Norman and Eric square up for a fight: bring down Hammond empire!
Labour Briefing1980sTranscribed by hand from the printed page.
Although a fudge is always on the cards at Congress House, there is now a real possibility that Eric Hammond's EETPU could be suspended, or even expelled, from the ranks of the TUC.
On Tuesday May 10th the EETPU refused to accept a TUC directive requiring it to withdraw from two single-union no-strike deals.
One had been signed with the Japanese electronics firm Orion, near Port Talbot, and the other with the haulage firm Cristian Salvesen, based in Warrington.
The EETPU called on its 330,000 members to endorse its decision, and decided to ballot them.
It also refused to appear in front of the TUC General Council to be formally censured for breaching a previous TUC directive instructing it not to organise or recruit membership at Rupert Murdoch's News International plant at Wapping.
Norman Willis has fought long and hard to avoid such disciplinary action against the EETPU but decided in the end to support a "strong censure" to head off expulsion calls from the print unions.
When the AEU signed a single-union deal for the proposed Ford plant in Dundee, Willis defended Bill Jordan, accepted the principle of the agreement, and even flew to Detroit to try to get Ford management to accept it.
The Orion and Salveson deals, however, are a bit more difficult for Willis. They involve the imposition of new deals into functioning workplaces where other trade unions already exist.
In each case, these deals were signed over the heads of the existing trade unions. Those unions have protested strongly to the TUC, and Willis is now responding to this pressure.
Thus the TUC finds itself with a duel position over single-union no-strike deals. They are not acceptable in existing workplaces where other unions are already organised, but they are acceptable on new, or "greenfield", sites.
The TUC Special Review Body is currently discussing a proposed code of conduct to regulate the introduction of single-union deals. No text has yet been produced.
TUC officials are keen to reach accommodation with the AEU leaders, who have already said they will not accept anything which restricts their right to enter into such agreements.
Suspension or even expulsion of unions from the TUC is not a new thing in Britain. A number of unions were suspended in the early 1970s, for example, for registering under the Industrial Relations Act. But the expulsion of the EETPU would represent a decisive break.
The EETPU (along with the UDM, and to a lesser extent the AEU) is spearheading the development in Britain of US-style business unionism. The hallmark of business unionism is not just right wing policies but a qualitatively different relationship to the employers.
This shows itself most clearly in willingness to join directly with employers to destroy other trade union structures.
A split in the TUC is therefore not only a real possibility, but also a necessary development if the trade union movement is to be defended. True, it could be the end of a unitary trade union federation in Britain, which has been a historic advantage for the working class. But there are higher issues at stake.
Unity cannot be purchased at any price. The cost of unity with Hammond is the continued drift of the TUC towards the right wing policies of the EETPU and the continued undermining of other trade unions.
This is shown by Hammond's actions even whilst these things are being debated inside the TUC. The EETPU has concluded an agreement with a consortium of construction companies to train workers for the London Docklands Development project. The EETPU will soon be moving into building trades such as bricklaying and plastering!
Even Alan Tuffin called for the EETPU to be expelled from the TUC when speaking at the UCW conference last week.
For Hamond, leaving the TUC is still a difficult option. Once outside the TUC, the EETPU will be outside the Bridlington Agreement (which outlaws the poaching of members by affiliated unions) and would be vulnerable to recruiting campaigns by other unions.
EETPU members in many workplaces would join TUC unions and breakaways into other unions would, quite rightly, be organised from within the EETPU itself.
The EETPU would be isolated and would seek to unite with organisations like the UDM and the RCN. The AEU is likely to stay inside the TUC; its membership is too vulnerable to unions like the TGWU.
This isolation should be compounded by the disaffiliation of the union from the Labour Party as well. It is a scandal that Michael Meacher has already said that he would be opposed to such a move.
This year's Labour Party Conference needs to debate these issues and take a clear stand against business unionism.