ee — The N.U.M, has not played a positive role in the labour movenent for some time, indeed it has not taken a positive attitude to most key questions which are of importance to the future of the miners, Today, however, with the National Power Loading Agreement, new ground has been opened, a new arena for discussion and struggle is open, The agreement has been steam-rollered around the areas by members of the National Executive, being in the process described as @ "breakthrough" , a "historic step", "revolutionary," etc, Thus a policy from the pyramidic head of the union came showering down on the rank and file, clouded by all the rhetoric the officers could muster, Judging by the results of the area ballots, it seems obvious that,even though the full pressure of union officials was behind the agreement, at least a large section of the rank and file want time to think. What was needed was a policy that could unite the whole of the miners, and hence give the N.U.M. a solidarity it has lacked 2 for years, By this "acid test” alone, the balloting deems it a massive failure. : The proposed breakthrough which the agreement sought was one of equality. The union deemed it against union principles that certain areas should, by virtue of better geological conditions, receive wages greater than those in other areas. A most notable and worthy principle, but to allow ments reason to be clouded by this and support a‘national agreement at any price" policy is purely opportunist. The agreement, although promising parity of wages between area by 1971, has a serious and reactionary nature to it. In entirety it presupposes that the union has only a right to "consultation", thus assuming and making concrete, with the N.U.M.'s consent, the managerial prrogatives. The union also surrenders its previously won rights by agreeing to co-operate in the maximum untilisation of machines, without demanding a larger share of the extra productivity. The bitterness of this pill is that whilst the N.C.B, received a 30% rise in productivity, the complete self-financing of all new investment (with £40 million a year to spare)s an increase in its operating surplus of over £70 million a year, the miners received stagnating earnings, increased insecwity and an increase in accident rates, Thus how can a union describe an agreement as "revolutionary" when a miner cannot receive the full benefits of his past labour? How can it be a "breakthrough" when it makes concrete and universal that the union only a right to consultation, A National Power Loading Agreement has always been a nettle that the N.U.M, has refused to grasp. To its credit it attempted to grasp it, but apparently dropped it when it realised the implication it incurred. Any real coming to terms with the problem would have meant a challenge to all managerial prerogatives and raised the demand for workers! control of the industry. This has been avoided and consequently the rank and file are split by virtue of having, at the moment, no : positive policies of their own. It is important that the miners should succeed in advancing the frontiers of workers' control in their industry, for,with their industrial strength snd the concessions already won, they are in a powerful position to lead the workers in other industries who are still struggling for their basic rights. The N,U.M, leadership has failed to recognise this and now any positive policies must come from the rank and file, The demand for workers! control should be the cornerstone of all our policies, To achieve this aim would indeed be a "breakthrough", anything short would mean a continuance of the status quo. Today's position within the N.U.M, makes necessary and urgent a truly representative
'* * policy, which purveys the hopes and aspirations of the miners as a whole, Therefore it is imperative that any future policy must as a first fundamental have a clear and determined will with regards to workers! controle
* Mr. Sherratt is a member of the Executive of the South Derbyshire Miners,