capitalist press-"Registration of trade unions lies at the centre of the Government's industrial relations policy, and is aimed at maintaining stricter control than has been possible in the past over unions' rules and on how they are followed" states the Financial Times on 29th September under a large headline reading "Registration—a key issue". For socialists in the trade unions it is essential to know how the union leaderships and the T.U.C. responded to this major threat to their members interests. In a year which witnessed very widespread and militant struggles by the working class to maintain living standards and defeat the Tory offensive, the union leaderships have balanced determinedly between the rank-and-file resistance and the anti-union drive by the state. The introduction of state registration of unions has clarified their role in no small measure.
IN PLACE OF STRIKE ACTION The first warning signs followed hard on the Special Congress held by the T.U.C. on 18th March this year, to discuss opposition to the new laws. The T.U.C. leaders pushed for rejection of official strike action against the Tories and succeededfor two reasons. The left union leaders never made clear to the Congress exactly what type of strike action they were advocating, nevery held out the idea of a prolonged mass strike and, consequently, seemed to offer only token action unlikely to shake the Government seriously. Secondly, in contrast to the lack of plans and details in the 'left's' proposals, the T.U.C. leaders pledged a seemingly strong campaign to stop the new Act, based on "avoiding" its worst effects through non-registration by unions and other calculated measures. The delegates voted down the General Strike call and passed the specific policies demanded by the General Council. One of these said "Unions shall be strongly advised not to become registered under the Act.....". The reasons were spelt out in the T.U.C.'s Report to the Congress-"It cannot be foreseen what the demands of the Registrar may be. Initially they may be modest, but it must be borne in mind that the Bill has political objectives. The Registrar will have the power and the duty of intervention and supervision" over the unions which register—a whip above the heads of union leaders as well as members. The attitude of the capitalist state was clear.
THE CAMPAIGN Immediately, the agreed policies for 'campaigning' against the anti-union laws were reduced to farce. The T.U.C.'s own Chairman, Lord Cooper, announced his personal willingness to register his own union-the 800,000 strong General and Municipal Workers' Union-in an interview with the Guardian of lOth May. The government fully appreciated the fluctuating indecisive resistance that the union bureaucrats would mount against the Act and increased the pressure on unions to become registered. It was already clear that non-registered unions would lose all right to call any industrial action in any circumstances without difficult, legal formalities. It was becoming clear that non-registered unions would lose tax exemptions they had always formerly enjoyed (The Guardian estimated a loss of £800,000 a year for a union of the size of the Transport & General Workers Union. Now, the Tories announced that all unions previously registered under the Trades Union Act of 187l-which means most unions, as the Act all owed the tax exemptions mentioned above-would be AUTOMATICALLY registered under the repressive new legislation. To stand by the agreed T.U.C. policy, unions would now have to take steps to de-register under the Industrial Relations Act, adding to the confusion and the Tory pressure to accept the legislation in full.
Resentment and crisis developed as the annual T.U.C. Congress approached in September. Rank-and-file pressure for action remained high, threatening to overturn the reluctant but sure search of the union bureaucrats for peaceful submission to the new laws. Delegates narrowly defeated Clive Jenkins at the annual conference of his union, the A.S.T.M.S. and demanded outright de-registration, and no compromise. Rebellious anti-registration currents were reported even inside Lord Cooper's G.M.W.U. "It was Jack Jones who opened the escape hatch for the bureaucrats, to avoid similar embarrassments. In a skilful speech to his own union's conference last after others had broken ranks and registered, as they were fairly certain to do, and taken the blame for the collapse of the T.U.C. policy. Thus the pressure from shopfloor militants could be kept at bay.
