Why the car companies are cracking down
Labour Briefing1980sTranscribed by hand from the printed page.
Commentators in the British financial press identify the key factor behind the present strikes by Ford, and other car workers, as being the "Nissan factor" — the influence of working practices introduced at the new Nissan plant in Sunderland.
This is a very narrow view of what are in fact worldwide developments in the car industry. For if the Sunderland plant did not exist, car workers in Britain would still face a similar situation.
There has been a new generalised offensive by the car companies designed to raise efficiency and productivity to new levels.
The successful Japanese companies are the primary, but not the only, model used by much of the industry.
But this is not a new thing. The Ford "AJ" or "After Japan" plan was drawn up in the early 1980s after Ford UK executives visited plants in Japan.
The detailed plan was designed to achieve Japanese productivity levels in their British plants. This plan remains a central factor behind Ford management strategy today.
What is new in the car industry today, however, is the scale of technological development and the scale of investment in new models taking place. These are new pressures to which Ford and other producers have to respond.
In Europe the lead in this is being taken by Fiat, Europe's second largest manufacturer. They are in the process of launching the Tipo — a new family car in which they have invested over £1 billion.
It makes their plant in Cassino the most advanced in the world. They claim a 100% automated paint facility and 55% automation on assembly — beating hollow the record previously held by Europe's biggest car manufacturer, VW/Audi with their 40% automation at the Hall assembly facility in West Germany.
Productivity levels produced by investment and automation are ony one side of the equation. High investment needs to be linked to high productivity of labour. This means brutally hard work, continuously carried out, and subject to repeated speed-up — a factor which is affecting workers involved in the production of volume cars all over the world.
Japanese car employers make their major contribution on methods of speed up. They have developed techniques which have led the world in harnessing the mental and physical capacity of workers to continuous very high speed production — although many of the others are now catching them up.
These techniques have been developed in Japan since the mid-1950s and are central to the profitability of Japanese industry.
The Ford package contains the main principles involved in these techniques. They want the introduction of short term contracts, the ending of all demarcation and the introduction of complete flexibility, including putting skilled men into one group and the introduction of "group leaders", creating a higher-paid force of Company spies on the shop floor. They also want the so-called Quality Circles which have been developed to a sophisticated level in Japan.
Quality Circles have far more to do with productivity than quality. In principle they are the same as the "worker participation" scheme which the last Labour government introduced into British Leyland in 1975, in the shape of the Ryder Report.
It had disastrous results for the shop stewards' movement and the workforce. The objective is to change the thinking of the workers. Instead of putting their own wages and conditions first, the problems of producton and profitability are prioritised. It also undermines trade union structures — particularly the shop stewards' movement, which is more responsive to the demands of the workforce.
In Japanese car plants everyone is involved in a Quality Circle. They are required to meet reularly, generally weekly, in their own time, to discuss ways of improving their production performance.
In some plants failure to produce positive proposals from such meetings is regarded as "unco-operative" or "anti-management" and can lead to dismissal.
Clearly, Quality Circles could not yet be introduced as effectively as this in Britain. They began to be introduced in Japan after the smashing of the independent unions and the creation of company controlled, yellow unions.
Their most extensive use in Britain is still in the Sunderland Nissan plant. But that plant is still in a honeymoon period. They are not yet pressing the workforce as hard as they intend to — and it is not a hig-ly capitalised plant.
But Quality Circles have already been established in some other parts of the car industry in Britain. They were a condition in the last two year deal in Austin Rover and were strongly supported by national union leaders who pushed the deal through.
The same individuals negotiated the current package with Ford. Mick Murphy, the TGWU national officer, became well known, but not so well respected, for saying that he was "over the moon" with the deal, a deal to which the workforce has become increasingly hostile.
In some Austin Rover plants, including the Cowley Assembly Plant at Oxford, the Quality Circles — under the name of "zone circles" — are already in operation, although in most places they still lack authority.
They were imposed from above by the employers, backed by trade union officials, and were to have one hour per week "facility time" — time to meet during working hours.
In the Cowley Assembly Plant they have been backed by right wing senior stewards and convenors and exist extensively throughout the plant. They operate on a voluntary basis and meet in working hours.
