[page 3]
The Social Contract is on the rocks, broken apart by hard economic facts. Price rises in 1976 excecded wage rises by 59. But, to break even against inflation, wages rises would have had to exceed price increases by 20% before tax and insurance. Food prices rose by a staggering 23.5%.
Under the Social Contract, the number of people living on or below the poverty line has risen to 13 million. Under Phase II. the weekly income of the average working class family fell in teal terms by E10.
The "big battalions" of the working class have begun to mutiny. Not surprisingly, fewer and fewer defenders of the Con-Trick speak out from the union top tables. Lawrence Daly declares nis "pride" in the Social Contract, but his boss. Joe Gormley, expresses the real fear of the bureaucrats when he explains that he "could not hope to win a vote at Annual Conference" for another period of wage restraint.
The leaders of NALGO and NUPE have acquired great prestige from their unions" campaign against Healey's cuts. But the cuts are part and parcel of the Social Contruct. And in its hour of need, they have declared their intention of using their prestige to shore up the Contract in return for a few concessions to strengchen their own positions......
Geotfrey Drain of NALGO has publicly offered such a deal: and NUPES Alan Fisher lus striven to postpone and defuse any fight with the argument that, "until we know the lerms of whatever incomes policy is being offered, I don't see how anyone intelligently can say they are for or against it".
The abject capitulation of NALGO bureaucrats before the court ruling against their March 9th strike dramatically showed the dangers of relying in fake "left" leaders. Both NUPE and CPSA have demagogically directed members to build local alliances against the cuts. Public sector activists must seize upon this to build real action committees, like those which have led the struggle, in Stirling and Aberdeen. Such committees have shown their ability to lead the fight for the right to work, for shorter hours, for equal pay, for higher wages. They provide a strong base for organising to force the TUC and STUC to break with the Social Contract.
Above all, they must organise support for all those in action against the Contract. Only such unity in action can break the isolation of those like Leyland's toolroom workers, who have stepped into the front rank of the Battle against wage restraint. Lined up against them are
the Lubous Government, the TUC, the National: Enterprise Board, their bosses, trade union officials and plant convenors. Communist Party members such as Derek Robinson, Leyland Combine Convener, have fuelled a massive media witch-hunt, accusing them of breaking "the unity of the movement". Robinson's "unity" however, is unity behind gentle persuasion of the TUC.
But the argument for differentiuls as the way ahead because "everyone eise can then get it and fall in line", is just not good enouch. For the weakly organised and poorly paid, differentials promise only a guarantee of business as before. The toolroom stewards' repented pledge that they do not oppose Phase I not only thies in the face of the reality of their strike, It also widens the divide in the eyes of public sector workers, who will get only a couple of pounds to cope with inflation from the upcoming settlements.
Any sociulist wages policy must hit the Social Contract at If levels, and unite the strength of the whole working class. The Key to stopping Phase Ill lies in smashing Phuse Il. Against quibbling over shillings, we must demand ACROSS THE BOARD INCREASES. TO COMPENSATE FOR INFLATION UNDER PHASE I. Flat rates, like ditferentials, though, cannot break a Social Contract whose strength lies in its posture as a "solution" to economic crisIs.
Neither can keep up on the treadmill of inflation. They offer only a permanent struggle to stay in the sume place. Trade unionists should renounce "blame" for the crisis of capitalism by demanding AUTOMATIC COST OF LIVING INCREASES ON A MONTHLY TRADE UNION INDEX — a sliding scale of wages. Last year, Stirling Trades Council at the STUC and Cowley workers in the TGWU wete virtually alone in this call. Today it is on the agenda of many major union conferences. Militants should take it up throughout the workers' movement.
The "Rank and File TUC"organised by Leyland stewards in Birmingham on April 3rd has great potential for building mass action. But action within the limits of endless "Days of Action" will only repeat the STUCS "Grand Old Duke of York" tacties up the hill of "pressure polities", down the hill for Mr. Healey's reply!
The polities of "militant trade unionism". too, have been lound wanting. We need i real socialist alternative. And this means openly organising for the policies outlined above, at the STUC, at the "Rank and File TUC"and at all levels of the labour movement.