Socialist Outlook

Socialist Viewpoint, International, Socialist Outlook and their supplements, 1984–2002

Teachers fight on

Socialist Viewpoint no. 7, September 1985 · pp 16-18 · 1,478 words

teachers' resolve to carry out this dispute to a successful conclusion.

NUR ballot defeat signals new dangers Jimmy Knapp with Scots NUM's Eric Clarke: if NUR had fought harder alongside miners, their own fight would have been easier.

THE result of the ballot of guards over industrial action against driver-only operation (DOO) was a massive and completely unexpected setback for railworkers and for the whole fight for jobs. The guards have traditionally been one of the more militant sections of the NUR.

The immediate issue in the ballot was the British Rail Board's (BRB) plans to introduce DOO on trains with the eventual abolition of the grade of guard and the loss of all 11,500 guards" jobs. But the BRB said clearly that they saw the dispute as being not just over DOO, but as a means to smash the NUR's policy of general opposition to the BRB's plans for railworkers.

These include:

• "Flexible rostering" - having shifis of varying lengths instead of the sei 8-hour shifts — was introduced in 1982 afer the defeat of the two-week ASLEF strike against it. So far, drivers' and guards' shifts vary only between 7 and 9 hours, but the BRB want to increase flexibility of shifts to between 4 and 12 hours, and to introduce "split shifts" (4 hours on, 4 hours off, 4 hours on) which would make working hours even more unsocial.

By JEFF SLEE

• "Open Stations" — getting rid of all platform and ticket barrier staff at smaller stations.

• 1,000 redundancies proposed out of 8,000 jobs of S&T staff (those responsible for maintenance of signalling equipment).

• Further closure of workshops the proposed closure of Swindon workshops next March, the rundown of Glasgow workshops and reductions in other works would mean around 5,000 redundancies over the next two years on top of the 14,000 workshop jobs lost in the last 5 years. These closures arise from the contracting out of building and maintenance of locomotives, coaches and wagons, which was previously all done by BR workshops.

In the longer term, the main threats are:

• Privatisation of particular lines which can be hived off from the rest of the rail network, e.g. the Southend lines out of London Fenchurch St and the London Victoria to Gatwick express.

• Privatisation of major Socialist Viewpoint, No. 7, September 1985 Poge 15

maintenance work and other peripheral parts of the rail industry.

• Driverless trains - the trains on the Victoria line of the London Underground and on the Tyne & Wear Metro could already be run without drivers, and the BRB are investigating this.

Since 1983 the NUR's positions -to which the leadership has kept -has been "no talks with the BRB over productivity" . Following the ballot result this policy is ruined, and the recall conference is likely to reverse it.

Two factors at work within the railways undoubtedly contributed to the defeat.

Firstly, the high level of turnover of railworkers - even now - and the large number of railworkers nearing retiring age means that even large job losses on the "traffic" side (drivers, guards and platform staff) do not necessarily mean redundancies. The BRB, in all the leaflets and personal letters from managers that were put out, made a lot of the argument that early retirement could account for all the jobs lost; although they may now use their victory to try to get rid of militants and those with bad disciplinary records.

As readers will know, the tradi-

tional steps taken by bosses cutting

lobs are "natural wastage" first,

tollowed by early retirements, volun-

tary redundancies, and finally com-

pulsory redundancies. It is difficult to

ight natura wastage and early

retirements, and if those are conced

ed it becomes more difficult to fight

redundancies. The railways are

peculiar in that the wages, hours and

conditions are so dreadful that until

very recently many have given up

jobs on the railways for any other jobs

they could find; consequently there

are still many new people being taken

on despite thousands of jobs lost

overall.

The offer of early retirements might

also have persuaded older quards to

vote "no" for tear of losing pension

rights, etc., and in the hope of get-

ting generous pay-offs to retire.

Secondly, many quards - even

those who voted "yes - saw DOO as unstoppable. The threat of DOO has

been hanging over us for at least nine

years. DOO has already been in-

troduced on some lines of the London

Underground, on the Tyne and Wear

Metro, and in 1983 on the Bedford to

St Pancras ("Bedpan'") line. In addi.

tion, management have for the last 20 years used modernisation - such as new signalling methods, and automatic sliding-door trains - to reduce the responsibilities of guards. To all this the NUR have acquiesced, the result being widespread fatalism

about DOO. Some quards who presumbaly voted "no - were arguing that the union should just negotiate the best terms of defeat possible. And many who voted "yes" did so out of loyalty to the union and hostility to management rather than out of any real conviction that a strike would stop DOO

A further problem was the attitude of many drivers. On the positive side was the wonderful solidarity shown by drivers put on the spot" by management. Drivers refused to work freight trains converted to DOO at Margam and Llanwern in South Wales and at Immingham in South Humberside, and drivers at King's Cross refused to attend DOO training schools; all being sent home with loss of pay for doing so. And the co operation of NUR and ASLEF at leadership level through the Rail Union Federation is in marked contrast to the rivalry and hostility that has traditionally existed between the two unions.

But on the negative side, there is still considerable hostility at local level largely a result of the 1982 ASIEF strike against flexible roster ing, when the NUR conceded flexible rostering, and failed to support the drivers. Sid Weighell then General Secretary of the NUR operly opposed the ASLEF strike. For many drivers -including some of the most militant of ASLEF members the bitter reaction to overtures from guards was "you were all quite happy to report for work and

To tolle

ASLEF leader Ray Buckton: improved

links at leadership level are marred by

memories of NUR scabbing in 1982.

get paid for doing nothing in the 1982

strike - why should we respect your

picket lines now?" To add to this,

drivers have been offered a bribe of

£7.32 per shift by the BRB for accep-

ting DOO.

The course of events during this

summer, and in particular the sack-

ing of over 200 guards on strike,

showed how wrong was the decision

of this year's NUR Annual Con-

terence to accept the Tory laws on

ballotting before strikes. This deci-

sion was pushed through by Knapp

using the justification of the bungled

London tube strike earlier this year.

A ballot of quards was called (initially for August 29 but then brought forward by a week), When guards started taking strike action against the attempts to impose DOO on selected freight trains - starting

with quards at Margam depot in South Wales on July 15 - it became clear that the ballot was a hindrance to spreading strike action from depot to depot and region to region.

Alter these guards at Margam, and others at Llanwern and Glasgow, were sacked there was immediate 1-day unofficial strike action on parts of the Southern Region, and occasional 1-day strikes elsewhere.

But many quards depots were waiting tor the ballot rather than try. ing to get unofficial strike action off the ground.

Without the ballot, it might have been possible for unofficial action to become widespread after the sack ings, and for the union to call official national strike action on that basis. As it was, the effect of the sackings and the lack of response to them served to "nimidate many guards into voting

The BRB had used the "get back to work or you're sacked" threat suc cessfully to end the 1982 ASLEF strike, and had now carried out the same threat against striking guards. They were undoubtedly going to use the same threat in the event of a national guards' strike.

Further intimidation by the BRB was the threat of a lock out: sending Socialist Viewpoint, No. 7, September: 1985. Poge 16

home without pay all railworkers in the event of a guards' strike. The BRB were obviously willing to sit out a long strike, and the government

through mobilising private lorry and coach firms — to outflank a strike.

The general fear of unemployment and of being sacked that now extends through most of the working class, and the failure of the union movement - with the exception of the

← NUR ballot post-mortem · Miners win at TUC →

Something wrong on this page?