Auew to Fighi Sackings Sackings

Scan page 7

The Labour Government's plans to impose wage-cuts on the working class received two major blows last week.

One was the concession of the railwaymen's wage claim, and the other was the decision of the National Conference of the AUEW opposing "any incomes policy having as its aim wage regulation through interference from any source"

Hugh Scanlon, the union president, spoke against the motion. He said the union should support the social contract as a way of avoiding the 'strengthened' version now being mooted.

"It will be a disaster if we are in any way committed to a social contract that envisages a deterioration rather than a maintenance of living standards. If the price of having to avoid such a disastrous step is to go with the existing contract then I am with that."

This argument is entirely spurious. The social contract was never designed, to maintain living standards but to cut them. The most important question is whether this resolution will be fought for at the TUC conference and in the factories or abandoned as a similar one was last year.

TO During the conference the latest increase in the unemployment figures was announced. Delegates passed an emergency motion saying that "every worker has a fundamental right to work" and instructing the union Executive to "mobilise and support action taken by the membership to enforce that right"

If this resolution is to be carried out it means that "action" in the Scanlon - voted for social contract form of, for example, occupations in the defence of jobs must be declared official.

RYDER

The role of the Ryder report in attacking the jobs and conditions of British Leyalnd workers emerged clearly in the conference. Bob Wright, the so-called lett, who recently lost the election for General Secretary to the right-winger John Boyd in a postal ballot, and who was closely involved in the investigation leading to the Ryder report, opposed a call for the nationalisation of Leyland. He argued:

"To say at this time that nationalisation is the only answer will to some extent set back our position in Leyland"

Wright clearly wants to keep his hands free for further deals at the expense of British Leyland workers. However, the motion was carried despite his opposition.