THE ENGINEERS The 'left' union leaders swiftly adopted Jones' formula at the T.U.C. Congress Hugh Scanlons' union the A.U.E.W. has consistently proved more militant in practice than Jack Jones in combatting the Tory Act for two main reasons. Firstly, the Engineering Employers' Federation (E.E.F.) has vociferously supported the Act-and called for yet worse anti-union lawsfirmly establishing the fact that the engineering industry is the prime target of the new laws. Secondly, the relatively democratic nature of Scanlon's engineering union, in its internal structure, means that officials are much more susceptible to rank-and-file pressure for action than in many other unions. The A.U.E.W. had held strikes against the Act in March. Now, it had a strong resolution before Congress demanding non-registration. As the Financial Times then explained on 24th August, "the T.G.W.U. has tabled an amendment to a strong anti-registration resolution", (Scanlon's resolution) -which the A.U.E.W. agreed to accept. The wording of the amendment introduced Jones'. vital condition-"non registration can only be effective if all affiliated unions act collectively". Congress carried the amended resolution. Only Vincent Flynn of the printing union, SOGAT pointed out to the delegates that the leaders of the "left" within the T.U.C., Jack Jones and Hugh Scanlon, had cleared the way for the final sell-out of the rank-and-file.
WAITING, WAITING All that remained for the "left" was to wait until Cooper or another right wing bureaucrat opted for registration, and they would be free to follow in his footsteps. Committed in theory to collective de-registration by member unions, the T.U.C. instructed all unions to deregister before Ist October. Otherwise, they would be automatically registered. The A.U.E.W. did so, but it seems Jones did not. On 24th September, the Financial Times reported-"last night Mr. Jack Jones, T.G.W.U. General Secretary was far from sure that his union would comply...." On the actual date, Ist October, the paper added "The G.G.W.U. is to tell the T.U.C. within the next few days that, after taking legal advice on its rule-book, it cannot withdraw" from the newregister. The excuse appears to be that the unions' rules are so worded as to legally require registration of the T.G.W.U. But the T.U.C's orders concerning such rules were too "quickly arrange to amend them and in the meantime inform the Registrar that they wish to de-register" (note l). Obviously, no mere legislation could be permitted to excuse unions from standing by this policy of de-registration. But the T.G.W.U. used this excuse. This means that at the time of writing, THE MOST POWERFUL UNION IN BRITAIN IS STATE REGISTERED, due to the provisions for automatic registration of trade unions unless they requested de-registration, whilst waiting for the right-wing leadership to move. The londer this state of affairs continues without protests, ГІНЕ abstract and remote in the eyes of many shopfloor militants by most union leaderships. They have not explained its importance as a giant stride towards state control of the labour movement's machinery and operations. Jones will be able to hind behind his legal excuses until, in the end, other unions openly opt for registration as a permanent policy. When this happens, Jones and other 'left' leaders will follow suite, under the terms of their own resolution at T.U.C Congress.
THE LESSONS The question of trade union registration is very far from being the only Tory weapon against the unions. The Industrial Relations Act, most of which comes into effect in December and in early 1972, contains very many harsh and repressive regulations (note 2). All of these will be available to the Tories to implement thé Engineering Employers' pleas for "action to reduce the present bargaining strength of certain trade union groups" (note 3). But definite lessons can be extracted from the experience described in this article of union leaders responses to registration as the only part of the new Act to become law at this stage.
The principal target of existing union leaderships is still the achievement of worthwhile economic reforms to satisfy their members' aspirations and, hence, retain their privileges as officials. The current constraints on British capitalism mean that such reforms are no longer forthcoming. The state no longer offers opportunities for marginal social change but, instead, displays the mailed fist of repression. In such conditions, the only alternatives facing the union bureaucrats are as quiet an acknowledgement of this reality as their members will permit-or powerful resistance. The latter can only mean recourse to mass struggle. In such a conflict, the privileges of the leaders would rapidly disintegrate. No bureaucrat of the 'right' or 'left' desires such erosion of his career and standing. For as long as possible, he will ride with the anger of his rank-and-file membership-if necessary, he will call token strikes against a government-but, in the final analysis, he functions as a bureaucrat only within the capitalist system and must accept it. The stalinists and reform ists of all shades still demand reforms as if the state could deliver them tomorrow. For revolutionary trade unionists, there must be no illusions in the state or its would be reformers. Neither Jack Jones nor Hugh Scanlon will defeat the Tories. Only an organised rank-and-file movement in the workplaces can do that. The urgent constructions of this movement is the lesson of the sell-out on registration.
T.G.W.U. MOLE
NOTES 1. Reported in the industrial relations journal "Incomes Data"
September 197l. 2. See "Red Mole", Vol. I. No. 13, November 1970. 3. "Wage Inflation and Unemployment", E.E.F., September 1971
For over a week, hundreds of students at Reading