Rolls Royce RB211 project, it is necessary to take a brief look at the condition of the airline id aircraft construction industries. The airline rket has been steadily reaching saturation int over the last two or three years. The InterJonal Airlines Transport Association has forced, over the last few years, a ban on price petition on scheduled flights (hence the ill boom in non-lATA charter flights). All he large international airlines are forced to put In prices in the hands of the IATA for the e reasons as capitalist corporations in other ds in the era of monopoly capitalism have to void price wars. With markets already staked sut and limited in their growth, for one corporaon to lower its prices in the hope of stealing market from another corporation in the • field, results in a disastrous price war that is out the profits of all concerned. Under e conditions, the airline companies try to pture larger shares of a fixed market by com sting technologically.
With a stagnant market, and with the impossibility of price competition, the airline companies and from the construction companies better, and faster aircraft-and delivery relatively shorter space of time. Under these sures, Rolls Royce, for example, accepted a very date for the RB211 which was insuffiSent to allow them to develop what was an almost entirely new engine. At the same time, enormous amounts of capital are needed to develop the marginal improvements that will give the purchaser the edge in the market. Hence, when the new carbon-filter fan blades that Rolls had developed failed, it was necessary to substitute titanium and the whole job had to be retooled and the Derby plant almost com pletely rebuilt. In addition to this, with more planes projected than there is market to absorb them, Lockheed gained far fewer orders for the TriStar than expected, hence the unforeseen development costs incurred for Rolls had to be spread over a smaller number of engines.
Rolls Royce and its national victories When Rolls took the order from Lockheeds in 1968, It was hailed as a national victory. In fact, the acceptance of the order reflected that the above factors had hit the British aircraft industry earlier and with greater impact than the American industry. Britain has a more backward technical base arid less total capital avallable than American firms in the same field. Rolls had to accept the Lockheed order or no order at all. It was forced to outbid two American firms for the contract Pratt and Whitney, and General Electric Co. It could only do this by accepting a price that guaranteed bankruptcy in the event of any development difficulties.
The launching programme for RBZ11. rose from E65m. in March 1968 (E50m. from the Labour Government), to E135m. in 1970 and still rising. The Ministry of Technology had to be silenced in early 1969 when it discovered the rate of spending. Concorde was embarrassing enough-total cost projection for 1962 was 2140m., by 1970 it was £730m, and still rising.
By January of this year, the Tories were faced with a choice. In addition to the E42m. promised last November, Rolls Royce would need an extra E160m. to continue with the project. They would need in addition another E50m. on completion to pay Lockhead compensation for exceeding the time limit. Rolls had no more capital, not even enough cash to pay their wages bill. Rolls could have dropped the project, but would have had to pay £300m. in compensation to Lockheed. The Tories had to find E200m. to give Rolfs Royce. This first choice was not politically feasible, and in addition to the fact that the figures were open-ended, each of the 540 engines would lose another E110,000 on the selling price. The alternative was simpleliquidate the company. Lockheed can't claim against a company that doesn't exist. Then scrap RB211 and nationalise the remaining plant. The remaining part of the industry makes a steady profit on spares for military and civil aircraft industries all over the capitalist world, Out of the past: the Canberra and whatever was paid in compensation lestimates vary from E50m. to E100m.l would be recouped over a short period.
Capitalist anarchy The whole affair is a remarkable example of the anarchy of capitalist production. British and American imperialism can't arrange sufficient flights for their executives to keep the airlines of the total capital of a society is invested in a field that is of little or no benefit to the majority of the population, and this share goes on grow ing to create marginal refinements of greater sophistication in order to maintain flagging profits. The pace gets too hot for the weaker imperialism of the partnership, and so by liqui. dating a firm on paper it deprives the bigger partner of E300m. overnight and throws its financial superstructure into chaos. The workers, upon whose backs this grandiose edifice of theft and conspicuous consumption of resources has been crected, are the same workers who are to be made to suffer from its internal contradictions.
The number of redundancies expected to follow in Rolls Royce alone is 20,000. An additional 20,000 may follow from Lucas, Shorts of Belfast, Camerons, and British Steel (Sheffield), combined, Shop stewards and Labour M.P.s in the Midlands and in Scotland have launched a campaign to demand total nationalisation of Rolls Royce and continuation of the RB211 project. The first demand has of course been met with the exception of the car division which is being sold off to private enterprise. We should look at the second demand more closely. It has been taken up by the unions, by the rank-and-file of the Labour Party, by the liberal press (The Guardian, etc.) and by the C.P. This cam paign to lobby Parliament is an instinctive response to the news of the collapse, but it has to be assessed realistically. Having no perspective of industrial action, it is unlikely to impress the Tories, but the final outcome will be determined by other considerations.
A Tory expenditure of E150m. to keep the project going may now be politically viable. This £150m. would be absolutely necessary since it is only the £50m. penalty clause that is negotiable, But the E150m. Is of course open-ended and would almost certainly escalate by the time of completion. If we include the E42m. promised in November last year, but never handed out, then the total cost could exceed E250m. It is extremely unlikely that, even on this consideration alone, the Tories would agree to restore the status quo. There are other considerations however. Lockheed were negotiating for a replacement for the RB211 with two American firms two days after the "collapse"-Pratt and Whitney and GEC. They both have engines in a further state of development than the AB211, and to win the contract with Lockheed would be a useful supplement to other orders for the same engines. The cost of the alterations to the TriStar would almost certainly be footed by the Nixon Administration. Lockheed will not be allowed to suffer by a Government that relies on Lockheed for a large proportion of their military requirements, and the construction companies have a powerful lobby in Congress-Senator Proxmire has already protested that Congress must not loan Lockheed the money to cover the contracts arise in that time, it would cost the losses suffered by renegotiating the penaity clause with Rolls Royce, since this is equivalent to bailing out a foreign competitor. Evening Standard, Feb, 9th). As to compensation, the Tories can safely allow the legal wrangle to spin out for years.
Parliamentary lobbies = no real action From the point of view of the workers who face redundancy, a reinstatement of the contract would be fine. But this is extremely unlikely to happen, and certainly not through Parliamentary lobbies. For the left to raise this demand is to encourage illusions in the aircraft industry given the state of the market, and to advocate massive expenditure of money on an investment that served even in 1968 to cover up the imminent collapse of contracts in this field. The demand has other dangers, however. It distracts attention away from the forms of effective action that workers can take. The demands that the Morning Stor have raised are internally contradictory (nationalisation under workers' control-by the Tories?; and continuation of the RB211, would simply mean continuation of the RB211 under a re-privatised Rolls Royce receiving E250m. liabilities and retain the parts militarily neces saryl. They have opportunistically adopted these demands simply because the workers faced with redundancy have posed them. Far from posing a realistic strategy or offering even a preliminary analysis of the economic contradictions in the industry, they offer only the spectacle of shocked indignation that the Tories would normally use to protect their interests, as "arguments" for their demands.
*For the RB211, despite inevitable development snags, is an assured engineering success, a feature of outstanding engineering skill. Power output is increased. There is a fuel consumption saving of 25%, noise level is reduced and smoke emission cut almost tonil. The last two factors are of great importance in addition to the economic advantages [to whom?]. New materials are used [a criterion of value?]. To destroy this would be an act of monumental vandalism that would make the Luddites look like a bunch of creative geniuses. To break up a team of workers, scientists, designers and technicians whose collective skills produced the wartime Merlin engines, the postwar Darts, Avons and Speys [sic!], and which are now producing the engine of the future, would be the most wanton destruction of the grestest asset sic that any nation has- the skill of its workers... The RB211 must continue because it is the future, It can and will be sold-because it is the best in the world-to Lockheed." (Morning Star, Tuesday 9th Feb. 19701. One has a feeling that even if the TriStar was to be used for transporting napalm to Vietnam the argument would be the same All this is completely irrelevant of course. No matter how good the engine may be, the workers become redundent just the same, those left in the industry work harder than ever, and the only response is a little name calling. Vic Feathar responded immediately: "Short of working for no money at all, the workers would cooperate with management.. to improve productivity]." (Times, Friday Feb. 5th). A sentiment reflected by Charles Hunt, chairman of the joint staff and manual workers union committee at Derby: "We are backing the company and I have no doubt a lot of voluntary overtime will be worked [sic]. It is up to us to prove that the RB211 is a good engine. We have asked everyone to keep working as normally as possible. " (Times, Sat. Feb. 10th). No redundancy Rather than talk vaguely about workers control under Tory nationalisation, the demand for "No redundancy" must be raised. This is a fight which can be won by employing the simple tactic of one out-all out. It is a demand that can gain popular support since it 20,000 workers, earning say an average of E30, are paid full wages for a year, and assuming that no new Govemment only E30m. Now, by scrapping RB211 the Tories are saving either £250m. or E300m., depending on which way you look at it. If E42m. can be given gratis to Rolls Royce land it is still in the Treasury), then E30m. can be "invested" in retaining that valuable "asset" for Britain's "future"'-the skills of these highly trained workers. At the same time, the fight for no redundancy can be escalated into a fight for workers' control on the platform that the tech nology and skills available are "employed" for more useful social purposes. In those subcontrac ting firms outside of Rolls Royce that are to be affected, the same fight bould be undertaken by the unions combined with demands for no short-time working. Only if these fights are won is it feasible to talk of "workers' control".
The fight against redundancy is crucial. Redundancy could be an added advantage for the Tories, flowing from the Rolls Royce liqui dation, in their attempts to reduce the living standards of the working class by combined ideological and legal repression. It should be continually pointed out that wage claims have played no part in the affair, and that the col lapse stems purely from the contradictions of international capitalism.
Introduction