Nus Conference No Lead

Scan page 8

A clear indication of the bankruptcy of protest politics epitomised by the Stalinist and left-reformist Broad Left leadership was given by the recent National Union of Students Conference.

As further and higher educaton are decimated by Healey's cuts and graduate unemployment reaches the highest ever level, the Broad Left can only offer more protest campaigns.

Alongside this goes talk of "links" with the trade union movement at all levels - which in reality means links with the bureaucracy at all levels.

The confidence of the rightwing in the Broad Left was clearly shown at Llandudno. Tribunite president Charles Clarke retained office against the 'socialist challenge of opportunist ex-IS member Hugh Lanning with the assistance of Tory votes transferred in the final count.

The continued domination of the NUS by the Broad Left, together with the gains made by the Tories (who had a member elected onto the executive highlight above all the absence of effective alternative leadership from the IS and IMG.

The Is, the largest opposition group, with a complete absence of an alternative programme become no more than a left cover for the bureaucracy - advocating as always nothing but "more militancy.

And whilst the IMG present various correct demands, they do not see these as the essential basis for a fight against the bureauAs for the small YSSS (WRP) group, their "programme' for students amounts to the four following demands: No cuts in overseas students! Defend the right to education for all! Force the Labour government to resign! Vote for the YSSS candidates and join the YSSS!

A serious • fight to defeat the reformists and Stalinists in the NUS must be based upon a fight for a programme of transitional demands developed out of the need to defend education as a right of the working class.

The following demands must be the battleground on which to fight the Broad Left:

*For a sliding scale of grants based upon a working-class cost of living index to keep pace with inflation.

*For a sliding scale of public expenditure.

*Students must fight alongside trade unions for the opening of the books of the local authorities to joint committees of students and trade unionists to reveal the profits of the suppliers and the plans to cut jobs and education. This is a step towards workers' control of education. the Leyland plan in the following terms.

available for wage increases in all plants _INB], security of employment including lay-off and sickness pay: ways in which the difference in average pay levels between plants are to be reduced -can only sensibly be negotiated on a group basis"

"FLEXIBLE"

Whalen goes on to argue for a "flexible" approach and proposes that the exact distribution of the negotiated sum of money can be left to local 'negotiators"

This is almost word for word Jones' plan but written five weeks before Jones announced it publicly, claiming it was T&GWU policy!

But this coordinated call for corporate bargaining has been extended, through participation, beyond Whalen writing T&GWU policy. It now engulfs leading convenors.

Derrick Robinson, Stalinist convenor of the British Leyland Longbridge complex, Chairman of the BMC Joint Shop Stewards Committee and Chairman of the Cars Council - highest 'participation' body on the car production side of Leyland, also displays a startling affinity with the Whalen document.

At' the March meeting of the Combine Shop Stewards Committee, (two weeks after Whalen's document was written) Robinson surprised the meeting by proposing that the committee reconsider its long-held position of defending independent plant bargaining, and adopt a policy of corporate negotiations. His proposal got little response.

At the beginning of April Robinson wrote a letter to Industry Minister Varley, which was reproduced in the Morning Star of April 10th: The letter argued the case for a more "flexible" approach to Stage Two in exactly the same terms as the Whalen statement.

Urging a change in government policy, Kobinson says:

"Rigidity of flat rate increases do not help us to solve the problems...In Leyland a great number of anomalies exist that need to be put right. as soon as Possible"

Robinson and Whalen are of course agreed on the main problems and anomalies, as a comparison shows.

Robinson: "Rates of pay for doing the same category of work varying by anything from £6 to £13 week depending on the job".

Whalen: "What justification is there...for the level of wages being generally higher in one plant than another?"

Robinson: "Differing termination dates for agreements - leading to the widening of pay levels".

Whalen: "Negotiating annual agreements different times throughout the year is an almost guaranteed way of "causing disputes... what justification is there for one plant receiving its wage increase at an earlier date or a later date than another....?"

Robinson "Reluctance to move to wider bargaining units due to the government's pay code".

Whalen: "Multi-group bargaining within a plant means built-in trouble. The Company would like to see all hourly paid employees in a plant covered by one collective negotiation. Indeed it may be appropriate, for employees in more than one plant to be covered by a collective negotiation.....

Robinson winds up the discussion, pointing out that:

"Removal of the restrictions will enable us to negotiate a basis to resolve the anomalies and eliminate the friction so that we can return to uninterrupted production runs that we have proved can be achieved".

These very striking comparisons show the real meaning of participation and its implications for the independence of the trade union movement and trade union democracy.

It is time to step up the campaign to defend democratic rights in the unions and to launch a new campaign, based on the new situation these developments create in the Leyland plants, to destroy the class collaboration of the Ryder Committees and to defend the independence of the shop stewards movement.

----- pull-quotes -----

COLLEGE GRANT

"some things, eg., the total amount of money • to be made