Jobs Knifed on the Waterfront

Scan page 9

A look at the consequences of the defeat of the Dock Work Regulation Bill (1976).

The TUC: voted for both wage control and import controls. sugar coațings of the bitter pill of the Social Contract was wiped out by the Lords early in November.

This was the defeat of the Dock Work Regulation Bill (1976), Which has been continually attacked by the right wing as a 'dockers charter" since its introduction into Parliament in December 1975.

The defeat of this Bill proves that the Callaghan leadership has absolutely nothing leit to offer the working class.

The final death-blow to the Ble was struck by the Lords amendment restricting the new Dock Labour Scheme (replacing the one established in 1967 and which was responsible for the ending of casual labour on the docks) to only half a mile from the waterfront.

This makes a complete nonsense of the original Bill, which in any case, in the view of many dock workers, was itself totally inadequate. This set out to create'a five mile CorridoI for the scheme around the coastline and the major inland waterways.

This would have protected the Jobs, wages and conditions of those workers employed outside the major ports but who were involved in cargo handling at inland container bases, warehouses and cold storage depots, which have been set up there by the employers in an attempt to operate with cheaper labour in pursuit of profit.

This is the reason for the massive campaign against the Bill launched by the cold-storage and warehousing monopolies, coordinated by Tory central office and aided and abetted in the Commons by Labour scabs Walden and Macintosh (who sat in the press bar whilst the vote was taking place!)

After T&GWU leader Jack Jones had asserted that he would not challenge the government on the defeat of the Bill; the National Docks Delegate Conference (T&G) at its meeting on November 22nd, voted by 55 votes to 18 to press instead for new legislation in the next session which would reestablish the original 5-mile limit.

This was passed after a previous resolution calling for national strike action to defend the Bil was ruled out of order by Jones.

In this Jones and the rest of the T&G bureaucracy have avoided the necessary fight to defend the Bill, claiming that the Bill is still a "partial victory" since it brings the unregistered ports into the scheme.

Whilst this is the case, the 2-mie corridor still allows "cowboy' firms to run cargo-handling operations outside, but still close to the docks - while in some cases the halfmile doesn't even reach the boundaries of traditional docks already registered!

The Docks Bill, far from taking away jobs from other workers -as has been lyingly asserted in every capitalist journal from the Daily Express to the Economist - would TUG are obvious. Its benefits to the working class are however nonexistent.

For this so-called strategy is nothing but an illusion, a cheap conjuror's trick.

If the magic of import controls could make the economic crisis disappear for British capitalists, Healey and Callaghan, who in every other way serve the employers, would have used it months ago.

At press:: ense to impose impor - sure because they 2= 23220: 30z thei competen Enla restritices c= Bats: expens not only defend the jobs of dockers but would I have extended the rights they have won in 30 years of struggle to thousands of less organised workers.

The need for such a Bill to cover unregistered ports and wharves began to arise during the late sixties and early seventies with the emergence of container bases, warehouses, cold storage depots and the build-up of unregistered ports outside the influence of the 1967 National Dock Labour Scheme.

These were being set up by employers who, faced with a strongly organised labour force, found themselves at first unable to impose speed up, redundancies and low wages in the industry.

As time has gone by, however, the National Dock Labour Board -with full collaboration of the union leadership - has been able to impose redundancies and the run-down of manning levels. This has taken place mainly through "natural wastage" (voluntary redundancy schemes) and severance (early retirement) - while basic wages are now so low that fishbobbers in Hull who will be brought into the scheme fear that have attempted and will attempt to force other capitalists to cede their markets to them, both by economic competition and diplomatic pressure.

The Labour government has just completed negotiating such agreements with Japan over shipbuilding cat imports, televisions electrical goods.

But these policies are not socialist. (It is no accident that Fascist Spain has the most extenshe sister of import controls of capitalis they may lose money through it!

Yet the much worse conditions for workers in the non-registered ports led to much work being taken away from the traditional areas and diverted to the unregistered ports, such as Portsmouth.

Jones These wharves and ports are able to operate profitably and offer lower handling charges, and even higher wages in some cases, than firms in the scheme who have to comply with all the regulations, charges and levies in the scheme which protect the jobs and conditions of the dockers.

British capitalism to protect the profits of its alling and backward industry from its competitors.

The steady introduction of import controls by the major capitalist countries would herald a slump on a massive scale with the collapse of world trade.

It would be combined with an attack on all the gains won by the working class.

