These Betrayals Halted Hotel 30 Years!

Scan page 9

with the TUC knifed post-war workers struggles At the meeting held in support of the Garners' Steak House strikers on April 13, in Transport House, Reg Taylor said that when he was on strike over 30 years ago the most important thing he learnt was: 'Don't trust the gravy train officers at the top'.

Brother Taylor was one of well over 1,000 London hotel workers who struck during 1946 and 1947.

Not only were they systematically stabbed in the back by the then leadership of the General and Municipal Workers Union and viciously attacked by police and courts but they were also attacked by a Court of Inquiry, the Industrial Court and other equivalents of today's ACAS.

These forces between them ensured that the fight for basic trade union rights was pushed back for a whole generation until it has had to be taken up again now by the workers at Garners, Claridges and the other battles that inevitably lie ahead.

Claims

A number of press reports have claimed that the Claridge's strike last month was the first ever at the hotel. This is by no means the case.

Immediately after the war, many hotel and catering workers in London were recruited into the General and Municipal Workers Union.

The GMWU's local catering officer was Arthur Lewis who was at the time and still is, MP for the Upton area of East London.

During 1946 about 500 of the 800 workers at the Savoy Hotel joined the GMWU. The management consistently refused to deal with the union, and at 6 am on 8 October picket lines were out at the Savoy on the demand for recognition.

What is particularly significant about what happened next, in the light of more recent events, is that the next day, 9 October, workers throughout the Savoy chain came out on strike in sympathy with the recognition demand.

Black supplies

These included waiters, chambermaids and cooks from Claridges, others from the Berkley and Dorchester Hotel and from Simson's Restaurant in the Strand.

Other unions called their members out in the hotels electricians and carpenters included, and meat porters at Smithfiek! promised to BBC Attlee-his government together This support was a decisive factor in the success of this particular strike. Strikers began to come out in the following days at the Russell and Piccadilly Hotels, and other managements announced their recognition of the GMWU, at a number of big restaurants, including the Princess and La Maison de The Times wrote on • 10 October that there was 'no justification' in the refusal of the Savoy management to grant recognition.

At first the management was intransigent. Just as at Claridges and Garners recently, they published claims that everything was proceeding normally.

They took out a court injunction against Lewis and two leaders of the Branch, Arturo Ravera and Francesco Piazza, to try to prevent them leading the picketing.

Statement

They even issued ment which said:

"The strike is simply a method of recruiting for the union and is part of a general scheme for an all-powerful position of trade unionism in this country"

For all this bravado, the Savoy management was nevertheless compelled to capitulate.

On 15 October they met Charles Dukes, GMWU General Secretary,.. Tom Cochrane, National Catering Officer and Wavering, the London District Secretary, as well as Arthur Lewis. Recognition was agreed.

The management, however, had left themselves an important loophole. The fully worked-out agreement.

Furthermore, the involvement of the national leadership of the GMWU, active supporters of the austerity policies of the then Labour government, ensured that any further moves by the hotel workers would be stabbed in the back Balance The new balance of forces showed itself early in the following year, 1947.

On 3 February a meeting at Lincoln's Inn Fields run by the Savoy workers union branch, protested about the delay of the management in signing the recognition agreement and called for strike action if this was not soon agreed.

The response of the union leadership to this was to issue a joint statement with the management a week later, attacking the irresponsible element which had run the Lincoln's Inn Fields meeting, and asserting that a most cordial atmosphere' had developed between the bureaucrats and the employers.

This cordiality, however, was not extended to the Savoy workers themselves.

Threat

In March, the management felt able, at the same time as eventually signing the recognition agreement to threaten the dismissal of Francesco Piazza, one of the main militants, against whom they had previously served an injunction.

This threat was immediately followed, on 13 March 1947, by a walk-out Within the next few days, sympathy strikes followed at the Berkley and Piccadilly Hotels, and also at Claridges, Simson's and even Lyons Corner House.

More workers would undoubtedly have come out had it not been for the strenuous efforts of the GMWU leadership to confine it to the Savoy chain alone.

The GMWU leadership Cooper-stepped into Lewis' vacant position went further in their sabotage.

On 22 March they actually agreed with the employers through the new negotiating machinery to Piazza's suspension for 14 days.

They next persuaded the strikers to return, and it was then found that the management would not have Piazza back even after the suspension.

Each time the GMWU officials took a step back, it strengthened the Savoy management, a id weakened those workers who had Strike The Court the strike ballı the union and autumn of 1947 by the submission of the case to the Industrial Court and then the National Arbitration Tribunal.

This was the machinery which existed at the time because the Labour government had retained wartime legal restrictions on the right to strike.

