The following is the text (somewhat abridged) of a leaflet published by Humberside Voice and is signed by the members of the Strike Committee of the Hull branch of the National Union of Seamen:
"Why we are on strike. The press and T.V. have completely ignored the case for the seamen's demand. That is why we feel it is vital to explain the issues to you in the leaflet.
"1. Wages and hours. In the past, unfortunately, the Union has failed to obtain a decent living wage for seamen. For example: The 1961 Agreement gave a basic wage for a 44 hour week of £9! Out of this, after deducting taxes and money kept back for FINES, a man could send home to wife and family a maximum of £7.10. a week. All overtime pay was retained by the employer till the end of the voyage. The seamen's families had to live till then on levels below Nationa Assistance! In the 1965 Agreement, the NUS accepted a 56 hour week because it meant a man could send an improved allowance of £11 maximum to his wife. But the agreement said that only essential duties should be done at weekends. THE EMPLOYERS COMPLETELY IGNORED THE AGREEMENT - weekends are worked still - regardless of whether they are essential duties of not. Result - the employer gets far more work done at basic rates, less at overtime rates.
"The presend demands, 1966
1. A 40 hour week - a thing which nearly all shore workers enjoy now - and an objective of the labour movement for half a century.
2. £14 a week as the AB's basic wage. This would mean that a man could send home £11 maximum to his wife and family.
Hardly an Unreasonable Demand
"2. The shipowners. The contribution of British shipping to the solving of our balance of payments problem is consistently falling. This cannot be blamed on labour costs which are below those of our successful international competitors. The growth of the world's super tanker fleet - which, British owners realised too late, are more economic - proves their failure to modernise, despite the largely undisclosed super profits made.
They are a powerful and ruthless vested interest, with a long history of anti-union activity. In 1955, they broke an unofficial strike by getting the Government to send out National Service call-up papers to strikers between 18 and 26 years old. In 1960, they jailed unofficial strikers who had breached the notorious Merchant Shippin Act (Note: This act is the one remaining example of 19th Century Master-Servants Acts. It is the same form of criminal law as in the armed forces, and enables the shipowners to dictate conditions of employment to which seamen's resistance is mutiny...Every day Masters act as Judge, Jury and Prosecutor, to fine men at sea; for being a few minutes late to work, a man may be fined several days pay, and on subsequent offences, fines are doubled. ...A seaman on leave who fails to report, maybe for serious domestic reasons, can be dragged back to the ship by the police on the orders of the Captain. If absent when the ship sails, he is a deserter, and can be jailed! His wife can also be jailed for "harbouring a deserter"!)
"3. Incomes policy. The NUS accepted the incomes policy in belief that it would benefit low-wage groups like seamen. We now find a 15% increase for doctors.. is permissible, but a 15% increase for seamen will ruin the country! Is it wrong for us to feel that "incomes policy" has become the old familiar WAGE RESTRAINT? Shipowners cry that they can't afford it, the seamen cannot judge this, and neither can Mr. Gunter BECAUSE PROFITS AND COSTS ARE THE BEST KEPT SECRET OF THE INDUSTRY ....THE SHIPOWNERS MUST PROVE THEIR CASE BY OPENING THEIR BOOKS. Too long they have they cried "wolf" about profits - now once too often...."
[The last line is cut through at the foot of the page in both scans; it is read from the tops of the letters, clearest on the second scan.]