It was in the 1920's and 30's that such policies were last applied world wide. The capitalist countries including Britain. attempted to cut them comperiors throats by uccer20: 2005 The non-registered docks are free to operate with minimum manning levels and rely on casual labour with no guarantee of work or pay.

Faced with the fact that jobs were being taken away from . the traditional areas to badly organised areas, the dockers began a series of actions culminating in the bitter strike of 1972.

However, the only outcome of the strike was the abolition of the Temporary Unattached Register (TUR) and dock jobs continue to fall dramatically while tonnages ncrease. (At Hull, for instance, the number of dockers has fallen from 4,500 to 1,800 in less than ten years.)

The Barge-Aboard Catamaran (B.A.C.A.T.) system (which until recently was blocked on Hull docks) was the latest attempt by the employer to reduce operating costs, By operating a system where barges were filled with cargo at Rotterdam, transported by mother ship to Hull and disconnected and sent up river far inland for unloading at an unregistered port, they would by-pass the major ports altogether and cut out any costly handling by registered dock workers.

The result was the collapse of world trade and record unemployment in every country.

Behind their protective tarifi walls, the capitalists mounted a steady attack on the working class; prices were increased, wages cut and anti-union laws introduced to try to break the strength of the working class.

Import controls were accompanied not by socialism, but by reaction.

Of course none of the Tribunites who advocate protecting British capitalism by import controls would advocate such an attack on the working class. While they are not prepared to lead a fight against the right-wing in the Labour Party who act entirely for capitalism, neither are they willing to act openly against the working class..

Instead they would like to find a way in which they can reconcile the demands of the working class with capitalism and retain their own standing as "left-wingers" without fighting the right-wing, let alone the employers.

But none of this is possible. The sharpening of the economic crisis internationally reduces their schemes for revitalising British capitalism to daydreams with which they deceive and confuse both tesseltes edite mercee dess.

The pells of apor songol registered ports into the scheme, thus benefiting workers at these ports, but there is no guarantee that work will not continue to be diverted to them from the traditional ports.

The latest indication of this has been at Portsmouth where the T&GWU bureaucracy has acted in such a way that dockers at this non-registered port lifted principled blacking they. had imposed on freight diverted from registered ports, such as Southampton, Poole and Weymouth.

Southampton dockers have now imposed a strong picket at Portsmouth to enforce the blacking.

2,000 additional jobs are now threatened with the proposed closure of Preston docks, which has suffered heavily through the buildup of non-registered ports such as at Heysham.

The demand by the Preston dockers that their union, the TaGWU, call tor national action to defend their jobs has to be supported and extended to include any threatened loss of jobs through management run-down and closures in all industries.

The struggle on the docks against job-cuts through modernis. ation and speed-up began with the introduction of containerisation in the sixties and the principled position then was that mechanis. ation could only be accepted on the basis of no loss of jobs and through the nationalisation of the docks under workers management.

However containerisation was sold to dockers by the leadership through the promise of de-casual isation, better conditions and a guaranteed wage.

In the same way today, the fight has to be for the defence of the Dock Work Regulation Bill in it: original form and for its extensior to cover all areas of cargo-handling.

• Tied in with this, the fight has to be taken up for industrial action te defend all docks and cargo job: through work sharing on full pay.

To prevent the closure of docks the demand has to be for the opening of the books of those owners of workers.

This would lay the basis for dockers to prepare a plan for running the docks and for national. isation without compensation under workers' management.

Such a struggle will require the building of a new political leader ship on the docks able to challenge the present bureaucratic T&GWU From our correspondent in HULL setting jobs. for British worker against jobs for Japanese, Germar Indian or Brazilian workers is a muddleheaded, reactionary diversion.

Most treacherous of all thei attempts to dress their nationalis positions in socialist clothing is thi argument voiced at the Labou Party conference that impor controls are of benefit to worker: because they prevent the sale o: cheap goods produced by worker on starvation wages in Asia.

This is not a policy to aid thi workers in the ex-colonies to figh their continued exploitation b imperialism, but to side witl imperialism to starve the worker in the colonies.

Import controls are no alter native to Healey's policies; the! neither lead towards socialism, no defend jobs.

The alternative is a fight directer towards the nationalisation of thi property of the British capitalist under the management of th working class.

In this fight British worker must find their allies in the worker and peasants of Asia, Africa and th rest of the world.

It is socialist internat: ratism not the nationalism of tr 'eits? #zich win defend the I::: Bitst worsens

Scan page 10

INDUSTRIAL MET S CIALIST PR Wedne:

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

TRADES AMUS CONCI survive, various capitalist countries