Institutions

Such institutions did no more than their modern day equivalents to serve the cause of the workers.

Thus, in an interesting parallel to events of our own day, the National Arbitration Tribunal actually reported on 30 July in favour of the reinstatement of Piazza.

By this time, the Savoy management felt in a strong enough position to do a George Ward and refuse to carry out the reinstatement.

A recent decision in the ordinary courts had only just made it possible for them to defy the 'advice' of the Arbitration Tribunal.

Once again, the Union leadership dallied. Instead of calling the inevitable strike they insisted on a ballot first.

After this had been passed, they then tried to postpone further action when the Minister of Labour announced a Court of Inquiry on 4 November.

The union members were not to be held back any longer. They walked out at the Savoy on 6 November, and were soon joined by others at Claridges, the Berkley and Simson's-in all, over 1000.

This struggle, which continued during the sittings of the Court of Inquiry in the rest of November 1947, proved much more bitter and violent than the two previous strikes.

On 11 November lorries were stopped from delivering supplies by a mass picket of over 200, some of whom sat in the road. Others shouted "Squeeze the rich! Support the strikers!"

It was said that a number of strikers were reluctant to be identified on the picket line so supporters came in large numbers from other unions.

In contrast to its later stance, the Electrical Trades Union called out its members in support. Three Labour MPs appeared on the picket line on 12 November.

It was after this that violence started. At 6am on 16 November three petrol tankers appeared at the Savoy and the 100 or so pickets who were on duty at the time were violently attacked by the police.

On the following day there were further violent scenes. Over 20 people were arrested, including Arthur Lewis.

Many protests against the police action followed, including statements in Parliament from the late Marcus Lipton.

More effective opposition was mounted by Smithfield meat market porters, who struck for one hour each morning.

Ship repair workers in the port of London stopped work on 25 vessels in another gesture of solidarity.

Meanwhile, the Court of Inquiry had been proceeding with its work, and issued its report on 24 November.

It again recommended the reinstatement of Piazza. This time, however, it was not necessarily to be to his old job, but "on terms reasonably equivalent to that which he had in the service of the Savoy"

also attacked it and called on leaders to end the ship take the leadership of strikes which the National Executiva has not thought proper :: recognise as official"

These statements provide: the GMWU leaders with a pretext to go for a settlemer: on any terms, and to move iagainst the local leade:s. including their own full-time officials who continued to support the strikes.

On 2 December the new GMWU General Secretar: Tom Williamson announced the settlement termsemployment for Piazza outside the Savoy group and reinstatement of the strikers "as soon as possible"!

Arthur Lewis was excluded from the meeting at which the strikers were told -without apparently being allowed even to vote-that they had to go back on these terms.

He was soon afterwards relieved of his responsibilities in acting for the unions in the catering industry.

This was by no means the of what Williamson and GMWU national leaderhad in store, however.

Interest

The only interest they now took in local militants some of whom were still suspended by management; was to take disciplinary action against them within the union.

On 3 December the London District Committee of the union expressed its full confidence in Arthur Lewis and passed a resolution "disapproving of the action of the National Executive and expressing profound disgust at the terms of the settlement' Two days later this committee was suspended, as were the officers of the catering branch covering the Savoy.

The action against the branch was allegedly because of talk there of setting up a break-away union, a hardly surprising, …if incorrect, reaction in the face of what had already happened.

Soon afterwards district chairman . Leslie and secretary V. Fox were suspended from office, as also was J. Blair, another prominent member of the branch.

Lewis, who at first wrongly fought his suspension through the courts, was later not only kicked out of his full- time position, but expelled from the union altogether for circulating a leaflet to the conference which put forward his case.

It is also of interest to notice that the bureaucrat who was put in charge of running the London district was none other than Jack Cooper, later Basnett's immediate predecessor as GMWU General Secretary and eventually elevated to the House of Lords.

Diabolical

The diabolical actions of the GMWU bureaucracy played an important role in holding back unionisation in the hotel and catering industry until the present generation.

There are obvious parallels with the present situation in the disastrous use of the courts, and the reactionary role of union officials.

• It is important, however. not to push the parallels too far. Though the unsuccessfui Claridges struggle of Apri 1978 was kept isolated and weak, the bureaucracy is not in a position now to move i with the same viciousness.

Furthermore, the working class is stronger and more confident now than it "as following a long period :: depression and war.

Now through the construction of a principled leadersia= in 1978, the laws of hister: and of class struggie 3. prove stronger thar 1: bureaucratic apparat. .:..

Scan page 10

NDUS RAL SOCIALIST PRESS. Heirera: : ME: