Lowry's letter tells a

Scan page 4

To:

Mr G. Hawley, National Secretary, TGWU/Vehicle Building and Automotive Group. Dear Mr Hawley, MR. A. THORNETT Our meeting on 14 February ended with a commitment from me to review our main arguments for refusing facilities to Mr A. Thornett to act as an elected deputy senior steward at Cowley Assembly Plant and to write to you formerly (sic) thereafter. These arguments are listed below:1. It was our clear understanding, as I recorded in my letter to Moss Evans dated 5 June 1974 concerning Mr. A. Thornett, that the TGWU was no longer questioning that Mr. Thornett would not under any circumstances be granted facilities to act as a senior steward, deputy senior steward or in any other similar capacity at Cowley Assembly Plant.

You know that the Personnel Manager at the Plant urged your union by a letter dated 29 November 1977 to delete his name from the list of candidates to prevent misunderstanding. Your union took a contrary view despite the fact that our understanding concerning the granting of facilities to Mr. A. Thornett had not been contradicted.

2. An analysis of dispute statistics for Cowley Assembly Plant reveals a considerable improvement at the Plant since April 1974 when we adopted our position in respect of Mr. Thornett. This analysis is attached as Appendix A. The figures are presented. so that the losses arising in March and April 1974 are isolated. Whether one looks at hours lost by those in dispute or vehicles lost the conclusion is the same: industrial dispute losses post-April 1974 are significantly lower than in 1973. If one extracts the losses arising from certain Company initiatives to achieve change in the last two years, in the re organisation of maintenance and the "four shop stewards" in the year May 1976 to April 1977 and Assignment to the industrial Engineering Agreement in the Paint Shop in the period May 1977 to January 1978, the figures for the last two years are an outstanding improvement...

3. In the four years since April 1974 we have established much greater understanding of the Company's problems and there is a sense of common purpose to make Cowley Assembly Plant a success. Participation has, if nothing else, given representatives a greater knowledge of the business, and the reasoning behind management policies and decisions. We expect trade union representatives to seek the best deal possible for their members but we do not expect and cannot accept a totally negative approach which has, perhaps, some basis other than trade union principles.

It was this unacceptable attitude that led to the 1974 confrontations. It is our view that Mr. Thornett holds the same ideals now as he did in 1974 and that all the evidence from such documents as Branch News in the interim years since 1974 shows that a totally hostile attitude still prevails. He has continually attacked the Company and his union officials, encouraging workers to take an extreme line, e.g. "reject speed up", "prepare to occupy the Plant' , "reject the wage review" ..A responsible trade union representative should advocate adherence to agreed procedures to attempt to resolve differences. The Company welcomes constructive alternatives but it cannot maintain good industrial relations when faced with such hostile and negative attitudes.

4. The incidents of 25 October, which are outlined in the attached copy of a letter from Mr. W. D. North to Mr. D. J. Buckle dated 27 October, are strong evidence of Mr. Thornett's disregard for any authority and procedure. Also attached are copies of two further letters about. recent events in transport which show that the disregard of generally accepted procedures is widespread amongst his members. Although Mr. Thornett cannot be said to have organised the meetings it can be said he did nothing to point out to those concerned the error of their ways. A shop steward, deputy senior or senior steward must in our view, not only know and keep to the code of conduct expected of him in his dealings with the Company but he must also advise and persuade others to keep within the basic codos, e.g. the Procedure Agreement.

The four points outlined above are our main arguments refusing to alter our position in regard to Mr. Thornett. We are not involving ourselves in an emotional witeh-hunt of an innocent working man. We are prepared, as is evidenced by this letter, to back our views with fact. The strong shop steward who advocates a different approach to that of a Company to a problem need not fear similar refusal of facilities provided he or she stays within the fundamental agreements governing the . conduct. of employee relations. Cowley Assembly Plant's policy is one of complete acceptance of trade unions and their representational system within the spirit and intent of the British Leyland Procedure Agreement 1976.

It is in defence of orderly industrial relations and the continued and uninterrupted employment of thousands at Cowley that the Company has to maintain its stand on its refusal to accept Mr. A. Thornett as a deputy senior steward. We have not dishonoured our commitment to recognise him as a transport department steward and we cannot see any valid reason to alter the position arrived at in 1974 with Mr. Moss Evans.

Yours sincerely, Pat Lowry Director of Personnel and Administration.

Scan page 5

SOCLALIST PRESS grants.

Williams' scheme suggested grants of about £10 per week to