unity Communists at the TUC
Wednesday 16 September 2009
Repeal anti-union laws
No2EU by Brian Denny
by Carolyn Jones We have discussed the inherent failure of the capitalist economic system and how unions should respond to the impact of the inevitable cyclical recession on jobs and services. To d a y’s debate turns to the key issues of employment rights and trade union freedoms. Will the debate and strategy that follows, be robust enough to defend workers? Issues include improving and extending redundancy payments and the national minimum wage; compensation for forced shorttime working; calls for the implementation of the agency workers directive and amending our laws to protect workers in Britain from the impact of dumping posted workers onto our unregulated labour market. All good stuff. Similarly, ending bogus self-employment and the practice of blacklisting as well as improving the resources and powers given to enforcement agencies are all demands to be supported. So why is there such a sense of deflation? The answer lies in both the
tone and substance. Against the backdrop of workers forging ahead with unofficial strikes, spontaneous occupations and unlawful solidarity action, the motions sound timid – more reminiscent of Oliver Twist’s ‘Please Sir, can I have some more?’ than of Marx’s ‘Workers of the World Unite’ . Such timidity reflects a defeatist acceptance that the present economic and political system is as good as it gets. The current economic crisis and political vacuum – with the proximity of a general election – present ideal opportunities to challenge the system. Basing our analysis on a simple reading of the motions is too pessimistic. Workers are under attack and, at the minimum, need their unions to fight for their jobs or decent redundancy pay. There is the beginnings of a wider rejection of anti-union laws. While one motion even goes as far as ‘congratulating’ workers taking direct action such as occupations to save jobs the POA are once again rattling cages by calling for street demonstrations and selective breaking of the anti-trade union
laws. The disputes at Vestas, the power stations (above), Visteon and Linamar show a militancy and creativity that can encourage further resistance. But I can’t help feeling that a pre-election opportunity to improve our framework of employment rights and trade union freedoms is being lost. A leadership with a sense of history and of destiny would take the fact that when last the TUC came to Liverpool in 1906 – it was the year the Trade Disputes Act was introduced after workers won the right to strike and to take solidarity action – and use it to challenge the laws that prevent workers in Britain today from taking industrial action in support of others in struggle or for political aims. The 1848 movement for the People’s Charter was a mass struggle for working class representation and democratic rights led by the trade unions. Thursday’s debates on the contemporary People’s Charter and on improved political representation can return us to something of the spirit of the Chartists of 1848. Carolyn Jones is the Communist Party trade union co-ordinator
The No2EU:Yes to Democracy coalition alerted voters to the dangers of the centralisation of power to EU institutions and served as a wake up call to the labour movement. Uncritical support from union hierarchies for anti-democratic EU treaties and neoliberal EU directives has long been used to promote the EU project. Prior to the euro elections, a deeply unpopular EU was matched by Labour’s decline with the government embroiled in two unpopular wars, corruption scandals and a deepening capitalist crisis. Two events in December 2008 exposed the undemocratic, antiworker direction of the EU to spur an electoral challenge – the Lindsey oil refinery dispute and the decision by an EU summit to ignore the Irish rejection of the Lisbon Treaty and re-run the referendum. It was clear the Labour vote would collapse. In Euro elections up to 60 per cent vote for parties that they would not otherwise do so. Unless something was done, the Lisbon Treaty would be given a free ride and fascists would step in unchallenged to exploit the volatile political mix. Britain would have rejected the Lisbon Treaty if Labour had kept its 2005 manifesto commitment to hold a referendum. French and Dutch voters had already rejected the original constitution and the Irish later rejected the repackaged Lisbon Treaty. continued on back page