NALGO sells out social workers
Socialist Press1979 1979-01-31Read it in the scan (PDF), scan page 10 →
Read from the scan by machine and not corrected: expect misread words, and now and then a caption or a line from a neighbouring story. For anything you quote, read the scan.
Scan page 10
Once again, this time due to the lorry drivers' strike, the TGWU's longest running dispute at Sandersons of Croft, near Skegness has been pushed into the background by the TGWU This strike-for reinstatement and for the most basic democratic right, to join a union-began on May 13, 1977 and is still as far away from a settlement as it was 20 months ago.
The TGWU leadership both locally and nationally have displayed time after time their treachery and cowardice in this dispute.
Their refusal to call for more mass pickets following the extremely successful PHOTO: Mark Rusher, IFL rejected the strikers, Sanderson backed off, breaking off the negotiaHELS Duped-Ron Todd A meeting of branch delegates from NALGO's local government group last week voted to accept a sellout "settlement" formula in a bid to end the six month pay strike by social workers.
NALGO bureaucrats argue that the deal is the best that could be obtained-but took the precaution of putting it forward in a meeting where social workers were heavily outnumbered.
Out of the 300 branches represented only 110 had social worker members. And the final vote, not surprisingly was 2-1 for acceptance.
NALGO officials claimed that they will only tell social workers to return to work where progress is made on local negotiations-but there is no doubt that the vote will be used as a green light to stampede through a squalid sell-out of the original fight for local wage Low pay The social workers' dispute has its roots with their disatisfaction at appallingly low rates of pay-low even in comparison with other local government workers.
This unrest came to a head at the 1977 National Conference which instructed full timers to abolish the existing national social workers pay scale, enabling branches to obtain local agreements.
Predictably the full timers did nothing to achieve these ends and it was left to the workers themselves who began in August 1978 with social workers in three branches striking over the local claims they had submitted.
To date dozens of branches have submitted claims. and 2,600 social workers from 15 branches have taken all-out strike action with over 2,000 elsewhere taking other militant action.
This militancy forced the national bureaucracy into "joint" negotiations with the employers culminating in the proposed agreement forced through last week's meeting.
This "deal" is nothing short pathetic. It offers a banded TARINCEY BRANCH EISLINGTOA MALCO NALGO hatchet man, Mike Blick. structure effectively giving social workers an average 5-6% increase: but with so many strings attached it looks like a puppeteer's nightmare.
The negotiators are basically selling this deal on the argument that if this struggle is not ended then NALGO will have nothing in the strike fund for future strikes!
This absurd "jam tomorrow" argument fails to explain how the employers will take NALGO seriously if we capitulate to them on this issue.
The negotiators claim that the social workers strike has little or no effect; but wherever strikers attempted to mount effective pickets (particularly in London, where they prevented fuel supplies reaching other council offices), they were instructed to stop by the officials!
Perhaps the most disgusting aspect of this deal is that any settlement made will not be paid until July 1979-the date of NALGO's normal annual pay settlement, Government officials have made it plain that money allo. cated to increase social work rates will be deducted from the maximum 5% proposed for all other local government office workers!
All NALGO members should be fighting this sell-out attempt and call for a continuation and escalation of the strike action to win:
*Locally conducted negotiations, no to national control.
*Local control of strike action.
*No to pay restraint and the 5% limit: for catching up pay increases protected against inflation through cost of living clauses.
*No to Whitley Councils and "Joint" consultation.
* Yes to properly constituted shop stewards systems.