In the Body Plant, where the left-wing is stronger, there has been more resistance. They have been pushed through by the convenors on the basis that the shop stewards will be involved in them as well. This actually makes the situation worse, because it is then easier for management to use them as an alternative to [th]e trade union structures.
The introduction of [Q]uality Circles in Austin [R]over has gone alongside [th]e abolition of whole [ca]tegories of workers — par[ti]cularly grades such as in[sp]ection and rectification, [in]volving many hundreds of [jo]b losses. These have been [re]placed on the tracks by [se]lf-inspection and self-[re]ctification.
Just as important as [Q]uality Circles is flexibility [of] labour. To be able to [m]ove workers from one job [to] another across grades and [sk]ill demarcations is crucial [fo]r management if work is [to] be continuous, irrespec[tiv]e of breakdowns and [ot]her production problems.
If non-production [wo]rkers can be switched to [pr]oduction when those [wo]rkers are absent or there [ar]e abnormal production [pr]oblems, management can [cu]t the number of absentee [an]d relief workers needed or [ev]en abolish them [co]mpletely.
The only break the track [wo]rkers get, apart from [br]ief official relief times, is [wh]en the track breaks down. [W]ith flexibility production [wo]rkers are required to do [ru]nning maintenance [th]emselves or help the fitters [in] the repair of bigger [br]eakdowns. They are also [ex]pected to do general clean[in]g to cut out the need for [jan]itors.
This is all designed to en[su]re that there is no break in [th]e workload throughout the [sh]ift.
Short-term contracts are [an]other major innovation. [Th]ey are massively used in [Ja]panese plants and allow [m]anagement to maintain a [mo]re experienced labour [fo]rce which can work flat-[ou]t.
At the same time they [em]ploy casual labour to cover peak periods and sack them at the end of it. This creates a labour force outside trade union control and vulnerable to management moves. Such contracts have already been introduced in some British plants. In newly privatised Unipart, the Austin Rover service division, short contract labour is regularly used to meet peak demand periods.
There have been disputes in Austin Rover over the introduction of these conditions. Management had already successfully introduced some of the conditions Ford are seeking into some of their plants. Short term contracts are being introduced in the Swindon Body plant, although the idea would be strongly opposed in the main plants.
Other developments are taking plce across the industry. Discipline has been stepped up. New disciplinary procedures have been introduced. In many plants the rate of dismissals has gone up massively. In the main Austin Rover plants workers are sacked every day for "offences" such as failure to keep pace with the track, failing to work to standard or breaking the very strict management codes on lateness or absenteeism.
It is these conditions — the strings attached to the deal — that have been central to the Ford strike. It is not just a matter for Ford workers either. The success of the employers in the next stage of this process in Britain will be greatly increased by the sellout of the Ford strike in Britain. The victory for the Ford management will lead to another round of speed-up. Car workers in Britain have to seek ways of confronting this.
The generalisation of this employers' offensive has some lessons for car workers in Britain and internationally. A generalised offensive needs a generalised response. In the British car industry, where the multi-union set-up fragments the workforce there is an urgent need for contact at rank and file level, particularly through the shop stewards' movement.
Some shop stewards in Ford and in other car manufacturers are calling for a national conference of car industry shop stewards to be held urgently to assess these developments and develop a strategy in response to them. This would be a very popular initiative and could be the starting point for a fightback in the car plants in Britain. It could also lay the basis for greater links with car workers across Europe, the USA and elsewhere.
The high level of militancy in the car plants in Britain is likely to continue and increase despite the sell-out of the Ford strike. Already the Land Rover plant in Birmingham has rejected a wage offer from management and has voted to strike.
The General Motors plants in Liverpool and Luton have voted for strike action over the decision by mangment to plunder tens of thousands of pounds from their pension fund, using new Tory legislation.
There needs to be an international response to this as well. The employers are organising their offensive across national frontiers. It is an international offensive with internationally developed techniques of attack. We need a forum in which at least car workers from Europe, if not beyond, can pool their experiences and develop a response beyond national limitations.