[page 4]
Not only was it the first time that active members of the women's liberation movement (including three from Socialist Woman Groups) were among the trade union women attending the 42nd Women's Conference; it was obvious that the ideas of the women's liberation have begun to permeate the working class movement. This was particularly evident in two of the most important debates.
In the discussion around the report from the Women's Advisory Committee on training and opportunity, entitled "Roots of Inequality" it was accepted that attitudes towards sex roles and functions begin at birth and are influenced by many things including the media and their relentless manipulation of women for profit. However this point was obviously overlooked by some of the speakers in the other debate on whether seperate Women's Conference was desirable when we were claiming equality with men. Those women who had "made it" in the male-dominated trade union world felt that what they had done could be done by many others and had little patience with the difficulties of the average woman worker in fighting prejudice and her feelings of inadequacy.
Only 50 women out of over 1,060 delegates attended the 1971 TUC, and Christine Page of USDAW promised us that abolition of the Women's Conference would not result in one extra woman delegate. Many speakers claimed that the subjects discussed at the Women's Conference should be of interest to all trade unionists but of course that is not to say they would get onto the TUC's already crowded agenda. Delegates were perfectly aware that the conference was used as a sop to the women but still felt it was useful for formulating policy on which the women could go back to their organisations and fight and for helping women to gain experience and confidence. (Delegates voted to keep Conference).
The Conference was notable for the high proportion of young delegates although many speakers empahsised how many years they had been coming—during which time little progress had been made in certain fields, notably equal pay. In the debate on this subject we heard of slow progress in various industries, of the dangers of job evaluation, and somewhat condescending advice from the teachers on how to get equal pay. However, only one or two delegates mentioned the need for action, and one of our speakers also emphasised the need for the unions to give a vigorous lead if equal pay (i.e. men and women as a whole having the same average wage) was to become a reality.
Other debates concerned the vital problem of recruitment and participation of women in trade unions and the question of "facilities for working women", particularly childcare.
The biggest disappointment was that the opportunities to exchange experiences with other delegates were so limited. Quite a number of delegates bought SW and it would have been good to be able to discuss it. However on the whole, we came away with the view that the calibre of the average woman trade union activist is quite as high as the men's.
Leonora Lloyd