on these issues and urge our readers in the unions to let us know their
WRP: time to dust off Importance of learning from post
the