Workers' Control Over Workers' Organisations

With the Labour Party taking an interest in "industrial democracy" it has almost become respectable to become an advocate of workers! coi:trol. Of course, many of those espousing industrial democracy are careful to make sure that the discussion goes no further than that of considering various methods of participation, with essential control, especially investment decisions, firmly in the hands of traditional bosses. However, some people call themselves arvocates of wokkers' control when they do little to encourage workers! control of the organisations to which they belong. To take a tyPical example: how can a man be serious about workers! control if he is appointed a trade union official for life? He could only justify his position by waging a struggle in his union for a changing over to regular elections. How many unions have regular elections for their officials as does the AEU/FW? Surely it is elementary that workers! democracy incorporates the great principle of the Paris Commune: the recall and regular election of officials. How else have ordinary workers got any guarantee against the soft life of office corrupting their representatives? The permanancy of appointment, linked with the huge differences between the galaricn of trade union officials and ordinary workers, lays the basis for caste interests and the development of an uncontrolled bueeaucracy in the union movement. Another important feature of all workers! organisatiois - political and industrial - has been the devaluation of conference decisions. The case of the Labour Party is well-known but there are mary other examples. Moreover, some unions do not even have aimual conferences. In other cases the subjects for discussion are strictly limited. Advocates of workers! control should ensure that in their own organisations the twin principles of the recall and regular election of officials, and the soveriegnty of democratically controlled and convened conferences are paramount. ett Lastly, someone ghoul@ do a paper on workers! control over the workers! control campaign. Not that I have any complaints - the organisers do a fine job with no compensation other that the knowledge that they are doing something useful. However, if the workers! control. movement is to give @ lead in the democratisation of all aspects of our life it mst evolve organisational forms which reflect its purpose. We should get to grips with the problem of ensuring that all the supporters of the campaign feel that they have taken part in the formulation of policy. Could I suggest that between now and the next conference there is a discussion on this questica?