RAILWAYS
Trouble on the Line
MAURICE. GENT writes: When before the election Mr. Wilson was all agog with the wonders of the technological revo- lution and spoke so enthusiastically about elimi- nating restrictive practices on both sides of in- dustry he must have realised he was offering some very dangerous hostages to fortune. But did he realise how dangerous those hostages would be and how soon they would come to afflict him? The dispute between the British Railways Board and the Associated Society of Locomotive Engiheers and Firemen is a classic example of an argument over restrictive practices; and it would of course happen in a nationalised industry and cause considerable personal inconvenience to a great number of voters.
The locomen's leaders, after considerable governmental prodding, did in the end, listen to reason, and agreed to get their members to have another think about whether they could decently expect a productivity bonus without accepting a change in the outdated manning scale. But by then much damage had been done. Normally reasonable men, who might usually associate vio- lence with mods and rockers, were shaking their fists at members of the working class, who prob- ably watched the same television programmes and had the same gardening problems as themselves.
To be fair to the locomen's leaders it should be recorded that in the past they have been willing to debate changes in practice that have led to highef wages. But during the present dispute ASLEF leaders, usually active propagandists in all Labour causes. were showing to the nation that they could not control a large portion of their membership, and argued for a long time that they could not debate a restrictive practice during talks on a productivity bonus because of a- previous conference decision.
The Prime Minister did what he could to dissociate the administration from the activities of this particular group of supporters by condemn- ing the go-slow, but the non-co-operation of the locomen, itself a particularly undesirable form of restrictive practice, did much to tarnish the dim image of a Labour Galahad fighting restrictive practices. The Prime Minister certainly did the right thing morally in condemning the go-slow• But attacking any group of trade unionists is a dangerous game when the Government desper- ately needs the co-operation of trade unions in the formation of an incomes policy. Its relations with the Transport and General Workers Union are sufficiently ambiguous for the Government not to wish to make more union enemies at this juncture.
Mr. Wilson's best friend in his fight for better use of manpower has been Mr. Gunter, himself an old railwayman, who has been a much firmer enemy of restrictive practices than any of his recent Conservative predecessors at the Ministry of Labour. The worry for the Government here is that his positive, no-nonsense attitude 'to those
Who are flouting agreements or refusing to co- operate in the more sensible use of labour will make trade union hackles rise. Already in left- Wing circles he has been praised as the best Con- servative Labour Ministerfor a long time. The railway crisis has so far been a serious nuisance rather than a catastrophe for the Government since the basic policy of the British Railways Board—that productivity bonuses must he earned through greater productivity—is in line with the Government's incomes policy. It has merely shown that despite all the talk about a technological revolution Labour's traditional sup- Porters are not willing to tear up every restrictive practice overnight and this can hardly surprise any student of the labour scene.
The really big battle on restrictive practices in the labour field is still to come. The Devlin report on the docks is to be published soon and it will be very tough and uncompromising. Mr. Gunter is determined to do something about the London docks even if it does mean some bloody noses.
Previous page
